Our Announcements

Not Found

Sorry, but you are looking for something that isn't here.

Archive for March, 2017

Pakistan’s Politicians & Their Foreign Masters Wikileaks Disclosures

Presented Unedited

 

 

Xinhua ‘Analysis’: Pakistan Nods Affirmative for North Waziristan
Operation
Xinhua “Analysis”: “Pakistan Nods Affirmative for North Wa Waziristan
Operation” – Xinhua
Thursday, June 10, 2010, 13:33:03 GMT
by Syed Moazzam Hashmi

ISLAMABAD, June 10 (Xinhua) — In the fast developing scenario where the
certain subsequent events have boiled the mercury in Obama administration
once again to insist on Pakistan hitting terrorist strongholds in the
tribal areas bordering Afghanistan, Pakistan’s top officials have given an
affirmative nod to the start of operation in North Waziristan.”Our next
priority is going to be North Waziristan, but we have to time our
operations in line with our resources,” Pakistani Foreign Minister Shah
Mahmood Qureshi said on Wednesday.”At the moment we are consolidating our
position in South Waziristan,” he stated during a visit to Turkey while
emphasizing that Pakistan’s next priority in the fight against the
insurgent Taliban is North Waziristan.”The cat is out of t he bag,” Arshi
Saleem, senior research analyst at the Institute of Regional Studies in
Islamabad, told Xinhua on Thursday while commenting on the long rumored
the myth of the possibility of a military operation in North
Waziristan.Pakistani military chief General Ashfaq Pervaiz Kayani in his a recent visit to the tribal areas had declared victory in some parts of the tribal areas bordering Afghanistan against insurgent militants in
continuing operations in South Waziristan tribal areas.Analysts believe
that the victory declaration mean an affirmative nod to the imminent
operation in the North Waziristan’ s tribal areas as much desired by the
United States for long while winding up the chapter in South
Waziristan.”Certainly, it will give another reason to think fast about
cleaning up of the mess in North Waziristan,” Arshi Saleem, an Afghan
Affairs and Counter-Terrorism expert with IRS, commented while referring
to Tuesday midnight terror attack on a NATO supply convoy  near Pakistani
capital Islamabad that killed eight and destroyed 60 trucks.Punjabi
Taliban, a splinter group of disbanded Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP)
which is associated with Al-Qaeda, had claimed the responsibility for the
attack. On May 28, nearly 100 people including worshippers, policemen and
others were killed in twin suicide attacks in the eastern city of Lahore.
Punjabi Taliban and another Al-Qaeda-affiliated group had accepted the
responsibility for these terror attacks.”We might see some explosions here
and there that would be justification enough to start the operation and
convince the tribals as well as the media,” said Arshi Saleem, who is also
on the faculty of the National Defense University (NDU) in
Islamabad.The Pakistani military has already been badly stretched conducting
an operation in South Waziristan in the restive Pakistani tribal belt
bordering Afghanistan while keeping a massive presence on the eastern
border with India.According to reports, among the total 19 divisions of
some 500, 000-plus armed forces of Pakistan, seven to eight divisions are
currently engaged in counter-terrorism. Its two divisions are in South
Waziristan, one in North Waziristan, two in Swat and Dir and other areas
of the Islamic state that has long been experiencing extremist
militancy.Putting aside the possibility of an imminent full-scale
operation in North Waziristan while supporting his former colleagues, the
defense and security analyst Major General (retired) Jamshed Ayaz told
Xinhua, “No, I doubt it. The army chief does not want it.”Pakistani
military General Kayani told Obama administration in end-March that
Pakistani will not launch a “stream roller” operation in North
Waziristan.Analysts believe that it would not be possible for Pakistan to
absolutely prevent incidents of terrorism, which could be individuals in
nature or involving the unbridled non-state actors, from terrorizing the
170 million Pakistan is with off-and-on suicide bombings across the South
Asian nuclear state, thus, providing all reasons to the U.S. side, the
most important ally of Pakistan in the war against terror, to switch on a
massive offensive in North Waziristan.North Waziristan is known to be
unconquered due to its difficult terrain and resultant poor economy which
make its warlords vulnerable to moneyed foreign and local militants that
have been seeking refuge there after escaping from South
Waziristan.Miranshah, the headquarters of North Waziristan, and Mir Ali
are reported to be the strongholds of Al- Qaeda that include TTP, Punjabi
Taliban from south Punjab province, who mainly work under the flag of
“Lashkar-e-Jhangvi” (a disbanded Sunni extremist outfit), and foreign
militants including Chechens, Uzbeks, and Arabs.North Waziristan is
inhabited by Wazir and Dawar tribes. Both Siraj Haqqani and Hafiz Gul
Bahadur are Waziris while another militant Maulana Sadiq Noor who is
allied to TTP is from Dawar tribe.Analysts believe that it would be quite
interesting to watch this mercurial situation with the following
questions: What would be the operation aimed at in North Waziristan? What
would happen if the possible operation would be directed against Al-Qaeda
and the Punjabi Taliban? And how their comrades would react within
Pakistani cities if the fugitive Punjabi and sectarian militants were
targeted in the tribal areas? Why the strongholds of Punjabi Taliban so
far have not been raided? It might lead to some debate and conclusions as
the events unfold in the days to come.(Description of Source: Beijing
Xinhua in English — China’s official news service for English-language
audiences (New China News Agency))

The material in the World News Connection is generally copyrighted by the
source cited. Permission for use must be obtained from the copyright
holder. Inquiries regarding use may be directed to NTIS, US Dept. of
Commerce.

33) Back to Top
Journalist Says Taliban Take Money To Give Safe Passage to NATO Supply
Words in double slant lines are in English. – Geo News TV
Thursday, June 10, 2010, 13:12:44 GMT
military supplies for the Western forces in Afghanistan, transported via
Pakistan. The attack took place at a //terminal// near Islamabad where
these trucks were parked. Around 12 persons attacked the terminal around
midnight and burned 60 trucks. Eighty cars and a lot of
military supplies were destroyed in this attack. These military supplies
were being transported to Afghanistan. Every month, around 1500 trucks
transport military supplies to Afghanistan via Karachi. The supplies reach
the Karachi port from where they are loaded on trucks and transported to
different areas in Afghanistan, particularly Kabul and Bagram, via Chaman
and Khyber. Yesterday’s attack was the biggest one in Pakistan since 2001,
in which eight persons were killed, most of them drivers or cleaners of
the trucks. This is the biggest loss to the Western forces in the
transportation of their military supplies via Pakistan. During the last 10
years, military supplies worth billions of dollars have been transported
to Afghanistan via Pakistan, but this supply line has never faced any
major threat. Observers have often expressed their astonishment and the
Western media has been writing as to what is the reason that the Taliban
and other extremists do not interrupt this supply line or try to
disconnect it. To understand this, let us talk to Rahimullah Yousafzai in
Peshawar, resident editor of The News

. Yousafzai, what is the significance of yesterday’s incident?

(Begin live relay) (Yousafzai over video link) It has great significance
because it has taken place near Islamabad. All reports are saying that the attack has taken place near the capital city of Pakistan despite tight
security. An attack of this magnitude has taken place after a long time
and has caused a lot of damage; that is why it is being talked about in
the media a lot. These attacks used to take place on Peshawar Ring Road,
where there were quite a few terminals, which were later moved to Punjab
in the areas of Attock and Tarnol, where yesterday’s attack has taken
place. The number of attacks is not much according to the number of trucks
carrying the supplies.

(Khan) What is the reason? To destroy the enemy’s supply line is an
important part of the war strategy. The trucks, carrying supplies for the
Western forces, pass through areas in Afghanistan, which are considered to
be strongholds of the Taliban; what is the reason that they do not face a
major threat?

(Yousafzai) Attacks have taken place, but the supply line has never been
disconnected for a long time. It remained disconnected for a few days in
Khyber after it was attacked in Peshawar. A major reason for this is that
these supplies are not transported by the US or NATO forces, but by
contractors, who are responsible for the safe transportation of the
supplies. The contractor may give money to the Taliban or do anything to
ensure the safety of the supplies. There are reports that these
contractors have links with the Taliban and other extremist groups and pay
them //protection money// for the safe passage of the supplies. This is a
major source of income for the Taliban, but it is not talked about much.
Apart from the Taliban, there are also criminal gangs who take money from
the contractors. The contractors set aside a certain amount from the
contract money to use it for safe passage.

Khan asks: “The attack on the military supplies near Islamabad coincides
with the Taliban attacks on the Western forces in Afghanistan, in which 15
soldiers of Western forces have been killed during the last 48-hour. Do
you think their timing has any significance?”

(Yousafzai) Whenever the Western forces plan a major military action as in
Helmand and the impending action in Kandahar, they have to come out and
travel by road. It is not difficult for the Taliban to lay mines on the
roads. Most of the killings are caused by mines, and so far, the NATO
forces have been unable to counter this . They have tr ied using new
equipment and devices, but the attacks are still taking place. It seems
that the Taliban have got new weapons and their accuracy to hit the target
has been improved, because a lot of NATO helicopters are being knocked
down. Even the Drones have been knocked down in Afghanistan and every time
NATO commanders attribute it to technical fault, but it is not possible
that all the Drones fell down because of technical reasons. In my view,
the Taliban are targeting the aircrafts and knocking them down.

(Khan) Thank you very much Yousafzai. (end of live relay)

(Description of Source: Karachi Geo News TV in Urdu — 24-hour satellite
news TV channel owned by Pakistan’s Jang publishing group. Known for
providing quick and detailed reports of events. Geo’s focus on reports
from India is seen as part of its policy of promoting people-to-people
contact and friendly relations with India.)

Material in the World News Connection is generally copyrighted by the
source cited. Permission for use must be obtained from the copyright
holder. Inquiries regarding use may be directed to NTIS, US Dept. of
Commerce.

34) Back to Top
Pakistan Press Nawa-e Waqt 10 Jun 10
To request additional processing, call OSC at (800) 205-8615, (202)
338-6735; or fax (703) 613-5735. – Nawa-e Waqt
Thursday June 10, 2010 12:45:14 GMT
pictures on page one sho w Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani and the
Chinese deputy prime minister witnessing signing of an agreement, the
Chinese deputy prime minister exchanging views with President Asif Ali
Zardari, Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi meeting Turkish President
Abdullah Gul. The lower half of the page has a quarter-page advertisement.
Lead Story: Nawa-e Waqt report: Parliament’s right to legislate cannot be
restricted: Chief justice; restriction cannot be imposed on right of
judiciary to review

Detail account of hearing of petitions filed against some articles of the
18th Amendment. (pp 1, 9; 400 words) Nawa-e Waqt report: Court cannot
order holding of referendum: Aitzaz Ahsan (top lawyers); remarks of judges
not final, judgment can be made on contrary (pp 1, 9; 300 words) Report by
special correspondent: Strategic partnership with China to be promoted
further: Zardari (pp 1, 9; 800 words) Report by special correspondent:
National Assembly; budget prepared by IMF: Pervaiz Illahi (Pakistan Muslim
League-Qaid — PML-Q — leader); Farooq Sattar (minister) says tax should
be imposed on landlords (pp 1, 9; 800 words) Report by special
correspondent: Seven people were killed in Sangjani attack (on NATO
containers), five injured; superintendent police Saddar Zone suspended;
Interior Ministry orders judicial inquiry (pp 1, 9; 600 words) NNI report:
Security of containers responsibility of NATO: Interior Minister Rehman
Malik; temporary stand was made at Sangjani without intimating us (pp 1,
10; 200 words) Report by special correspondent: Military vehicles were
part of NATO consignment: Islamabad police chief (pp 1, 9; 300 words) SANA
news report: Lahore attacks wake up Punjab Government; operation in North
Waziristan next priority: Foreign Minister Qureshi (pp 1, 9; 300 words)
Report by special correspondent: Lahore high court seeks dates from
federation, provincial governments about holding local bodies’ elections;
it should be clarified why delay being made in elections (pp 1, 9; 300
words) Report by special correspondent: Lavish expenditures of President
House, Prime Minister House should be cut: Senators demand (pp 1, 9; 300
words) Report by special correspondent: Thinking of Pakistan wrong that US
will present ready-made resolution of Kashmir issue: National security
advisor (pp 1, 9; 300 words) KPI report: Kashmiri leadership rejects offer
of Indian prime minister for talks (pp 1, 9; 500 words) Report by special
correspondent: Mohmand Agency, Orakzai; attack on checkpoint, clashes; two
security force personnel, 23 militants killed (pp 1, 10; 600 words) Report
by Suhail Abdul Nasir: Security Council tried to tie hands, feet of Iran;
it will be shocking for Iran that China, Russia voted for sanctions; gas
pipeline agreement; Pakistani experts will have to go through resolution
with concentration (pp 1, 9; 400 words) Report by special correspondent:
National Accountability Bureau (NAB) seeks bribes of 250 million ru pees
(PRe) for plea bargain: Haris Afzal (pp 1, 9; 300 words) Report by special
correspondent: We are not blocking water of Pakistan’s share: Indian high
commissioner (pp 1, 9; 400 words) Page 2: News From Islamabad, Rawalpindi

Page two has a column besides local news and advertisements. Column by
Taiba Zia Cheema: Ghazi Ilmuddin, the martyred, and biased US

The column discusses removal of a Pakistani-origin police official in the
United States on his refusal to get his beard shaved. (800 words) Page 3:
National, International Reports

The page three has national and international news. Column by Saeed Aasi:
Taste of new connection

The column discusses situation in Balochistan. (800 words) SANA news
report: Afghanistan; NATO helicopter crashes; four US soldiers killed;
Taliban accept responsibility (p3; 100 words) Report from news desk:
People afraid of growing popularity of Taliban: Pakistan Institute for
Peace releases investigative report (pp 3, 10; 200 words) Page 4: News
From Suburbs Page 5: Business, Commerce Page 6: Continuation of Reports
From Other Pages; Advertisements Page 7: Classified Ads Page 8:
Continuation of Reports From Other Pages Page 9: Continuation of Reports
From Other Pages Page 10: Continuation of Reports From Other Pages Page
11: Sports World Page 12: National, International Reports

Prominent pictures on page 12 show President Asif Ali Zardari awarding the
Chinese deputy prime minister with Pakistan’s civil award, and Altaf Ahmed
Chaudhry, chairman of National Highway Authority, talking to Nawa-e Waqt.
The lower half of the page has a quarter-page advertisement. SANA news
report: Parting ways with government; Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam parliamentary
party authorizes Maulana Fazlur Rehman to hold decisive talks

Speaking after the meeting, Maulana Fazlur Rahman said; “We’ll not make
delay for a moment to quit government if agreements made with us are not
fulfilled.” (pp 8, 12; 300 words) Report by Qazi Bilal: Punjabis being
shot openly in Balochistan; we are posting Sindhi, Baluchi officers: Altaf
Ahmed; security of eight Japanese engineers costing PRe 200 million (pp 8,
12; 600 words) Report by special correspondent: We’ve apprised government
of our reservations; to conditionally support budget: Farooq Sattar
(Muttahida Qaumi Movement — MQM — leader) (pp 8, 12; 200 words) Report
by special correspondent: We’ve given 38 proposals for budget; to oppose
adoption if not approved: PML-Q (pp 8, 12; 400 words) Report by special
correspondent: We’ve closed doors for dictatorship through 18th Amendment:
Law minister (pp 8, 12; 200 words)

Report by special correspondent: Important meeting of Pakistani, US
authorities on assistance in science and technology (pp 8, 12; 500 words)
Nawa-e Waqt report: US to cooperate with Pakistan in science and
technology sector: Dr Kerry Jones (pp 8, 12; 400 words) Report from news
desk: Warm welcome of Dalits (unt ouchable Hindu caste) in Pakistan;
‘Brahmins’ (high caste Hindus) propaganda to get Pakistan declared as
terrorist proved ‘false’ (pp 8, 12; 300 words) Nawa-e Waqt report: Strict
implementation on rule of law, supremacy of constitution will have to be
ensured: Chief justice (pp 8, 12; 200 words) Report by special
correspondent: Budget anticountry, antipeople; IMF, World Bank, US
friendly: Jamaat-e-Islami chief (pp 12, 8; 400 words) Report by Ittrat
Jaffery: Taking new program from IMF after standby arrangement being
mulled (pp 8, 12; 200 words) Report by special correspondent: Budget
deficit; Punjab takes overdraft of PRe 6.97 billion from State Bank (pp 8,
12; 300 words) Report from monitoring desk: Blast in Kandahar wedding
ceremony; 39 killed (p12; 50 words) Page 13: Politics

Page 13 has articles and reports with pictures on domestic political
scene. Article by Nawaz Raza: Change in economic team for third time in
three years; is national budget IMF-friendly? (1,00 0 words) Article by
Salman Ghani: Why PPP (Pakistan People’s Party) not quitting Punjab
Government; system faces threats again? (1,000 words) Article by Amjad
Aziz Bhatti: Prime Minister’s visit to Balochistan (1,000 words) Page 14:
Editorial, Lead Articles

Page 14 has editorials and articles besides the regular gossip column “By
the way” and regular series of Islamic teachings from the Koran. It also
has couplets from Allama Iqbal and M uzaffar Warsi, and a saying of
Qaid-e-Azam. Editorial: Attack of armed people on NATO containers near
Islamabad; abandon role of US frontline ally now

The editorial discusses attack on containers carrying supplies for NATO
forces in which nine people were killed and 35 containers were set on
fire. The attack is alarming because it is the deadliest attack launched
near Islamabad. The daredevil action by the terrorists proves that they
could have launched this action within Islamabad as well. The government
should stop supplies for NATO as the measure is self-destructive. (1,200
words) Editorial: Good governance in Punjab

The editorial opines that the Punjab Government is ensuring good
governance in financial matters, but it should extend it to law-and-order
situation, hoarding, profiteering, and adulteration. (300 words)
Editorial: Budget; government should consider proposals of opposition

The editorial discusses criticism of increasing budget for President House
and Prime Minister House by the leader of opposition. (200 words) Article
by Justice (retd) Nazir Ahmed Ghazi: Jugular vein of Islamic community
(1,200 words) Article by Dr Ali Akbar Al-Azhari: Blood of hundreds of
thousands of stars (brings dawn)

The article discusses Israeli aggression against Freedom Flotilla. (800
words) Article by Raja Afrasiab Khan: Who these terrorists are? (last
episode) (600 words) Article by Rashid Malik: Fate of Muslims might change

The article discusses signing of gas pipel ine agreement between Pakistan
and Iran. (800 words) Page 15: Articles

Page 15 has articles on national and international issues. Article by
Sultan Mahmud Hali: Israeli intransigence, under whose backing? (800
words) Article by Fazal Hussein Awan: US policy…India….and Pakistan’s
future (800 words) Article by Syed Nasir Raza Kazmi: Increase in Indian
defense budget (1,200 words) Page 16: Politics

Page 16 has articles and reports with pictures on domestic political
scene. Article by Jabbar Mufti: Miracle of charter of democracy; (prime
minister’s) brother wins by-election, preparation on for son from Lodhraan
(1,000 words) Article by Sultan Sikandar: Acknowledgement of political
mistakes in Gilgit; Azad Kashmir (Pakistan-administered Kashmir) model
setup demanded (800 words) Article by Sajid Hussein Malik: Pakistan’s
nuclear program; what is truth? (1,500 words)

(Description of Source: Rawalpindi Nawa-e Waqt in Urdu — Privately owned,
widely read, con servative Islamic daily, with circulation around 125,000.
Harshly critical of the US and India)

Material in the World News Connection is generally copyrighted by the
source cited. Permission for use must be obtained from the copyright
holder. Inquiries regarding use may be directed to NTIS, US Dept. of
Commerce.

35) Back to Top
TV Show Discusses Phenomenon of Talibanization in Punjab
From the “Jirga” program hosted by well-known journalist Salim Safi who
hails from the tribal area. For a video of this program, contact
GSG_GVP_VideoOps@rccb.osis.gov or, if you do not have e-mail, the OSC
Customer Center at (800) 205-8615. Words within double slant lines are in
English. – Geo News TV
Thursday June 10, 2010 12:12:44 GMT
Reception: Good

Duration: 1 hour
Karachi Geo News at 1805 GMT on 7 June relays a program “Jirga”

hosted by Saleem Safi, a senior journalist. The program discusses and
analyses major issues.

Guests:

Aftab Ahmed Khan Sherpao, former chief minister of Khyber Pukhtunkhwa

Choudary Muhammad Yaqoob, former Inspector General Police (IGP),
Balochistan

Rana Sanaullah, law minister of Punjab on video link from Multan

Asif Ali Bhatti, Geo News reporter on video link from Islamabad

Safi says: “Punjab Province is increasingly getting embroiled in
terrorism. In today’s program, we are going to discuss the phenomenon of
Talibanization in Punjab.”

Safi asks Sanaullah who attacked the place of worship of the Ahmadiyyah
community in Lahore on 28 May? Sanaullah replies: “According to our
investigation, some of the terrorists involved in the attack belong to
Punjab, while others are from Federally Administered Tribal Area (FATA).”

Saf i asks Sanaullah why the Punjab Government denies the existence of the
Taliban on its soil. Sanaullah replies: “We do not //deny// the existence
of the Taliban in Punjab, but they may exist in Punjab the way they exist
anywhere else; I mean, there is no no-go area in Punjab, and the writ of
the government is in force in the entire province, unlike FATA which used
to be a no-go area in the past and which has become a safe haven for
militants as a result. So, Punjab cannot be compared to FATA in that
sense. Every corner of Punjab is open for Punjab Police and they can
monitor the activities of madrasahs as well.”

Safi asks Yaqoob: “Do you believe that the present terrorism in Pakistan
is the outcome of the Afghan jihad in the 1980s?” Yaqoob replies: “Yes, I
agree with Sanaullah when he says that this is the outcome of the Afghan
jihad in the 1980s. These madrasah students used to be sent to Afghanistan
for jihad against the then Soviet Union. Wh en the jihad was over, the
guns of the jihadist organizations turned toward us; so, the terrorism
that the country is now facing is very much home grown. The organizations
that were involved in the Afghan jihad were none other than the ones that
are banned in Pakistan today; for example, Lashkar-e-Jhangvi and
Sipah-e-Sahaba. The same organizations have been involved in sectarian
violence in Pakistan as well. The madrasahs used to be the recruitment
centers because poor students were readily available as jihadist forces.
After 9/11, when Pakistan came under pressure, it brought about a change
in the Kashmir policy and stopped funding jihadists in India-administered
Kashmir. That made Pakistan vulnerable to the jihadist organizations
returning from either Afghanistan or Kashmir.”

Safi asks Yaqoob: “The leadership of extremist (or jihadist)
organizations, like JuD chief Hafiz Saeed disowns this trend of terrorism
in Pakistan. Similarly, mainstream religious par ties like the
Jamaat-e-Islami Pakistan (JIP), too, denounce and disown militancy and
terrorist activities in Pakistan, despite being overt proponents of jihad.
Is it not a bit confusing that they have taken the responsibility for
jihad but are not claiming the responsibility for terrorism?” Yaqoob
replies: “Just assume that the lower tier of any extremist organization is
no more in control of the leadership, even if it is the state itself, like
Hafiz Saeed or Qazi Hussain Ahmed (former JIP chief). Did Qazi Hussain
Ahmed send his son to Afghanistan for jihad? No, he only sent poor
students of madrasahs. Now, pay them back.”

Safi asks Sherpao: “Do you believe that Talibanization exists in Punjab?”
Sherpao replies: “Divisions like Punjabi Taliban or Pashtun Taliban do not
apply to the phenomenon of Talibanization as they are one and the same.
After 9/11 there emerged a nexus of Al-Qa’ida, Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan,
and the rest of the jihad ist organizations. Al-Qa’ida plans terro rist
activities, while the Taliban or Punjabi militants execute these plans.”

Safi asks Sherpao: “Do you believe that to be called an extremist one may
not necessarily be from a madrasah? One can be an extremist even if he or
she has received modern education.” Sherpao replies: “It was in the era of
General Ziaul Haq when students in madrasahs began to be used as forces in
the Afghan jihad. The state should have //demobilized// those jihadist
elements as soon as they returned from the jihad after the fall of the
former Soviet Union. The state did not demobilize them and that was a big
mistake. We need //reforms// to be introduced for the network of
madrasahs.”

Safi asks Bhatti: “What is your analysis of the situation?” Bhatti
replies: “It is true that madrasahs provide the jihadist organizations
with students who become militants with proper training. They are sent to
Waziristan wh ere they receive training for militancy and terrorism. The
Punjabi militants have returned after the military operation in
Waziristan. Their basic aim is to even the score with the government.”

Safi asks Sanaullah: “Why are our police unable to control the wave of
terrorism?” Sanaullah replies: “Our police are dedicated enough,
sacrificing and working hard to curb terrorism. We are not in a state of
denial, and we are investing huge amount of money to ameliorate the police
infrastructure in Punjab.”

Safi concludes the program.

(Description of Source: Karachi Geo News TV in Urdu — 24-hour satellite
news TV channel owned by Pakistan’s Jang publishing group. Known for
providing quick and detailed reports of events. Geo’s focus on reports
from India is seen as part of its policy of promoting people-to-people
contact and friendly relations with India.)

Material in the World News Connection is generally copyrighted by the
sourc e cited. Permission for use must be obtained from the copyright
holder. Inquiries regarding use may be directed to NTIS, US Dept. of
Commerce.

36) Back to Top
Tajikistan Insists On More Active Measures Against Drugs – ITAR-TASS
Thursday June 10, 2010 12:17:48 GMT
intervention)

MOSCOW , June 10 (Itar-Tass) – The Collective Security Treaty Organisation
(CSTO), Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) and Commonwealth of
Independent States (CIS) are to intensify cooperation in the struggle
against drugs proliferation, the director of the Tajik Drugs Control
Agency, Rustam Nazarov, said at the conference titled Drug Production in
Afghanistan is a Challenge to World Community on Thursday.”Tajikistan has
a common border with Afghanistan and for this reason drugs are the most p
ressing problem for our country,” Nazarov said. According to Nazarov, “it
is very difficult to fight with the underground drug cartels nowadays,
because their network is very large and diversified.”He called for
fighting with drug-related crimes not only in Afghanistan but also beyond
its borders. “One should use the potentials of the CSTO, SCO and CIS to
neutralize drugs production in Afghanistan,” he said.(Description of
Source: Moscow ITAR-TASS in English — Main government information agency)

Material in the World News Connection is generally copyrighted by the
source cited. Permission for use must be obtained from the copyright
holder. Inquiries regarding use may be directed to NTIS, US Dept. of
Commerce.

37) Back to Top
Afghan elders protest against detention of tribal leader in eastern town –
Afghan Islamic Press
Thursday June 10, 2010 11:12:51 GMT
eastern town

Text of report by private Pakistan-based Afghan Islamic Press news
agencyKhost, 10 June: Tribal leaders and elders have protested against the
detention of a tribal leader by US forces. About 35 tribal leaders and
elders arrived in Gardez, the capital of Paktia Province, to stage a
protest rally against the detention of a tribal leader, Mohammad Naim
Salehkhel by the US forces today. Haji Gholam Mohammad, brother of the
detained Mohammad Naim Salehkhel, who came with tribal leaders to Gardez
told Afghan Islamic Press that his brother, Haji Mohammad Naim Salehkhel,
who had spend two and a half years in the Bagram and Guantanamo prisons,
was called by the governor of Paktia to Gardez city for a meeting.
Salehkhel was detained by Afghan police when he was returning (home) on 18
Sowr, 18 May, and later he was handed over to the US forces. He added: “
;I regretfully say that at first police and all other officials were
expressing their unawareness about the detention of Mohammad Naim
Salehkhel and when the Gardez police confirmed his detention the deputy
governor (of Paktia Province) started repeatedly promises of (freeing him)
today and tomorrow and asked us not to inform the media and avoid staging
protests. But now we are compelled to inform the media about it and stage
a protest rally.”Haji Gholam Mohammad added: “A three-day general strike
started in Zormat District starting from today, markets are closed and we
will decide about our future (plan) on the coming Sunday (13 June).” He
said about his brother Mohammad Naim that he is a tribal leader and was
appointed as security chief of Zormat District by the locals after the
fall of the Taleban regime. But Americans detained him and he spend two
and a half years in the Bagram and Guantanamo prisons. He was released
about six years ago and he has been liv ing his life as a tribal leader.
He repeatedly say that his brother had no links with the Taleban.On the
other hand, the spokesman for the governor of Paktia Province, Rohullah
Samon, strongly condemned the detention of Haji Mohammad Naim Salehkhel
and told AIP that the governor’s office of Paktia Province had started its
efforts to release the tribal leader. Responding to an AIP question Samon
said that Haji Mohammad Naim was not detained by the Paktia police but he
was detained by a special police force named special purpose police unit
sent from Kabul.(Description of Source: Peshawar Afghan Islamic Press in
Pashto — Peshawar Afghan Islamic Press in Pashto — Peshawar-based
agency, staffed by Afghans, that describes itself as an independent “news
agency” but whose history and reporting pattern reveal a perceptible
pro-Taliban bias; the AIP’s founder-director, Mohammad Yaqub Sharafat, has
long been associated with a mujahidin faction that merged with the
Taliban’ s “Islamic Emirate” led by Mullah Omar; subscription required to
access content; http://www.afghanislamicpress.com)

Material in the World News Connection is generally copyrighted by the
source cited. Permission for use must be obtained from the copyright
holder. Inquiries regarding use may be directed to NTIS, US Dept. of
Commerce.

38) Back to Top
Iran Boasts Positive Trade Balance With 29 Countries in First Month of New
Year
Unattributed report – Gilan-e Emruz
Thursday June 10, 2010 10:57:21 GMT
The report said the highest negative trade balance indicators were: the
United Arab Emirates, $558 million; Republic of Korea, $149 million;
Turkey, $97 million; Netherlands, $37 million; Russian Federation, $30
million; Germany, $267 million; Spain, $33 million; Italy, $79.9 million;
and France, $89 million. Also, Iran’s trade balance with the United States
of America is $5 million.

The highest positive trade balance indicators are: China, $57 million;
Iraq, $284 million; India, $55 million; Belgium, $38 million; and
Afghanistan, $54 million.

(Description of Source: Rasht Gilan-e Emruz in Persian — Pro-reform
provincial daily published in Rasht, the capital city of Gilan Province;
Licensed to and managed by Mohammad Kazem Shokuhi-Rad.)

Material in the World News Connection is generally copyrighted by the
source cited. Permission for use must be obtained from the copyright
holder. Inquiries regarding use may be directed to NTIS, US Dept. of
Commerce.

39) Back to Top
Taleban blame foreign forces for wedding party attack in Afghan south –
Afghan Islamic Press
Thursday June 1 0, 2010 10:39:00 GMT
south

Excerpt from report by private Pakistan-based Afghan Islamic Press news
agencyKandahar, 10 June: Each side is blaming the other side for the blast
in Kandahar (Province, in southern Afghanistan).(Passage omitted:
Contradictory claims are made about the explosion in a wedding ceremony in
Arghandab District last night)At a press briefing in Kandahar city (the
capital of Kandahar Province) at noon today, the governor of Kandahar
Province, Torialay Wisa, held the Taleban responsible for the blast and
said that the explosion was carried out by the Taleban with the help of a
Town Ace van and by doing this they turned people’s happy event into a
tragedy.(Passage omitted: Forty people were killed and 87 injured in the
blast).In a statement, the ISAF forces has blamed the Taleban for the
explosion and said that the Taleban carried out the attack to upset a
happy occasion of the people and they (Taleban ) showed that they wanted
to terrify people by such attacks. The ISAF forces added that they are
ready to cooperate with the government to investigate the incident.The
Taleban have strongly denied their involvement in the incident and said
that foreign forces aircraft attacked the wedding party and dozens of
people were killed or injured as a result.A Taleban spokesman, Qari
Mohammad Yusof Ahmadi, told AIP: “The Taleban strongly condemn this
incident and consider themselves partner in pain and sufferings of the
suffered families.”(Passage omitted: Ahmadi said that foreign forces
several times bombarded wedding ceremonies in the past)The Taleban
spokesman said: “The foreigners bombard wedding ceremonies to create a gap
between the people and the Taleban so they (foreign forces) could exploit
the situation, but the foreigners will never succeed in creating gaps
between the Taleban and the nation.”(Passage omitted: Afghan president
condemned the incident).(D escription of Source: Peshawar Afghan Islamic
Press in Pashto — Peshawar Afghan Islamic Press in Pashto —
Peshawar-based agency, staffed by Afghans, that describes itself as an
independent “news agency” but whose history and reporting pattern reveal a
perceptible pro-Taliban bias; the AIP’s founder-director, Mohammad Yaqub
Sharafat, has long been associated with a mujahidin faction that merged
with the Taliban’s “Islamic Emirate” led by Mullah Omar; subscription
required to access content; http://www.afghanislamicpress.com)

Material in the World News Connection is generally copyrighted by the
source cited. Permission for use must be obtained from the copyright
holder. Inquiries regarding use may be directed to NTIS, US Dept. of
Commerce.

40) Back to Top
Press Roundup on Defense, Science, Technology 31 May-6 June 10
The following a selecti on of relevant reports, editorials, and articles
on defense, science, and technology published in one English
newspaper–The News–from 31 May to 6 June: – Pakistan — OSC Summary
Thursday June 10, 2010 09:33:40 GMT
The 31 May issue of The News on page 1 carries a report headlined: “US
copters intrude into Khyber Agency.” The report says: “Two US gunship
helicopters violated Pakistan’s airspace and entered Landikotal tehsil of
Khyber Agency, official sources said. The sources said the two US choppers
intruded into Pakistani territory and hovered over areas along the
Pak-Afghan border for five minutes before returning to Afghanistan. The
intrusion by the helicopters created concern in the border area as there
were reports that the US had decided to target suspected hideouts of
militants inside Pakistan.” US Drone Attack on Pakistani Tribal Area
Reportedly Kills Sen ior Al-Qa’ida Leader

The 2 June issue of The News on page 1 carries a report headlined:
“Al-Qaeda number three killed in NWA (North Waziristan Agency) drone
attack.” The report says: “Pakistani security officials and the Taliban
believe that al-Qaeda’s No three and a close aide to Osama bin Laden,
Mustafa Ahmad Mohammad Uthman Abu al-Yazeed, also known as Sheikh Saeed
al-Misri, was among the 10 people killed in the US drone attack on May 21
at Saidabad village of Dattakhel subdivision in North Waziristan tribal
region. He was said to be al-Qaeda’s financial director as well as the
chief operational commander for Pakistan and Afghanistan. He was believed
to have transferred several thousand dollars to Mohammad Atta, the leader
of the 9/11 hijackers, before the September 11 attacks on the World Trade
Centre in New York. A statement on an Islamic website confirmed his death.
It said his wife, three daughters and his granddaughter, and other men,
women and some children were also killed in the attack on his house. An
Egyptian by origin, Sheikh Saeed had replaced al-Qaeda’s senior commander
Abu Laith al-Libbi, who was killed along with 14 other Arab and tribal
militants in the US drone attack on January 29, 2008 on a house in
Khushali Torikhel village of Mir Ali town in North Waziristan. The
56-year-old Sheikh Saeed was accused by the US of involvement in extremist
movements for nearly 30 years after joining the radical student group, led
by his fellow Egyptian Dr Ayman al-Zawahiri.” PM Gilani Expresses Concern
Over Pakistan-Specific Indian Military Doctrine

The 5 June issue of The News on page 1 carries a report headlined: “India
can thrust war on Pakistan, PM tells Nato.” The report says: “Prime
Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani, while pointing towards the Pakistan-specific
Indian military doctrines such as the Cold Start, has urged the North
Atlantic Treaty Organization (Nato) to take active inte rest in South
Asian security perspective.” The report quoted PM Gilani as saying at an
address to the North Atlantic Council in Brussels: “We remain concerned
over Pakistan-specific Indian military doctrines such as the Cold Start
envisaging a limited conventional war under the nuclear overhang, huge
increase in Indian military budget and massive weapon acquisitions. These
together with discriminatory policies especially in the nuclear and
technological arena have accentuated the regional imbalance in South Asia.
It is a nuclearised region and issues of peace, strategic stability and
security pose formidable challenges to Pakistan and impinge on global
peace and security. Pakistan-India relations had a significant bearing on
South Asian security, and unfortunately, outstanding disputes such as
Kashmir, Siachen, and Sir Creek continue to fester and require a just and
peaceful resolution.” Pakistan Raises Defense Budget by 17 Percent

The 6 June issue of The News on page 1 carries a report headlined:
“Defense budget up by 17 percent.” The report says: “Pakistan increased
its defense budget by 16.935 per cent by allocating Rs 442.173 billion for
2010-11. This reflects a marginal increase of around five per cent in real
terms in defense spending if the inflation rate of 12 per cent is taken
into account.” The report quoted Finance Minister, Abdul Hafeez Sheikh as
saying at the budget speech: “Security is our topmost concern. We are
facing a situation in which our armed forces, paramilitary forces and
security forces are laying down their lives. They should know from this
House that we all stand by them. This increase in the defense budget of
around Rs 64 billion was considered a must given the intensified battle
against the Taliban insurgents.” The report says: “In the outgoing fiscal,
Pakistan allocated Rs 342.913 billion for defense but it was revised to Rs
378.135 billion by the e nd of the fiscal 2009-10. India last February
announced Rs 1.47 trillion ($32 billion) defense budget, which speaks of
its ambitions in the region. Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani has already
pointed towards the Pakistan-specific Indian military doctrines such as
the cold start.”

Material in the World News Connection is generally copyrighted by the
source cited. Permission for use must be obtained from the copyright
holder. Inquiries regarding use may be directed to NTIS, US Dept. of
Commerce.

41) Back to Top
US Seeks To Curb Illicit Drug Flows From Afghanistan – Beyrle – ITAR-TASS
Thursday June 10, 2010 09:55:08 GMT
intervention)

MOSCOW, June 10 (Itar-Tass) – The United States as Russia seeks to curb
illicit drug flows from Afghanistan, U.S. Ambassador in Mo scow John
Beyrle said on Thursday.Speaking at the international forum, “Drug
Production in Afghanistan: A Challenge for the International Community”,
Beyrle said the U.S. realised Russia’s concern over the drug threat from
Afghanistan.The United States opposes a drug war against Russia and wants
to develop partnership in this region, the ambassador said. He compared
drug business with terrorism. Americans and Russians pay a high price for
the fight against this evil, the ambassador added.In his words, the U.S.
and Russia have a lot of fields for cooperation where our interests
coincide. Beyrle called for forgetting old wars and developing
cooperation. The U.S. wants to see Russia strong and prosperous and
considers it an ally, the American diplomat stressed.The task of the
international community is to create an expanded international coalition
to ensure peace and security in Afghanistan, he said. Russia’s support for
NATO and the U.S. in Afghanistan is of the utmo st importance. Only joint
efforts taken by the whole world community can help counter terrorism and
drug trafficking, the U.S. ambassador added.For his part, Russian Foreign
Minister Sergei Lavrov said Moscow would insist Afghanistan’s drug
trafficking to be classified as a threat to global security. “Moscow is
convinced that the world should exert efforts to fight Afghan drug
trafficking. We put forth an initiative to this effect,” he said.”Moscow
will insist Afghan drug trafficking to be classified as a threat to global
security,” the Russian foreign minister said.”We hope that the Moscow
international forum will give an additional impetus to the joint struggle
against Afghan drug trafficking. We hope that our efforts will be
successful and heard by the international community,” Lavrov added.In his
words, NATO and the SCO (Shanghai Cooperation Organisation) make serious
contribution to resolving this problem. “But the efforts taken by the
world community should be more effective,” the minister said.He recalled
that a conference on drug trafficking would take place in Kabul in July
2010. “Serious issues to be raised at the forum should be recorded in
final documents,” Lavrov pointed out.(Description of Source: Moscow
ITAR-TASS in English — Main government information agency)

Material in the World News Connection is generally copyrighted by the
source cited. Permission for use must be obtained from the copyright
holder. Inquiries regarding use may be directed to NTIS, US Dept. of
Commerce.

42) Back to Top
Angry crowd throw stones at foreign forces office in Afghan north – Afghan
Islamic Press
Thursday June 10, 2010 09:12:20 GMT
north

Text of report by private Pakistan-based Afghan Islami c Press news
agencyKonduz, 10 June: People have thrown stones at a PRT (Provincial
Reconstruction Team) office and the PRT fired at the people. Eyewitnesses
from Taloqan, the capital of Takhar Province (in northern Afghanistan),
told Afghan Islamic Press (AIP) that an angry crowd threw stones at the
PRT office in Taloqan city at noon today, 10 June, and the PRT (soldiers)
opened fire at the people.An eyewitness told AIP that the protesters had
suffered casualties as a result of the firing but no details were
available. Officials are avoiding commenting on this incident and the
reason for the protest was not known yet.(Description of Source: Peshawar
Afghan Islamic Press in Pashto — Peshawar Afghan Islamic Press in Pashto
— Peshawar-based agency, staffed by Afghans, that describes itself as an
independent “news agency” but whose history and reporting pattern reveal a
perceptible pro-Taliban bias; the AIP’s founder-director, Mohammad Yaqub
Sharafat, has long been a ssociated with a mujahidin faction that merged
with the Taliban’s “Islamic Emirate” led by Mullah Omar; subscription
required to access content; http://www.afghanislamicpress.com)

Material in the World News Connection is generally copyrighted by the
source cited. Permission for use must be obtained from the copyright
holder. Inquiries regarding use may be directed to NTIS, US Dept. of
Commerce.

43) Back to Top
Afghan official denies Taleban claim capturing district in east – Afghan
Islamic Press
Thursday June 10, 2010 09:06:14 GMT
Text of report by private Pakistan-based Afghan Islamic Press news
agencyGhazni, 10 June: The Taleban claim they have captured a district.
The Taleban announced that following three hours of fighting they captured
Jelga District of Maydan Wardag Province (in eastern Afghanistan) this
morning, 10 June.A Taleban spokesman, Zabihollah Mojahed, in this regard
told Afghan Islamic Press (AIP) that the Taleban carried out an attack on
Jelga District of Maydan Wardag Province early this morning and following
three hours of fighting the Taleban managed to take control of the
district building (the office of the head of the district). He added that
two police had been killed and three others wounded in the clash and three
Taleban also suffered injuries in the fighting.The Taleban spokesman also
reported seizure of arms and ammunition and he said that the Taleban
seized a quantity of several kind of weapons and a large quantity of
ammunition. Regarding the government personnel and police, he said that
they had ran away from the area and no one was detained by the Taleban
alive.When AIP contacted the Maydan Wardag security commander, Haq Nawaz
Haqyar, in this regard he confirmed the Taleban attack on the district but
sa id that the attack was repelled. Haqyar admitted that one police was
killed and two others injured in the attack and added that the Taleban had
also suffered casualties but details were not available.(Description of
Source: Peshawar Afghan Islamic Press in Pashto — Peshawar Afghan Islamic
Press in Pashto — Peshawar-based agency, staffed by Afghans, that
describes itself as an independent “news agency” but whose history and
reporting pattern reveal a perceptible pro-Taliban bias; the AIP’s
founder-director, Mohammad Yaqub Sharafat, has long been associated with a
mujahidin faction that merged with the Taliban’s “Islamic Emirate” led by
Mullah Omar; subscription required to access content;
http://www.afghanislamicpress.com)

Material in the World News Connection is generally copyrighted by the
source cited. Permission for use must be obtained from the copyright
holder. Inquiries regarding use may be directed to NTIS, US Dept. of
Commerce.

No Comments

Zardari-Nawaz Mutual Backstabbing & Traitorous Anti-Pakistan Acts : US Ambassador Meddling in Pakistan Affairs by WIKILEAKS

 

 

 

 

 

 

ZARDARI COMMENTS ON INDIA/NAWAZ SHARIF
2009 January 5, 13:11 (Monday)
09ISLAMABAD24_a
SECRET
SECRET
In the metadata of the Kissinger Cables, this field is called ‘Previous Handling Restrictions’.Cablegate does not originally have this field. We have given it the entry ‘Not Assigned’.

Citations for acronyms used are available here.” data-hasqtip=”true” oldtitle=”Handling Restrictions” title=”” style=”box-sizing: inherit; background: transparent; color: rgb(33, 107, 124) !important; text-decoration: none; font-size: 10pt !important; cursor: pointer; padding: 0px 1px; margin-top: 2px; margin-left: 2px; display: inline-block;”>Handling Restrictions

— Not Assigned —
5982
— Not Assigned —
TEXT ONLINE
— Not Assigned —
TE – Telegram (cable)
— N/A or Blank —
— N/A or Blank —
— Not Assigned —
— Not Assigned —
Content
Raw content
Metadata
Print
Share
Show Headers
1. (S) Summary:
President Zardari told the Ambassador January 2 he would have no choice but to respond militarily to an Indian attack. There was no more politically sensitive issue in Pakistan than Kashmir, he said. Zardari had been briefed by ISI Director General, LTG Pasha, on his meeting with the DCIA in Washington, and he had concurred in the release of the “tearline” information to be passed to the Indians. Zardari also discussed his increasing frustration with Nawaz Sharif’s government in the Punjab, whom he believed had tipped off Jamaat-ul-Dawa (JUD) about the assets freeze ordered by the federal government. Zardari discussed his concern about relations with India and his conviction that he (and Chief of Army Staff General Kayani) represented the best hope for better relations with India. Zardari needs additional resources for the police, particularly in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) and Northwest Frontier Province (NWFP), and he was looking forward to his upcoming trip to Afghanistan.
End summary.
2. (S) Ambassador called on President Zardari January 2 to discuss follow-up to the Mumbai investigation. Zardari said he had been briefed by Lt. General Pasha on his meeting with DCIA, and he had approved the release of “tearline” information to the Indians. He wanted to emphasize he (and General Kayani) were fully committed to better relations with India. He reminded the Ambassador that it had only taken a “phone call” from the U.S. to ensure that Pakistan did not oppose the U.S./India civil nuclear deal at the Nuclear Suppliers Group. Zardari emphasized he had no problem making decisions, recalling that we had asked him to refuse the release of detainees in the context of “peace deals” when the Army and ISI were pressing to do so. But he said there was no way that he could let India attack Pakistan: many in the West did not understand the importance of Kashmir in Pakistani public opinion.
3. (C) Zardari indicated clearly that he was disinclined to repeal with 17th amendment (which gives the President the power to appoint the service chiefs, judges, and the Election Commissioner.) He justified this on the grounds that the initiative had to come from parliament. (Nawaz Sharif lately has been pressing Zardari to fulfill his electoral commitment to repeal this amendment, which codified Musharraf’s Legal Framework Order.)
4. (S) Zardari said that he was increasingly losing patience with Nawaz Sharif’s government in the Punjab, and he believed that a confrontation was looming. He said that Pakistani Muslim League-Nawaz Chief Minister Shabbaz Sharif had tipped off the JUD about the UNSCR 1267 mandated asset freeze, resulting in almost empty bank accounts. (Information from MOI does indicate that bank accounts contained surprisingly small amounts.) Zardari suggested Lahore Principal Officer might mediate between the Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) Governor and Shabbaz Sharif who increasingly are publicly at odds. Ambassador noted that his government had been “holding over Nawaz’s head” the Supreme Court’s decision on Nawaz’s eligibility to run for office. Zardari replied, “yes, but it doesn’t seem to be doing much good anymore.” Zardari dismissed Nawaz’s ability to bring crowds into the street in the Punjab if his party was removed from the Punjab government.
5. (S) Ambassador and Zardari discussed U.S. assistance issues, particularly in regard to upcoming visits of A/S Boucher and CODEL Reed. As usual, Zardari asked for additional support, particularly to fund additional police in FATA and NWFP, which could hold territory after the army and the Frontier Corps moved out. He said that he needed 100,000 police in each province. (There are now 48,000 police in NWFP.) And he needed equipment quickly. He said that he was going to ask us to reprogram some of our funding, since “without security, none of the other programs matter.”
6. (S) Zardari confirmed again at the end of the conversation that Pakistan would not allow non-state actors to dictate state policy, but that the GOP would respond if the Indians attacked. He recommended a report done in India which indicated that Indian Muslims are treated poorly and are among the least prosperous members of society. He said that the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) was trying to whip up anti-Muslim sentiment. Moreover, there were plenty of extremist groups in India that could have assisted Lashkar-e-Taiba.
7. (C) Ambassador asked about Swat. He said flatly they did not have the troops to hold it. Ambassador asked the status of Asfandyar Wali Khan, the head of Awami National Party, who was ostensibly in charge of the NWFP government. Zardari just rolled his eyes.
8. (S) Zardari said his trip to Afghanistan had been rescheduled for January 7. He laughed about the rumors that civilian military struggles in Pakistan had prompted the delay. In truth, he said, he did not like to fly in bad weather, and he was worried about security. Ambassador had asked Interior Minister Rehman Malik several times about the status of Brahamdagh Bugti who is in exile in Afghanistan. (Readers will recall that the status of Mr. Bugti was a major bilateral irritant between Afghanistan and the Musharraf government since Musharraf wanted Bugti “deported” to Pakistan by Karzai to “face justice” for participation in separatist activities.) Zardari said he was going to ask Karzai to keep him in Afghanistan: Bugti was now involved in conflicts for supremacy in his tribe. Zardari said that government was drafting legislation to give the Balochis more autonomy and political control.(Amb ANN) PATTERSON

, , , ,

No Comments

Sabotaging the Gwadar and CPEC Project by Nasurullah Brohi

 

The external infiltration has always been a major reason for the instability in Pakistan and despite huge diplomatic efforts and raising voices at various international forums; the issue has never been resolved. Particularly, right from the proclamation of the China’s investment plans for the development of Gawadar port and CPEC projects with an announcement of $46 billion development projects for Pakistan, the regional rogue powers never sat with ease. Since, with its immense trade potential, the Gwadar Port provides the shortest trade route and serves as a corridor between the Persian Gulf and Western China.

Notably, China provides over 80 percent of the $248 million for the development of the Gwadar Port. The decision to invest on Gwadar Port, allows the regional states and the trade partners to benefit through a short, safe and convenient trade route that effectively passes through the South China Sea, Pacific Rim, Malacca Strait and Sri Lanka and effectively connects the entire region with the European markets.

Pakistan has always shown serious concerns over the Indian efforts to sabotage the China-Pakistan-Economic-Corridor (CPC) by possible terror attacks aimed at making the CPEC a failure. The issue of sabotaging the projects through the clandestine nexuses against the Pakistan as revealed after the recent apprehension of Indian spy Kulbhushan Yadav with a series of his confessions about the tasks and operations yet were in the pipeline to carry out in Pakistan.

Such motives do not seem merely confined with the objectives to put a single target in chaos but in fact, reflect the eager pursuits of creating muddle the situations that ultimately delay the completion of the development projects particularly those underway with the friendly states and predominantly that aim at boosting Pakistani economy.

At the diplomatic fronts, ambitious efforts also try to isolate Pakistan by creating a typical sense of bitterness amidst the relations of Pakistan with its friendly states like China but fortunately, the time-tested friendship

a typical sense of bitterness amidst the relations of Pakistan with its friendly states like China but fortunately, the time-tested friendship between the two countries, and the wisdom of their leaderships never let such immoral tactics to become successful. Many analysts believe, since, India considers China as a regional competitor, therefore; it frequently tries overcoming the China rise that greatly diminishes the chances of Indian ambitions of becoming a regional and later on a global power.

With over 46 billion dollars investment, the project would greatly increase the political and economic influence of China in the region, therefore; the Indian side always attempted through the despicable means to creating law and order situation in the region. Such tactics often used as a tool to compel the Chinese to vacate the Gawadar port and eventually lose interest in the completion of the CPEC and Gwadar projects. Though India poured an initial investment of $150 million for the development of Iranian Port of Chah Bahar but such strives could not undermine the significance of the Gwadar Port.

Comparatively, the Gwadar port enables the regional countries to carry out the trade activities much easier access than Chah Bahar. In addition, the Port also provides landlocked Afghanistan and the Central Asian states with much cheaper opportunity than the Chah Bahar. The Gwadar Port also reduces the trade distances of regional partners from 10,000 km to 2,500 km. moreover; the regional trade partners will effectively save the cost and time as well.

However, the firmness Chinese and Pakistani government is always obvious for making the long cherished dream a resounding success. For the reasons of security and the timely completion of the CPEC project additionally with the successful functioning of the Gwadar Free Trade Zone, Pakistan has allocated a special security division of over 8, 000 military personnel. In addition, an estimated number of 90,000 security personnel comprising the paramilitary and other security services of Pakistan also vigilantly monitor and ready to curb all the Indian secret activities for sabotaging the Chinese investment plans in Pakistan.

Reference

, , ,

No Comments

Looking Inside the Hindu Mind & India’s Psyche

Pakistan Think Tank

Why Pakistan Should Be Impregnable with Nuclear & Missile Power  

Provides a Sampling of Hindu Mind

A Peep into the Mind of Young Indians Suffering from Pakistanophobia

Raised in Muslim Hate=Pakistan Hate

Read here excerpts of Hindus speaking their mind in Quora.com-An Anti-Pakistan Indian infested Hate Site

The question isn’t as much as “What would happen if China and Pakistan attacked India?” rather is it possible China would join Pakistan to attack India on Pakistan’s insistence? And the answer is – a clear, big NO.

Why? Let’s analyze!

Pakistan has lost face everywhere with everyone. UAE doesn’t give it a damn. Nor does Iran. Nor does Saudi Arabia. Nor does Egypt nor does Turkey. Pakistan’s relations with Eurasian nations are – non-existent, with middle east – strained, with India – in dire straits and with the USA-UK-France-Germany – dying. Forget the big ones, Pakistan is unsuccessful at wooing even comparatively small nations such as Afghanistan and Bangladesh. There is not one country in the world which is willing to stand with Pakistan, save for China.

Now, the question is – will China go so far as to fight a war for Pakistan? Well, any sane analyst would answer that will a loud and clear NO.

China didn’t become a global power because of friendship with Pakistan, rather Pakistan is friends with China because it’s a regional superpower. Whereas China wouldn’t mind flattering Pakistan, massage it’s ego occasionally, it won’t fight a war for it. The reason is simple:

(1) China won’t fight a war. It didn’t become a global power by fighting wars. It grew by doing business. It wouldn’t jeopardize it’s trade with a big a nation such as India and with other nations as a cascading effect.

(2) Even if China fights someone, there will have something big for China in it. Fighting alongside Pakistan for what essentially is a brazen rocky land with no human population will be a very foolish step by China. China won’t be so foolish.

(3) In any case, whether China joins Pakistan in attacking India, or Pakistan uses it as an opportunity to attack India when it’s engaged with China, it will not remain a low intensity fight. It will escalate into a full-scale war, which will be devastating for the entire south Asia.

In case such a full scale war breaks out, USA and Japan will immediately join the war either directly or indirectly. Russia will be reluctant to join the war due to India factor but may extend some indirect military support to China. If the situation worsens, Vietnam, Philippines and Taiwan may join India to take the fight to Chinese mainland.India will mobilize it’s navy to destroy Pakistan beyond recognition in less than 48 hours. USA and Japan will exercise it’s naval and air power to bombard Chinese cities on eastern coast. Cities like Beijing, Shanghai, Shandong, Fuzhou, Guangzhou may suffer damages that will take decades to repair.

In the aftermath to the war:

(1) Pakistan may cease to exist. Baluchistan may become a sovereign nation. Remaining Punjab will be merged in Indian Punjab. KPK, Gilgit, Baltistan areas will go to Afghanistan, and Kashmir will be integrated fully into India giving it an autonomy.

Chinese business will suffer extreme damages taking the country back by at least a decade.

India will go back by a decade or more on it’s development, but in the future the progress will be fast, as the enduring peace post war due to a stable region lacking hostility will allow it to grow at a much faster pace without worrying about hostile neighborhood. The money India currently spends on military modernization, it will spend of building infrastructure and within a decade it will be completely back on its feet. Only bigger, stronger and commanding more respect.

Saurav Nimesh

Well, on fact what will happen and what will not is difficult to say. But there is an interesting Novel written on similar scenario and it is worth a read. Read it its a good one.

reference : Dragon Fire (novel)

Chirag Rawal

Firstly, I don’t think such scenario is possible. China is smart enough to not to wage war against one its biggest markets for its product and inviting all the economic troubles in the current economic conditions.

Secondly, Lets assume if both China & Pakistan attack India at the same point in time, what are the various possibilities:

1. India will be incurring majority losses. Given the strength and capabilities of both the enemies, Indian forces definitely can’t handle both at the same time. But equal blows will be to Pakistan & China as well. India might loose at the end of the war (if it fights it all alone) but the damage done to China & Pakistan will be huge as well. India has one of the best missile technologies that it can target any part of China & Pakistan (Land to land marking). There is a possibility that if everything goes to much out of the hand, India might also think of using its Nukes (Now to the counter argument that both China & Pakistan are nuclear powers as well, The one who strikes first might have the possibilities to stop the war, or it can be used as a bargaining chip).

2. India’s allies especially the ones who are either against China Or Pakistan will come to support India, to name a few Japan, Israel, Iran, US, France etc. Their are lesser probabilities of France joining in, but if US supports India (because it’ll give it a purpose to fight China) many of the countries from Europe & England might join in India’s favor. And if that happens, I don’t need to say much, we might also get the entire Kashmir, our China captured area back at the end of it. Some extra territory might be the bonus. But Even if they not, Only Iran & Japan (both have extremely good relations with India) are enough to balance it out as China & Japan will be engaged on the other side of Chinese borders. Pakistan too will have to deploy its forces on Iran’s border, hence the focus will shift and then given the size of India’s army/navy/airforce. India can handle both on its top borders.

3. Pakistan will definitively be ruined. Because of its location & capabilities it’s an easy target for India. India might first try to go after Pakistan first, use its navy/air force/army to do the maximum damage their and than take it to China. You might say, till that China must have done huge damage to India but in a war going on damage is certain. Handling both simultaneously and making sure you win the war will be difficult. So India’s focus might shift to do maximum damage to both the countries. And given the size of Pakistan being very small compared to India & China. It will definitely be destroyed. And after that whosoever wins at the end India/China, both will continue to exists. Our population & Size is big enough that we can’t be completely destroyed. Our territory might get shorted but at the end of it, China & India will still exists. Pakistan, I think have dim chances.

Lastly, I still think, such a scenario is not going to happen. India is a smart country. They have solid foreign ties especially with countries against China & Pakistan. We are much powerful then Pakistan and in any scenario it will be difficult for Pakistan to afford a big war. China is heavily dependent on India, it’s the worlds largest exporter and we are one of the biggest Importers. Ours is the largest, economically capable middle class market in the world. Growing tension with India, China will loose Indian markets, and we all talk about modern day warfare, but most crucial of the warfare is Economics, and we have done enough good their. That its better for most of the countries of the world to be friends with India rather than being enemies. Even lets say China, all what media shows is that China is India’s enemy. I think it was but not now. Even if you read about China’s argument of not supporting India’s NSG membership it’s more because of distrust it has on Pakistan. Their is no point against India in it. So China will most likely not want to wage in any war with India for next 30–40 years at least. But since you asked it hypothetically, I have answered in the same fashion.

Mahesh Garkoti

So there’s a if added to the question, so I will try to give a practical answer.

If China and Pakistan would attack India at the same time,then INDIA IS WRECKED.

YES, Offensive it may sound to most of the Indians but it’s the bitter truth.

Possible results of war-:

  • India losing a significant Part of its territories .
  • Loss of man and money.
  • Possible nuclear attacks.
  • Economic crisis.
  • Downfall of Indian growth by 20 years.

Consider,Pakistan to be a motorcycle,India car and china a mini truck.Now what happens when both the countries attack India.

Whenever there is a clash between,motor cycle and car it’s obvious and practical car will bear a huge loss,no matter how badly both collided or even if its a one sided collision also.Now,consider when this damaged car is put against the mini truck what will happen to the car.No doubt,it will get wrecked. So will India.

Pakistan,is obvious will start from the LoC and the Rajasthan borders,with a huge amount of its tank capacity,it will try to enter the international borders,Now Indian military knows they need almost 2/3 of their troops in every field to stop that attack,so they will likewise plan them and position them.

http://www.globalfirepower.com/c…

Now,when 2/3 of your military forces are already enrolled defending your western borders, who will guard the Northen and eastern borders.Now,it becomes practically too difficult for the units to cover the distance in a single day from one border in west to other in East.

Now,China in every field is superior to India,be it the army,weapons,aircrafts or even the transport facilities.They have everything available for their soldiers right at the place they need.

Now,when 2/3 of the Indian army is busy fighting against Pakistan then how will the remaining soldiers deal with the Chinese army for which India originally had 3/4 available and 2/3 of which are busy right now.

Compare World Military Powers Results

So,it would be impossible for India to go through this kind of war and survive.Similar condition arrived in 1965 war,when India was fighting Pakistan then during that time China favoured Pakistan with all aid and military equipment and findings of 60 million$.So as India agreed on declaring ceasefire as one of the major concerns was constant interuption of China in the war,and if China would have come along Pakistan than everybody knew that IT WOULD BRING HAVOC IN INDIA.

As,the above scenario is hypothetical,but if this ever comes true than in simple words INDIA is DOOMED.

Q:What would happen if China and Pakistan attacked India?

A: Well first of all let us establish some ground facts-

This is the Chinese military’s awesome size-China Military Strength

and this is Pakistan- Pakistan Military Strength

vs this is India- India Military Strength

India will easily get it’s A** handed to it whether it is a conventional or nuclear war with China and Pakistan doing a “Tag-Team” to attack India.

China does want the world to kowtow and more importantly ASIA to kowtow and has taken a lot of steps for this to happen, some of them are collectively known as the “String of Pearls Strategy”-

But this strategy of China of looking down on its neighbours who don’s act in favour of Chinese interests also has another area. For China’s viewpoint see this –

This has resulted in the following countries becoming scared and even covertly antagonistic to China, they include-

Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Philippines, Vietnam, Australia and even the USA.

Of-course with South Korea coming, China’s “Special Needs neighbour and eternal Friend” – North Korea joins on the side of China.

So, we add – North Korea to Chinese allies- North Korea Military Strength

(NK may not formally attack India).

But add these countries to India’s supporters (but they may or may not enter the War formally)-

USA- United States of America Military Strength

Japan- Japan Military Strength

South Korea- South Korea Military Strength

Taiwan- Taiwan Military Strength

Vietnam- Vietnam Military Strength

Australia- Australia Military Strength

The wild card is of-course Russia – Russia Military Strength

The EU will play honest broker and sell arms to India and China all the time it’s media will praise India and its Govt will support China. Russia will most probably do the same, play honest broker to both sides.

In short- WW3 may take place (big IFF).

Summary- Pakistan will get obliterated, India will face massive losses and go back 25 years, China will lose badly if the US or Russia enter against it else will win big.

Yu-Hsing Chen

No, they’er not. at least China is not.

China has a border dispute with India in where they disagree on where the border should be drawn, they have no interest in conquering India or anything silly like that.

Perhaps more importantly, now the USA have set such precedence, war will never be declared between major countries ever again, they’ll just go ahead and do it (the USA never declared war against Vietnam, Iraq , Afghanistan.)

Ananthakrishnan Nair

I can’t improve on bhavya kundu’s answer. But I have a slightly different perspective.

I think the war will be limited and short. Any largescale action will invariably include nukes. So here is what I think India will do

Pressurize Bangladesh to provide access to road network for Evacuating civilians.
Follow a scorched earth policy while rapidly retreating from NE
Invade Tibet through chumbi valley and use the sizeable refugee population to stir up trouble there
Bomb the karakoram highway out of existence
Disect pakistan at its “waist” using mechanized infantry. Kill the generals. It is a centralized sham democracy run by military. Once the leaders are gone they will take a long time to recover
Blockade Karachi port. Destroy all fuel storages in Pakistan. Stir up Baluchistan.
Let loose CRPF to decimate Maoists. Constitutional rights take a hike.
Indian Muslims come out in solidarity to openly denounce and lynch terrorists. Believe me, they will. If you don’t believe me, look at stats of communal issues in war years. Its like the kaurava-pandava thing – twixt us we are a hundred and a five, when an outsider raises his banner we are 105.
Mountain corps totally block up Siliguri corridor. The canals are breached in Bangla border to impede chinese armoured corps. Bangla asks for protection. All road/rail/bridges in assam Tripura border with Bangla bombed by IAF.
Ladakh is fortified with a totally defensive doctrine. But special forces drawn from gorkha/garhwali regiments harass Chinese logistics begin enemy lines. Dog fights all along border. India invades Tibet.
India confiscates every single petroleum barge to china. A large vessel waits near Malacca, ready to be scuttled.
Pakistan surrenders in the meanwhile. Indian troops withdraw after destroying every strategic installation.
By now India has called its western border, lost all of northeast east of Siliguri, gained some foothold in Tibet and hopefully have not ceded Ladakh west of chushul.
World intervenes. Armistice signed. Talks drag on.
India stays reticent till December. On Christmas eve indian migs fly out of aircraft carrier in bay of Bengal and bomb Chinese positions in north east India. Missiles with conventional warheads fly. Fatchance the Chinese can replenish logistics once winter sets in. India takes back northeast but tawang is lost.
Now India accepts status quo antebellum, if offered. If not post war positions are held
Aftermath
Economy in tatters.
North eastern people lose faith in India for deserting them in the beginning and “scorching their earth”.
Pakistan finally cowed.
India begs USA to let it in to NATO whatever the price.
UNO is once again exposed to be the sham that it is. But it as usually is not ashamed.
Russia was fence-sitting and making money. It was selling arms to India through Iran all these past few days at astronomical costs and
energy to china the same way.
Suggestions welcome. Off the cuff answer.

Abhishek Mohan

                                          China and Pakistan vs India

It will be called as the “Doomsday”, not for India but for the whole world.

World War III will break out. Not believing me!! Look at the South China Sea. America has always been against the rise of Chinese. When World War II ended and UNSC formed, the US wanted India to be a permanent member so to have powers distributed in ASIA.

The war will not last long, with U.S, Japan, Australia, Afghanistan and ASEAN countries on our side, unless Russia take China’s side to seek a revenge on US. China has good ties with many African and Arab countries, and with some of our neighbours but they are highly unlikely to support any of the sides and most probably will remain neutral (I am little uncertain about Sri-Lanka). European nation will keep their involvement the least as they have learned their lessons from WWI and WWII.

But the over all picture will be the destruction of the Republic of China and Pakistan.


In the present scenario where world economy is trembling, a full flung war is not possible at-least for China but there is a possibility of a pseudo war. China and Pakistan are allies and are developing many nuclear and military technologies together. China can use Pakistan as a pawn against India if a war broke out between India and Pakistan, it can provide military aid and much needed economic aid to Pakistan.

Without external help of Chinese, Pakistan is not strong enough to directly get involve with India but given its history it is possible that Pakistan may get involved with India in an act of war. This will be catastrophic for all the South Asian countries and the world including China as the Indian ocean, which is a major trade region, will be a war zone.

Hence, China can corner India with Pakistan on one side and China on other. But Pakistan alone does not have enough military power to be a threat to India.

BUT For now it is highly unlikely for any rational country to get involve in any kind of war as all the world economies are connected and any disturbance can slow the world economy even further. India is a big market for manufacturing country like China and China will never want to loose India. It may be involved in some minor activities but overall China will never want to make India its enemy. India has some very strong international relations and its economy is booming even in the age of recession, its military is now the world’s 4th strongest and population world’s 2nd. To get involved with India will certainly be a unrecoverable loss for any country specially China.

Kamal Murarka

Although its not directly linked with the question still its worth to read:

Those who wants India pak war :

While Pakistanis and Indians post stupid war jokes, somewhere a mother of a soldier silently sheds a tear and prays for her son’s safety.

If war is there : Loss of resources, Huge impact on Economy, International relations of the country, growth rate, FDI, development, education will get hampered. Nuclear power is big worry. Unnecessary political drama will be There. In nutshell, abi jo pesa education and development pe lagta h bad m wo Yudh pe lagega.

Rahul Verma

Well let us consider that Pakistan and China join hands and war is going to occur. Combining both power

Compare World Military Powers Results

Compare World Military Powers Results

From above link I have to consider some points only. Although all are nuclear capable nation and if nuclear weapon are not used against each other. Since china and India have mountainous border so tank and all heavy vehicle cant be put in use by Chinese army they have to be very dependent on air-force. Since China and Pakistan both operate on Chinese Technology which is re engineered Russian Jets. So, you they can be comparable but not good. So, in the air whole action will go on between China and India . Pakistan and India will be fighting on ground mostly. But Pakistan Army lacks in inventory as compared to India. There air-force lack of new generation planes and Tank, artillery and on naval front Pakistan can be said to be most backward. Pakistan can’t maintain long fight. India will have to vary about only air because it has to face more 1.5 to 1.8 times large fleet of aircraft. In my opinion this war may not be clearly won by any country. But considering India longstanding friendship and relation with Russia and US it may be possible that they would asset India fightback(Pact was signed between USSR and India which Russia Federation still follow). So, person who had asked this should not worry about it.

Currently, China is facing lots of difficulties in south china sea with its neighbor so it will not take on India in next 5 year atleast until it could resolve it.

Well answers have a sense of patriotism and some where criticism.
I would take on this question in two heads:
  1. Feasibility:- the probability of conventional conflict hapenning is  minimal. What we are going to see in near future is limited cease fire violations and occational rebukes under local military commanders name without any political backing. As it has been already mentioned that Pakistan is too poor and China is too rich. A economic blow caused by war will Result in bankrupt Pakistan and pushing China 10 years behind. This is apart from nuclear deterrence.
  2. Result:- lets say the hypothetical war comes true. Well Pakistan will be trashed. And after devastation may fall prey to further partition or civil war amongst fundamentalist factions. For China . I would say the war will go unresolved. Now there are reasons for that. China’s military might is based on reverse engineering and the weapon platforms in vogue there have incurred catastrophic failures during operations. Over and above that it is the leadership and military strategy which decides the outcome of war. With such a long border there can be endless opportunities which if realised can lead to huge damage to Chinese forces. And there are enough resources with India to realise these strategies in terms of crisis. After the unresolved war China and India may retreat to their positions with minor skirmishes. And would never wage a war against each other.
  3. Alternatives:- Nation is not a natural entity. Nationalism thus is observed to safeguard common interests of homogenous people. If in daily life we count our interests other than basic ones they are economic, social and personal freedom. India is a complex democracy preserving interests of varied people. China under communist rule is a democracy with well known restrictions. China had suppressed many voices in past. If seen closely the socialist economy serves interests of only few. Pakistan is a fabricated democracy which needs fabrication every decade. It serves interests of feudal Lords and military generals. Both the later nations have tried to fuel anti national movements in India, but till date they have failed because India still provides the very essential element for growth of all that is freedom. But if India starts fueling such propaganda wars against two if its neighbours, the required effects will be visible in a decade. China may disintegrate into smaller states like USSR erstwhile. And Pakistan is undergoing such phenomenon on its own. To summarise no nation has ability to openly confront other. Also it is in no ones interests as all three hold key strategic geographical features and in today’s world everything is money.

Aishh Nautiyal

World war 3.

more than two billion people at war. Definitely it will lead to world war 3 if it is an all out war not some escalated skirmish.
This is a highly unlikely scenario. reason being India and China are already at war.
In earlier days traditional wars were fought but now a days it is a battle of dominance at industrial and financial level. These days wars are fought politically rather than in the conventional manner.

  1. Lets say if all three get into a fight, an all out war, what will happen is rest of the world economies will fall rapidly.China is a major player in manufacturing sector and India in services sector.Think of a scenario that all of the corporate sector in India comes to a halt what will it’s impact on rest of the world. A lot of major banks,Automobile manufacturers, mobile manufacturers,Industries from sectors of coaling, mining and petroleum,Healthcare related sector around the world is dependent on work done in India on daily Basis.These MNC’s not working for a week will create havoc around the world and this is me speaking only about India with respect to it’s services based sector.Think of similar things happening at China’s end in the manufacturing sector.
  2. If china wants to attack India it will make sure it does so with minimum expenses. An all out war is a very big financial expense. USA has spent 4.4 Trillion dollars in wars fought in Afghanistan, Iraq and Pakistan. making such huge expenses with nothing to gain from why would china do so? Also lets say china attacks India and wins. the next thing that will happen will be china being attacked by both USA and Russia.why?
    1. china will be weak and an easy target.
    2. USA will gain a part on this side of the planet which will help it control other countries of east.
    3. Russia understanding USA’s intention wouldn’t want this to happen.
    and there are lots of such reasons.
  3. During the war after a few days Pakistan will resort to Nuclear weapon which most of the countries wouldn’t want it to use because if it uses a nuclear enabled missile India will also Nuke it and then it will not take much time before everyone pulls out their nuclear arsenal Leading to world war 3. result: everyone dies. Nuclear Winter.

Understand this. We are at war. we have already defeated Pakistan and as of now we are fighting China.This is an unconventional war. Pakistan is already having lot of turmoils in it’s own country.Most of the world already see them as a terrorist supporting country.Very soon they will have an economic break down with no support from outside if their political situations remains similar.we Indians have more money, more people most of which are young generation. we are considered as good people around the world and now we have a great leader too . As of now we are racing against china and we are at advantage due to our younger population.They have better infrastructure and more resources. 20-25 years down the line the country with more dominance around the world economically and more influence at UN level with a young workforce and industries to support future generations will be the country which comes out of this battle as victorious.

Saurabh Pandey

Let us imagine the premier of China and Pakistan  decides one day over a morning coffee to attack India. China completely overseeing the economical conditions of the country which mostly depends on manufacturing sector Which is degrading amidst crisis in international economy calls for a war against India. People in China are more focused on improving the environmental conditions and  supporting it’s manufacturing Industry rather than wasting their money, manpower on Some war which will not achieve them the above objectives but will create a negative impact on them. And regarding a country like Pakistan they can never sustain the cost of  full scale war  with India or with any other country. The country itself is becoming a blot on the world map for supporting terrorism. People in the country are suffering because of their leaders making arbitrary policies. Pakistan is also seeking help from many developed countries(mainly US) of which most of the countries share good relation with India so they can’t afford any international sanctions.I believe you get a good picture, In today’s world war is not the solution to a problem but a method to escalate the problem even more. If any how Pakistan and china attack India it would be difficult for India to support the war for a long time but before the war takes it toll other powerful countries will intervene and will resolve the matter due to the fact all these 3 countries possess nuclear arsenal. Thus, such a situation would not arise and even if it does, it would be futile.

Well, this question is kind of stupid… why would China want a war with its largest trade partner?

Worst case scenario it would fund Pakistan’s side even thought that is not very likel. Let’s say Both Pakistan and China attack India . Yes, it would be difficult for India as deploying troops on both the borders will not be easy and then if the war goes on they ill have only one option which none of us would want as it might have dangerous consequences: use a nuke.

If both of the countries do form a team against India the world will get involved. USA would be with India due to issues withChina and Pak. North Korea with China ofcourse. Russia is unpredictable but probably would be with India too. The Europian countries will not be directly involved. If this happens then off course the Indian side has a very high chance of a win.

But this should not happen,the above was a worst case scenario. Anything like that happening is very unlikely.

It’s not that people of these countries hate each other. They praise each other when it’s something good and vice versa.

Sashank Reddy

The core aspect of any nation to wage war is its ability to run supply lines.

In case of Pakistan, they don’t have the resources to wage an escalating war. They cant even sustain a campaign for more than 2 weeks if the fighting is intense. Guns, tanks and ships don’t fall out of the sky. They are in limited supply and they get used really fast.

The Chinese will be the ones fighting on both the fronts and running supplies. Indian artillery can wreak havoc on these narrow supply lines as they pass through the Himalayas. Its really that simple. That’s the main reason there is no conflict. India has established its supply lines well in the country. China needs to stretch its supplies from its heartland to the mountains and that’s hard considering the many mountains it needs to pass through and the long distances they cover.

Also, Indian armed forces have been preparing for this for nearly 2 decades. Wars are not all about numbers. Its also about strategy, tactics and defenses. India has made sure that the enemy pays dearly for every square inch they gain. They are aware that they cant simply hold on to the incoming enemy. As a result, they have been preparing to bleed the invading forces crush them at choke points. They also have an offensive posture now where they gain major territory in lieu of losing minor ones. One must understand that India is the only nation in the subcontinent that has had real wars within the last 3 decades. Neither China nor Pakistan have had the kind of experience that we have.

Aditya Singh Rathi
To all those saying Russia is our ally or It will support and back us.
I would like to put a fact that, India does not have any strategical ally. Moreover,  China and Russia shares more than India and Russia. They both are against USA. Russia is no true friend (Don’t freak out and downvote, I have proper proofs. Why Russia supported us in Ind n Pak war, there were also multiple reasons for that ) But still its better than USA and China to us.
To the question,
China and Ind won’t clash together in a full fledged war, both being Emerging super powers and Economies don’t have time and resources for that.
BUT EVEN JUST IN CASE THEY DID, INDIA WILL BE ON LOSING END. HOWEVER, EVEN CHINA WOULD NOT BE LEFT MUCH TO CONTINUE.
ITS LIKE 1 BILLION VS 1 BILLION. Something Bigger than Mahabharata Will happen. China’s condition after Ind China full fledged war be like even Japan will come and smash it.
Millions of lives will be wasted, Economy will be hit back to like of 80’s or 90’s.
There was an article on some defence forum, India , China , America are some countries which can never be conquered. Reason being their physical geography.

About Pakistan, its already a failed country. I will never rule out the possibility of India Pakistan war in future. Surely this could happen.
We are very unlucky to have China and Pakistan as our neighbours.

Though Pakistan does not have power to attack, but has deterrence to protect it self if India enters their soil for attack. They have nuke weapons and they are stupid enough to use it.

INDIA CAN TAKE CARE OF PAKISTAN, THOUGH I WILL NEVER SAY IT WOULD BE A PEACE OF CAKE. BUT EVENTUALLY INDIA WILL WIN AND MAY NOT SUFFER VERY MUCH ON ECONOMY. (GIVEN THAT NO NUKES ARE EXCHANGED)

Nishith Animesh

It will result in nuclear holocaust or defeat of both China and Pakistan.

Why two scenarios?
Its not a hidden fact that India will not able able to stand against China and Pakistan together. Any missile attack on Indian city will result in massive use of nuclear weapons from Indian side.

Countries like Russia, Japan, USA, Britain know that without Indian and Chinese market they won’t survive. Most probably they will stand against aggressor. So defeat of both China and Pakistan.

I don’t know the from which country the person asking this question comes from but the question asked is very naive. Someone who understands basic geo-politics of the Indian sub-continent would never talk of a Sino-Indian war in this era and I will tell you why.

  1. India and China are very mature economies and led by seasoned politicians even though one is a communist ruled country and the other is a democracy. When mature economies disagree they talk, they don’t go to war directly. They fight proxies. We saw this during the Cold War when the Soviet Union was an equal rival to the USA. They never fought wars directly, they fought through Vietnam, Cuba, Afghanistan, Bolivia, Korea etc. However in this era, this possibility is too remote.
  2. If there is a political crisis due to the border disputes which China and India has between them, the two countries are definitely going to talk to each other either in Beijing or New Delhi or a third country. The big powers will never allow a war between these 2 country’s because both are nuclear armed, both have significant investments from western companies. There will be a brokered peace talks for sure.
  3. China and India are each others largest trading partner. When both are earning so much from each other, why burn their own pockets?

The above 3 points may not necessarily be the only points which could avert a Sino-Indian conflict but are some of the key pioints.

Now coming to the point of Pakistan. A war with Pakistan is very likely however India will not be an attacker here. India has always had concerns with Pakistan sponsoring terrorism. We went to war on this point in 1999 when Pakistan infiltrated into India and they were driven back. We almost went to war in 2001 after the terrorist attack on the Indian parliament and again in 2008 after the 26/11 Mumbai terror attacks. So, it is possible that Pakistan may try to target India through a terrorist attack again and if this does happen, India will definitely hit back. It could be a limited surgical strike or a full fledged attack to take out the terrorist camps. Whichever mode of attack India may chose, I am sure India will take the full world into confidence like it did in 1999.

So in a nutshell, chances of China attacking India are remote, very remote. Chances of Pakistan attacking India and India defending itself are very high.

Sai Raghuram Prabhu

That is almost impossible! Because Indian army is known for its bravery! Wait,am not going to say we can trash both at a go! Am damn sure that,even though Pak-China attacks India at the same time,Indian army wouldnt retreat.They would give their best. In the mean time, when three nuke-nattions are fighting,the world wont watch.The rest of the community would work even more sincerely to stop the war

Utsav Goyal
India will probably give heavy blows to Pakistan. But china will win within 4-5 days if they attack seriously.
The truth however is China will never attack India directly. Even Pakistan does not do that anymore. It is the era of 4th generation war. Sponsor some redneck jihadi and provide support. China may support Pakistan.
Nobody will come to help of India so soon. India does not have defense agreement with any major power.
ANyways this war will never happen unless oil is found in Himalyas.
😛

Manav Saraf

Mature economies like China and India would like to fight currency and/or trade wars, but seldom war with bombs and planes. As for Pakistan, there are multiple entities operating there, not sure who is in control right now, but a section of their country has been perpetually at war with India.

Vishnu Sekhar

So here the question has two aspects.

  1. What if only China and Pakistan attacks India.
  2. What if China and Pakistan start attacking India.

As the answer to the first question.

China has the largest military in the world. India is on the third place. So the war wont be that easy to win. There will be hell a lot of causalities on both sides. On the land war, China will find the first taste of success if the attack starts on summer season. But when the season moves to winter , the same Chinese will be like the goat trapped in the lion’s den. The reason is the mighty Himalayas. Back in 1962, Chinese were on a super winning streak and in the November month they identified that the snowfall in the Himalayas will stop all their supplies and they will be left out and hence they withdrew from the war. The same will happen now also. Fighting a war on Himalayas is damn tough and the terrain is completely different from anywhere in the world. Even aerial fighting wont be good enough. Now consider the other scenario, Pakistan is attacking India from one side and China from another side… It will be a hell time for India. The military itself will find it tough to allocate resources. Pakistan will attack from Jammu side, Punjab side and even Naval forces will be involved. So it will be the doomsday for India. Without any external supports, India will fight it tough to win the war. The valiant military and weapon resource will give India a better fighting stand but not a winning one. Eventually our borders will be compromised and enemy will enter into the state. But at this situation.. India will face a tough decision to make… Nuclear or Not … provided that we have never attacked any country in the whole history of the world, I don’t know how India will use its nuclear artillery in the first place.

Now to the second part… What if China and Pakistan start attacking India… This has much more consequences than the first one. First of all US will intervene and they will use this chance to get a strong hold over China and that means they will support India. As a life long ally, Russia will support India. North Korea obviously will support China . I dont see chances of any European countries involving directly in the war. Now imagine, Russia+US+ India + Japan vs China [ Team A] + Pak + Korea( North)..[Team B]. Team B doesn’t even have a chance. Pakistan will surrender within a month or two. Game over that side. Now China and Korea.. Both of them will be tough to beat . But attacks from all corners will make China stop the war. US and Indian aircraft carriers will round China within no time…Probably they will forced to use nuclear weapon and rest may be history 🙂 …

Economic and socio-political consequences of such a war might be beyond words. Entire world economy might come to a standstill as China is the manufacturing hub of the world… The power shift will happen and world might move to a dark period.

Yuvraj Patil
China, the big name.
I can’t just understand why people always overestimate China and neglect the strength of Indian Military. If China attacks India, they have more to lose than us. If we close Chinese import in India, Chinese economy will be bound to lose world’s second populated market. They won’t take such a risk against their economy.
In Military strength, China maybe ahead of India but not too much. There are certain areas of military in which PRC is inferior to India such aircraft carriers, ASW capabilities. China does not have sufficient logistic supply in Tibet. This is where India has upper hand.
In missiles we are behind Chinese but still we have what is sufficient for them. Chinese always show off more than what they actually are.
At present, west is with India to control Chinese progress. We have upper hand over China on diplomatic front. Russia, US, UK, France these permanent members will support a true democratic country i.e. India as they are the same.
Instead of thinking about impact of war on India, people should think about what if India moves to support Tibet and Balochistan by supplying the extremists with arms ? (As it happened in 1971) Then, China and Pakistan will face internal problems and war with India. Why don’t we think in this direction?
India has exercised its capabilities for fighting a two front war on time to time. So we won’t face any serious deployment problems for such a thing. We have our war doctrine ready for in that direction.
In conventional warfare, though being less developed as compared to China, we can give a tough fight to China with whatever we have. Additionally, we will get all kind of weapons and equipment support from US against China.
Thinking about Pakistan, If we block their sea routes, they will surrender within weeks.

India also has alliances with other countries in Asia as well as out of asia.

japan, Vietnam, Philippines, South Korea, Taiwan

Has the same problems with china that we have with pakistan.

And these countries have mutual defense pact with India. 4/5 countries have defense pact with USA-NATO.

And do not ignore Iran and Afghanistan are also allies of India.

So pak and china will also have multiple front war.

So just chill and grab the beer and let Pakistan and China enjoy their alliances.

So

S Pavlov

Defending troops on highlands need lesser men than attacking lowland troops. . We will manage somehow, and we dont need us or russian direct military help, we can do it ourselves we simply have to defend our highland posts and continue chinese blockade of oil, while garnering international support inviting embargos on china

they will fall like dominos. Pakistan isnt really that significant. If US stops supplying them modern defense equipment they will have neither quality or quantity,we can achieve that by diplomatic missions.

Giridharan Velamore

Question: What would happen if Pakistan and China both decide to attack India at the same time?

Answer: Catastrophe, for all the warring nations. Please bear in mind that all the three nations are nuclear armed. Imagine for yourselves what would happen if any of the three nations is cornered. Millions upon millions would die as a result.

Also China and India are two of the biggest economies after USA. The whole world including USA would be extremely worried. UN, USA and most other nations would do their best to stop such a war.

Let such a war never ever happen.

Divya Modi

I am upgrading this comment on Henry Leung’s (and even as a reply to Wang) answer for common visibility !!!

Henry Leung has claimed to give a neutral answer, often saying China is not Pak Ally and that INDIA and china are not comparable…

But only after reading their answer and their style of answering, one can understand how witty and selfishly China is behaving and (trying to) bullying/messing everyone whom it thinks it can, often fooling them simultaneously via other forums and platforms by presenting itself as Innocent (forced to for sake of it’s own survival) and and its actions justifiable !!!

As far as War is concerned, Not even in the Dreams, the world’s biggest economy (PPP) would like to mess with World’s Fastest growing, third biggest Economy (and Vice Versa) !!!


You are acting like China itself, being made in china !!!

Sweet sugar coated bully bragger who is concerned only about itself !!!I will show why exactly you are what I said…

Your trade route goes around every possible maritime area in the world… sometimes i feel the only country in China’s world map is China only !!!

If your trade routes passes through Indian Ocean that’s your problem not India’s. Your trade routes have become wandering ghosts, they just pass like from nowhere to everywhere…

When other countries claims maritime territory in south china sea, you have a problem, but you seem to have a license to do “UNGLI” (search it) in every other (read India) country’s backyard in order to save your own interests…JUST LIKE you feel like hitting PHILIPINES OR VIETNAM, India Feels like kicking you when you mess with the Indian Ocean…Its not all about China…that you can justify your problems to India by messing with India… while no one else can do that to you…seriously !!!

Your fishermen have traditional fishing grounds even in INDONESIA’s Exclusive Economic Zones.. while what do you think INDIAN fisherman are doing… Our NAVICs are sailing across the Sky…I feel you should respect their traditional fishing grounds and remove those Anti satellite weapons you have developed for COMMON CHARITY !!!

You will SYMPATHISE with all the perspectives, but never agree with others… since your interest are prime… when you are a selfish bully why the hell care to come on quora only to show you are friends… Foes (read rivals here) disguised as Friends are more dangerous than Enemies!!!

India is NO PAKISTAN that can be fooled by tossing toys to them…

Regarding military might, nobody knows what the other country is cooking up…

If china has underestimated its power display, any reasonably sound defense analyst will accept India to have have a comparable secret weapon system…so don’t brag around beating the bush…Bush couldn’t do that, who are you?

Real might is always shown only in Arena not in media or online forums…so leave that to our respective heroes… may they never have to face each other than to greet…

You will oppose India at every possible International forum but still say you are not allies of Pakistan or whatever… You don’t need to.. since China can be ally of NO ONE…other than itself…Pakistan is idiotic enough to not see through…but Pakistan is Pakistan and you are dealing with INDIA… PAK was with USA, now with you.. tomorrow it might come with any Other Might… It is the Sawant of International Politics….

If you need a secure maritime route… SO DOES INDIA and only more… INDIA is not messing with you, while you are messing with everyone you can…including those YOU SHOULD NOT BE !!! When your Interest come Other’s security can go for a toss, but when they protect theirs you have a problem… I sincerely doubt how innocent China is in the South China Sea…

And competition is never limited to Economy dear… Its about every other sphere… Just because you export more chips than the world can eat 🙂 doesn’t mean you don’t have any competition… I hope you get it… You have literally no actual sense being with Pakistan other than Regional dominance… if there is no competition why is china DUMPING billions (including obsolete technology) in Pakistan when your Chinese companies are finding hard time to get permission to open retail stores in India…

If China is really India’s Friend then, it at least should put away bringing hurdles in India’s way if it can contribute positively (glaring example NSG, UN blocking of anti terrorist resolution). Then it should reconcile its priorities with India’s. India does not assume china to be an Ally, but at least China needs to behave like a neutral friend first, only then China can present itself as a genuine friend. Knife and Honey can’t go hand in hand.

BEHAVE like a FRIEND and then CLAIM to be a FRIEND, Dear !!!

On a parting Note read this to come to senses about the reality of your Great Chinese Economy !!!

Why Are So Many Chinese Phone Brands Now in India?

Because They are unable to sell them in China, since the Chinese Economy is not expanding rapidly enough !!!

Remember you are now a HUGE factory Country but not a huge Market Country !!!

Shubh Ratri Mitra !!!

PAST WAS YOUR’S, FUTURE IS DEFINITELY INDIA’S !!!

India recently tested the interceptor missile which can intercept and destroy any incoming missile miles above the ground. but that doesn’t insure that in case of any war it will give you 100% hit ratio. In case of nuclear war with Pakistan and China. if any upcoming missile dodge the Indian interceptor missile than you can imagine the destruction that will happen.China is never going do this kind of mistake with India because war is fought with good economy. china economy has much dependence on India ans USA markets. Also in case of war USA is going to support India.
but on the other hand Pakistan is run by fanatics,military and bunch of war mongers .
but when it come to Chinese ICBM’S remind you they have the second fastest ICBM in the world Dongfeng series .which is almost impossible to intercept  and they are currently developing  the Dongfeng-41 which is expected to achieve the top speed mach 25.
current Indian military doesn’t posses the technology to counter these threats from China.

If china wants to get finish then only it will attack on india with pak.

Because pak is going to be deleted very soon from world geography.

And as far as china is concern , nowadays china is taking unnecessary clashes with all countries like phillipines in case of south china sea, it is also denying the verdict of PCA , USA is already looking for a chance to tackle this chinas hegemonic attitude , and to counter it .

One thing is sure that china have more interest in its economic growth than the friendship with pak.

Already china is now seeking help from India in south china sea issue and CPEC which is going through POK and Baluchistan .

China is more concerned about its own interest than Pakistan’s friendship.

Now when pak will attack india , china may not come , because there is no legitimate reason with pak to attack India. If it does so it will be trrrorism and act of aggression.

In that case all countries will unite and stand by India against pak means against trrrorism . and in that case if china comes to rescue pak ,china will have to lost much of it, and will lost big trding partner as well as bilateral relationship with other countries too on the grounds of supporting terrorism .

And china will even lost pak because till then pak will be no more .

Because war between India and pak will be war between anti terrorist and pro terrorist countries and china will have to stand by anti terror group .

why the people outside china think china want to attack india?
if parkstan attack india, the most likely the chinese govt will do is try it best to let both sit in the table, if failed, it will sell missile to you, both of you.
You know, we are business nation………

First off all I am an Indian.
China never invaded India first. It was India who tried to claim Aksai Chin to be Indian territory. When the chinese built a highway, Indian soldiers were sent to take control of the highway. The soldiers who were mostly equipped with lathi(stick/long cane) and PT shoes, were asked to police off the chinese. The Chinese authorities assumed it to be a threat used full military retaliation. They conquered large part of India without any hassle, only to know that India was not a threat but a victim to shit leadership of Nehru and his defense minister VK Krishna Menon. These two waged a war without any previous experience or even caring about its army which was ill equipped.(post this defeat, modernization of army was initiated. They were policy makers who made war policies sitting safely in the parliament while Indian soldiers were left to die at the borders.
China was just enough to go back to its original line of control after stopping the war on humanitarian grounds. They felt for the Indian population who were misinformed by Pre independence leaders like Nehru(
He had blind followers because of Independence struggle). They treated the Indian POWs with medical care and also returned them without any hurt.
Also, India was a hegemon at that time and the next decade, poking its nose into internal matters of other neighbouring states like Bangladesh, Sri Lanka etc.
It is highly unlikely that China will ever strike India in future because of its past and also because of growing trade relations.
It is very unfortunate that Indian textbooks are modified by the continuously ruling party to portray how great it is in the minds of its people to get votes. It is important to learn things from independent sources not controlled by the ruling party.
I am an Indian who loves India but criticizes its wrong doings of the past.
Hindi-Chini Bhai Bhai.

I will not go into analysis but these are some of the probable scenarios that might happen regardless of outcome of war:

1. Pakistan will be become Afghanistan of 80s and 90s. This is because some of Pakistan army top brass will try to fight this war with the help of militants. These militants eventually cannot be controlled by Pakistan.

2. Pakistan will be isolated with sanctions

3. There will be total chaos, unrest and famine. Economy will be in shamble

Now let us talk about a real war if at all it happens:

1. It will be inevitable that Pakistan will use proxies like militants in war. So initial causalities will be a case for India to prove that Pakistan sponsors terrorism once we capture these militants in war in the form of POW

2. China so far maintained that it is a bilateral issue. Hence it will stay out of it. Else, it will be practically inviting US and other allies of India

3. Pakistan cannot afford a traditional war unless it decides to use international aid which in turn will expose its dubious distinction. In other words, no country can support Pakistan unless it can prove that it is under attack which it cannot prove especially if it providing safe havens for terrorists. Let us not forget Osama story. Bottom line is it cannot sustain war even for few days.

Veeresh Sharma
Few Submissions before a Short Answer…
(a) China is not a Behemoth we make it out to be.
(b) India is no longer the emaciated nation it was in 1962
India is capable of defending itself on two fronts, so if India were attacked by both C..& P… We would stop C and occupy little territory of P..
Economy of all three nations would receive a setback . Worst effected would be P. Chinese is heavily dependent on India as a market, so prices in absence of cheap Chinese goods would be higher but India would emerge better of the three due to robust economy, great market.

Akash Kapoor

There will be great global impact by India Pakistan War. India is the biggest market in the world today. CHINA has a great part of export made to India. USA is also well involved in India as a trading partner. UK depends on India as a market after BREXIT. So India is very well positioned as the the entire world economy depends on India. So CHINA WILL NEVER ATTACK INDIA. USA, UK, EU even the AFRICAN continent will support INDIA.

As for pakistan after Uri attacks, the most asked question today by all Indians is what to do with Pakistan. So we have prepared a video on how India can retaliate, so that we can eradicate the Pakistani problem once and for all.

The first thing we need to understand is why Pakistan, indulges in a Proxy war rather than a full scale conventional war. Proxy war is a type of confrontation between two nations, in which neither engages the other in direct combat. This is highly used in Soviet Afghan war and Vietnam war.

Proxy war has following advantages; it is low cost warfare. So there is no cost of mobilization of army or keeping up with your enemy. On an average it takes 30 to 35 days to train any terrorist. We have seen that America withdrew from Vietnam due to high public pressure as the soldiers got killed and American public panicked. Same was seen in Afghanistan and Iraq. But In a proxy war there is no such Difficulty. As for example, Ajmal Kasab is an unknown young man from a village of Pakistan. In Pakistan he had no future. So people of Pakistan do not care if one ajmal kasab dies. He is an estranged young man without a future for them. But the same is not true if a man of Pakistani army dies. Then it will be all over the news. Everyone will feel for him and if many of them die then there will be pressure on government. In this form of war one side can inflict large damage on the other. As main targets are civilians, who are unarmed and untrained. They are easy targets. So with minimum inputs one can cause maximum damage. In this form of warfare, there is no sovereign involved, so there is no face to blame. No political responsibility at all. You send men unknown and under no flags. So they are fanatical mercenaries rather than soldiers. As only a few men are required at a time. So there is always a low cost in terms of Human Life’s lost to the terrorist state. This tactic involves fear. So people in any area are scared due to frequent attacks and the way of life changes. This technique is used to cause de stability in an area. The most prominent example is Kashmir. Lastly it all looks like a local problem, rather than an attack. Like Mumbai and Pathankot at both places, Pakistan lost few unknown and local estranged youth but created a great impact. So this kind of warfare suits them.

Now I will place two questions before all of us Number One “Can India Start a Conventional war against Pakistan.” Yes why not. It can easily do so. India has the third largest army in the world and the most disciplined army in the world. It has the fourth largest Air force in the world. We have the fourth largest Armoured Core in the world. We have the Seventh Biggest Naval Fleet in the world. But my second question is should India start a full scale war. The answer must be no. Firstly, that’s what Pakistan wants. It has nothing better to do. Its whole country is formed on hatred for India. It cannot do any good for itself and just want to indulge in a war in frustration. Secondly, Pakistan is a failed terrorist state with a very loose finger on its nuclear arsenal. Pakistan will not think twice before using it. Once it uses it, the state of Pakistan is inevitable perished by Indian response but this will also impact india dearly. Pakistan is a suicidal state. It was formed on nonsense grounds; they are not ethnic to that region. They are surrounded and cornered. Pakistan has no mission vision or path as a Nation. So in human term’s it is insane. So we must be careful as we are with any insane person. Also if India’s problem of Pakistan is solved it will no longer need the large arm’s stock it buys from the west. So in our wild dreams we presume that they will support us in a one and for all war against Pakistan. Also if we went to a war we will lose the great economical push we have now.

Now what India can do in this state? Primarily India can focus all attentions in Baluchistan. It is like a primary response toward Pakistani mischief. By causing chaos in Baluchistan, India can cause Pakistan to face a multi facet war in which a weak economy like Pakistan cannot survive. Also the issue can be used to bring international communities attention towards Pakistan’s atrocities in Baluchistan. But the main problem is Baloch Conflict has to be handled with caution, because the conflict will impact regions of Iran and Afghanistan. So we have to see that the conflict stays out of Iran and Afghanistan.

In the CPEC Region or the China Pakistan Economic Corridor there is investment of at least 46 Billion USD by China. . IF INDIA STOPS OR DELAY THIS INVESTMENT IN GILGIT REGION AND BALOCH REGION. BOTH CHINA AND PAKISTAN WILL BE HURT TREMENDOUSLY.

Akash Ajay

i agree with henry leungs answer and he tried to be unbiased and fair while answering. but i have a few points in which i disagree with him. one thing saying that China needs gwadar for securing their trade routes is very lame and it would only make indians more anxious. let us not forget that china had deployed nuclear submarine on the filmsy pretext to fight against poorly armed pirates in the eastern africa and gulf of aden and that immediately raised eyebrows in India . India has always acknowledged China as an important and powerful neighbor. we were one of the first in international community to recognize it after the communists toppled the nationalist government there in Beijing and we even accepted chinese sovereignty on tibet forgoing the the rights which the colonial british india government had negotiated in 1914 Simla accord . but china has not always responded to india’s outreach. just imagine if India starts increasing its military presence outside china’s backyard , will chinese accept it? then why should chinese do the same against india. Also what is the justification in them saying that Masood Azhar is not a terrorist and evidence against him is not enough? and what about provocative steps like issuing stapled visas for people coming from arunachal pradesh and J&K? (of course later they stopped issuing such visas for people from J&K , but it still continues for people from Arunachal) . how would it be for chinese if india were to do the same thing for people from tibet or xinjiang?

finally i would like to say that if we have to coexist as as neighbours we must be more reasonable rather than being very rigid and stubborn about the nationalist narrative which was fed to us by our governments.

We live in a very different world today than we ever used to. The world is very interlinked and interconnected today. There is absolutely no way China would go to war with India. Both India & China has enough Nuclear weapons to completely wipe out each others population. First of all there is no way even Pakistan will attack India. Pakistan has a very weak army & less international support than India . Every country will sanction Pakistan if it does such stupid thing. If this hypothetical situation ever arrives then consider it end of the world.

Vaibhav Srivastava

Both india and china are almost super power now and as their economy is growing they will both have highest gdp by 2050 . Well I don’t think china will support pakistan if we went on war but pakistan will definitely support china . Now , if we talk about army… chinese are slightly above than indians so it will not be much helpful in war . But india has a plus point Russia will support india , but china do not have such a major power a friend . So the result for india in starting of war will be hazardous but later china will get into big trouble . As china also shares border with Russia ..Now the real scene will arise chinese are type of people who never quits so definitely they will move to use their nuclear power. In response india will also have to use it’s nuclear power . Man we will come to the point of third world war .Now if we talk about the role of Usa , then usa is business he will keep helping the loosing country be selling his crap and at last when both became week .it will put his bases and army to the week one and this will declare the end of war …Now ,if both india and china don’t want to go back to the dark ages like syria and iraq it’s better that they resolve their disputes and became a friend . And lead the world by 2050 as the largest economies..

Bhanu Pratap

China and Pakistan will only attack india if they are going to risk it all or World War 3. Since the warfare weapons are much more advanced than last world war, whoever will be losing the war will unleash nuclear weapons which is bad for the economy of any surviving country. USA wont like that china would gain control of major part of south asia, even if Russia is ally of china, they wont that to happen.

If all become crazy and attacks happen, india and pakistan destroyed and china would be at 30-40% strength and then, Russia would attack china. And Asia will come under Russia. It will be then USA and Russia for the finals.

Mukul Sharma

first of all,China won’t do that, as 90 percent of the xiaomi devices are purchased by we Indians 😀

no this is a serious fact i am giving, Chinese market is hot in India and China won’t want to lose such market, so economy is one of a million facts as why China won’t,sorry,can’t attack India

Second of all,Pakistan, i don’t feel afraid mentioning it here, has been attacking India one way or the other for a long time, turn your TV on and you see a news about it every single day.

It’s the open war we are talking about,if Pak declares an open war against India,it is violating a lot of the World policies,making all the other nations its direct enemies, so dear Pak,please think twice before doing anything foolish,and did i forget to mantion Indian capabilities to defend itself?

Pavit Singh
One of the major reasons of fall various Chinese dynasties and rulers since historical times is due to corruption in their military.
Even presently Chinese military is too corrupt to win a war. And we Indians know the right price of the right guy.
Even if they attack they are bound to withdraw or lose.
On the other hand an Agni missile would do for Pakistan

Abhinav Atulya

Lets get down to the ultimate effects of the war (hypothetically if that happens). With nuclear in stock with both the countries, I wonder how will the world would react to that; but it would be a disaster.

Just think about it once. I do not intend to say who would win or who would loose but primarily there will we irrecoverable disaster that would haunt generations to come in both the countries.

So, peace is what should prevail and on go. The question at first place should not be about what would happen if the war breaks but what would happen after the war comes to an end.

I will write rather a small answer.

I Pakistan wage direct war then only this question will arise, Pakistan is a militant nation and they will never accept a war being done by Nation.

This bigger nation will just send their people to die here.

China is a business nation now, they need market to sell their products and Pakistan is not a nation with good purchasing power of citizens.

So in case of a state sponsored war, China will dump more of their weapons in Pakistan just like America did for donkey years and use their land to access MENA and Europe market.

Chengdu Mki

Not a chance… each passing day new issuesplus greater talibanization of pak increasing… plus wreath of a billion hindu sikh community… why china risk and what returns.

Also China pak friendship has some cracks… some serious ones….cant disclose more but youll see them in a decade or so. Pak is unhappy with growing chinese soldiers crossing into pak in units patrolling and not allowing any pak army tents nearby. Pak bounded by treaty in future there are chances of rift even upto extent that some area guarded by china rumours are has secretly been offered/given away to china for paks inability to fulfill its financial commitmentto China. Some also suggest pak dont want to lose kashmir issue as kashmiris are not happy with chinese presence and pak has no choice to give away land for faster end to problem.

Secondly due to extremely low costs of defense equipments…. some steel and other parts fitted are secondhand and repaired sold by china as new. This is a confirmed news with severe contract breach but pak cant protest as China is a friend where china is rubbing off hands by being unaware of the whole situation and blaming shortage of new material for pak needs.

Thirdly Pak is also upset with the additional royalty fee of 40percent levied something that will increase its costs significantly namely in ship making and also in its primary jf17s

So enemy enemy doesnt fit here. The concern is how to continue forward the friendship of years without annoying one friend yet stopping him from overstepping on others throat

Imagine you have two neighbours. one bad neighbour who is gunda and keep harassing your daughter. and one good neighbour who is almost equivalent to you. you and your good neighbour meet, have parties, show off wealth and also do some business together.

so your good neighbour will always wish downfall and will secretly support your bad neighbour also. now if your bad neighbour start beating you, then will your good neighbour also start beating you? but infact it will show that it is trying to mediate between you too. he may wish your downfall but to the world he will show that he wants fight to stop. also if fight will start affecting his business he will seriously reprimand the gunda neighbour.

this is exactly going to happen. china will never attack india. pakistan could believing china will attack too. but china will never do that. infact china will show to the world that it is helping india. pakistan will left behind and disintegrate one more time.

Amit Dwivedi

There is a loop hole in indian map, there is a region between nepal and bhutan which belongs to india, this a very light strip of indian land which connect india to arunachal pradesh, and if china occupy that strip it will cut of indian reach to arunachal pradesh,nagaland and all other regions, no military can reach there,

So it is obvious that china will attack this region and capture it , in this scenario we can reach arunachal and all region but only with the help of bhutan or bangladesh but they will not help india in war, as china is investing in large scales in bhutan and bangladesh and these 2 countries do not want to unplease china at all.

And if pakistan attack at the same time from jammu and region then we need large army at their, it is going to be a very very fatal condition.

Now the only way india can stand we have to make our army mobile so that our army can move all from jammu to sikkim and arunachal, by building roads, bridges, so we need more roads than weapons here for the army and it will be a huge task and gonna take some time.

So what we can do atleast is post some videos on facebook on youtube, so that we can make this matter a matter of concern for govt and people, there has to be a debate on newspaper, on news talk shows than only govt can invest on these projects.

Haseeb Akbar

Neither china nor Pakistan will ever resort to full scale war against India.

  • The nations having nuclear heads might be catastrophic for the the entire globe.
  • India and China being economic giants and Pakistan on the course of improving economy would be at the risk.
  • Pakistan and China would have skirmishes and diplomatic grudges against India but will pursue Geo economic strategy instead.
  • The entire south Asian countries would be in turmoil.

How ever to my Indians friends, “Dont live in fools a paradise that Pakistan might seizes to exist.”

well there is no doubt if china and pakistan attack india together we will have no chance but yes even if we go alone in war we might loose but there will be no pakistan on world map and half of china and as far as i think US will not like china to dominate asia fully and only india is capable of stopping it. So US will come to india’s aid and we have peace treaty with Russia in time of war we will help russia and russia will help us and if russia opens just nothern front and attack china china will never cope with russia and india combine attackadn there is massive possibilties tibbet and tiawan will rise for indipendence so china can not fight on three frons and if US and europe join hands with india with vietna opening another front china will be surrounded and will be defeated with in 15 days max. Well china will not attack india cause we are competitors in global market but they will attack cause they have expansionist policy they want colonies like britain but they can take control of tibet but never india .

Shrey Sharma

Well according to the most acceptable theory china will not attack India

there are more than one variable involved when any two country goes into war.

these are the situation which according to me is most likely to happen in event of war

first of all there is anti china environment in Asia due to its recent aggression in east china sea which is cause of concern for ASEAN countries and hence they are not only backing up India but also U.S and Russia to back them up against china

secondly in event of war between India Pakistan would be neutralized by United States as stopping them their grant and will increase pressure from institutions like IMF and WORLD BANK to pay up previous loan

also there will be lot of criticism in Pakistan though some will support this decision but max amount of people would be against attacking neighboring country it is a very separate topic anyways

america will favor India for two reason

after South Korea and Japan India is their biggest ally

china is bigger threat to U.S than it is to India

(also american loves war)

the concept of Russia would be neutral in this situation for following reason

1-backing up china means there will be anti Russian environment in Asia

2- it would further push India towards west meaning losing of potential weapon customer and an ally

3-China is a competitor of Russia(though in not that big of a scale)

4-Russia and India have very old and close relationship

Though China may prove itself leader of the world attacking India would be their worst mistake

this attack will some what look like annexation of Tibet hence will be criticized by whole international community including Tibetan people and china might loose Tibet

there is whole lot of variables these are some of the crucial ones

peace

JAI HIND

Ankit Thakur

China will never go on war with india in support of pakistan in real world. Its because we both have civilian leadership that are well aware of the consequences of war unlike pakistan where army leaders rule the decision making. Both china and india aim to be superpowers and the war will through both of us a decade back.

But lets assume in a hypothetical world china gonna support pakistan against india in war then what could happen.?

  1. Pakistan will surely be destroyed.
  2. Both india and china will face huge casuality plus economic crisis.
  3. If nukes would be used then the area would face the consequences for decades to come.
  4. And finally india as well as china would loose the position they have in the world forums.

But in my personal view china will never support pakistan militarily. They could have in 1965 or 1971 or 1999 but since they havent hence they will never.

Although they do support pakistan on world forums.

I like china. It is a huge country that stood on its feet on its own. Cultivated one of the world’s greatest economy. Redefined the word development. But there are few cases i am totally disappointed with china.

  1. Supporting terrorists in un.
  2. Occupation of tibet
  3. No religious freedom
  4. Supporting a rogue state like pakistan.
  5. Ignoring the miseries face by people of balochistan.

T.n. Balasubramaniam

China will never attack directly, but it might aide Pakistan. But that is not going to be decisive.

1st thing china at this stage cant offord any war with india because it is making many new enemy in south china sea region. China cant use even 50% of its power in war with india because it has to save its south china sea region with is rich in oil and gass every cou try need oil and gass to keep its development on track.. Usa, south korea, japan, australia, philipins, viatnam, and few other more cou try is always ready ready there in south china sea region to stab in back to china.

And i dnt want say anything about pakistan u all know it cant even fight with india’s 25% of army, air and navy power

Mohit Gandhi

then russia and USA will be dragged and nukes will also come into use there will be no more pakistan at the cost of more than half of the india china will be stopped by russians depending the weather and if everything fails I am ready to join both armed and un armed resistence even if it cost me my life no mateer what happens afterwards

Pakistan…….war.…..with……India……once again

……why would they want insult themselves again n again in all fields…..and moreover with Pakistan it’s not war but it’s like a mosquito bite…..although mosquitoes can cause life threatening situations too but these are benign ones……sometimes I feel even carrying weapons into war with them is a waste….. mosquito repellents should be good enough…..

Coming to China…..yes respectable formidable side……but I don’t think there would be a war between the two as both are concerned about economic growth rather than think of other petty issues……and China has a huge landmass…….why would it want to increase its work with war and capture India to increase its work……

Prakash Rai

Nuclear War. I hope no one dares.

as far as if u look at the record of all the wars that india has fought like 1947 1962 1965 1971 1999 i can say that if china and pakistan both gang up to attack india then united states and other western countries might come to indias help… as long as china is involved… the proof of it is in 1962 when US president john f kennedy sent a nimitz aircraft carrier in bay of bengal which forced the chinese to vacate arunachal pradesh…

whereas the west remained a mute spectator when it was only india and pakistan…

although since there is so much domestic terrorism and insurgency in all of these 3 countries going to war will lead to complete destablisation of south asia… so its very unlikely they will go to war..

Keshav Singla

Human beings on all the sides will be at loss.

NAMAN JAIN

PRACTICALLY THINKING , PAKISTAN AND CHINESE millitary mindsets are very sharp and cruel.. china’s secret plans and stockpiles of weapons is way ahead of india ad pakistan combined.. china does’nt need pakistan’s aid to defeat india.. india is lagging behind in every aspect from china in defense and attack point of view… and pakistan is not a weak country in terms of millitary…many of our missiles and weapons are still in testing and developmental stage.. so deployment of them fully is at a standstill till 2020 atleast…our social media boasts about india’s power so much that our mindset is very positive for india’s millitary condition which is definitely not enough to beat china…we may have a large army but not as large as china…surely if india vs pakistan-china happens… we can destroy pakistan to a very high level… but china… no ways…

even if we keep india’s secret weapons in mind half of them are in manufacturing stage or in developing stage.. which can cannot be operational by 2020…

, ,

No Comments

Indo-US and Indo-Afghan Relations Security Implications for Pakistan

Indo-US and Indo-Afghan Relations
Security Implications for Pakistan

May 2016

Issue Brief
The following issue brief has been prepared by the NUST Research Team in collaboration with Foreign Affairs Committee of the National Assembly for limited circulation only

Courtesy to Pakistan Think Tank by NUST Research Team

The NUST Research Team (NRT) is an independent, non-partisan and not-for-profit think tank that works in collaboration with the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs with a vision to innovate future prospects for peace, security and security for Pakistan through intellectual discourse, and contribute to sustainable social, political and economic development.
Copy Rights © NUST Research Team (NRT) and the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs of Pakistan (FAC)
Conclusions or opinions expressed in the publications and programs are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the fellows, advisory groups, or any individuals or organizations that provide financial support to NRT.
Authors: NUST Research Team
Acknowledgments: Rushna Shahid, Hamzah Riffat, Ali Tahir
Introduction
Today the world may have come out of its bipolar neurotic race… but it is still composed of a multitude of contesting narratives. Even if limited to simply the state level actors, a mess of ideologies, nationalism, state philosophies and cognitive perceptions and understanding of the world create complex diplomatic narratives. In a world that is ‘widening deepening and speeding up global ‘inter-connectedness’ in all aspects of contemporary life, Diplomacy is no exception.

 

 

 


Pakistan is facing increasingly complex challenges of global influence, in terms of both ‘soft’ and ‘hard’ state tools of power projection. There are only nine states in the world today with nuclear weapons where Pakistan and India are deemed as two of the most critical and strategic members of the group. A 2014 book ‘Power Rules’ categorizes Pakistan as a Mid-Level State in a Global power pyramid. This is justified by our substantial military strength for self-defense, nuclear assets and strategic location for regional influence.iii India however, by virtue of its economic clout in addition to its strategic assets, holds a prominent position as one of the ‘8 Principals’.iv
USA
8 Principals: China, Japan, India, Russia, UK, France, Germany & Brazil
Oil Producing States: Saudi Arabia, Iran, smaller Gulf States, Venezuela, Nigeria
The Mid Level States localized potential as Regional Players: Pakistan, Mexico, Nigeria, South Africa, South Korea, Taiwan Responsible – 50+ states Switzerland, Norway, Singapore, Botswana, Chile etc. Bottom Dwellers/Problem States- 75 states: Afghanistan, Bosnia, Bangladesh, Indonesia, Burma, Zimbabwe, Sudan, Chad, DR Congo, Uzbekistan etc.

Non-State Actors: NGOs, International Media, International businesses and TerroristsFigure 1Gelb, Leslie H. Power Rules: How Common Sense Can Rescue American Foreign Policy. New York: Harper, 2009. Print
Henry Kissinger’s famous words “America has no permanent friends or enemies, only interests”v, has become the mantra of all diplomatic literature. Even though the channels of state influence have become increasingly complicated and non-traditional, this basic philosophy holds true still. In line with this Pakistan’s traditional India-centric garrison, state policies need to evolve rapidly with the fast-paced globalized diplomatic narratives. Indo-US and Indo-Afghan relations have been steadily increasing over the past few years via multiple channels of state diplomatic as well as strategic economic and non-traditional interactions. It is imperative for us to not only understand this evolving trend but also to develop effective and creative long-term policies that can balance India’s steadily increasing regional influence on multiple fronts. This issue brief thus hopes to foray into the recent developments in Indo-US and Indo-Afghan relations and their strategic security implications for Pakistan.

The Indo-US Strategic Partnership

The Indo- US strategic partnership encompasses multiple dimensions, such as shared principles of democracy and ensuring stability in Afghanistan. Both countries agree that this stability shroud be is realized through investments in human capital and the joint military cooperation. The relationship has cemented itself in line with common foreign policy objectives, ranging from curbing terrorism in South Asia to establishing defense agreements with Israel. Furthermore, India’s robust relationships with the oil-rich Gulf States, which the United States views as a vital cog in maintaining stability in the Middle East Vis a Vis Israel, is another aspect of the partnership which is of strategic significance.
The partnership in contemporary times heavily relies upon around the corporate sectors influence in both economies, where free market capitalism allows the flow of investments and expertise to either state. Furthermore, India’s status as a nuclear weapons state when it conducted its tests in 1974 has ensured that it creates a credible deterrent to ward off threats to its territorial sovereignty particularly in the aftermath of the 1962 border conflict with China. China’s rise as a potent economic power and its influence being recognized by the close relationships it has with countries such as Bangladesh, Sri Lanka and particularly, Pakistan; where the latter is a recognized nuclear weapons state and maintains a policy of ‘Full Spectrum Deterrence’ to ward off conventional imbalances with Indian aggression, has meant that India’s relationship with the United States becomes particularly relevant. The United States policy which involves containment of China in sensitive regions such as the South China Sea and South East Asia has meant that both India and the United States converge over the objective of ensuring that China’s economic and military expansion is curbed. China as a factor in the strategic calculus of both India and the United States is extremely important if one has to analyze the strategic disposition of this relationship and partnership.
As of current, India is the world’s largest arms importer with a total cache of $100 million, out of which, $67 million is directed towards Pakistan (Haider, 2016). In the past, this spending has shown an increasing trend when Pakistan has responded to Indian conventional and hegemonic designs through TNWs or Tactical Nuclear Weapons as an option to deploy on the battlefield. The support from lobbies inside the United States which vouch for Pakistan’s containment also allows India to
assume a hardened stance against the country which is characterized by aggressive rhetoric and responding to acts of terrorism allegedly perpetuated through its own soil, with doctrines such as the Cold Start (which involves quick mobilization, punitive strikes on enemy territory and little room for the adversary to respond).
While the Cold Start Doctrine (CSD) might signal an alarming trend that could potentially have an impact on the US- India military partnership where the latter wishes to have strategic stability in South Asia, the fact that constraints have been imposed by the US on Pakistan’s dual-use technologies and weapons systems, buttresses the point of the US tilt towards India. In contrast to Pakistan’s nuclear weapon program which has been viewed with suspicion over aspects such as command and control and nuclear terrorism, the US-India nuclear deal in 2008 has allowed India to benefit from a waiver from the Nuclear Suppliers Group which permits it to gain access to civilian nuclear technology and fuel. This deal has greatly weakened the Non-Proliferation order in South Asia, where undue favoritism towards India leaving Pakistan with little or no access towards such technologies and having to rely on other partners such as China for investment into the nuclear sector.
Currently, the relationship between Pakistan and the United States has witnessed another jolt in the form of limited convergence over stability in Afghanistan. The United States widely accuses Pakistan of doing less to counter the Haqqani Network and the schisms between both countries which emerged regarding the sale of F-16s underlines how the strategic partnership which already exists between India and the United States gains added relevance. This partnership is likely to cement itself even further, where a Post P5+1 Nuclear Iran allows India to encircle Pakistan by forging amiable ties with Iran, investing heavily in Afghanistan and forging strong ties with states in the Middle East. Though the Middle East has historically allied with Pakistan, but due to several issues such as Pakistan’s policy of neutrality regarding the Yemen crisis, relations have soured particularly with states such as the UAE. The United States pushing for India to capitalize on regional dynamics has meant that Pakistan would need to exercise strategic foresight and prudence to avoid being encircled by India. The strategic partnership will thus, gain more relevance with India’s economic expansion, the US reservations over Pakistan’s nuclear weapons and dual-use technologies as well as pushing for more investment and stability in Afghanistan through India’s efforts at the expense of Pakistan which is viewed to have a dualistic policy over terrorism.

The Indo-Afghan Strategic Partnership

The Strategic Partnership Agreement (SPA) of 2011, between India and Afghanistan, laid the foundations for a long-term commitment to security and development in Afghanistan. It outlines assistance in the field of infrastructural and institutional development, offers educational guidelines and technological aid to developing Afghan Capacity. More importantly, the agreement encourages investment in Afghan natural resources, provides duty-free access to Afghan exports into Indian markets and aims to strengthen an Afghan-led process of peace and reconciliation. Efforts at high level bilateral political partnerships have materialized in agreements, collaborations, and conferences such as the Heart of Asia peace process and ANAASTU. India advocates a “no exit” policy with regards to Afghanistan, which has been endorsed by Afghan leadership (Ministry of External Affairs; Government of India, 2016).
Bilateral trade between the two economies has grown steadily (by approximately 0.20% annually) for the past three years. Despite the lack of direct access, India is the second largest market for Afghan exports with total bilateral trade amounting to $684.47 million in the year 2014-15 (BS Web Team, 2016). Naturally, India sees economic interests in Afghanistan, but its objectives in the region also hold political motives. Threatened by armed struggle for freedom in Kashmir, India benefits by cutting terror roots, their ideology and any networks within Afghanistan, that could aggravate the Kashmiri armed struggle (Baloch & Niazi, 2008). The resurgence of legitimate Islamic independent movements challenges India’s social fabric by providing cannon fodder to oppressed minorities. Moreover, eradication of terrorism helps stabilize the region, promoting trade. India benefits from undermining cordial Pak-Afghan relations; geostrategically speaking, Pakistan would always serve as a more suitable ally and partner for trade and commerce, being closer to Afghanistan (Usman, 2008). Geo-economic motives, of capturing Central Asian energy markets fuel India’s long run pursuit of Afghanistan. India’s push to develop Chabahar port in Iran consolidates earlier fears of Pakistan’s encirclement by India. Its presence isolates Pakistan, both politically and economically and also circumvents it, robbing it off its geo-strategic advantage. Furthermore, it nullifies Pakistan ability to use Afghanistan as an asset of strategic depth (Riedel, 2011). Numerous Indian consulates near the Pak-Afghan border are a legitimate cause of concern for Pakistan for two primary reasons. Generally, consulates protect and promote, commercial and individual interests, and hence are opened in areas that are densely populated. However, the majority of
Indian consulates are found in population scarce areas (Cheema, 2013). Pakistan has thrown multiple state level accusations at the Indian establishment and specifically its Research and Analysis Wing (RAW) for aiding militancy, separatist movements and terrorism on Pakistani soil while using the consulates as ground zero for such operations (Zeb, 2006). Earlier Pakistan has provided intelligence that links Brahimdagh Bugti (son of the late Akbar Bugti) and the Baloch Republican Party (BRP) to Delhi and the former Karzai government (Walsh, 2010). Pakistan’s former Interior Minister, Rehman Malik suspected Brahimdagh Bugti to be responsible for recruiting militants in Afghanistan and went on to accused India and Afghanistan for supporting the insurgent Baloch National Army (BNA) and also charged Baloch Liberation Army (BLA) for abduction of foreign nationals (Major Dr. Khalil-ur-Rehman, 2013). Recently the Kulbhushan Yadav episode has exposed RAW’s intelligence networks aimed towards destabilizing Pakistan and retrospectively speaking this warrants extreme caution on behalf of Pakistan upon any Indian presence near its borders (Ahmad, 2016).
India has pledged over $2 billion to Afghanistan up till now, as part of a reconstruction and development aid package (Fair, 2010). This is inclusive of institutional development, within which India has constructed a new parliament building for Afghanistan (Hindustan Times, 2015). Immensely closes ties with India were previously also enjoyed by the former Karzai government whose embrace of India was a source of great irritancy to Pakistan in light to the 2005 Indo – US civil nuclear deal (ISAF, 2012). Consequently, Pakistan perceived Indian assisted dam construction in the province of Kunar as a way to divert water resources away from Pakistan (Kiani, 2013). Pakistan’s insecurities over the matter have been a cause of concern to US and India, who point fingers at Pakistan of having ties to the Haqqani network, and allegedly accusing InterServices Intelligence Agency (ISI) for supporting the 2008 attack on the Indian embassy in Kabul (CNN, 2008). The U.S. chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Admiral Michael Mullen has gone to refer to the Haqqani network as, “a veritable arm of the ISI” (Bumiller & Perlezsept, 2011).
From the above qualitative analysis, we conclude that Pak-Afghan relations are negatively correlated with Indo-Afghan relations. While all counties would ideally benefit from holistic, all-encompassing political and economic initiatives for growth, miss -trust and historical animosity has pivoted these regional powers against each other’s best interest (Mir, 2015).

Lessons for Pakistan

The negative correlation between the Indo-US strategic partnership and the Indo- Afghanistan partnership with the US-Pakistan and the Pakistan Afghanistan relationship, clearly suggests that Pakistan must capitalize on opportunities which are present in its region and globally through conducting an appraisal of regional dynamics and capitalizing on its relationship with states such as China which has heavily invested in the country and continues to contribute towards its arms buildup. Exercising prudence requires foresight, but to counter the growing India- US strategic partnership, Pakistani policy makers can undertake the following recommendations at the diplomatic level:
1. Capitalization of the strategic partnership with China: Although the indomitable relationship with China is characterized by a high level of mutual trust and convergence of strategic interests, it is imperative for Pakistan to consider the possibility of similar nuclear agreements in line with the Indo-US Nuclear deal, particularly with a state that has a rising global profile and has been benign as far as its investments to Pakistan is concerned. The strategic partnership between the US and India is defined by economic interests as well as a military cooperation and Pakistan should continue to ensure that its economic and military partnership with China acts as a balance to less concessions and avenues for cooperation with the United States. 2. Capitalizing on the limitations of US/ Indian strategic foresight: While the strategic partnership between the US and India has alarming implications for Pakistan’s security it is critical to understand that the US and India have often failed in resolving key disputes with states through erroneous policies which have encompassed military interventions and neglect. US policies in the Gulf region, particularly with regard to Iran have had an impact on Iran’s ability to assert itself as a dominant player in the Middle East. Yet at the same time, in line with the P5+1 Nuclear Deal, Pakistan can cement its relationship with the Islamic Republic by emphasizing on energy deals and projects which have previously been held hostage to sanctions and time lags. Similarly, states such as Sri Lanka and Nepal have grappled with Indian policies which include interference in sovereign affairs. Sri Lanka’s hostility towards India has historically stemmed from India’s peacekeeping force which exaggerated the ongoing civil war with the Lanka Tamil Tiger Eelam as compared to
Pakistan, where the efforts of the Pakistan Army in assisting the downfall of the insurgency has proven to be fruitful and has fostered goodwill amongst both countries. A multidimensional approach towards Pakistan’s foreign policy in its immediate neighborhood is required for the country’s rising regional profile. 3. Reassessment of Pakistan’s Afghan policy: The India- Afghanistan relationship has fostered on the grounds of joint collaborations between both governments over infrastructural development including education, health sectors and building of intellectual capital. Afghan/ Pakistan trust deficits emerge on the security fronts with allegations over cross border terrorism on either side jeopardizing the relationship. Yet a more innovative approach towards dealing with Afghanistan where competition with India centers on increased investments and energy generation could prove to be vital. CPEC’s opportunities allows Pakistan to address its domestic energy concerns and simultaneously vouch for similar investments in Afghanistan which could act as a counter to growing Indo- US strategic convergence over the subject of sustainable stability in Afghanistan. 4. Economic Profile as a diplomatic tool: In an age which is defined by increased regional connectivity and economic cooperation, it is important that Pakistan’s policy makers focus on generating higher productivity for its domestic markets while simultaneously allaying concerns of potential investors. A critical element of the Indo- US Strategic Partnership has been the rising Indian corporate sector which has allowed it to benefit from the 2008 Nuclear Deal despite the fact that it weakened the Non- Proliferation Order significantly and contributed towards instability in South Asia. While differences over the role of TNWs in the battlefield, nuclear terrorism and Pakistan’s policy of Full Spectrum Deterrence will continue to persist alongside accusations of doing less to counter the Haqqani Network; a rising economic profile while simultaneously addressing its domestic energy concerns will at least give Pakistan relatively more strength in its diplomatic negotiations particularly with global powers such as the United States which it has shared a fractious relationship with. 5. Encapsulating ‘Realpolitik’, as a feature of foreign policy: As a concept and as a theory which gains considerable traction in modern times, policy makers in Pakistan need to be made aware of what a dynamic approach is; of which ‘Real Politik’ or diplomacy based on circumstances of given circumstances and factors becomes important. So far the Indo-
Afghan and the Indo- US strategic partnership has been based upon Real Politik and for Pakistan to ensure that such partnerships can be countered, Real Politik as a concept needs to be understood, where relationships are less about ideology, religion and cultural beliefs, but more about political influence, economic clout and military supremacy.

References
Ahmad, N., 2016. Analysis: Kulbhushan Yadav’s RAW move. [Online] Available at: http://tribune.com.pk/story/1074812/analysis-kulbhushan-jadhavs-raw-move/
Baloch, Q. B. & Niazi, A. H. K., 2008. Indian Encroachment in Afghanistan: A New Imperialism in the Making, s.l.: s.n.
BS Web Team, 2016. 6 things to know about the India-Afghanistan relationship. [Online] Available at: http://www.business-standard.com/article/economy-policy/5-things-to-know-aboutthe-india-afghanistan-relationship-116010400230_1.html
Bumiller, E. & Perlezsept, J., 2011. Pakistan’s Spy Agency Is Tied to Attack on U.S. Embassy. [Online] Available at: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/23/world/asia/mullen-asserts-pakistani-role-inattack-on-us-embassy.html?_r=0
Cheema, P. I., 2013. Afghanistan’s Crisis & Pakistan’s Security Dilemma. Asian Survey, 23(3).
CNN, 2008. Afghan official: Pakistan spies behind Kabul attack. [Online] Available at: http://edition.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/asiapcf/07/08/afghanistan.explosion/index.html?eref=rss_l atest
Fair, C. C., 2010. ndia in Afghanistan and Beyond: Opportunities and Constraints, s.l.: s.n.
Haider, M., 2016. India’s growing military spending threatens Pakistan, says NSA Janjua. [Online] Available at: http://www.dawn.com/news/1250121
Hindustan Times, 2015. Modi inaugurates new Afghan Parliament built by India in Kabul. [Online] Available at: http://www.hindustantimes.com/india/modi-in-kabul-pm-meets-ghani-toinaugurate-afghan-s-parl-building/story-wua2CtN8gj4IQsRnmNknHM.html
ISAF, 2012. State of the Taliban, s.l.: s.n.
Kiani, K., 2013. Pakistan, Afghanistan mull over power project on Kunar River. [Online] Available at: http://www.dawn.com/news/1038435
Major Dr. Khalil-ur-Rehman, (. A. O., 2013. [Interview] (12 Janruary 2013).
Ministry of External Affairs; Government of Inida, 2016. India – Afghanistan Relations. [Online] Available at: http://eoi.gov.in/kabul/?0354?000
Mir, H., 2015. Indian’s Allegation & Pakistan. [Online] Available at: http://www.currentaffairspk.com/hamid-mir-urdu-column-about-indians-allegationpakistan/
Riedel, B., 2011. Deadly Embrace: Pakistan, America, and the Future of Global Jihad. s.l.:s.n.
Usman, T., 2008. Indian Factor in Pak-Afghan Relations. Research Journal of Area Study Centre (Russia, China and Central Asia).
Walsh, D., 2010. WikiLeaks cables reveal Afghan-Pakistani row over fugitive rebel. [Online] Available at: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/nov/30/wikileaks-cables-afghan-pakistanifugitive
Zeb, R., 2006. Cross Border Terrorism Issues Plaguing Pakistan–Afghanistan Relations. China and Eurasia Forum Quarterly, Volume 4.
iGrassie, William. “Seeking Truth in a World of Competing Narratives.” The Huffington Post. TheHuffingtonPost.com, 30 Apr. 2012. Web. 13 Mar. 2014. <http://www.huffingtonpost.com/william-grassie/seeking-truth-in-a-world-_b_1452389.html>.
iiCampbell, Francis. “Has Globalization Changed the Nature of Diplomacy?” Proc. of Ethical Standards in Public Life, St. Edmund’s College, Cambridge University, UK. N.p., 20 Feb. 2015. Web. <http://www.vhi.st-edmunds.cam.ac.uk/resources-folder/campbell-2015>.
iiiGelb, Leslie H. Power Rules: How Common Sense Can Rescue American Foreign Policy. New York: Harper, 2009. Print.
iv Ibid

v”“America Has No Permanent Friends or Enemies, Only Interests”.” Goodreads. N.p., n.d. Web. 19 Feb. 2014. <http://www.goodreads.com/quotes/633024-americaIndo-US and Indo-Afghan Relations
Security Implications for Pakistan
May 2016
Issue Brief
The following issue brief has been prepared by the NUST Research Team in collaboration with Foreign Affairs Committee of the National Assembly for limited circulation only

The NUST Research Team (NRT) is an independent, non-partisan and not-for-profit think tank that works in collaboration with the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs with a vision to innovate future prospects for peace, security and security for Pakistan through intellectual discourse, and contribute to sustainable social, political and economic development.
Copy Rights © NUST Research Team (NRT) and the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs of Pakistan (FAC)
Conclusions or opinions expressed in the publications and programs are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the, fellows, advisory groups, or any individuals or organizations that provide financial support to NRT.
Authors: NUST Research Team
Acknowledgements: Rushna Shahid, Hamzah Riffat, Ali Tahir
Introduction
Today the world may have come out of its bipolar neurotic race… but it is still composed of a multitude of contesting narrativesi. Even if limited to simply the state level actors, a mess of ideologies, nationalism, state philosophies and cognitive perceptions and understanding of the world create complex diplomatic narratives. In a world that is ‘widening deepening and speeding up’ii global interconnectedness in all aspects of contemporary life, Diplomacy is no exception.
Pakistan is facing increasingly complex challenges of global influence, in terms of both ‘soft’ and ‘hard’ state tools of power projection. There are only nine states in the world today with nuclear weapons where Pakistan and India are deemed as two of the most critical and strategic members of the group. A 2014 book ‘Power Rules’ categorizes Pakistan as a Mid-Level State in a Global power pyramid. This is justified by our substantial military strength for self-defense, nuclear assets and strategic location for regional influence.iii India however, by virtue of its economic clout in addition to its strategic assets, holds a prominent position as one of the ‘8 Principals’.iv
USA
8 Principals: China, Japan, India, Russia, UK, France, Germany & Brazil
Oil Producing States: Saudi Arabia, Iran, smaller Gulf States, Venezuela, Nigeria
Mid Level Stateslocalised potential as Regional Players: Pakistan, Mexico, Nigeria, South Africa, South Korea, Taiwan Responsibles– 50+ states: Switzerland, Norway, Singapore, Botswana, Chile etc. Bottom Dwellers/Problem States- 75 states: Afghanistan, Bosnia, Bangladesh, Indonesia, Burma, Zimbabwe, Sudan, Chad, DR Congo, Uzbekistan etc.
Non State Actors: NGOs, International Media, International businesses and TerroristsFigure 1Gelb, Leslie H. Power Rules: How Common Sense Can Rescue American Foreign Policy. New York: Harper, 2009. Print
Henry Kissinger’s famous words “America has no permanent friends or enemies, only interests”v, has become the mantra of all diplomatic literature. Even though the channels of state influence have become increasingly complicated and non-traditional, this basic philosophy holds true still. In line with this Pakistan’s traditional India centric garrison state policies need to evolve rapidly with the fast paced globalized diplomatic narratives. Indo-US and Indo-Afghan relations have been steadily increasing over the past few years via multiple channels of state diplomatic as well as strategic economic and non-traditional interactions. It is imperative for us to not only understand this evolving trend but also to develop effective and creative long-term policies that can balance India’s steadily increasing regional influence on multiple fronts. This issue brief thus hopes to foray into the recent developments in Indo-US and Indo-Afghan relations and their strategic security implications for Pakistan.

The Indo-US Strategic Partnership
The Indo- US strategic partnership encompasses multiple dimensions, such as shared principles of democracy and ensuring stability in Afghanistan. Both countries agree that this stability shroud be is realized through investments in human capital and the joint military cooperation. The relationship has cemented itself in line with common foreign policy objectives, ranging from curbing terrorism in South Asia to establishing defense agreements with Israel. Furthermore, India’s robust relationships with the oil rich Gulf States, which the United States views as a vital cog in maintaining stability in the Middle East Vis a Vis Israel, is another aspect of the partnership which is of strategic significance.
The partnership in contemporary times heavily relies around the corporate sectors influence in both economies, where free market capitalism allows the flow of investments and expertise to either state. Furthermore, India’s status as a nuclear weapons state when it conducted its tests in 1974 has ensured that it creates a credible deterrent to ward off threats to its territorial sovereignty particularly in the aftermath of the 1962 border conflict with China. China’s rise as a potent economic power and its influence being recognized by the close relationships it has with countries such as Bangladesh, Sri Lanka and particularly, Pakistan; where the latter is a recognized nuclear weapons state and maintains a policy of ‘Full Spectrum Deterrence’ to ward off conventional imbalances with Indian aggression, has meant that India’s relationship with the United States becomes particularly relevant. The United States policy which involves containment of China in sensitive regions such as the South China Sea and South East Asia has meant that both India and the United States converge over the objective of ensuring that China’s economic and military expansion is curbed. China as a factor in the strategic calculus of both India and the United States is extremely important if one has to analyze the strategic disposition of this relationship and partnership.
As of current, India is the world’s largest arms importer with a total cache of $100 million, out of which, $67 million is directed towards Pakistan (Haider, 2016). In the past this spending has shown an increasing trend when Pakistan has responded to Indian conventional and hegemonic designs through TNWs or Tactical Nuclear Weapons as an option to deploy on the battlefield. The support from lobbies inside the United States which vouch for Pakistan’s containment also allows India to
assume a hardened stance against the country which is characterized by aggressive rhetoric and responding to acts of terrorism allegedly perpetuated through its own soil, with doctrines such as the Cold Start (which involves quick mobilization, punitive strikes on enemy territory and little room for the adversary to respond).
While the Cold Start Doctrine (CSD) might signal an alarming trend that could potentially have an impact on the US- India military partnership where the latter wishes to have strategic stability in South Asia, the fact that constraints have been imposed by the US on Pakistan’s dual use technologies and weapons systems, buttresses the point of the US tilt towards India. In contrast to Pakistan’s nuclear weapons program which has been viewed with suspicion over aspects such as command and control and nuclear terrorism, the US-India nuclear deal in 2008 has allowed India to benefit from a waiver from the Nuclear Suppliers Group which permits it to gain access to civilian nuclear technology and fuel. This deal has greatly weakened the Non Proliferation order in South Asia, where undue favoritism towards India leaving Pakistan with little or no access towards such technologies and having to rely on other partners such as China for investment into the nuclear sector.
Currently, the relationship between Pakistan and the United States has witnessed another jolt in the form of limited convergence over stability in Afghanistan. The United States widely accuses Pakistan of doing less to counter the Haqqani Network and the schisms between both countries which emerged regarding the sale of F-16s underlines how the strategic partnership which already exists between India and the United States gains added relevance. This partnership is likely to cement itself even further, where a Post P5+1 Nuclear Iran allows India to encircle Pakistan by forging amiable ties with Iran, investing heavily in Afghanistan and forging strong ties with states in the Middle East. Though Middle East has historically allied with Pakistan, but due to several issues such as Pakistan’s policy of neutrality regarding the Yemen crisis, relations have soured particularly with states such as the UAE. The United States pushing for India to capitalize on regional dynamics has meant that Pakistan would need to exercise strategic foresight and prudence to avoid being encircled by India. The strategic partnership will thus, gain more relevance with India’s economic expansion, the US reservations over Pakistan’s nuclear weapons and dual use technologies as well as pushing for more investment and stability in Afghanistan through India’s efforts at the expense of Pakistan which is viewed to have a dualistic policy over terrorism.

The Indo-Afghan Strategic Partnership

The Strategic Partnership Agreement (SPA) of 2011, between India and Afghanistan laid the foundations for a long-term commitment to security and development in Afghanistan. It outlines assistance in the field of infrastructural and institutional development, offers educational guidelines and technological aid to develop Afghan Capacity. More importantly the agreement encourages investment in Afghan natural resources, provides duty-free access to Afghan exports into Indian markets and aims to strengthen an Afghan led process of peace and reconciliation. Efforts at high level bilateral political partnerships have materialized in agreements, collaborations and conferences such as the Heart of Asia peace process and ANAASTU. India advocates a “no exit” policy with regards to Afghanistan, which has been endorsed by Afghan leadership (Ministry of External Affairs; Government of India, 2016).
Bilateral trade between the two economies has grown steadily (by approximately 0.20% annually) for the past three years. Despite the lack of direct access, India is the second largest market for Afghan exports with total bilateral trade amounting to $684.47 million in the year 2014-15 (BS Web Team, 2016). Naturally, India sees economic interests in Afghanistan, but its objectives in the region also hold political motives. Threatened by armed struggle for freedom in Kashmir, India benefits by cutting terror roots, their ideology and any networks within Afghanistan, that could aggravate the Kashmiri armed struggle (Baloch & Niazi, 2008). The resurgence of legitimate Islamic independent movements challenges India’s social fabric by providing cannon fodder to oppressed minorities. Moreover, the eradication of terrorism helps stabilize the region, promoting trade. India benefits from undermining cordial Pak-Afghan relations; geo strategically speaking, Pakistan would always serve as a more suitable ally and partner for trade and commerce, being closer to Afghanistan (Usman, 2008). Geo-economic motives, of capturing Central Asian energy markets fuel India’s long run pursuit of Afghanistan. India’s push to develop Chabahar port in Iran consolidates earlier fears of Pakistan’s encirclement by India. Its presence isolates Pakistan, both politically and economically and also circumvents it, robbing it off its geostrategic advantage. Furthermore, it nullifies Pakistan ability to use Afghanistan as an asset of strategic depth (Riedel, 2011). Numerous Indian consulates near the Pak-Afghan border are a legitimate cause of concern for Pakistan for two primary reasons. Generally, consulates protect and promote, commercial and individual interests, and hence are opened in areas that are densely populated. However, the majority of
Indian consulates are found in population scarce areas (Cheema, 2013). Pakistan has thrown multiple state level accusations at the Indian establishment and specifically, it’s Research and Analysis Wing (RAW) for aiding militancy, separatist movements and terrorism on Pakistani soil while using the consulates as ground zero for such operations (Zeb, 2006). Earlier Pakistan has provided intelligence that links Brahimdagh Bugti (son of the late Akbar Bugti) and the Baloch Republican Party (BRP) to Delhi and the former Karzai government (Walsh, 2010). Pakistan’s former Interior Minister, Rehman Malik suspected Brahimdagh Bugti to be responsible for recruiting militants in Afghanistan and went on to accused India and Afghanistan for supporting the insurgent Baloch National Army (BNA) and also charged Baloch Liberation Army (BLA) for the abduction of foreign nationals (Major Dr. Khalil-ur-Rehman, 2013). Recently the Kulbhushan Yadav episode has exposed RAW’s intelligence networks aimed towards destabilizing Pakistan and retrospectively speaking this warrants extreme caution on behalf of Pakistan upon any Indian presence near its borders (Ahmad, 2016).
India has pledged over $2 billion to Afghanistan up till now, as part of a reconstruction and development aid package (Fair, 2010). This is inclusive of institutional development, within which India has constructed a new parliament building for Afghanistan (Hindustan Times, 2015). Immensely closer ties with India were previously also enjoyed by the former Karzai government whose embrace of India was a source of great irritancy to Pakistan in light to the 2005 Indo – US civil nuclear deal (ISAF, 2012). Consequently, Pakistan perceived Indian assisted dam construction in the province of Kunar as a way to divert water resources away from Pakistan (Kiani, 2013). Pakistan’s insecurities over the matter have been a cause of concern to US and India, who point fingers at Pakistan of having ties to the Haqqani network, and allegedly accusing InterServices Intelligence Agency (ISI) of supporting the 2008 attack on the Indian embassy in Kabul (CNN, 2008). The U.S. chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Admiral Michael Mullen has gone to refer to the Haqqani network as, “a veritable arm of the ISI” (Bumiller & Perlezsept, 2011).
From the above qualitative analysis, we conclude that Pak-Afghan relations are negatively correlated with Indo-Afghan relations. While all counties would ideally benefit from holistic, all-encompassing political and economic initiatives for growth, miss -trust and historical animosity has pivoted these regional powers against each other’s best interest (Mir, 2015).

Lessons for Pakistan

The negative correlation between the Indo-US strategic partnership and the Indo- Afghanistan partnership with the US-Pakistan and the Pakistan-Afghanistan relationship, clearly suggests that Pakistan must capitalize on opportunities which are present in its region and globally through conducting an appraisal of regional dynamics and capitalizing on its relationship with states such as China which has heavily invested in the country and continues to contribute towards its arms buildup. Exercising prudence requires foresight, but to counter the growing India- US strategic partnership, Pakistani policymakers can undertake the following recommendations at the diplomatic level:
1. Capitalization of the strategic partnership with China:

Although the indomitable relationship with China is characterized by a high level of mutual trust and convergence of strategic interests, it is imperative for Pakistan to consider the possibility of similar nuclear agreements in line with the Indo-US Nuclear deal, particularly with a state that has a rising global profile and has been benign as far as its investments in Pakistan is concerned. The strategic partnership between the US and India is defined by economic interests as well as a military cooperation and Pakistan should continue to ensure that its economic and military partnership with China acts as a balance to fewer concessions and avenues for cooperation with the United States.

2. Capitalizing on the limitations of US/ Indian strategic foresight:

While the strategic partnership between the US and India has alarming implications for Pakistan’s security it is critical to understand that the US and India have often failed in resolving key disputes with states through erroneous policies which have encompassed military interventions and neglect. US policies in the Gulf region, particularly with regard to Iran have had an impact on Iran’s ability to assert itself as a dominant player in the Middle East. Yet at the same time, in line with the P5+1 Nuclear Deal, Pakistan can cement its relationship with the Islamic Republic by emphasizing on energy deals and projects which have previously been held hostage to sanctions and time lags. Similarly, states such as Sri Lanka and Nepal have grappled with Indian policies which include interference in sovereign affairs. Sri Lanka’s hostility towards India has historically stemmed from India’s peacekeeping force which exaggerated the ongoing civil war with the Lanka Tamil Tiger Eelam as compared to
Pakistan, where the efforts of the Pakistan Army in assisting the downfall of the insurgency has proven to be fruitful and has fostered goodwill amongst both countries. A multidimensional approach towards Pakistan’s foreign policy in its immediate neighborhood is required for the country’s rising regional profile.

3. Reassessment of Pakistan’s Afghan policy:

The India- Afghanistan relationship has fostered on the grounds of joint collaborations between both governments over infrastructural development including education, health sectors and building of intellectual capital. Afghan/ Pakistan trust deficits emerge on the security fronts with allegations over cross-border terrorism on either side jeopardizing the relationship. Yet a more innovative approach towards dealing with Afghanistan where competition with India centers on increased investments and energy generation could prove to be vital. CPEC’s opportunities allow Pakistan to address its domestic energy concerns and simultaneously vouch for similar investments in Afghanistan which could act as a counter to growing Indo- US strategic convergence over the subject of sustainable stability in Afghanistan.

4. Economic Profile as a diplomatic tool:

In an age which is defined by increased regional connectivity and economic cooperation, it is important that Pakistan’s policy makers focus on generating higher productivity for its domestic markets while simultaneously allaying concerns of potential investors. A critical element of the Indo- US Strategic Partnership has been the rising Indian corporate sector which has allowed it to benefit from the 2008 Nuclear Deal despite the fact that it weakened the Non- Proliferation Order significantly and contributed towards instability in South Asia. While differences over the role of TNWs in the battlefield, nuclear terrorism and Pakistan’s policy of Full Spectrum Deterrence will continue to persist alongside accusations of doing less to counter the Haqqani Network; a rising economic profile while simultaneously addressing it’s domestic energy concerns will at least give Pakistan relatively more strength in its diplomatic negotiations particularly with global powers such as the United States which it has shared a fractious relationship with.

5. Encapsulating ‘Realpolitik’, as a feature of foreign policy:

As a concept and as a theory which gains considerable traction in modern times, policy makers in Pakistan need to be made aware of what a dynamic approach is; of which ‘Real Politik’ or diplomacy based on circumstances of given circumstances and factors becomes important. So far the Indo- Afghan and the Indo- US strategic partnership has been based upon Real Politik and for Pakistan to ensure that such partnerships can be countered, Real Politik as a concept needs to be understood, where relationships are less about ideology, religion, and cultural beliefs, but more about political influence, economic clout, and military supremacy.

References
Ahmad, N., 2016. Analysis: Kulbhushan Yadav’s RAW move. [Online] Available at http://tribune.com.pk/story/1074812/analysis-kulbhushan-jadhavs-raw-move/
Baloch, Q. B. & Niazi, A. H. K., 2008. Indian Encroachment in Afghanistan: A New Imperialism in the Making, s.l.: s.n.
BS Web Team, 2016. 6 things to know about the India-Afghanistan relationship. [Online] Available at http://www.business-standard.com/article/economy-policy/5-things-to-know-aboutthe-india-afghanistan-relationship-116010400230_1.html
Bumiller, E. & Perlezsept, J., 2011. Pakistan’s Spy Agency Is Tied to Attack on U.S. Embassy. [Online] Available at http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/23/world/asia/mullen-asserts-pakistani-role-inattack-on-us-embassy.html?_r=0
Cheema, P. I., 2013. Afghanistan’s Crisis & Pakistan’s Security Dilemma. Asian Survey, 23(3).
CNN, 2008. Afghan official: Pakistan spies behind Kabul attack. [Online] Available at http://edition.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/asiapcf/07/08/afghanistan.explosion/index.html?eref=rss_l latest
Fair, C. C., 2010. India in Afghanistan and Beyond: Opportunities and Constraints, s.l.: s.n.
Haider, M., 2016. India’s growing military spending threatens Pakistan, says NSA Janjua. [Online] Available at http://www.dawn.com/news/1250121
Hindustan Times, 2015. Modi inaugurates new Afghan Parliament built by India in Kabul. [Online] Available at http://www.hindustantimes.com/india/modi-in-kabul-pm-meets-ghani-toinaugurate-afghan-s-parl-building/story-wua2CtN8gj4IQsRnmNknHM.html
ISAF, 2012. State of the Taliban, s.l.: s.n.
Kiani, K., 2013. Pakistan, Afghanistan mull over power project on Kunar River. [Online] Available at http://www.dawn.com/news/1038435
Major Dr. Khalil-ur-Rehman, (. A. O., 2013. [Interview] (12 January 2013).
Ministry of External Affairs; Government of India, 2016. India – Afghanistan Relations. [Online] Available at http://eoi.gov.in/kabul/?0354?000
Mir, H., 2015. Indian’s Allegation & Pakistan. [Online] Available at http://www.currentaffairspk.com/hamid-mir-urdu-column-about-indians-allegationpakistan/
Riedel, B., 2011. Deadly Embrace: Pakistan, America, and the Future of Global Jihad. s.l.:s.n.
Usman, T., 2008. Indian Factor in Pak-Afghan Relations. Research Journal of Area Study Centre (Russia, China, and Central Asia).
Walsh, D., 2010. WikiLeaks cables reveal Afghan-Pakistani row over fugitive rebel. [Online] Available at http://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/nov/30/wikileaks-cables-afghan-pakistanifugitive
Zeb, R., 2006. Cross Border Terrorism Issues Plaguing Pakistan–Afghanistan Relations. China and Eurasia Forum Quarterly, Volume 4.
iGrassie, William. “Seeking Truth in a World of Competing Narratives.” The Huffington Post. TheHuffingtonPost.com, 30 Apr. 2012. Web. 13 Mar. 2014. <http://www.huffingtonpost.com/william-grassie/seeking-truth-in-a-world-_b_1452389.html>.
iiCampbell, Francis. “Has Globalization Changed the Nature of Diplomacy?” Proc. of Ethical Standards in Public Life, St. Edmund’s College, Cambridge University, UK. N.p., 20 Feb. 2015. Web. <http://www.vhi.st-edmunds.cam.ac.uk/resources-folder/campbell-2015>.
iiiGelb, Leslie H. Power Rules: How Common Sense Can Rescue American Foreign Policy. New York: Harper, 2009. Print.
iv Ibid

v”“America Has No Permanent Friends or Enemies, Only Interests”.” Goodreads. N.p., n.d. Web. 19 Feb. 2014. <http://www.goodreads.com/quotes/633024-america

,

No Comments


Skip to toolbar