PDA

View Full Version : We'll obliterate you: US warned Pakistan



santosh tiwari
22 Sep 06,, 08:36
We'll obliterate you: US warned Pakistan
Tim Reid
September 22, 2006

PERVEZ MUSHARRAF, the President of Pakistan, claimed last night that the Bush Administration threatened to bomb his country "into the Stone Age" if it did not co-operate with the US after 9/11, sharply increasing tensions between the US and one of its closest allies in the war on terrorism.

The President, who will meet Mr Bush in the White House today, said the threat was made by Richard Armitage, then the Deputy Secretary of State, in the days after the terror attacks, and was issued to the Pakistani intelligence director.

“The intelligence director told me that (Armitage) said, ‘Be prepared to be bombed. Be prepared to go back to the Stone Age’,” President Musharraf said. “I think it was a very rude remark.”

The claims come at the end of a week in which relations between the US and Pakistan have sharply deteriorated, and days ahead of the publication of President Musharraf’s memoir, In the Line of Fire.

On Wednesday, President Bush, in an interview with CNN, said that he would not hesitate to authorise immediate American military action inside Pakistan if he had intelligence of Osama bin Laden’s whereabouts. Asked if he would give an order to kill the al-Qaeda leader, Mr Bush said “absolutely”.

President Musharraf was clearly angered by Mr Bush’s declaration that the US would act independently of his authority inside Pakistan.

“We wouldn’t like to allow that. We would like to do that ourselves,” he said. The President’s potentially incendiary claim of US threats comes at a particularly sensitive time between Washington and Islamabad, amid suspicion in Washington that Pakistan is not doing enough to curb a resurgent Taleban in Afghanistan, or in the hunt for bin Laden.

Before the 9/11 attacks Pakistan was one of the only countries in the world to maintain relations with the Taleban, which was harbouring bin Laden, and the Pakistani intelligence services had close relations with the Taleban regime.

In recent days Islamabad has vehemently denied US media reports that it has struck a deal with al-Qaeda and Taleban militants inside Pakistan, and even one report that it has assured bin Laden that if captured, he would not face prosecution.

President Musharraf told the CBS 60 Minutes programme that when he was told of Mr Armitage’s threat, he reacted in a responsible way. “One has to think and take actions in the interest of the nation, and that’s what I did,” President Musharraf said.

Documents showed that Mr Armitage, who last night disputed the language but did not deny the claim, met the Pakistani Ambassador and the visiting head of Pakistan’s military intelligence service in Washington on September 13, 2001, and asked Pakistan to take seven steps.

President Musharraf told CBS that he was irked by US demands that Pakistan turn over its border posts and bases for the American military to use.

He said some demands were ludicrous, including one insisting that he suppress domestic expression of support for terrorism against the United States. “If somebody’s expressing views, we cannot curb the expression of views,” he said.

The official 9/11 commission report on the attacks, based largely on government documents, said that US national security officials focused immediately on securing Pakistani co-operation as they planned a response.

Within days of 9/11 President Musharraf cut his government’s ties to the Taleban regime in Afghanistan and co- operated with US efforts to track and capture al-Qaeda and Taleban forces that sought refuge in Pakistan. President Bush often praises Islamabad for being one of Washington’s greatest and most crucial allies in the war on terrorism.

President Musharraf also spoke about his embarrassment when informed at the UN in 2003 by George Tenet, who was then CIA Director, that Pakistani nuclear weapon technology had been passed to Iran and North Korea by the father of the Pakistani nuclear bomb, A. Q. Khan.

“(Tenet) took his briefcase out, passed me some papers. It was a centrifuge design with all its numbers and signatures of Pakistan. It was the most embarrassing moment,” President Musharraf told CBS.

He learnt then, he says, that not only were blueprints being given to Iran and North Korea, but that the centrifuges themselves - the crucial technology needed to enrich uranium to weapons grade - were being passed to them.

“(Khan) gave them centrifuge designs. He gave them centrifuge parts. He gave them centrifuges.

“(The shipments) were not done once. They must have been transported many times.”

STRAINED DAYS

September 11, 2001. President Musharraf condemns attacks on the US as “brutal and horrible”

February 2002. On a visit to the White House Musharraf says: “We reject terrorism . . . we will continue to fulfill our responsibilities”

February 2004. Nuclear scientist Abdul Qadeer Khan accused of selling secrets. "Musharraf denies knowledge of his activities".

December 2004. Bush says Musharraf is “a person with whom I’ve worked very closely over the past four years”

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,20457093-2703,00.html

Akshay
22 Sep 06,, 09:42
Ohhh Mama, are we gonna some action now? It is clear that US patience is waning incase of Pakistan. I don't see any direct confrontation with Pak but strangulation methods can be applied starting with cancelling F-16 delivery, then cancelling textile quota & after that maybe UN sanctions or am I just letting my horses go loose too quickly?

santosh tiwari
22 Sep 06,, 12:15
Ohhh Mama, are we gonna some action now? It is clear that US patience is waning incase of Pakistan. I don't see any direct confrontation with Pak but strangulation methods can be applied starting with cancelling F-16 delivery, then cancelling textile quota & after that maybe UN sanctions or am I just letting my horses go loose too quickly?

this was one of the top news in the most reputed news paper of australia. I never saw any news in any news paper here, where it was said, US want to “obliterate” either Iran or N Korea. while pakistan…….. ? I thought I would post this news for discussion.

the most interesting thing here is, even case of Mr A.Q.Khan is also highlighted here. i felt, this news was something like they have known who is behind all the happening. Just go through the news 2-3 times from top to bottom. the sense is something like they already had many things in their mind. rest, we would wait and see what happens next. one thing is sure, case of O.B.Laden is not like Iran or N Korea. more than 3000 innocent people of US were killed, they will not leave those who were behind that.

xplore
22 Sep 06,, 14:17
Ohhh Mama, are we gonna some action now? It is clear that US patience is waning incase of Pakistan. I don't see any direct confrontation with Pak but strangulation methods can be applied starting with cancelling F-16 delivery, then cancelling textile quota & after that maybe UN sanctions or am I just letting my horses go loose too quickly?

US is not in any such position and also not in near future.

Direct conflict is totally out of question, in case of cancellation of F16's Pakistan have alternate of Euro fighters and aso its own JF17.

Sanctions is most funniest idea. In that case US will loose the rest cooperation and Afghanistan would become a succide mission.

The actually didnt pushed Pakistan in to trouble rather they invited it by going to Afghanistan. The best solution was to recognise Taliban and bring these savages in to political process not to spread them around the world.......Every mistake have a price:confused:

lemontree
22 Sep 06,, 14:44
The actually didnt pushed Pakistan in to trouble rather they invited it by going to Afghanistan. The best solution was to recognise Taliban and bring these savages in to political process not to spread them around the world.......Every mistake have a price:confused:
Do you know anything about the Taliban? That you desire that be made part of the political process.

Tronic
22 Sep 06,, 16:37
Direct conflict is totally out of question, in case of cancellation of F16's Pakistan have alternate of Euro fighters and aso its own JF17.

America subsidizes its weapons sales to you.... you won't be able to afford the Eurofighter.... and the JF-17 is well..... Chinese... Chinese tech. is inferior to Russian, so they will be falling even harder....

kams
22 Sep 06,, 16:57
WASHINGTON Sep 22, 2006 (AP)— President Bush President said Friday he was "taken aback" by a purported U.S. threat to bomb Pakistan back to the Stone Age if it did not cooperate in the fight against terrorism after the Sept. 11 attacks.

He praised Pakistani President Gen. Pervez Musharraf for being one of the first foreign leaders to come out after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks to stand with the U.S. to "help root out an enemy."

At a joint White House news conference, Musharraf said a peace treaty between his government and tribes along the Pakistan-Afghanistan border is not meant to support the Taliban.

He said news reports had mischaracterized the deals. "The deal is not at all with the Taliban. This deal is against the Taliban. This deal is with the tribal elders," Musharaff said.

Said Bush: "I believe him." :biggrin: :biggrin: :biggrin:
He said that Musharaff had looked him in the eye and vowed that "the tribal deal is intended to reject the Talibanization of the people and that there won't be a Taliban and there wont be al-Aqaida (in Pakistan)."
Mushy-Bush (http://www.abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=2478081)

xplore
22 Sep 06,, 17:15
America subsidizes its weapons sales to you.... you won't be able to afford the Eurofighter.... and the JF-17 is well..... Chinese... Chinese tech. is inferior to Russian, so they will be falling even harder....

It is simply a disinformation that US subsidizes its weapons sales. Pakistan paid 5 Billion $ in advance and was not delivered F16 for decades. If you calculate the intrest on that sum it will go five times of original.

And now US do not enjoy monopoly over arms market.

highsea
22 Sep 06,, 17:30
It is simply a disinformation that US subsidizes its weapons sales. Pakistan paid 5 Billion $ in advance and was not delivered F16 for decades. If you calculate the intrest on that sum it will go five times of original.Uh, it was $658 Million for 28 aircraft, and it the money was returned.
...Finally, on December 1st, 1998, the New Zealand Government announced that it would lease-buy the 28 Pakistani F-16s stored at the AMARC. Three days later, the United States said they hoped for an 'early and fair' agreement on how to compensate Islamabad for its aborted purchase of US F-16 fighters. President Clinton briefed Pakistani Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif on US efforts to compensate Pakistan for the $658 million it paid for the 28 F-16s. US officials said the United States has already paid $157 million of this back to Islamabad, raising the money by selling aircraft components to other countries. New Zealand agreed to pay some $105 million over 10 years to lease the fighters, providing additional funds that could be used to give Pakistan some of its money back.

At the end of 1998, the United States announced it would pay Pakistan $326.9 million in cash and up to $140 million in other compensation to settle the eight-year dispute. The $140 million will include about $60 million in US white wheat that Pakistan will receive during the current US fiscal year, which began on October 1st. The remaining $80 million in compensation will be negotiated by the two sides. The F-16 issue has been a headache for Pakistan, which is grappling to repay millions of dollars on its $32 billion in foreign debt amid a hard currency drought caused by sanctions and the suspension of International Monetary Fund programs.

http://www.f-16.net/f-16_users_article14.html
And no, it is not disinformation that weapons sales are subsidized. Offsets are standard procedure- not just for the US, but for most other countries as well. They take a wide variety of forms, but they are part of virtually every contract.

Ray
22 Sep 06,, 17:38
$5.1B Proposed in Sales, Upgrades, Weapons for Pakistan's F-16s
Posted 05-Jul-2006 10:43
Related stories: Alliances, Americas - USA, Asia - Central, Asia - India, Avionics, BAE, Boeing, Bombs - General, Bombs - Smart, Contracts - Intent, ECM, Fighters & Attack, Issues - International, Issues - Political, Lockheed Martin, Missiles - Air-Air, Northrop-Grumman, Other Corporation, Radars, Raytheon, Sensors & Guidance, Support & Maintenance, Support Functions - Other, United Technologies
Also on this day: 05-Jul-2006 »
AIR_F-16A_Pakistan_Bombing.jpg
PAF F-16A drops Mk.82s
(click to view full)

On June 28, 2006, the US DSCA notified Congress via a series of releases of its intention to provide Pakistan with a $5.1 billion Foreign Military Sales package to upgrade the F-16s that serve as the PAF's top of the line fighters. Some of these items had been put on hold following the October 2005 earthquake in Pakistan & Kashmir, but the request for new F-16 Block 50/52s is now going ahead, along with new weapons, engine modifications and upgrades for Pakistan's older F-16 A/Bs, and related equipment.

These items are detailed below... along with some of the controversies the proposed sales are likely to create. Note that these notices of a potential sale are required by law, but do not mean that the sale has been concluded - the US Congress has 30 days to review the sale, and it will go through unless legislation is passed to block it. As such, any controversies created could have an effect on the final outcome.

Item 1: 36 New F-16 Block 50/52s - $3 billion
AIR_F-16_Block52_Greece.jpg
Greek F-16 Block 50/52s
(click to view full)

The Government of Pakistan has requested a possible sale of 36 F-16C Block 50 and F-16D Block 52 two-seater aircraft - other reports indicate a buy of 18 jets, with an option for another 18. The total value, if all options are exercised, could be as high as $3 billion.

While Pakistan's existing F-16s use the Pratt & Whitney F100 engine, the new planes will be equipped with either the Pratt & Whitney F100-PW-229 or General Electric's F110-GE-129 Increased Performance Engines (IPEs). They will also be equipped with the APG-68(V)9 radars, which are the most modern F-16 radar except for the UAE's F-16E/F Block 60 "Desert Falcons" and their AN/APG-80 AESA radars; AESA radars have also reportedly been fitted to some US aircraft.

The package for Pakistan's new F-16s also includes:

* 7 spare F100-PW-229 IPE or F110-GE-129 IPE engines
* 7 spare APG-68(V)9 radar sets
* 36 Joint Helmet Mounted Cueing Systems (JHMCS)
* 36 AN/ARC-238 SINCGARS radios with HAVE QUICK I/II
* 36 Conformal Fuel Tanks (pairs) that fit along the aircraft's sides to give them extra range
* 36 Link-16 Multifunctional Information Distribution System-Low Volume Terminals; DID has covered the tactical uses of MIDS-LVT Link 16 systems
* 36 Global Positioning Systems (GPS) and Embedded GPS/Inertial Navigation Systems
* 36 APX-113 Advanced Identification Friend or Foe Systems
* 36 Advanced Integrated Defensive Electronic Warfare Suites without Digital Radio Frequency Memory (DRFM); or AN/ALQ-184 Electronic Counter Measures pod without DRFM; or AN/ALQ-131 Electronic Counter Measures pod without DRFM; or AN/ALQ-187 Advanced Self-Protection Integrated Suites without DRFM; or AN/ALQ-178 Self-Protection Electronic Warfare Suites without DRFM
* 1 Unit Level Trainer
* Associated support equipment, software development/integration, modification kits, capability to employ a wide variety of munitions, spares and repair parts, flight test instrumentation, publications and technical documentation, CONUS-personnel training and training equipment, U.S. Government and contractor technical and logistics personnel services, and other related requirements to ensure full program supportability.

The principal contractors will be:

* Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company, Fort Worth, TX
* Lockheed Martin Missile and Fire Control, Dallas, TX
* BAE Advanced Systems Greenlawn, NY
* Boeing Corporation Seattle, WA
* Boeing Integrated Defense Systems: St Louis, MO; Long Beach, CA; San Diego, CA
* Raytheon Company: Lexington, MA; Goleta, CA
* Raytheon Missile Systems in Tucson, AZ
* Northrop-Grumman Electro-Optical Systems in Garland, TX
* Northrop-Grumman Electronic Systems in Baltimore, MD
* United Technology Company subsidiary Pratt & Whitney in East Hartford, CT; or
* General Electric Aircraft Engines in Cincinnati, OH

There are no known offset agreements in connection with this proposed sale. Implementation of this proposed sale will require multiple trips to Pakistan involving U.S. Government and contractor representatives for technical review/support and program management of the aircraft. See DSCA release [PDF format].

Item 2: Weapons for the New F-16s - $650 Million

To equip those new F-16s, the Government of Pakistan has requested a possible sale of:

* 500 AIM-120C5 Advanced Medium Range Air-to-Air Missiles (AMRAAM)
* 12 AMRAAM training missiles - these have seeker warheads but lack engines
* 200 AIM-9M-8/9 Sidewinder Short-Range Air-Air Missiles; they are the version before the fifth-generation AIM-9X.
* 240 LAU-129/A Launchers - these support AMRAAM or Sidewinder missiles.
* 500 Joint Direct Attack Munition (JDAM) Guidance Kits: GBU-31/38 Guided Bomb Unit (GBU) kits
* 1,600 Enhanced-GBU-12/24 GBUs
* 800 MK-82 500 pound General Purpose (GP) and MK-84 2,000 pound GP bombs
* 700 BLU-109 2,000 pound bunker-buster bombs with the FMU-143 Fuse
* Associated support equipment, software development/integration, modification kits, capability to employ a wide variety of munitions, spares and repair parts, flight test instrumentation, publications and technical documentation, CONUS-personnel training and training equipment, U.S. Government and contractor technical and logistics personnel services, and other related requirements to ensure full program supportability will also be provided.

The total value, if all options are exercised, could be as high as $650 million. The principal contractors will be:

* BAE Advanced Systems in Greenlawn, NY
* Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company in Fort Worth, TX
* Lockheed Martin Missile and Fire Control in Dallas, TX
* Northrop-Grumman Electro-Optical Systems in Garland, TX
* Northrop-Grumman Electronic Systems in Baltimore, MD

There are no known offset agreements in connection with this proposed sale. Implementation of this proposed sale will require multiple trips to Pakistan involving U.S. Government and contractor representatives for technical review/support, program management, and modification of the aircraft. See DSCA release [PDF format].

Item 3: F-16A/B Mid-Life Update Modification Kits - $1.3 billion

The Government of Pakistan has requested a possible sale of 60 F-16A/B Mid-Life Update (MLU) modification and Falcon Star Structural Service Life Enhancement kits consisting of:

* APG-68(V)9 with Synthetic Aperture Radar or the APG-66(V)2 radar, which is a much smaller improvement on earlier F-16s. The APG-68 with SAR is far better at air to ground work, and can be used to monitor ground activity.
* Joint Helmet Mounted Cueing Systems (JHMCS)
* AN/APX-113 Advanced Identification Friend or Foe Systems
* AN/ALE-47 Advanced Countermeasures Dispenser Systems
* Have Quick I/II Radios
* Link-16 Multifunctional Information Distribution System-Low Volume Terminals (MIDS-LVT)
* SNIPER (formerly known as AN/AAQ-33 PANTERA) targeting pod capability
* Reconnaissance pod capability
* Advanced Air Combat Maneuvering Instrumentation Units (used for training exercises)
* MDE included in the MLU modification and structural upgrade kits
* 21 ALQ-131 Block II Electronic Countermeasures Pods without the Digital Radio Frequency Memory (DRFM); or ALQ-184 Electronic Countermeasures Pods without DRFM;
* 60 ALQ-213 Electronic Warfare Management Systems;
* 1 Unit Level Trainer; and
* 10 APG-68(V)9 spare radar sets.
* Radars, modems, receivers, installation, avionics, spare and repair parts, support equipment, CONUS-personnel training and training equipment, technical assistance, publications and technical documentation, system drawings, U.S. Government and contractor engineering, and other related logistics elements necessary for full program support.

ELEC_JHMCS_Visor.jpg
JHMCS

The total value, if all options are exercised, could be as high as $1.3 billion.

According to the US DSCA, Pakistan intends to purchase the MLU Program equipment "to enhance survivability, communications connectivity, and extend the useful life of its F-16A/B fighter aircraft. The modifications and upgrades in this proposed sale will permit Pakistan's F-16A/B squadron to operate safely, and enhance Pakistan's conventional deterrent capability. Pakistan's air fleet can readily use these updates to enhance and extend the life of its aircraft."

The principal contractors will be:

* BAE Advanced Systems in Greenlawn, NY
* Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company in Fort Worth, TX
* Lockheed Martin Missile and Fire Control in Dallas, TX
* Northrop-Grumman Electro-Optical Systems in Garland, TX
* Northrop-Grumman Electronic Systems in Baltimore, MD

There are no known offset agreements in connection with this proposed sale. Implementation of this proposed sale will require multiple trips to Pakistan involving U.S. Government and contractor representatives. See DSCA release [PDF format].

InsideDefense.com makes the interesting observation that Pakistan doesn't have 60 F-16s to upgrade. The clear implication is that the Pakistani government is interested in buying used F-16s from other countries and upgrading them.

Item 4: F-16A/B Engine Modifications & UP/STAR - $151 Million
F100 engine
F100 Engine Test

The third contract involves Engine Modifications and Falcon UP/STAR Structural Upgrades as well as associated equipment and services. The total value, if all options are exercised, could be as high as $151 million.

More specifically, the Government of Pakistan has requested engine improvements and structural modifications to its F-16 fleet, which includes a possible sale of:

* 14 F100-PW-220E engines
* 14 Falcon UP/STAR F-16 structural upgrade kits
* De-modification and preparation of 26 aircraft
* Support equipment, software development/integration, modification kits, spares and repair parts, flight test instrumentation, publications and technical documentation, personnel training and training equipment, U.S. Government and contractor technical and logistics personnel services, and other related requirements to support the program.

The principal contractors will be:

* Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company in Fort Worth, TX
* United Technology Company subsidiary Pratt & Whitney in East Hartford, CT.

There are no known offset agreements proposed in connection with this potential sale, but implementation of the engine modifications and UP/STAR repairs will require multiple trips to Pakistan involving U.S. Government and contractor representatives for technical review/support, program management, and modification of the aircraft. See DSCA release [PDF format].

Potential Controversies
GEO_Afghanistan_ISAF_British_Zone_Map.jpg
ISAF, S. Afghanistan
(click to view full)

The DSCA has said that "Release of this system would not significantly reduce India's quantitative or qualitative military advantage." India disagrees, and military experts in Delhi will likely note that the same equipment (GPS, targeting pods, bunker-busters) that could potentially find uses against al-Qaeda terrorists in Pakistan's "lawless frontier" could also be used in precision strikes on India's military facilities in the event of war.

The DSCA counters that release of the F-16C/D Block 50/52 aircraft to Pakistan "will neither affect the regional balance of power nor introduce a new technology as this level of capability or higher already exists in other countries in the region." India does operate more advanced SU-30MKI aircraft with R-77 "AMRAAMski" missiles, advanced avionics, et. al.; these are superior in range, armament, and maneuverability to Pakistan's F-16s, and will remain so. Meanwhile, India's $7-10 billion MRCA competition is certain to introduce 125-200 aircraft that are certain to be more advanced than the F-16 Block 50/52.

The US DSCA adds in its submission to Congress that "The modification of the engines and Falcon UP/STAR structural updates will provide capable F-16's that can be used for close air support in ongoing operations contributing to the GWOT." The DSCA also cites the June 2004 designation of Pakistan as a Major Non-North Atlantic Treaty Organization Ally in its submission. The British commander of NATO's ISAF force in Southern Afghanistan sees Pakistan's role in a rather different light, however; he recently noted that al-Qaeda in Afghanistan is still run out of Pakistan (specifically Quetta), with Pakistani knowledge and even support from Islamist elements in its security apparatus. Ah, the dynamics of counter-insurgency in tribal societies. Pakistan angrily denies this, of course.

India's objections to this sale have been muted thus far, and phrased carefully to emphasize their effect on India-Pakistan ties rather than India-US ties. Meanwhile, President Bush's personal diplomacy approach has fostered a strong relationship with Gen. Musharraf that is inclined to view such requests favourably as part of the USA's 3-corner balancing act in the region. Barring unusual circumstances, therefore, it's reasonable to expect this sale to go through with little more than a concerned speech or two in Congress.

UPDATES:

* July 20/06: Well, here's the first copncerned speech from an opposed Congressman: Eliot Engel [D-NY], citing Pakistan's support for terrorism in India. Mr Engel is a senior member of the House International Relations Committee, and was one of the first Members of Congress to come out in favour of the proposed India-US nuclear energy deal. He'll be making his views public at the July 20, 2006 House International Relations Committee hearing on the Pakistan sales - and that meeting will tell us if opposition to the deal has real traction.

http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/2006/07/51b-proposed-in-sales-upgrades-weapons-for-pakistans-f16s/index.php

a win win for Pak.

Upgraded.

Subsidised or done free?

highsea
22 Sep 06,, 18:00
...Subsidised or done free?Sir, as I understand it, 50% of the $6 Billion in US Aid for Pakistan can be used for military purposes, the other 50% must be for other uses (civilian infrastructure, food, medicine, etc.). Some of these funds may already have been used, but presumably the remainder will be used in this deal.

Ray
22 Sep 06,, 19:26
Maybe.

But to claim that the US is not giving AID and also not subsidising or giving things free is like looking a gift horse in the teeth and wondering why it is not made out of GOLD! :shock:

There are many issues of the US government that does not appeal to me, but I am not cussed to state that nothing good the US govt is doing around the world!

The first two F 16s were FREE!

There is a thread and news item on this forum where the Pakistani PM Aziz said so!

And if the US stops giving aid and stops WB and IMF, Pakistan will SINK and China would not be too keen to salvage Pakistan either! It is not that Paksitan is a child of China. China has her own priorities to look into. If she didn't, Pakistan would be the last one kowtowing to Bush. There are enough posts here of Pakistanis who have openly stated that the US is a fair weather friend and China is the true friend!

highsea
22 Sep 06,, 19:39
...There are enough posts here of Pakistanis who have openly stated that the US is a fair weather friend and China is the true friend!And many Indians who say the same thing, to be fair.

These comments stem from the fact that the US has rules on how our aid and weapons are used, and certain conditions that countries have to abide by to be eligible for that aid. When the rules are not followed, we cut off the aid/weapons. Pakistan and India both have experienced this more than once.

This makes us "Fair Weather Friends".

Being the US, we're damned if we do, and damned if we don't.

Ray
22 Sep 06,, 20:01
And many Indians who say the same thing, to be fair.

These comments stem from the fact that the US has rules on how our aid and weapons are used, and certain conditions that countries have to abide by to be eligible for that aid. When the rules are not followed, we cut off the aid/weapons. Pakistan and India both have experienced this more than once.

This makes us "Fair Weather Friends".

Being the US, we're damned if we do, and damned if we don't.

The US has never been India's friend before and so the issue of being a fair weather friend does not arise.

India is now a friend of the US, but on equal terms. Why so? We have money to pay and not beg. Yet, it is friendship on both sides that we are ready to exchange items on cash and carry. Remember, the tsunami. US wanted to help. We appreciated the gesture of a friend, but we did not want to bother the US since her money was required by poorer nations. US appreciated that we had emerged from the begging bowl existence. Note how it came handy when Pakistan was hit by the earthquake!

The friendship with the US is stronger than ever before because the US is not afraid that India, unlike others, will whimper and weep for money at every sneeze that upsets the economy or at every cough of God!

The US had given aid to India before (cold war days), but then it was not the sole donor. Others were equally around in case of need I will admit.

If the US does not support India now, it will be disappointing but one still can't claim that it is a fair weather friend since the US is pursuing her policy and India hers and India or the US is doing no favors to each other. US needs India and India needs US because our strategic and economic goals are common.

Now take this scenario. If the US smashes Pakistan, as Armitage said, then India would be obligated and will have to admit that US has done India a great favour by removing a perenial pinprick. But the US is not doing so.

In fact, the US is nursing Pakistan as any doting parent would. So it is a sine non qua that US is pursuing a policy that suits her and not India!

US is a friend in so far as it is not working actively against India and that is quite a departure from the past!

I am sure India appreciates that US is neither for nor against India and that is a good start for a great friendship that beckons on the horizon of Time.

highsea
22 Sep 06,, 20:24
If the US does not support India now, it will be disappointing but one still can't claim that it is a fair weather friend since the US is pursuing her policy and India hers and India or the US is doing no favors to each other. US needs India and India needs US because our strategic and economic goals are common.I agree Sir, I was speaking to what Indian Internet Warriors say on the various Forums, not what is reality. Referring to the comments re the nuke deal, MRCA tender, MCTR, sanctions over the nuke tests, Iran, etc. The common theme is "don't trust the US", same comments we hear from many Pakistani posters.

The US doesn't hide our policies wrt introducing new military capabilities into a region, or non-proliferation and the NPT. We have been pretty consistent in that regard, no matter who is in power at the moment. As long as those policies coincide with what a country wants to do, every thing is rosy. But when things diverge, the US is always the one to blame, lol.

Ray
22 Sep 06,, 22:36
I agree Sir, I was speaking to what Indian Internet Warriors say on the various Forums, not what is reality. Referring to the comments re the nuke deal, MRCA tender, MCTR, sanctions over the nuke tests, Iran, etc. The common theme is "don't trust the US", same comments we hear from many Pakistani posters.

The US doesn't hide our policies wrt introducing new military capabilities into a region, or non-proliferation and the NPT. We have been pretty consistent in that regard, no matter who is in power at the moment. As long as those policies coincide with what a country wants to do, every thing is rosy. But when things diverge, the US is always the one to blame, lol.

I will go one better.

The Pak newspaper openly state that US is a fair weather chum and that China is the true believer!

And the best part is that they still extend their palm for the alms!

And having got the alms and as soon as the US back is turned go back to abusing the US.

Look at Musharraf. Having milked US dry and having kowtowed all the way, he suddenly finds courage and states that US scared the living sh1t out of him and so he played ball!

After all, elections are coming!

The common Pakistani is baying for his blood and his country is in a whole lot of sub-national awakening and sectarian violence!

However, of the option of leadership or lack of it, Musharraf is the only one who is dependable to do what Bush wants him to do. The remainder will sell their grandmothers or so is what one infers given the media commentary out of Pakistan and from the various forum posts!!

highsea
22 Sep 06,, 23:19
I will go one better.

The Pak newspaper openly state that US is a fair weather chum and that China is the true believer!

And the best part is that they still extend their palm for the alms!

And having got the alms and as soon as the US back is turned go back to abusing the US.Can't argue with that, Sir. Of course that can also be said for KSA, Egypt, etc...

However, of the option of leadership or lack of it, Musharraf is the only one who is dependable to do what Bush wants him to do. The remainder will sell their grandmothers or so is what one infers given the media commentary out of Pakistan and from the various forum posts!!And so we are forced to play ball with Mushy, at least as far as it goes. If he is overthrown by the hardliners, war is practically inevitable. I think the US has learned a lesson from Iraq though- hopefully we wouldn't try to fix things up afterwards.

Let's hope it doesn't come to that.

AntiSatellite
22 Sep 06,, 23:40
America subsidizes its weapons sales to you.... you won't be able to afford the Eurofighter.... and the JF-17 is well..... Chinese... Chinese tech. is inferior to Russian, so they will be falling even harder....

India has been objecting to the US decision to sell F16 fighter jets to Pakistan for a long time but America had approved a lot of these sales long ago because they viewed India as a 'SovietStooge' alongside nations like Laos, Cuba, Bulgaria, Yugoslavia, Liberia and Vietnam.

Tronic
23 Sep 06,, 02:35
India has been objecting to the US decision to sell F16 fighter jets to Pakistan for a long time but America had approved a lot of these sales long ago because they viewed India as a 'SovietStooge' alongside nations like Laos, Cuba, Bulgaria, Yugoslavia, Liberia and Vietnam.
huh??? What time period are you talking about??? I doubt India protested against F-16s to Pak in the 80s....

Archer
23 Sep 06,, 03:15
I agree Sir, I was speaking to what Indian Internet Warriors say on the various Forums, not what is reality. Referring to the comments re the nuke deal, MRCA tender, MCTR, sanctions over the nuke tests, Iran, etc. The common theme is "don't trust the US", same comments we hear from many Pakistani posters.

The US doesn't hide our policies wrt introducing new military capabilities into a region, or non-proliferation and the NPT. We have been pretty consistent in that regard, no matter who is in power at the moment. As long as those policies coincide with what a country wants to do, every thing is rosy. But when things diverge, the US is always the one to blame, lol.

The basic bone of contention between India & the US is Pak. If both countries aligned on this single issue, the ties between both countries would see an exponential boost. Having said that, India is simply too big a nation to be clutching any other countries apron strings/ orbit/ - it will seek some degree of independence. But overall, I do think the US and India will agree on more issues than disagree, given how ties have progressed.

kams
23 Sep 06,, 04:18
I agree Sir, I was speaking to what Indian Internet Warriors say on the various Forums, not what is reality. Referring to the comments re the nuke deal, MRCA tender, MCTR, sanctions over the nuke tests, Iran, etc. The common theme is "don't trust the US", same comments we hear from many Pakistani posters.

The US doesn't hide our policies wrt introducing new military capabilities into a region, or non-proliferation and the NPT. We have been pretty consistent in that regard, no matter who is in power at the moment. As long as those policies coincide with what a country wants to do, every thing is rosy. But when things diverge, the US is always the one to blame, lol.

Thats what I have been trying to tell Indian Internet warriors in umpteen forums. Unfortunately they fail to see US side and do not comprehend US laws, especially with respect to Nuclear testing. Then we hear about how its dangerous to buy F/A-18 from US because she won't supply spares in case of a war with Pakistan:confused: I gave up trying to explain US laws.


The basic bone of contention between India & the US is Pak.

I do believe Pakistan is a mere occassional irritant in Indo-US relationship. US needs Pakistan for separate reason. (Hope all of you been watching CNN past couple of days, amazing statements:biggrin: ) US has abandoned its earlier policy of regarding India and Pakistan as equals.

GVChamp
23 Sep 06,, 04:27
Anyone else smell a lie? I seem to recall reading on this board about a possible revolt in a province known as "Balochistan." Throw in some tensions from the recent Pope comments, and wouldn't we expect a very, very nasty situation brewing in Pakistan?
I'd want to start distancing myself from a very unpopular superpower, too, if I were in that position.

kams
23 Sep 06,, 04:41
Anyone else smell a lie? I seem to recall reading on this board about a possible revolt in a province known as "Balochistan." Throw in some tensions from the recent Pope comments, and wouldn't we expect a very, very nasty situation brewing in Pakistan?
I'd want to start distancing myself from a very unpopular superpower, too, if I were in that position.

All of Mushy's statements/ quotes etc may have some bearing on impending elections in Pakistan. (due in 2007 is it?)

Samudra
23 Sep 06,, 05:18
All of Mushy's statements/ quotes etc may have some bearing on impending elections in Pakistan. (due in 2007 is it?)

How long can he do his balancing act? The longer he does the more is the trouble he will leave behind - for Pakistan and the world.

Musharaf cannot last for eternity.He has to bring in sustainable political stability to that county.

But then, many of our neighbours are lost in is charm.:eek:

gilgamesh
23 Sep 06,, 05:57
US would not be foolish enough to bomb Pakistan into stone age. They can get all they want from Pakistan without the current melodrama. US can easily arm twist Pakistan to bend over backwards and accommodate them(in doing what it takes to destroy Taliban, if neccessary give staging area) .

From a political political perspective, US mid term elections are on the way, current US relationship with Pak, which has shades of grey, cannot be easily explained away to general public, so the noise. I bet Musharaff was in the know what was coming. Also, it strengthens Mushy's position, for standing upto Americans.

santosh tiwari
23 Sep 06,, 09:13
Bruce Loudon, South Asia correspondent
September 23, 2006

PAKISTAN defiantly dug in its heels yesterday and insisted it would not allow foreign forces to enter its territory in search of Osama bin Laden, setting the stage for a major new clash between President Pervez Musharraf and critics who claim Islamabad is double-dealing with al-Qa'ida and the Taliban.

Speaking in the Pakistani capital, senior government officials rejected absolutely the notion of foreign forces setting foot inside the country to hunt bin Laden and other senior al-Qa'ida and Taliban figures who Western intelligence sources are convinced are hiding in the remote territory of North Waziristan, close to the Afghan border.

Tasnim Aslam, a senior official in Islamabad, said: "Any terrorist action to be taken inside Pakistani territory would be taken by Pakistan. He (Musharraf) has said that he would not allow foreign troops to come inside our territory."

Islamabad had reacted angrily after reports that six US helicopter gunships had flown into North Waziristan from Afghanistan in hot pursuit of Taliban guerillas.

Asked in a CNN interview this week whether he would send troops into Pakistan if he received good intelligence on the al-Qa'ida leader's whereabouts, US President George W. Bush said: "Absolutely, we would take action necessary to bring him to justice."

But General Musharraf insisted he would not allow the sovereignty of his country to be breached by the US.

"We will do it ourselves," he said. "We are able to do everything, wherever we locate anybody. There have been many such occasions where we have located al-Qa'ida or Taliban activity and we have struck with full force."

The row is expected to be the main point on the agenda when Mr Bush holds a meeting in the White House next week with General Musharraf and Afghanistan President Hamid Karzai, who is in the vanguard of those who believe Islamabad is soft on terrorism and not doing enough.

India, too, cannot be expected to let General Musharraf off the hook, particularly after reports began circulating in New Delhi yesterday that investigators probing the July 11 terror bomb blasts in Mumbai have clearly linked the attack to al-Qa'ida and Pakistan-based Lashkar-e-Toiba. Investigators have allegedly established the bombers trained in Pakistan-controlled Kashmir - some of them alongside Mohammad Atta, the ringleader in the September 11, 2001, attacks on the US.

Mr Karzai has said coalition forces in Afghanistan could not end the Taliban onslaught unless "terrorist sanctuaries" outside the country were destroyed - a clear reference to Pakistan.

Mr Karzai said "outsiders", whom he did not name, were behind the Taliban attacks, adding: "Military action in Afghanistan alone, therefore, will not deliver our shared goal of eliminating terrorism."

"Adding further to the pressure on General Musharraf, the top US commander overseeing military operations in Afghanistan, General John Abizaid, was quoted yesterday as saying Taliban military activity was being organised from and supported by Pakistan."

General Musharraf was reported yesterday as saying "what (Karzai) has said is not correct".

"I am already doing a lot in Pakistan. They need to be doing more in Afghanistan," he said.

TV reports in New Delhi said investigators probing the blasts on the rail network in Mumbai, the nation's economic capital, had confirmed the role of LET in the attack, funded by al-Qa'ida.

The reports said the conspiracy to bomb the Mumbai train system was hatched at a terrorist camp in Kashmir, and that evidence collected by police showed the terrorists were trained by al-Qa'ida.

LET, according to last night's reports, "did the nuts and bolts job as it has many active and sleeper cells in India's hinterland". The reports said more than 50 jihadis were involved in executing the bomb blasts.

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,20461364-2703,00.html

gilgamesh
23 Sep 06,, 11:17
http://www.tribuneindia.com/2006/20060922/main6.htm

Pak called ‘client state for sale to highest bidder’
Rajeev Sharma
Tribune News Service

New Delhi, September 21
True to the American sense of timing, as Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf prepares to meet US President George W. Bush tomorrow, a leading American daily has described Pakistan as a “client state for sale to the highest bidder”.

The Wall Street Journal carried a stinging article on September 19 queerly entitled “Musharrafistan” wherein the author, Mansoor Ijaz, says Pakistan has lost its identity and calls on General Musharraf to “stop being all things to all people”. The author’s brief counsel to the General is to step down from power.

Ijaz’s most relevant observation, from the Indian point of view, is that General Musharraf is continuing to court Iranian mullahs in the hope of building an Iran-Pakistan-India gas pipeline “that could fund the revival of insurgency in Kashmir”.

The author has a long list of advice for General Musharraf, including that he should end his “hypocritical alliance” with Islamist activists; change the direction of the country’s nuclear programme; build a real economy that integrates Pakistan into the world; and construct real peace, not mirages that mask tension.

Ijaz has lambasted the deal that the Musharraf regime recently signed with north Waziristan tribal chiefs and described the Waziristan agency as a “state within a state” and a haven for the “worst enemies” of the civilised world.

The author makes an acidic comment on Pakistan-Afghanistan relations when he calls General Musharraf’s recent trip to Kabul an “exercise in damage control”. The government of President Hamid Karzai has for the past more than an year openly accused Pakistan of orchestrating a proxy war against it.

Ijaz talks of the lopsided approach of the Pakistan Government which has been funnelling billions of dollars into development of a nuclear arsenal while not finding enough money to feed its children. This, according to the author, is the prime reason why many of Pakistani children are destined to be terrorists.

The Wall Street Journal describes Ijaz as “a New York financier with Pakistani ancestry”.

xplore
23 Sep 06,, 15:26
The basic bone of contention between India & the US is Pak. If both countries aligned on this single issue, the ties between both countries would see an exponential boost. Having said that, India is simply too big a nation to be clutching any other countries apron strings/ orbit/ - it will seek some degree of independence. But overall, I do think the US and India will agree on more issues than disagree, given how ties have progressed.

Friendship between countries is always stretigic and never emotional as some Indian guys are projecting here.:biggrin:

US needs India to curtail China (the common enemy of both) and at the same times needs Pakistan's support on the mess what it calls war on terror. As to China and Pakistan's relations, China wants a strong Pakistan to counter India and same is what Pakistan needs. Thats how these partnerships are working.

But remember that US would never let India to be that strong that it become a threat for US so they will keep strengthning Pakistan too, and as end result Pakistan will get batter relations with all major powers.

This few years would be a prime time for Pakistan to establish its economy and defence and become a major player in world politics.

kams
23 Sep 06,, 16:37
US would not be foolish enough to bomb Pakistan into stone age. They can get all they want from Pakistan without the current melodrama. US can easily arm twist Pakistan to bend over backwards and accommodate them(in doing what it takes to destroy Taliban, if neccessary give staging area) .

From a political political perspective, US mid term elections are on the way, current US relationship with Pak, which has shades of grey, cannot be easily explained away to general public, so the noise. I bet Musharaff was in the know what was coming. Also, it strengthens Mushy's position, for standing upto Americans.

How can one bomb Pakistan back to stone age? Remember Harrapa, Mohenjadaro etc? they were much advanced than current status of Pakistan:biggrin: :biggrin: :biggrin: (now don't jump on me saying Harappa is not stone age, its close enough for me)

gilgamesh
23 Sep 06,, 17:13
How can one bomb Pakistan back to stone age? Remember Harrapa, Mohenjadaro etc? they were much advanced than current status of Pakistan:biggrin: :biggrin: :biggrin: (now don't jump on me saying Harappa is not stone age, its close enough for me)

I stand corrected bro. Don't insult Harappa!:biggrin:

kams
23 Sep 06,, 17:54
I stand corrected bro. Don't insult Harappa!:biggrin:

ooops sorryyyyyy

Ray
23 Sep 06,, 19:21
Friendship between countries is always stretigic and never emotional as some Indian guys are projecting here.:biggrin:

US needs India to curtail China (the common enemy of both) and at the same times needs Pakistan's support on the mess what it calls war on terror. As to China and Pakistan's relations, China wants a strong Pakistan to counter India and same is what Pakistan needs. Thats how these partnerships are working.

But remember that US would never let India to be that strong that it become a threat for US so they will keep strengthning Pakistan too, and as end result Pakistan will get batter relations with all major powers.

This few years would be a prime time for Pakistan to establish its economy and defence and become a major player in world politics.

The War on Terror is not a Mess.

It is being prolonged by the US just to have some justification to be present in the region to keep rogue states in check. Indeed, it is a strategic requirement. You are absolutely correct.

Of course the US is strengthening Pakistan by Bush ordering Musharraf to hold elections by 2007 and restore democracy. Didn't hear his speech, did you?


and as end result Pakistan will get batter relations with all major powers.

In so far as 'battering' is concerned, you are again right/

Armstrong battered the Pakistani ego and standing amongst the comity of nations by having stated that the unless Pakistan joined the US in the War on Terror, it would bombed back to the Stone Age. And of course, Armstrong is wrong. Pakistan IS in the Stone Age and so the issue is redundant.

Then the US has battered Pakistan when Bush stated that he required no one's permission to carried out the US attacks into Pakistan, meaning that Pakistan is but a vassal state of the US and not a sovereign state. No wonder the PAF does not contest the USAF when the repeatedly and at will raid into Pakistan or when the US soldiers enter Pakistan to raid areas!

It is indeed a real royal battering.

Why ask for more battering by the US and the World powers?

Of course it is a great friendship to have a puppet on a string!

Anoop C
23 Sep 06,, 21:00
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,20461364-2703,00.html


Tasnim Aslam, a senior official in Islamabad, said: "Any terrorist action to be taken inside Pakistani territory would be taken by Pakistan.

What the good lady ought to have said was anti-terrorist action. Freudian slip, perhaps.

kams
24 Sep 06,, 00:21
ISLAMABAD, Pakistan, Sept. 23, 2006

(CBS) This story was written by Farhan Bokhari for CBSNews.com.Leaders of Pakistan’s Islamic political parties are threatening to launch fresh protests against the country’s military ruler General Pervez Musharraf following his claim in a "60 Minutes" interview that former U.S. Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage threatened to bomb Pakistan "back to the Stone Age."


In Pakistan, Hafiz Hussain Ahmed, a senior leader of the coalition of Islamic parties known as the Muttahida Majlis-e-Amal (MMA) said on Saturday that his group would seek a detailed parliamentary discussion on U.S.-Pakistan relations when the parliament’s next session takes place. "I am amazed that it has taken General Musharraf five years to publicly reveal this exchange with Armitage. It is humiliating that our own parliament did not get to hear this first-hand account. This account came out while Musharraf was in the U.S. Didn’t we as Pakistanis deserve to hear this first?" he said in an interview with CBS News. "Armitage’s remarks underline the issue that America has no respect for Muslims or governments of Islamic countries," he added.

Asadullah Bhutto, a leader of the largest Islamic party known as the ‘Jamaat-e-Islami’ told CBS News that General Musharraf’s claim "confirms what we have said all along is true. This is simply the point that the U.S. relationship with Pakistan is not that of one country being the friend of another. The Americans simply treat Pakistan like a client state – an employee who is ordered about."

Most analysts believe that the fallout from the controversy does not pose an immediate threat to General Musharraf’s government. But there were also warnings that the controversy promises to solidify Pakistan’s rising opposition to the ruling regime. "Parties like the MMA have said for long, Musharraf has compromised on Pakistan’s vital interests, he has conceded more ground to the Americans than any other leader in this country’s history," Hasan Askari Rizvi, a leading Pakistani commentator on security and national affairs told CBS News. Mr Rizvi said, General Musharraf’s claim would harden "anti-Americanism and unite those who oppose ties to the U.S. This threat of being bombed back to the Stone Age is not going to be taken lightly by many people," he added.

Former Pakistani officials who dealt with the U.S. while Mr Armitage was still in office described him as a tough negotiator. "There were rumors that in his first meeting with Lieutenant General Mahmood Ahmed, Armitage conveyed a very tough message, but the exact wording has never before been revealed," said a former Pakistani government official who spoke to CBS News on the condition that his name would not be revealed.

Bull-necked, a weight-lifter and a veteran of the Vietnam war, Mr Armitage left many Pakistani officials with the impression of being unusually blunt. "He is not your usual diplomat type who speaks in a diplomatic language. When Armitage spoke, you knew this was not a man given to delivering messages between the lines. He is a straight talker," added the former Pakistani official.

Mr.President sh*t hit the fan at home.

As I recall some one was talking about freindship b/w countries.:biggrin:

Vepr
24 Sep 06,, 00:27
This few years would be a prime time for Pakistan to establish its economy and defence and become a major player in world politics.
Provided you dont get bombed by USA and advance to the stone age. :biggrin:

Vepr
24 Sep 06,, 00:29
I stand corrected bro. Don't insult Harappa!:biggrin:

Yeah Harappa would probably sell weapons to Pakistan (which will advance into the stone age)

Vepr
24 Sep 06,, 00:41
[xplore;269688]
US is not in any such position and also not in near future.
Yeah! Never seen them lob a few ICBMS off a sub in IO.


Direct conflict is totally out of question, in case of cancellation of F16's Pakistan have alternate of Euro fighters and aso its own JF17.
First buy them and then talk.

Sanctions is most funniest idea. In that case US will loose the rest cooperation and Afghanistan would become a succide mission.
Nopes in the stone age Pakistan, only trouble would be in obtaining a huge number of Bulldozers.


The best solution was to recognise Taliban and bring these savages in to political process not to spread them around the world
You think that the world behaves on Pakistani Hudood laws eh? Exonerating the rapist and punishing the victim?

Ray
24 Sep 06,, 08:27
Musharraf was to be courtmartialed and that is why he undertook the coup.

Thereafter,it was one long race for him to somehow hold on to his seat since without the Presidentship and power over all Pakistan, he would be a dead duck.

That is why if one sees the events as it got charted in the annals of history, one would realise that he is clutching on to straws to save himself.

First. it was clinging onto the Pakistani populace and so the populist tirade against "sham democracy".

Then, endearing himself to the theocratic classes so that he could cobble up a government.

Then being the handmaiden of the US so that he could revamp the economy to justify his existence as also obtain military hardware to appease the uniformed hawks.

And now that the election is nigh, he has to go back to his populist Islamic image by whimpering that he is acutally a Tiger, but the US has defanged him and made him toothless.

Right as rain, he is the true Islamist - blame others for his own failings!

They will never change!

santosh tiwari
24 Sep 06,, 16:45
September 25, 2006

SO President Pervez Musharraf is military dictator turned tease, making us wait for his book launch in New York today for more details of the Bush administration's crudely worded threat against Pakistan if it did not support the war on terror.

"Be prepared to be bombed. Be prepared to go back to the Stone Age," was the graphic warning from deputy secretary of state Richard Armitage, though admittedly it came one day after September 11. Armitage has disputed the wording but the fact that such a threat had to be made raises the question of whose side Pakistan is really on.

Pakistan's Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Lieutenant General Ehsan-ul-Haq, was in London last week talking about how no other nation has suffered so much in the service of the war on terror.

His forces deployed in the badlands that border Afghanistan have lost more than 500 soldiers - "more than the whole of the coalition combined". Musharraf himself has narrowly escaped three assassination attempts.

Pakistan's military intelligence, the Inter-Service Intelligence (ISI), last month helped foil the alleged Heathrow plot to blow up trans-Atlantic flights and the six most senior al-Qa'ida officials to be caught so far, including Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, the planner of the September 11 attacks, were all arrested in Pakistan.

So far, so impressive. On the other hand, how come those al-Qa'ida leaders were living in Pakistan not in caves but in residential areas, even a military cantonment, in Khalid's case? American special forces searching for Osama bin Laden and his deputy Ayman al-Zawahiri are convinced the ISI tipped off Zawahiri on two occasions when they got near.

Yesterday, Pakistani officials reiterated they were still hunting bin Laden, and rejected French media reports that the al-Qa'ida leader had died from typhoid.

A senior security official said it was "inconceivable that an event of this nature would remain unnoticed in Pakistan where we are constantly on the al-Qa'ida hunt".

But why do most would-be suicide bombers regard Pakistan as a finishing school?

And while military planners in Washington focus on Tehran's nuclear program, remember where the Iranians acquired their uranium-enrichment capability.

In 2003, I spent a week with US troops in Afghanistan at a godforsaken firebase called Shkin on the border with Pakistan. Every day, fighters would come and take potshots at the Americans then run back across the invisible border. The soldiers could do nothing because Pakistan refused to allow hot pursuit.

For those of us who have followed Pakistan for some time, it's a familiar story. Remember General Zia ul-Haq, who seized power in 1977? He, like Musharraf, spent two years as an international pariah. When the Soviet army crossed the Oxus into Afghanistan in 1979, he suddenly became the West's most crucial ally.

Because US support to the Afghans was a covert operation, it was channelled through the ISI. But what the West ignored then, and again after September 11, was that the ISI had its own agenda.

It was the ISI's idea in the mid-1980s to ship in young Arabs, including bin Laden, and train them to fight. When the Russians left, and the West overnight abandoned Afghanistan (and slashed aid to Pakistan), the ISI supported the creation of the Taliban.

After September 11, Musharraf had little option but to join the war on terror. Even if the Pakistani leader was genuinely committed, the ISI saw no reason to stop supporting those same Afghans they had been helping for more than two decades.

So whenever Musharraf has come under pressure from Washington, he has banned jihadi groups and watched them reform under new names. Or he has agreed to regulate madrasahs, the Islamist schools, then done nothing. In almost five years since the fall of the Taliban in Kabul, not a single Taliban leader or commander has been arrested in Pakistan. Yet they operate openly from there, particularly around the town of Quetta, long known as Taliban Central.

"Is Pakistan playing a malevolent role by supplying training?" asked a diplomat involved in drawing up British Afghan policy. "Well, we haven't found a smoking gun. It seems Musharraf is guilty of the sin of omission."

Whether Islamabad is simply turning a blind eye to training and recruitment inside its own borders or actively involved, the West's failure to see Pakistan as the real battleground of the war on terror is one of the reasons the Taliban have re-emerged as such a threat.

For obvious reasons, most leaders wait till they are no longer in office to release their memoirs. Musharraf's choice of title is intriguing. In the Line of Fire was a Hollywood movie starring Clint Eastwood as a veteran secret service agent haunted by his failure many years earlier to save President John F.Kennedy from assassination.

Is the general trying to tell us something?

The Sunday Times

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,20470336-601,00.html

santosh tiwari
24 Sep 06,, 17:30
ISLAMABAD: Pakistan has put off signing the letter of acceptance (LOA) for purchase of 36 F-16 fighters from the US after complaints from its Airforce that the planes were "bereft" of vital electronic warfare systems.

After the complaints, Pakistan's Ministry of Defence asked the US Secretary of Air Force International Affairs, (SAIFA), which is the coordinator and supervisor for the project, to extend the signing of LOA until December 31, Pakistani weekly Friday Times reported.

The last extension was sought on July 31 this year. The deal was apparently deferred partly due to conditions imposed by the US on the operations of F-16s and the "absence" of vital electronic capabilities from these platforms.

President Musharraf was expected to take up these issues when he meets President George W Bush in Washington on Saturday. "The signing of deal is off. Perhaps President Musharraf will try to extract some concessions during his meeting with Bush. But the entire deal is likely to spark much more debate and change before finalisation," a Pakistani official said.

According Friday Times , the F-16s were being offered without EW programme capabilities for their radar warning receiver (RWR). "This means that they will have pre-installed threat library and its RWR will only be able to identify Non-NATO aircraft," an expert said.

"Any NATO aircraft attacking these F-16s using Beyond Visual Range (BVR) capability could take them out easily simply because these F-16s would not know when they would be locked in sight of the attacking adversary and hence would be unable to take evasive measure," he said.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/2018614.cms

Ray
24 Sep 06,, 20:26
The actually didnt pushed Pakistan in to trouble rather they invited it by going to Afghanistan. The best solution was to recognise Taliban and bring these savages in to political process not to spread them around the world.......Every mistake have a price:confused:

Have you ever read any serious articles or commentaries?

It doesn't appears so, since most of your posts are half baked and more of your personal conjectures.

To be fair to you, I will concede that you do sometimes quote some obscure items whose credibility remains as obscure as the link. But then, it is after all printed matter and printed matter has value, especially for those who base their opinion on only one article or are too ill read to fathom the nuances.

As far as the Taliban and Pakistan goes, there are enough articles that can be trotted out for your education and to wean you away from your delusion that you are a immensely successful spin doctor. But then you will only believe an Islamic printed matter.

May I introduce this Islamic commentary for your educations?

Post #1
http://www.worldaffairsboard.com/showthread.php?t=16817

Take it for what it is worth. But, it is genuinely Islamic printed matter. No less than the Daily Times of Pakistan! And that too from Lahore, the seat of Pakistani formal (not madrassa!) education!

santosh tiwari
25 Sep 06,, 03:37
Bruce Loudon, South Asia correspondent
September 25, 2006

SPECULATION about the death of Osama bin Laden continued to swirl across the globe last night, but in the three capitals most likely to be the first to know if and when he dies - Riyadh, Islamabad and Washington - there were blanket denials of any knowledge of French reports that the al-Qa'ida leader had succumbed to typhoid last month.

Significantly, in view of claims that it was Saudi intelligence that was said to be the original source for the report, an official statement issued by the Government in Riyadh said: "The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia has no evidence to support recent media reports that Osama bin Laden is dead.

"Information that has been reported otherwise is purely speculative and cannot be independently verified."

Internet monitors who track terrorist chatter also said they had come across nothing to support the reports. The Washington-based IntelCentre, which monitors terrorism communications, was quoted as saying it was not aware of any similar reports on the internet.

Officials in Pakistan, where bin Laden is believed to be based in the remote North Waziristan district, insisted they knew nothing that would confirm the reports of his death on August 23. Pakistan's Interior Minister, Aftab Sherpao, said: "No, we do not have any such information with us."

The French regional daily L'Est Republicain reported on Saturday that Saudi intelligence first got reports of bin Laden's death on September 4 and that last Thursday this was passed to the French DGSE foreign intelligence service, which relayed it to President Jacques Chirac's office.

Australian officials were treating the claim cautiously, with Deputy Prime Minister Mark Vaile warning against premature celebrations.

A source in Islamabad dismissed the reports, saying bin Laden was seen by a commander he had spoken to only last month.

"This sounds like wishful thinking by those wanting to see the sheik dead," the source said.

A senior Washington official said: "I don't think this is a piece of information that would remain secret for long - no one would have any interest in keeping it quiet."

Mr Chirac said bin Laden's death "has not been confirmed in any way whatsoever", despite the original report being attributed to his security services. He has ordered an inquiry into the leaking of the DGSE memo.

Reports of bin Laden's death have emerged regularly, only for him to appear later in audio or video recordings. His last videotaped message came out in late 2004, but several audio tapes have been released this year. The last was at the end of June.

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,20470466-2703,00.html

santosh tiwari
25 Sep 06,, 16:49
WASHINGTON: Three days ahead of the trilateral summit with US President George W Bush and Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf, Afghan leader Hamid Karzai has said the al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden is "probably" in Pakistan and he can be captured if "collectively tried".

"He (Osama) is not in Afghanistan. I can tell you that for sure," Karzai said during NBC's "Meet the Press" programme. When asked if he is in Pakistan, the Afghan leader replied: "Probably he is there. That's what the reports say now that come across".

Asked to comment on a report of the Rand Corporation, which was privately endorsed by official circles, that essentially accused the Pakistani government and forces of being in collusion with the Taliban, he said: "We have a serious problem in this regard." "When I said we must go to the sources of terrorism, where they are trained, where they are equipped, where they are given money, where they are given motivation and sent to kill international coalition forces, engineers, doctors, Afghans, that's what I meant."

Pressed on whether he is talking about Pakistan, he said "whatever the source is". He also made the point that Kabul will be happy if Musharraf's deal with the tribal chiefs is implemented. "... if that is implemented, we will be very happy.

But unfortunately, right after the signing of the agreement, we saw that two tribal chiefs in Pakistan were killed in that area by the terrorists, by the Taliban, and an Afghan governor in the neighbourhood of that area of that was killed by a suicide bomber. So the trend since then is not good.

But we will have to wait and see as to whether the truce, as it is agreed upon, is going to be implemented or will be violated" Karzai said.

"If it is violated, then we will be very sceptical and that will exactly be a sanctuary for terrorism in that part of Pakistan" Karzai added.

He maintained that Afghanistan had provided the location to Islamabad of Osama bin Laden and argued that if "all" cooperate the al-Qaida chief could be nabbed.

"We have provided, from time to time, for the past so many years, information to our friends, our brothers, our neighbours in Pakistan about sanctuaries, about training grounds, about personalities associated with terrorism.

They came back to us and said that some of the information was old, but that it was true sometime before that and that we hope that more action will be taken" the Afghan leader said. Asked if Pakistan can capture bin Laden the Afghanistan leader remarked," I don't have so much information to speculate on that. But if you all tried to collectively, he would not be able to hide".

Separately, the ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, Jane Harman said the Bush administration failed to nab bin Laden after cornering him at Tora Bora and that there is now a fair degree of certainty that the al-Qaida chief is in Pakistan.

"We missed a chance. We had him cornered at Tora Bora in Afghanistan. And under this administration, no action was taken. We also know, I think for a fair certainty that he's in the tribal area of Pakistan. I don't believe he's in Afghanistan. Resources were not focused on this problem as we got bogged down in Iraq. Now we have more resources on the problem. But we should have been able to capture him within the last five years" Harman said on CNN's Late Edition.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/2026021.cms

Ray
26 Sep 06,, 20:05
uesday, September 26, 2006 E-Mail this article to a friend Printer Friendly Version

Inside story of Musharraf-Mahmood tussle

By Hassan Abbas

On the eve of the 9/11 terror attacks, in a crucial National Security Council meeting at the White House, Colin Powell, the then U.S. secretary of state, strongly asserted: “We have to make it clear to Pakistan and Afghanistan, this is show time.”

General Mahmood Ahmed, who was on an official visit to the United States as a CIA guest, and Maleeha Lodhi, Pakistan’s ambassador to the United States, were asked to attend a meeting with senior American officials on September 12, 2001. To be fully prepared, Mahmood called Musharraf to discuss the emerging scenario and take instructions for the important meeting. Musharraf told him to report back immediately after the meeting and gauge how the wind was blowing. On the morning of September 12, the U.S. deputy secretary of state, Richard Armitage, in a “hard-hitting conversation,” told Mahmood that Pakistan had to make a choice—“you are either 100 percent with us or 100 percent against us—–there is no gray area.” In the words of Armitage, Mahmood “was immediately willing to cooperate.” In the afternoon, Mahmood was invited to CIA headquarters at Langley, Virginia, where he told George Tenet, the CIA director, that in his view Mullah Omar, the Taliban chief, was a religious man with humanitarian instincts and not a man of violence! This was a bit difficult for the CIA officials to digest. General Mahmood was firmly told that Mullah Omar and the Taliban would have to face U.S. military might if Osama bin Laden along with other Al-Qaeda leaders were not handed over without delay. To send the message across clearly, Richard Armitage held a second meeting with Mahmood the same day, informing him that he would soon be handed over specific American demands which are “non-negotiable”, to which Mahmood reiterated that Pakistan would cooperate.

Having gone through the list that was provided to him on September 13, Mahmood declared that he was quite clear on the subject and that “he knew how the President thought, and the President would accept these points.” Mahmood then faxed the document to Musharraf and in a subsequent call conveyed his impressions. Mahmood was of the view that the words used by Armitage about Taliban were in fact meant for Pakistan and he didn’t consider it necessary to emphasize this point. Musharraf genuinely believed that such a direct threat was given. While Musharraf had hardly gone through the list of demands, his aide de camp informed him that Colin Powell was on the line. Musharraf liked and respected Powell, and the conversation was not going to be a problem, he thought. He told him that he understood and appreciated the U.S. position, but that he would respond to the U.S. demands after having discussed these with his associates. Powell was a bit perplexed at this response and thought it necessary to inform him that General Mahmood had already assured them that these demands would be acceptable to the government of Pakistan. It is not certain if Musharraf bit his lip when he heard this, but he did grit his teeth, and his relationship with Mahmood suffered a crack. Interestingly, Mahmood on his return from the US, also informed Musharraf about his visit to the Pentagon after the tragedy and argued that there were no traces of any commercial plane having hit the Pentagon. He also made a case that in his assessment, the attacks were an inside job! Some senior generals surrounding Musharraf at that time were convinced by this line of argument largely based on Mahmood’s “first hand” narrative.

On September 16, 2001, Musharraf sent a delegation to the Taliban with the mission to convince them to hand over Osama bin Laden. It included Lieutenant General Mahmood, and a group of religious figures known to have good relations with the Taliban. The mission failed, but more worrisome was the revelation that Mufti Shamzai of the Binori mosque in Karachi, instead of conveying the official message, encouraged Mullah Omar to start a jihad against the United States if it attacked Afghanistan. Musharraf came to know of this fact through an ISI official who had accompanied the team and had loyally reported the matter to Musharraf. After this, Mahmood, whose arrogance and presumption had come to grate on Musharraf’s expansive tolerance by now, was offered the ceremonial slot of chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee, because Musharraf was still grateful to him for what he had done for him on the eve of October 12, 1999. Mahmood refused the offer thinking that he was indispensable and a possible successor to Musharraf. But things were changing fast and Musharraf now had the support of most of his corps commanders about his new alignment with the US (except Generals Usmani, Mahmood and Mohammad Aziz who had advised caution). Gauging the mood of changing circumstances and knowing that Musharraf was about to make some important changes in the military, Mahmood, through a close friend of Musharraf, a retired brigadier based in Islamabad, put in a request to be retained as director general of ISI, even if an officer junior to him was to be promoted to the rank of four star general for the post of CJCSC. This time Musharraf refused and Mahmood had to go home.

This sudden departure of Mahmood led to many rumors. Mahmood went into a low profile and started working on his favorite project – a book on the 1965 war. When he finished the work, he sent the manuscript to GHQ for permission to publish. Interestingly the title of the work was “Myth of 1965 victory”. Musharraf himself looked at the manuscript and noted on the file that Mahmood should re-consider the title – especially use of the word myth in relation to the 1965 war. This was enough of a hint and Mahmood almost shelved the idea of publishing the book for a while. Mahmood had already requested Musharraf for a job and thought that he should not annoy Musharraf on any count. He was right - he did get a job soon. And instead, Musharraf started working on his book project.

[Hassan Abbas, a former Pakistani government official is now a fellow at the Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University. He is the author of “Pakistan’s Drift into Extremism: Allah, the Army and America’s War on Terror (M E Sharpe, 2005)]
http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2006\09\26\story_26-9-2006_pg7_13

lemontree
27 Sep 06,, 05:08
The above article by Hassan Abbas has one glaring omission, that Lt. Gen. Mahmood was removed as a result of US insistance. The US demand arose after the Govt of India handed over telecon intercepts of Mahmood instructing Omar Sharif (accused in Daniel Pearls murder case) to transfer $100,000 to Mohd Atta.

I am not sure about the power struggle angle, but it appears to be hogwash.