Is Letting Pakistan Collapse An Option?

[Vikramaditya]

"The News", a daily of Pakistan, has carried on December 24, 2010, an analysis by Amir Mir, the well-known Pakistani journalist, of acts of suicide terrorism in Pakistan during 2010. It covers data up to December 23.

According to this analysis, till December 23, there were 52 acts of suicide terrorism resulting in 1224 fatalities as against 80 acts in 2009 with 1217 fatalities. Though the number of suicide attacks came down from 80 in 2009 to 52, the lethality of the attacks increased with the largest number of fatalities in a year since the Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), the anti-Shia Lashkar-e-Jhangvi (LEJ) and their associates such as the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan (IMU) and the Islamic Jihad Union (IJU), another Uzbek group, stepped up their acts of suicide terrorism after the Army raid in the Lal Masjid of Islamabade in July,2007.

According to Amir Mir, the number of fatalities due to suicide terrorism rose from 837 in 2007 to 965 in 2008. It went up to 1217 in 2009 and 1224 till December 23,2010. During 2010, the largest number of attacks were in the Khyber Pakhtunkwa province (KP) with 25 attacks resulting in 416 fatalities. There were 12 suicide attacks in the Federally-Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) with 381 fatalities followed by Punjab with seven acts of suicide terrorism resulting in 312 fatalities. There were four incidents in Balochistan with 81 deaths, two in Sindh with 28 deaths and another two in Pakistan-Occupied Kashmir (POK) with six deaths.

The Pashtun belt in KP and the FATA continued to be the worst affected. Thirty-seven of the 52 attacks were in the Pashtun belt with 797 deaths. There were 15 attacks in the non-Pashtun areas with 427 deaths. Muslims killing Muslims and Pashtuns killing Pashtuns has become the defining characteristic of the Pashtun Taliban. As against this, the Punjabi Taliban has concentrated its attacks in Pakistani territory on non-Deobandi and non-Wahabi Muslims consisting of the Shias, the Barelvis and the Ahmadiyas. The expression Punjabi Taliban is applied in Pakistan to the LEJ, the Lashkar-e-Toiba (LET), the Harkat-ul-Jihad-al-Islami (HUJI), the Harkat-ul-Mujahideen (HUM) and the Jaish-e-Mohammad (JEM). Of these, the LET, which is the closest to the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), did not indulge in any act of terrorism in Pakistani territory. Its main focus was on India and Afghanistan.

Of the 1224 fatalities till December 23,2010, 1055 were civilians as against 863 out of 1217 in 2009 and 169 belonged to the security forces. Of those from the security forces killed,62 belonged to the police, 48 to the armed forces, 26 to the Frontier Constabulary, 24 to other para-military units and nine to the ISI. Of the civilians killed, 151 were Shias and 103 were Ahmediyas. Three American nationals were among those killed in 2010. On an average, suicide bombers killed 102 persons per month in 2010, compared with 2009's average of 101 killings a month.

Earlier on August 5,2010, the "Dawn" of Karachi had carried an analysis of suicide terrorism in Pakistan by Manzar Zaidi, a strategic affairs analyst. His analysis covered all suicide terrorism before and after the Lal Masjid raid. It brought out two facts. Firstly, before the Lal Masjid raid, suicide terrorism in Pakistan was largely a Punjabi phenomenon confined to Sindh and Punjab. There were no acts of suicide terrorism in the Pashtun belt. After the Lal Masjid raid, it has become a largely Pashtun phenomenon with the Pashtun belt being the worst affected. Secondly, there has been an increase in attacks on military-connected targets after the Lal Masjid raid.

The analyses carried by the "News" and the "Dawn" covered only acts of suicide terrorism. They did not cover other acts of terrorism such as the targeted attacks on Shias by the LEJ in Karachi and in the cities of Pakistani Punjab and acts of ethnic terrorism involving the Mohajirs and the the Pashtuns in Karachi. Interestingly, there have been no acts of suicide or suicidal terrorism involving the Afghan Taliban in the non-Pashtun belt. The attacks of the Afghan Taliban and the Haqqani group, headed by Jalalludin Haqqani, have been confined to the Kurram Agency in the FATA where there are a large number of Shia Pashtuns, who have become the victims of frequent attacks by the Pakistani as well as the Afghan Taliban as well as by the LEJ.

Neither the intensified operations of the Pakistan Army in the Malakand Division of KP and in South Waziristan, Bajaur and Mohmand agencies of the FATA nor the intensified Drone (unmanned planes carrying missiles) strikes by the US in the FATA have dented the motivation of the Pashtuns—-Pakistani and Afghan— taking to suicide acts of terrorism directed against the civilians and suicidal attacks (fedayeen attacks) against the Pakistani security forces.

The insincere counter-terrorism policies of the Pakistan Army come in the way of the restoration of law and order in the Pashtun belt. The worsening internal security situation and the persistent US criticism of its inaction against the Talibans and Al Qaeda demand that the Pakistan Army act firmly at least against the Pakistani Taliban. But,its interest in recovering its strategic depth in Afghanistan dictate that it avoid firm action against Pashtun terrorism. Its continued use of Punjabi terrorism against India demands that its support to the Punjabi terrorist organizations remain undiminished. The Pashtun terrorists are its strategic assets in Afghanistan. The Punjabi terrorists are its strategic assets against India.

Unless there is an end to these contradictory and insincere policies, the US-led NATO forces are not going to prevail in Afghanistan. Nor is the US going to prevail against Al Qaeda in North Waziristan. Despite two years of intensified Drone strikes, the US is nowhere near victory against either Al Qaeda or the Talibans. Ground operations in Pakistani territory could lead to a disruption of NATO's logistic supplies to its troops in Afghanistan through Pakistani territory. They are, therefore, unlikely. Deniable covert actions with the help of Pakistani assets well-disposed to the US could be an alternative, but the US has avoided building up a covert action capability which can be tried on the ground.

The fear of Pakistan becoming a failed State prevents the US from acting tough against it. Soft options have failed to nudge Pakistan into acting against the terrorists. Hard options such as the denial of military and economic assistance are avoided lest there be a collapse of the State of Pakistan. The time has come to examine whether the collapse of Pakistan is something to be dreaded. A collapse could lead to a spell of sectarian anarchy, but not necessarily to the triumph of Al Qaeda and the Talibans. The very fact that the international community is prepared to let Pakistan collapse could induce some good sense in the thinking of its army and intelligence establishment. The army thinks that the world cannot afford to let Pakistan collapse. It has to be told that the world is prepared to let it collapse if it does not act against terrorism emanating from its territory effectively.

http://www.eurasiareview.com/analysis/is-letting-pakistan-collapse-an-option-26122010/

 

[Tshering22]

I agree with the title big time. A collapse would prompt UNSC to intervene and seize nuclear weapons as the world won't be a silent audience to the collapse of a nuclear armed fundamentalist nation. P-5 will definitely intervene and probably a UN Peacekeeping Force would be deployed once nuclear armaments are seized. That would weaken the prospects of jihadi terrorism as well since the nuclear blackmail would cease to exist meaning that IAF could take the slightest whiff of terrorism and exact grim retribution of any future (goodness forbid) terrorist attack.

 

[ejazr]

^^^Its not as easy as it sounds really.

Collapse is what the TTP and Al Qaeda want. Its more likley that AQ sympathisers after the collapse will work over time to pass on nuke weapons to AQ elements, possibly LeT and others. Its more likely that it would turn into an Afghanistan of the 90s or Somalia where no country would want to go in and there will be no actors to talk to. At present the US has its agents and mentors at all levels within Pakistan to atleast monitor if not influence Pakistani policies. We have Americans present in FATA and tribal areas as well as those providing training to security personeel guarding nuek facilities. In a collapse, all these assets will have to be evacuated making US blind and wary of any ground intervention after Iraq and Afghanistan wars as well as a sick economy.

The worst affected will be its neighbours India, Iran and Afghanistan. China might be affected sightly but giving the difficult and small border, not that much.


As a realist, a collapsed Pakistan might soothe the ego, but will easily affect India more than China which is our main contender in Asia. IDSA came out with an excellent book "Wither Pakistan" that covers various scenarios that Pakistan may be in in the next 10 years and how Indiashould react to it. Must read to get a good backgrounder.

For those interested, they can check out http://www.idsa.in/book/WhitherPakistan

IMO Pakistan may lurch from crisis to crisis, but the two most arguably powerful countries in the world US and China will not let Pakistan collapse for their own reasons.

 

[LETHALFORCE]

Collapse may not be a good option if it causes a refugee problem for India and also possibly for China??

 

[Yusuf]

The west has even drawn maps of what a cut up pakistan would look like so when it really gets bad for the west read US, I don't think they would wait to let pak go....

 

[nitesh]

People who are supporting the current state of pakistan to continue, can they give the benefits of this current situation? Apart from IT (International Terrorism) export what else it has given to the world? People say that nukes will go to hand of AQ sympathizers, why the heck we should worry about that as an Indian? We are so happy to be west's peddle in this. So if a terrorist army who is the best in doing genocides keep holding the nukes so that it can use them to blackmail only India and keep killing Indians. We should be happy that no body in west is being affected by that? What kind of hypocrisy is that. I say let the nukes go loose and let the master of terrorists feel the heat of those. Why only we?

Collapse of pakistan is not AN option, it is THE ONLY option.

 

[dineshchaturvedi]

Very hypothetical question, not happening.

 

[Yusuf]

This nuke blackmail is the only thing that is holding the state of Pak together. We have to analyze that aspect of Pakistans policy. It is used to deter India and secondly it is used as a ploy to keep the west interested in Pakistan and feed it as Pak presents the west with nightmare scenario of nukes going into the hands of fundamentalists/terrorists.

Pak nukes are in component form and as a full bomb is not a threat to India at least if it gets into the hands of AQ who will use the dirty bomb primarily to target the west. The west could proceed to take out all such installations that stores nuke components before it would think of ditching pak and let the nukes get into the hands of AQ/Taliban. The US has more than enough intel on Pak nukes that is required to take it out.

 

[ejazr]

I certainly don't agree with the current state to continue. There is no reason for us to just cross our legs and just sit our hands on top ofthem. But hoping for a collapse (assuming the US/China will let it happen) and then expecting the International community to pick up the pieces AFTER the fact is stretching the limits of US power, espicially in the current era.

The US establishing almost-permanant bases along Afghanistan and giving more aid to Pakistan per annum after only Israel shows what direction they are going.

So what should be done? This is an interesting question that has no single answer. But a few points could be:
(1) Focus on regime change rather than nation collapse. That is, focus on making ISI/Army the culprit (Which is a fact) to the Pakistani people themselves. This has to be covert and should look indigenous. Expose the HR abuses of the army in FATA and Balochistan. The role of the ISI in subverting the political process e.t.c. Channel the anger of the public towards the ISI/Army and away from political parties.

(2) This is relates, strengthen the local political parties like ANP, Balochi parties, Sindhi political parties, MQM e.t.c. They should be powerful enough to attack the army/ISI publically and still not feel threatened.

(3) Have covert teams that assasinate known terrorist leaders. This could be through IEDs and hit teams that speak local langauges like Punjabi, Pashto or Hindko, or as simple as hiring local criminals to do the job. The focus should be on operational leaders like Massod Azhar or Lakhvi rather than those with hot air like Saeed or say Zaid Hamid. Infact the latter two should be recorded and then translations of their speeches should be made public through international media like BBC, Aljazeera, e.t.c to expose anti-India rhetoric and put diplomatic pressure. Hit teams should focus only on those who are operationally involved in training cadres and lanching attacks.

(4) Work to improve the lot of poorer section of Pakistanis through targeted trade policies particularly from areas like Gilgit Baltistan, FATA, Balochistan and publicise policies of say no tariffs for handicrafts or whatever these people make to be exported to Pakistan. Even if the GoP does not allow this to be realised. Advertisements through local radio and newspapers should inform the people of these policies. TAPI-like projects are "ok" but it will only benefit the oligarchs in Pakistan.

(5) At the same time have open channels to talk with the army and even ISI. Talks are not surrender. Keeping a line open will give an insight on how the deep state is reacting.

And so on, but in none of these actions should the Indian footprint be visible anywhere. It should "seem" to come from local sources, presumably religious local sources. There are many local militant groups that are angry with the ISI/Army for their double game with the US and they could play a role in point (3). Opening a channel with Afghan Taliban and encouragin them to wean off ISI support could also fall in this category. A more diplomatic level support from Indian missions focussing on countriesl like UAE, Oman, Saudi Arabia, Iran to political parties rather than the Army particularly ANP, MQM, Baloch parties would work for point (2). Point (1) would need a sustained media/print campaign as well as online particularly in local languages other than just Urdu. A focus on the ideological aspect which is also the weak point. On how the ISI/Army is hypocrtical in its relations with the US and is responsible for the current mess Pakistan is in.

 

[bhramos]

It already started to self destruction mode........... see its education system

 

[ejazr]

This is from the IDSA's book on Pakistan focusing on India's Option towards an unstable Pakistan. The book was prepared by IDSA's Pakistan experts so it gives an idea of what could be the type of input the GoI is receiving.

India's Options
India's policy towards Pakistan will be shaped by the emerging reality based on the above trends. In such a scenario, the anti-India mindset of its military and the ruling elite is not likely to change and may in fact worsen. In such a scenario what should be India's policy options?

• India need not be apologetic about its policies towards Pakistan. It should make clear that it has genuine security concerns in Pakistan and that it would deal with them appropriately.
  
• India's policies will need to be based on hard reality and not on any wishful thinking that suddenly Pakistan will change course and become friendly towards India.
  
• In an unstable Pakistan, the society will get differentiated. The idea of Pakistan may bechallenged by many groups. Therefore, India should be prepared to engage and deal with all sections of Pakistani society which may be amenable towards better relations with India. In this regard India should engage with the Mohajirs, the Barelvis, the Shias, the Baloch, the Gilgitis, the Baltis and civil society groups and not just the government of the day. India should also take care that Indian actions do not give a pretext to anti-India constituencies in Pakistan to unite against India.
  
• India cannot let its guard drop as Pakistan becomes unstable and unpredictable. Thus,India must remain prepared to deal with any military challenge that Pakistan may throw at it. At the same time India should foresee and deal with any challenge posed by the Taliban and other radicalised groups in the future.
  
• India must not let its policies be overly securitised as this will detract it from its fundamental task of ensuring inclusive growth for its people. In other words, the challenge from Pakistan should not make India think only in terms of military responses. India should develop a wide variety of responses, using both hard and soft power options to deal with Pakistan. Thus a nuanced approach to Pakistan will be required while dealing with challengeslike 26/11. It would be prudent not to rule out any option and choice of any option should bemade judiciously.
  
• India should use its soft power proactively. It should develop a range of policy options which aim at developing people-to-people contacts. This will help create constituencies in Pakistan which look at India not as a threat but as an opportunity. Offering scholarships to students from Pakistan can be considered as also help in providing medical treatment to Pakistanis. India's visa policy should be mademore liberal for Pakistanis trying to take advantage of opportunities in India.Aman ki Asha, the media initiative started in January 2010, should be used as an opportunity to indicate its benign intent. At the same time it should be ensured that security agencies are well-equipped to stop the infiltration of terrorists from Pakistan.
  
• India should closely monitor the developments within Pakistan particularly in the context of provincial and sectarian faultlines which may deepen in the coming years. India should be sensitive to developments in Sindh and Punjab, the two provinces which share borders with India. India must maintain contacts with people from different regions of Pakistan.
  
• Diplomacy should be the first line of defence for India. India should sensitise the international community about the serious threats to international security that an unstable Pakistan presents, particularly in the context of the security of nuclear weapons.
  
• India at the moment has limited options to nudge Pakistan in the right direction as the Pakistani military elite has an obvious anti-India mindset. However, India must offer Pakistan the alternative of bilateral and regional cooperation as a way out of instability. An increase in bilateral trade could help the Pakistani economy enormously and also create constituencies on both sides with stakes in peace and stability.
  
• India should try to open its links with the Pakistani military, the most important player in Pakistani polity, even if it may be difficult to begin with. A structured dialogue with Pakistani military will help India both in understanding the military's view-point and getting its own point of view across directly.
  
• Nuclear CBMs should be strengthened and followed through.
  
• It is important that India should deal with the separatists in Kashmir by itself rather than through Pakistan. Pakistan should have no role in the resolution of India's internal problems. Confidence building measures to strengthen links between the two parts of Kashmir should be encouraged.
  
• Water is likely to emerge as a major issue in Indo-Pak relations in the future. The highly irresponsible and misleading propaganda in Pakistani media forecasting wars, even a nuclear conflict, over water should be effectively countered through dissemination of facts. The Indus Water Treaty (IWT) is coming under stress as Pakistan has delayed the projects proposed by India on the western rivers. India should pursue its water policy more assertively. The concerns of the Kashmiri people regarding the IWT and their demands on the western rivers need to be underlined in bilateral discussions. India should ensure optimal use of eastern rivers within the limits set by the IWT. Legal instruments relating to the possibility of stopping or suspending IWT can be explored to put pressure on Pakistan if it does not stop its subversive policies towards India.
  
• India must offer proposals for bilateral and regional cooperation with Pakistan in a proactive manner. This will create international goodwill and expose Pakistani insincerity about pursuing peace with India.
  
• India must retain at all times a decisive edge over Pakistan as far as conventional military might is concerned.
  
• India should assess the importance of Pakistani military getting involved in fighting insurgency on the western front. A two-front situation is developing for the Pakistani army. The Pakistani army is not as yet geared to simultaneously fight India as well the Taliban. However, India remains the common enemy of both the Taliban and the Pakistan army. India should not follow any policy which would bring them together against India.

To sum up, Indian policy towards Pakistan must be geared to the new unfolding situation in Pakistan. India has a range of options, both soft and hard, to deal with the situation. India's growing economic profile and its rising international recognition give it a chance to deal with the Pakistan problem in a much better way than was the case before. The challenge before India will be how to protect itself from the consequences of a blow-back from an unstable Pakistan and also to evolve a sophisticated approach combining hard and soft options in dealing with it.

 

[Yusuf]

Ejaz some good points there, but i would not say we should have good trade and bilateral ties with the state of pakistan. It will be like feeding the terrorists.
Problem is that India disbanded its good base under Gujaral and failed to pick up from there.
We should be involved in that country covertly and overtly.
We have to use propaganda to make sure the people of Pakistan know who is dragging them down. Something that no Indian govt has ever done. What is holding them back is certainly not understandable.
We should establish direct relations with the individual entities that might leave the state of pakistan like Sindhis,Balohis, Gilgit and Baltistan. These people may be amenable to us. We can have a selective visa system for such people so that they can come here and may be we develop closer relations with the people of that region. Trade with them as well, use third country if required to prevent PakJab backlash, but make sure those guys know that we are the benefactors.
Covertly finish off the terror heads. I think assassination of Dawood Ibrahim would be the biggest single kill, even more than Hafiz Saeed to signal indian intent.
I agree with the point that India should talk only to Kashmiris and not involive Pak. In fact we should talk to local kashmirirs in PoK and GB people directly bypassing Pak. Expose Pak design on gobbling up the entire state of Kashmir with no independence. It has happened in GB where they have annexed the region. GB is part or the entire state of Jammu and Kashmir. If GB falls, Chinese will get cut off from PakJab.

The only problematic region is the Pashtun belt for India. But they will be busy on their western front. A greater Astan what includes this region would take care of that i think.

All in all India has to make a move vis a vis Pakistan and not just sit back and relax and wait till the day it collapses in its own.

 

[ejazr]

When it comes to trade, I specfically feel that the focus should be towards beifiting the poor and disenfranchised sections. That is instead of trading with the Punjabi landlowners and Zamindars, it should be focussed on cross LoC trade in Kashmir, handicrafts from Gilgit Baltistan, poor farmers in Seraiki belt and Balochistan and trade with farmers in FATA.

Even thought the trade might be insignificant, this will create favourable reporting. Hence the idea of launghing full page advertisements in local langauge newspapers or radio for low or no tariffs for specific products like handicrafts in Gilgit Baltistan and produce from Seraiki Farmers. There could also be a rule about who recives the low or no tariffs beneifts by defninig an annual income limit of some sort.

The idea of trade feeding Pakistani military might be true. However, Pakistan has a trade deficit with India at present and is likely to have one even if trade increases,on the other hand India has a 20Billion USD trade deficit with China and plan to increase trade to $100B with chances of the deficit getting wider, arn't we feeding the Chinese military here? Infact, companies that we trade in Pakistan are mainly private while Chinese companies are govt. controlled and have a more chance of helping Chinese military or intelligence organisations espicially our telecom trade with HUWAEI.

In other words, India is taking money out of Pakistan by virtue of the trade deficit from Pakistan which is a smaller threat compared to China. While by virtue of our trade deficit with China we are giving them $20B every year. Something to think about.

 

[johnee]

Like Yusuf mentioned, nukes keep pak intact from India(as an enemy) and from west/US(as an ally). Nukes of Pak threaten India directly and west/US indirectly. India is already facing the pakistani nukes, if they fall into the hands of terrorists(as if pakistani army is not terrorist enough), then ironically India's threat level decreases. In short, pakistani nukes falling into the hands of terrorists is good for India. Its like from fire to frying pan. And to the contrast, US/west fears the nukes falling into the hands of terrorists, who will unlike Pakistan army, will use nukes against everyone(and not just India). To the west/US, this is nightmare.

If Pakistan becomes a nightmare for the west/US, then it will be dismantled, no doubt. And its not as difficult as it seems. Already the writ of the state does not run in much of what is known as Pakistan. Warlords, tribal lords, ...etc rule their little fiefdoms. So, overthrowing of the state(read Pakistani army) is not going to change anything on ground for average citizenry of Pakistan. What is likely to happen is that the snake(Pakistani state under PA) will be defanged(denuked).

As for any potential refugee problem, it is better to have a refugee problem than a problem of terrorists, under nuclear protection, killing innocent citizens.

 

[anoop_mig25]

It already started to self destruction mode........... see its education system

if this was pakistan`s government runed school then its no different then from what large number of indan government runed schools are.students lagging in basics
i did n`t find anything anti-india/america/world in this particular video.i mean jhiad feed?

and china wont allow pakistan to collapse for next 50-100 years after all they are investing in int and pakistan would be becoming very important land mass for china to carry out its trade with world so china would keep providing with money to keep it intact

 

[neo29]

Pakistan has everything ready for a collapse. It has extremism, failing economy, poverty, rebellion in various parts of the country and over all public frustration over the mismanagement.

All India needs to do is feed fodder to all these reasons, and then sit back and watch a country collapse.

 

[Yusuf]

No we cannot sit back and watch..the real work starts after they start to collapse.

 

[nitesh]

Trade with pakistan, this is as stupid at it goes. India has to come out of defensive mindset. Our government has tried every option in the book to talk and it is failed. At least we are in better position then so called world powers who are paying hafta (ransom) to pakistani army to keep the nukes safe and pointed towards only India. There is no need to translate there leader's speeches and showing it to world. Who does not want to understand the problem, didn't benzir bhutto spoken the same language as these terrorists speak.

We need to understand what pakistan is about, the foundation of the state is based on hate, you can not change the basics of the state. There people who are so called poor are more interested in seeing India's destruction then making there life prosperous.

All this people to people talk, talking to ISI/Army is bogus, if they make peace to us, then what is the meaning of there existence?

We are over estimating the powers of US and China who are tucking there tail in between and paying pakistanis ransom, when we can dismember pakistan in 1971, we can do it now also by playing the economic card. Only mindset needs to change. There should be absolutely no sympathy towards any soul in pakistan, things will change automatically.

 

[LETHALFORCE]

if this was pakistan`s government runed school then its no different then from what large number of indan government runed schools are.students lagging in basics
i did n`t find anything anti-india/america/world in this particular video.i mean jhiad feed?

and china wont allow pakistan to collapse for next 50-100 years after all they are investing in int and pakistan would be becoming very important land mass for china to carry out its trade with world so china would keep providing with money to keep it intact

China provide 75% of the aid to North Korea, this will not save North korrea when the time comes.

 

[ejazr]

Well a few points

(1) If you look at public opinion surveys, parts of Pakistan like Balochistan , NWFP and Sindh are usually favourable towards a settlement with India. These people combined are about 50% of the Pakistani population. The Punjabi populace have a long baggae including partition that colours their vision.

(2) As a realist, the question should be "When will Pakistan fail?" first, What is the probability that the two arguably most powerful countries will allow Pakistan to fail in the near term, medium term, long term? Its not out of an irrational fear that they are trying to make Pakistan survive, but out of their own self-interest. For atleast 40 years Pakistan has been an "ally" of the US in the cold war era and China has a strong partner in fingering south asia power balance. These countries will keep Pakistan together not just out of a fear of a failed Pakistan and its implication, but the benefit of Pakistan as a pivotal point for both US and China when it comes to its geographic location. On the other hand, the only factors working for a collapse are within Pakistan. AFAIK, there are no covert operations on a country wide scale that is working towards a destablisation program. And the US in particular would keep an eye out for that with all its listening posts throughout Pakistan. And then there is the possibility of TAPI moving out to Gwadar and becoming a US controlled outlet of Central Asian energy as part of its own Great Game.
Some good reading on this aspect here http://www.defenceforum.in/forum/showthread.php?t=17414

(3) When it comes to refugee crisis, I think we won't see a Bangladesh like situation really. There might be a move by non-muslim communities like Hindus and Sikhs to seek asylum in India as violence and turmoil increases. Pashtoons and Balochis are more likely to cross into Afghanistan. Shias might seek asylum in the west or Iran. The border regions with Sindh are mostly desert and wastelands and its not easy to cross into India there. While Punjabis would not be affected as much, in particular because the Army itself is Punjabi dominated and will keep Karachi and N. Punjab protected.

(4) De-nuking Pakistan is not a simple task. I doubt even the US knows where all the nukes are even though they must be trying very hard. The wikileaks cable shows the direction of the US has been more towards nuke security and assuring Pakistan that its nuke capability will not be hampered.

(5) We don't have the luxury to just wait for Pakistan's collapse. IF it happens, we should be prepared for it. But till then, there has to be a proactive appraoch and the best model that applies is the Soviet Union containment by the US. This is where people to people contacts come into play. The USSR had an iron curtain and did not want any information to reach to its people. But the US was open and even encouraged defectors from USSR to come to the US. Control of information was critical in making the Soviet citizens think that USSR was much more advanced than the US and that they are leading a better life.
Similarly, India should remain an open society. Every news article and TV report that shows the improving life of Indian citizens or the communal harmony within Indian society is a step in that direction. The surrender policy for Kashmiri militans for example follow from the same policies of encouraging defections. There are similarly many policy objectives like forcing USSR into a spiraling defence expenditure and so on.

We need innovative and out of the box thinking and not just the same old perscriptions.