nrj
Ambassador
- Joined
- Nov 16, 2009
- Messages
- 9,658
- Likes
- 3,911
"Pakistan" as a state is reresentated by several organizations/ groups -
1. there is the Military establishment - which has both pro-western side(s) and pro-silamic sides (opposed to each other), not to mention pro-"nationalistic" sides, which may overlap with the other two.
2. there is the political class, educated elite - again divided into pro-western, pro-islamic and pro-nationalistic groups.
3. there is the ISI/ intelligence network - whose allegiance is partly to the military and partly to the political bosses - with all it's own divisions and internal issues. Generally anti-western, extremely anti-Indian and thinks of itself as the godfather of Islamic insurgency in the south asian region.
4. there are the mercantile and business classes - who woud support any side to further their dollar interests.
None of them sadly represent or are represented by the Pakistani people - who have been brain washed with anti-Indian, anti-minority and anti-western rhetoric for the last 2-6 decades. Still, the average Pakistani is neither a terrorist, nor a muslim fundamentalist - they are like every other average citizen of the third world - trying to find a decent living with all the corruption and irrationality inherent to their society.
Yet - what is the definition of a "terrorist state"?
A state which by design allows / supports insurgents/ terrorists in another soverign country. Pakistan in taht respect has been a terrorist state for ages - sicne the 1980s. when they started arming and supporting the Mujahideens in Afghanistan, followed by the insurgents in J 7 K.
the real question is, WHO makes the definition and for what purpose -
We all know the real certificate has to come from USA - through the UN/ NATO. USA already knows what Pakistan did, has been doing and will do.
What will it take for the US government to make that leap, from knowledge to action?
Very good post.
In other thread, I mentioned that US will not abandon pak unless it earns satisfactory ROI from af-pak. If this alliance is about to end, US will do it within few months else its not happening for a very long time.
IMO clouds should clear by early next year. By that time we'll have firm idea whether US is going to continue military operations in Af-pak or its opting strategy of pressuring pak to act on specified tasks through various economic/political leverages.
If US will continue its presence in af-pak year from now, I'll say Indian strategy is working. GOI has played a very daring card by its attempt to drag Iran in this active equation.
Pak is in safer position here than US/India/Astan since other's have got more to loose. Reaching a mutually agreeable deal is tough.
During this process, it does not matter if US or India calls Pakistan a 'terrorist state'. Its just a meaningless irrelevant slang like 'superpower'. Even if tomorrow UNSC passes some resolution on Pak being a terrorist state, its still irrelevant since the entire argument GOP has is that, its infiltrated with rouge elements & we're fighting against them. You can not take your forces in GOP houses as it'll appear unwise move. For GOP(read pakistan as a whole state) to be taken down, you'll have to frame the govt into a trap to catch them red-handed with highest offices compromised.
Pakistan thrives on the indulgence of world community's understanding (please note here that voices of states affected by paki activities are comfortably undermined)
How close Pakistan is to be declared as terrorist state? I don't know the unit of measuring so but for the sake of question I'll rate it at highest probable magnitude.
"What will it take for the US government to make that leap, from knowledge to action?"
Actions are already there. Osama operation simply left pak terrified. US forces are ready & can engage at will when orders are passed and pak can't do a jack about it. They might not even know if B2s are flying over their head right now.
People talk about disintegrating pak, but even in that situation the larger natives (which are essentially anti-indian, anti-western elements) will have the rightful say in proposed solution. Why afganistan is not stable? Because US has suppressed political opposition of karzai. When you are talking of reconstruction of state, you cant go around setting up pro-US lobby as new regime. It has to be accepted by the natives without which problems like iraq/astan will always remain there.
Question here is, what amount of action from US are we looking for? Honestly speaking, Indians are not ready for US backed boom-boom operation. And US will not go ahead with it unless it has credible & healthy political/military partner in SA. Already NATO chairmans are expressing unhappiness over the way US has handled astan.
For most of the world, pak is already a terrorist state. I fail to assign any significance to the symbolism of someone putting official label over pakistan.