This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
State updates Indo-Pak Scenario
The U.S. must use its diplomatic capital to prevent conflict between India and Pakistan. Zarate 2/20/11 (Juan C. a senior adviser at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, was deputy assistant to the president and deputy national security adviser for combating terrorism from 2005 to 2009. An alarming South Asia powder keg, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/02/18/AR2011021805662.html) <In 1914, a terrorist assassinated Archduke Franz Ferdinand in Sarajevo - unleashing geopolitical forces and World War I. Today, while the United States rightly worries about al-Qaeda targeting the homeland, the most dangerous threat may be another terrorist flash point on the horizon. Lashkar-i-Taiba holds the match that could spark a conflagration between nuclear-armed historic rivals India and Pakistan. Lashkar-i-Taiba is a Frankenstein's monster of the Pakistani government's creation 20 years ago. It has diverse financial networks and well-trained and well-armed cadres that have struck Indian targets from Mumbai to Kabul. It collaborates with the witches' brew of terrorist groups in Pakistan, including al-Qaeda, and has demonstrated global jihadist ambitions. It is merely a matter of time before Lashkar-i-Taiba attacks again. Significant terrorist attacks in India, against Parliament in 2001 and in Mumbai in 2008, brought India and Pakistan to the brink of war. The countries remain deeply distrustful of each other. Another major strike against Indian targets in today's tinderbox environment could lead to a broader, more devastating conflict. The United States should be directing political and diplomatic capital to prevent such a conflagration. The meeting between Indian and Pakistani officials in Bhutan this month - their first high-level sit-down since last summer - set the stage for restarting serious talks on the thorny issue of Kashmir. >
Diplomatic capital and pressure on the Pakistani government is key to calming tensions and solving the the terrorist threat in the region. Zarate 2/20/11 (Juan C. a senior adviser at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, was deputy assistant to the president and
deputy national security adviser for combating terrorism from 2005 to 2009. An alarming South Asia powder keg, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/02/18/AR2011021805662.html)
<So what can the United States do to ratchet down tensions? We need to build trust, confidence and consistent lines of communications between India and Pakistan. This begins by helping both parties pave the way for a constructive dialogue on the status of Kashmir. Steps toward progress would include pushing for real accountability of figures responsible for the 2008 Mumbai attacks and the handing over of wanted Lashkar-i-Taiba facilitators such as Indian crime lord Dawood Ibrahim. The United States also needs to disrupt the terrorist group's fundraising and planning. The focus should be on unearthing names and disrupting cells outside Pakistan that are tied to Lashkar-i-Taiba, which involves pressuring Islamabad for the names of Westerners who may have trained at Lashkar-i-Taiba camps. This is among the thorniest U.S. national security and counterterrorism problems. It requires officials to focus on imagining the "aftershocks" of a terrorist attack and act before the threat manifests - even as other national security issues such as unrest in the Middle East boil over. Yet without political attention, diplomatic capital and sustained preventative actions, a critical region could descend into chaos. History shows that the actions of a small group of committed terrorists, such as the Black Hand in 1914 or al-Qaeda in 2001 - can spark broader wars. History could repeat itself with Lashkar-i-Taiba. Asymmetric threats that serve as flash points for broader geopolitical crises may be the greatest threat we face from terrorism.
Dobson Debate DIP CAP
State updates Indo-Pak Scenario
Now is the key time, another attack by Lashkar-i-Taiba would cause India to retaliate against Pakistan, destroying Pakistani stability, hurt efforts to solve terrorism in western Pakistan and Afghanistan, and lead to a nuclear war between India and Pakistan. Zarate 2/20/11 (Juan C. a senior adviser at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, was deputy assistant to the president and deputy
national security adviser for combating terrorism from 2005 to 2009. An alarming South Asia powder keg, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wpdyn/content/article/2011/02/18/AR2011021805662.html)
Washington has only so much time. Indian officials are increasingly dissatisfied with Pakistan's attempts to constrain Lashkar-i-Taiba and remain convinced that Pakistani intelligence supports the group. An Indian intelligence report concluded last year that Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence Directorate was involved in the 2008 Mumbai attacks, and late last year the Indian government raised security levels in anticipation of strikes. India is unlikely to show restraint in the event of another attack. Lashkar-i-Taiba may also feel emboldened since the assassination in early January of a moderate Punjabi governor muted Pakistani moderates and underscored the weakness of the government in Islamabad. The group does not want peace talks to resume, so it might act to derail progress. Elements of the group may see conflict with India as in their interest, especially after months of unrest in Kashmir. And the Pakistani government may not be able to control the monster it created. A war in South Asia would be disastrous not just for the United States. In addition to the human devastation, it would destroy efforts to bring stability to the region and to disrupt terrorist havens in western Pakistan. Many of the 140,000 Pakistani troops fighting militants in the west would be redeployed east to battle Indian ground forces. This would effectively convert tribal areas bordering Afghanistan into a playing field for militants. Worse, the Pakistani government might be induced to make common cause with Lashkar-i-Taiba, launching a proxy fight against India. Such a war would also fuel even more destructive violent extremism within Pakistan. In the worst-case scenario, an attack could lead to a nuclear war between India and Pakistan. India's superior conventional forces threaten Pakistan, and Islamabad could resort to nuclear weapons were a serious conflict to erupt. Indeed, The Post reported that Pakistan's nuclear weapons and capabilities are set to surpass those of India. >
LeT‘s leader Hafiz Saeed led a 10. he also signalled a possible expansion of conflict.‘ But the talks collapsed in acrimony. with the Indian side claiming that Pakistan had failed to move to resolve differences over the prosecution of anti-India terrorist groups operating from its territory. Just ahead of these talks. then there can be no serious diplomacy until Pakistan stops seeking to leverage Islamist militancy as a weapon in Kashmir and against India. Last February. bringing the prospect of conflict closer. Pillai had claimed that Pakistan‘s Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) had played a ‗much more significant‘ role in the Mumbai attacks than was initially thought. After all.‘ Testimony by captured alleged Pakistani-American terrorist David Headley appeared to support Pillai‘s claims. 2011 By Ahmad Majidyar & Apoorva Shah http://the-diplomat. with Headley reportedly telling FBI interrogators that the ISI went so far as ‗choosing the weapons to be used in the attack. Indian policymakers— even those in favour of reconciliation—may well conclude they have no partner in Pakistan. Indian Home Secretary G. no doubt hoping that détente between the two nuclear neighbours might lead them to end their proxy war in Afghanistan.Dobson Debate DIP CAP State updates Indo-Pak Scenario A Reality Check on India. and leave Pakistan better able to fight the Taliban and al-Qaeda on its own soil. .‘ If all this is true. The country has reportedly doubled its nuclear arsenal over the last four years. K. diplomacy conducted under terrorism‘s shadow can backfire. killing 170 people. But it‘s much too early to get carried away.India and Pakistan‘s foreign ministers met in Islamabad supposedly in order to ‗restore trust. It‘s also not at all clear that Pakistan really is sincere in its desire for rapprochement. adding that he believed Pakistan was ‗coordinating it from the beginning till the end. and should there be another attack on Indian soil. suggesting that the group might broaden its operations to the southern Indian—and largely Muslim—district of Hyderabad. Pakistan February 17. Western nations should be troubled that a country that professes to be committed to fighting Islamic militants at home has decided to focus so much attention on developing its nuclear prowess instead. Indians should also be concerned.com/2011/02/17/areality-check-on-india-pakistan/ On February 10. for example. On July 15. Indeed.000-strong procession in Lahore to mark ‗Kashmir Solidarity Day‘ and warned India to ‗liberate‘ Kashmir or face jihad. Washington welcomed the announcement. Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) and similar groups continue to operate freely in Pakistan. 2010. and is believed to be building its fourth plutonium reactor. India and Pakistan announced that they would resume peace talks that were suspended after Pakistan-based terrorists attacked multiple sites in Mumbai in November 2008.
it is a completely unrealistic scenario. or at least the Muslim-dominated valley of Kashmir and the capital of Srinagar [ Images ]. Faced with the likelihood of Indian rejection of outside intervention. The Pakistani state and its army have been obsessed with India since its creation in 1947. American diplomacy has put the Kashmir problem in the 'too hard' category and left it to simmer. more stable solution may exist now. reopening transportation links. with Pakistan. and China. Of course. setting up hot lines between military commands. On the contrary. The deal removes the central obstacle to closer strategic ties between Washington and New Delhi [ Images ] — the nuclear proliferation problem.Dobson Debate DIP CAP State updates Indo-Pak Scenario 'US should encourage India to be more flexible on Kashmir' 2/26/11 http://www. the dialogue has not seriously addressed the Kashmir issue because of the significant gulf between the two parties and India's refusal to negotiate while still a target of terrorist attacks planned and organised in Pakistan. in effect the cease-fire line of 1948. India has made it clear that it will not withdraw from Kashmir. there would be no need for nuclear weapons or for a jihadist option to compel Indian withdrawal from the valley. which held back the development of their relationship for two decades. . The basis for such an approach would be to use the Indo-Pakistani bilateral dialogue. as the ultimate border with Pakistan. Once Kashmir was 'reunited' with Pakistan.htm The other critical issue for American diplomacy to address is the underlying problem that drives Pakistan's relationship with terror: India [ Images ] and Kashmir [ Images ]. India is probably prepared to accept the Line of Control [ Images ].rediff. That dialogue has already produced a series of confidencebuilding measures between the two countries. after the terrorist attack on the Indian parliament in December 2001. This was the case during the Kargil [ Images ] crisis in 1999. and again in 2002 when India mobilised its army for war on the Pakistani border. and holding periodic discussions at the foreign secretary level on all the issues that divide the two. Unfortunately. The Kashmir issue periodically boils over. A unique opportunity for quiet American diplomacy to help advance the Kashmir issue to a better. Pakistan. but not a fundamental redrawing of borders to put the valley under Pakistan's sovereignty. The ISI built much of the modern jihadist infrastructure in South Asia precisely to fight India asymmetrically.com/news/column/us-must-encourage-india-to-be-more-flexible-onkashmir/20110226. an optimal resolution of Kashmir would be a union of the province. either directly in Kashmir or to defend Pakistan's strategic depth in Afghanistan. There is a way to resolve the Kashmir problem more realistically. and the United States and the international community have to step in to try to prevent a full-scale war. India argues it has already made a major concession by de facto accepting the partition of the state between itself. The results are all too predictable. But the two have gone far in the back-channel talks on how to resolve Kashmir. This is precisely the outcome that Pakistani leaders have in mind when they urge American leaders to devote diplomatic and political energy to the Kashmir issue. The United States has long been reluctant to engage more actively in the Kashmir dispute in light of the Indian posture that outside intervention is unwarranted and that Kashmir is a purely bilateral issue. From the Pakistani perspective. The US-India nuclear deal has created a more stable and enduring basis for relations between the two countries than at any time in their history.
the two states are unlikely to be able to reach such an agreement on their own. It is a unique and propitious moment. and Al Qaeda [ Images ]. Lashkar-e-Tayiba. which favors India. it would set the stage for a different era in the subcontinent and for more productive interaction between the international community and Pakistan. Excerpted with the author's permission from Bruce Reidel's book. But more than anything else. Brookings Institution Press. the environment. such as transportation. Since the Kargil war in 1999. I urged Obama to do just this on Air Force One and in the strategic review. then he can reenter and advance the back channel with the political clout to secure a peace breakthrough. With the desire to fight asymmetric warfare against India eliminated. A quiet American effort led by the President to promote a solution is probably essential to move the parties toward an agreement. is now supported by an almost unique bipartisan consensus in the American foreign policy establishment and Congress. If Prime Minister Singh [ Images ] can see real evidence of LeT being broken up and dismantled in Pakistan. begun by President Clinton and advanced by President Bush. an idea recently floated in India. It could set the stage for a genuine rapprochement between India and Pakistan and nurture trade and economic interaction that could transform the subcontinent for the better. and tourism. The key will be whether the United States can make clear to Pakistan that its red lines about terror are real. public initiative--discretion and privacy are essential. Resolution of the Kashmiri issue would go a long way toward making Pakistan a more normal state and one less preoccupied with India. Obama has begun a strategic partnership dialogue with Islamabad [ Images ].Dobson Debate DIP CAP State updates Indo-Pak Scenario In the new era of US-Indian strategic partnership. sports. especially the red line on Lashkar-e-Tayiba [ Images ]. A resolution of the major outstanding issue between Islamabad and New Delhi would reduce the arms race between them and the risk of nuclear conflict. This is the big idea America needs to promote in South Asia. the Indians have been more open to an American role in Kashmir because they sense Washington is fundamentally in favor of a resolution to maintain the status quo. This should not be a formal. Washington. DC . America and the Future of Global Jihad. At the same time. It is also in India's interest to find a solution to a conflict that has gone on too long. Washington should quietly but forcefully encourage New Delhi to be more flexible on Kashmir. Given the history of mistrust that pervades both sides. Pakistan would also be discouraged from making alliances with the Taliban [ Images ]. Such an agreement would not resolve all the tensions between the two neighbors or end the problem of the Taliban in Afghanistan. Deadly Embrace: Pakistan. The United States currently has better relations with both India and Pakistan than at any other time in the past several decades. A special condominium might be created to allow the two constituencies to work together on issues specific to the region. President Obama [ Images ] has already hosted Singh at the White House for a state dinner and traveled to New Delhi in November 2010. It is clearly in the American interest to try to defuse a lingering conflict that has generated global terrorism and repeatedly threatened to create a full-scale military confrontation on the subcontinent. The two currencies of India and Pakistan could become legal tender on both sides of the border. the sanctions that poisoned US-Pakistani ties for decades have been removed by new legislation passed with bipartisan support. a seasoned South Asia hand. That in turn would help to ensure the survival of genuine civilian democratic rule in the country. for example. Its rapprochement with India. Former ambassador Bill Milam. A Kashmir solution would have to be structured around a formula for making the Line of Control both a permanent and normal international border (perhaps with some minor modifications) and a permeable frontier between the two parts of Kashmir so that the Kashmiri people could live more normal lives. has insightfully stressed that the "India-Centricity of the Pakistani mindset is the most important factor and variable" in the future of the country. It would also remove a major rationale for the army's disproportionate role in Pakistan's national security affairs.
000 troops from Indian-held Kashmir. Sir Creek. the strategic framework under which India and Pakistan discuss important issues such as Siachen. and. critically Jammu and Kashmir. Pakistan and India had made significant progress on a variety of fronts. ―Pakistan‘s acceptance of the trouble emanating from its borders is viewed by many in India as a starting point for future negotiations‖. terrorism and drug trafficking. the Indian government itself is now ready for talks due to ―growing voices within India…calling for a dialogue with Pakistan‖. What is clear. both Musharraf and Singh have recently acknowledged that the two countries had come very close to ‗clinching a deal‘ in 2007 and the basis of the talks had been Musharraf‘s 4-point formula: ―make the LoC irrelevant. In fact. Experts believe that apart from US pressure. however. it had been successful lobbying by the Indian government that had led to ―Holbrooke‘s responsibilities (being) limited to AfPak‖ and ―who has allegedly been pressured to avoid using the K-word . According to reports. .Kashmir‖. Prior to the Mumbai attacks.Dobson Debate DIP CAP State updates Indo-Pak Scenario The Kashmir-Kabul Connection and US Diplomacy by Mehlaqa Samdani It remains to be seen whether or not Secretary Clinton succeeded in reducing the trust deficit between the United States and Pakistan during her recent visit to the region. India and Kashmiris to oversee the transition and make it work. economic and commercial cooperation and friendly exchanges. This is somewhat surprising given India‘s reluctance to allow third parties to interfere on the question of Kashmir. Tulbul Navigation Project/Wullar Barrage. not only did Clinton‘s visit to the region prompt India‘s withdrawal of 15. is that she made significant progress towards a resumption of dialogue between India and Pakistan. which in India‘s case at least is no longer the case. peace and security. but was also the reason behind the Indian prime minister‘s announcement that India was ready for talks with Pakistan without pre-conditions. and have a joint mechanism comprising Pakistan. The United States is likely to play a critical role in facilitating these talks especially since there is growing recognition among US policymakers that stability in Afghanistan will only be achieved if Pakistan‘s concerns regarding its eastern border are addressed. Also.‖ At that time. Pakistan also seems eager to begin dialogue and has already appointed an envoy for this purpose. both governments had been beset by internal domestic opposition. In fact. demilitarize Kashmir. The countries had completed the fifth round of the composite dialogue. give self-governance to the Kashmiris.
In exchange for Abdullah‘s withdrawal.‖ This sums up the exploratory and confidence building nature of this high profile visit to the US.‖ On a question. they nonetheless formed the perspective in which this diplomacy was framed.org/blog/kashmir-kabul-connection-and-us-diplomacy Mar 12. in the face of a $275 billion trade deficit. China is the direct recipient of the US Long Arm-Long War Strategy. Economically.insaf. though the Chinese President too faces his elections. Though irritants. In the light of the constraints faced by President Obama and the State Department in addressing issues that in fact destabilise South Asia. who was ―considered pro-India by Islamabad…Pakistan's military…agreed to actively mediate between Washington and the Taliban over a reconciliation plan that will allow the US to exit from Afghanistan‖ http://csis. he evaded the issue and responded: ―I think it‘s a manifestation of the nature of our discussions here…that we have ongoing with China. In addition.pk/Media/InsafBlog/tabid/168/articleType/ArticleView/articleId/5572/China-US-diplomacy-andAfPak-Brig-Samson-Sharaf. rhetoric was low key. he appears to be fully backed in his diplomacy and can go back and claim that he has made significant economic and diplomatic success. French and Japanese locomotive manufacturers in the past. WOT and the much-trumpeted Long War. In contrast. He also spared America the diplomatic spar by not mentioning that China had already begun reducing its exports to the US. In the backdrop are diplomatic flurry. Afghanistan and the surrounding regions. the US in quid pro quo refrained from mentioning Pakistan‘s growing nuclear cooperation with China. More so. They are more significant in what has not been said. it was also for the first time that Pakistan was not in the headlines as a punching bag for the US failures in Afghanistan. no mention of Pakistan caused much dismay in its thinking circles. conceding export deals to a tune of $45 billion is not significant. this establishment is handicapped by a somewhat lame duck President. Though India feels happy at its diplomatic clout and staying on the right side of State Department diplomacy. China realises that the US is unhappy about . But. State Department Spokesman Philip J. pre-visit co-ordinations and concessions from either side. China will get access to the lucrative US locomotive market and joint manufacturing facilities with General Electric (GE) that in a few years will help the Chinese locomotive industries to elbow out GE just as it has done with the German. China also agreed to give the US contractors proximately $88 billion contracts and an order for 200 Boeing aircrafts worth $19 billion creating jobs for a starved US workforce. 2011 China-US diplomacy and AfPak: Brig Samson Sharaf http://www. I wouldn‘t read anything else into it. Both eastward expansion of NATO and the bases in Afghanistan affect it directly.aspx published in Nation 1/23/11 The visit of the Chinese President Hu Jintao to the US will not live in memory for the declarations that were made in the joint press conferences and the press releases. suspicions and differences were not highlighted publicly. Following the Democrat traditions of resolving issues diplomatically. no. according to an Asia Times report. Crowley was quick to assert that ―there‘s no change in the US policy. AfPak and India. In this calculus of mutual diplomatic conceding. at the heels of the aggressive diplomatic visit by Vice President Biden and Mullen‘s mantra to do more. Pentagon that calls all the shots on strategic and security issues and the desire to coopt India for its long-term objectives in Central and South Asia. that the US was causing international financial destabilisation by printing out dollars and its human rights record in Guantanamo Bay and rendition centres. that references to irritants and suspicions were dropped as a policy to appease India. the withdrawal of Abdullah Abdullah from the planned runoff election took place due to US pressure. Cognisant of the upcoming elections in USA and the support that Barack Obama needs from the right.Dobson Debate DIP CAP State updates Indo-Pak Scenario In fact. But the irritants remain. inasmuch as China did not mention Kashmir. In return.
Fourth. Readers may be surprised at my assertion. Then there are issues of US arms sales to Taiwan. then the forces of intolerance will unleash themselves against the entire system. Then the road to economic engagements will be more promising and may lead to a matrix whence economic compulsions will overshadow military concerns. this also raises a question whether China has managed to avert an extraordinary escalation in AfPak at the heels of the Biden‘s visit and Petraeus‘ Plan. rather than the shady NGO mafias aligned with the corrupt officials and politicians of the government. If it has. return of diplomacy as an instrument to negotiate peace and improved Pak-Afghan relations. US postponed the talks amid a growing crisis sparked by the arrest of an American. The only democratic options are to either perform or call for immediate elections.Dobson Debate DIP CAP State updates Indo-Pak Scenario Chinese presence in Pakistan and Balochistan. crucial to China‘s economic progress. There are prospects of people‘s revolution for Pakistan following the recent Tunisian example. They have provided the US administration with enough economic concessions to carry to their vote banks in the next presidential elections and return with the people‘s verdict.net/detailnews. particularly along the Line of Control. Third. Second. In case the Chinese achieve these objectives. Peace along the divided frontier of Kashmir will give a much-needed respite to the people of the region. This also impacts Chinese bilateralism with Japan and South Korea. The fact that this visit avoided such real issues reflects multiple connotations.asp?id=78757 High-level strategic dialogue among the United States. If that happens. the Chinese see the Democrats far better diplomatic partners than the Republicans. it brings back North Korea to the negotiating table. Pakistan and Afghanistan set for scheduled for February 23-24 this year in Washington have been postponed. are militarily adventurous and more aligned to the Pentagon. the Chinese have displayed remarkable cognisance and insight of the constraints faced by the Democrat administration. The success will also provide room for Pakistan to concentrate more on its domestic issues. India and support to Pakistan. post-earthquake and post-flood scenario. the Chinese have decided to bet on them for peace in the region. then roads to a diplomatic and negotiated settlement of the Afghan issue will be wide open. It is time that as in the 50s and 60s. The government must realise that far too much time has been lost to political tantrums and it is time they deliver honestly. as the most viable and constitutional instrument to absorb and deliver these projects. This would also open doors to India and Pakistan to resume peace diplomacy. First. It also knows that the Baloch separatist movements that are particularly anti-Chinese have sponsors with US blessings. The slide and rot must be stopped and arrested. then the regions around Pakistan are likely to see a graduated deescalation. challenge the forces of intolerance. carry out mutual trade and reduce force levels pending the resolution of the question under UN auspices. Kashmir. who represent the right. and boost trust and confidence building measures across the entire spectrum of irritants. but it is a fact that the Pakistani system lacks the wherewithal to absorb and deliver on the significant aid flowing into Pakistan. the armed forces play their role in national development. Hence. permit them to interact. Pak-US and Afghan strategic dialogue? Sajjad Shaukat http://pakobserver. Dalai Lama. Raymond Davis . In this regard. and give breathing space to the armed forces to play a pro-active role in national development in the post-conflict.
Pakistan and the United States. Besides the crisis over Raymond Davis. 2011. the new US Envoy for Afghanistan and Pakistan. Setting aside the ground realties that Pakistan. and the US has stepped up pressure on Pakistan to free him. a GPS satellite tracking device. which has been bearing multiple losses in combating this menace since 9/11. previous history of Pak-US ties proves that Washington has always pressurised Pakistan on a number of occasions. it was agreed to postpone the Trilateral Meeting…we look forward to convening a very productive Trilateral Meeting at the earliest opportunity. Washington Post and the Guardian have also revealed that Davis Raymond is agent of American CIA. the United States continues its efforts to free its imprisoned citizen and is now reportedly issuing veiled threats. even President Barack Obama urged Pakistan to free Raymond as he has diplomatic immunity under the Geneva Convention. While. who was arrested with loaded weapons. John Kerry in Lahore remarked that issue of ―Davis has nothing to do with local courts as diplomats enjoy immunity…we cannot allow that one incident can break the strong relationship between the two countries. In this respect. rejecting Pakistan‘s stand that its government or any official .‖ He further explained that Washington remains ―committed to robust engagement between Afghanistan.‖ Notably. Indian blame game against Islamabad. continued during exchange of information between the two neighbouring countries regarding Mumbai mayhem. This fact shows a greater contradiction between the Obama Administration and their media. Despite all of this. recently. As regards the strategic dialogue.‖ Meanwhile in the recent days the US and Pakistani military chiefs had a day-long meeting in Oman. where Pakistan‘s police has rejected the American‘s self-defense claim and accused him of cold-blooded murder as a court extended his remand. with the support of the US. the visiting Chairman of the US Foreign Relations Committee. The public wants Davis tried and convicted. photographs of Pakistan‘s defence installations and tribal areas. the suspension of talks — with no new date announced marked the latest blow to strained US ties with Pakistan. legal experts in Pakistan are of the opinion that Raymond Davis is a murderer who has no diplomatic immunity. State Department spokesman Philip Crowley said in a statement. On February 15.Dobson Debate DIP CAP State updates Indo-Pak Scenario who was accused of murdering two Pakistani nationals. like other US high officials. There is no doubt that a diplomatic crisis has boiled up between Washington and Islamabad over the detention of Raymond Davis. has been the major victim of terrorism. while American authorities are still silent about his role in Pakistan. as we share many issues of mutual concern and benefit from being at the same table. And the Pakistani government is in a tough situation. it is mentionable that in the aftermath of the November 26 catastrophe of Mumbai. In this connection. On the other hand. ―In light of the political changes in Pakistan and after discussions with Afghan and Pakistani officials in Washington. even western media and renowned newspapers such as The New York Times. itself. Meanwhile. America. and Pakistan‘s Ambassador Husain Haqqani was invited to the State Department for a formal meeting with Marc Grossman. while tilting towards India had put diplomatic duress on Islamabad. Many Pakistanis are suspicious about Davis.
Speaking in Indian tune. Iran and China. As a matter of fact. In case of the Indian occupied Kashmir. but the same will produce negative impact on both the countries. Machiavelli and Morgenthau agree that the powerful states can safeguard their interest by exerting psychological pressure on the less powerful states. the issue still remains unresolved as UN resolutions regarding the plebiscite were never implemented because Washington and some western powers support the illegitimate stand of India due to their collective interests. while the US-led NATO forces cannot win over the Taliban militants without Islamabad‘s support. The prevalent global system tends to give a greater political and economic leverage to the affluent developed countries which could protect their interests at the cost of the weaker countries. UN had permitted the United States to attack Afghanistan under the cover of right of selfdefence. Condoleeza Rice and British Foreign Secretary Milliband who had visited India and Pakistan stressed upon Islamabad to take actions against the banned Jamaatud Dawa and the already banned Lashkar-i-Tayba. since the US-led NATO forces occupied Afghanistan after 9/11. In this context. Nevertheless. In fact. In the recent past. US-led some western allies compelled Pakistan to accept some Indian false demands. any controversy arises on the controversial issues. coercion and even violence as essential elements of the American diplomacy. . ―coercion to be an effective tool of foreign policy. Whenever. at that critical juncture. it is notable that in 2001. we are living in an unequal world order. New Delhi wanted to make Islamabad accept all other Indian demands since our rulers admitted on February 12. Past experience proves that economic dependence on foreign countries always brings political dependence in its wake. It also continuous drone attacks on Pakistan‘s soil without bothering for the sovereignty of our country. presenting one after another list of bogus evidence. In this regard.‖ Kissinger also endorses politics of bargaining and pressure through threats. our country had been facing precarious financial problem. India wanted to avail the Mumbai tragedy in increasing further pressure on Pakistan with the help of America in order to force Islamabad to confess that all the terrorists responsible for Mumbai attacks came from Pakistan. Non-cooperation or any misunderstanding among the US. they had also said that the terrorists involved in the Mumbai events came from Pakistan. Americans should know that Pakistan is still a frontline country and a key state actor for American ‗different war‘ in Afghanistan. Pakistan and Afghanistan are though part of American pressure on Islamabad. 2009 that Ajmal Kasab is Pakistani national and Mumbai terror-attacks were ―partially planned in Pakistan. Thomas Schelling remarks about the US. suspension of strategic talks among the US. the UN Security Council enforces the doctrine of collective security against the small states. IMF decided to sanction loan to Pakistan after American green signal.Dobson Debate DIP CAP State updates Indo-Pak Scenario agency was not involved in the Mumbai attacks. renowned political philosophers. giving a greater setback to the US war on terror. In that scenario. While elaborating shrewd diplomacy. a renowned strategic thinker. US former Secretary of State. Another instance of American pressure is that the US is emphasising Islamabad to take action against the militants of North Waziristan. Hobbes. While. Pakistan and Afghanistan will encourage India which is already manipulating US war in Afghanistan.‖ In that context. while the five big powers protect their interests by using veto. This shows discrimination between the powerful and the weaker. In these terms. stiff resistance of the Taliban militants which created unending lawlessness in the country has made it a most conducive place for India to prepare conspiracies to fulfill its secret strategic designs against Pakistan.
or indeed sets its own rules of play. suspension of trilateral talks for a long time is likely to create misunderstanding among these three countries. despite the rhetoric and expressions of hope. Nonetheless. Jalalabad. but that does not deter us from going into the field with it. that of Havana. We also enter the game under threat of constant violence by our adversary. We have had before other versions of a similar ‗spirit‘ — the Lahore spirit. When we give such latitude to Pakistan and our own play is so defensive and permissive. the Islamabad one. Kandhar and other sensitive parts of the Pak-Afghan border. and New Delhi too. Washington and Kabul outline progress on issues such as the war in Afghanistan and the campaign against extremism. encouraging the terrorists and especially thwarting American regaional and global interests at this critical juncture when Washington is already facing violent anti-American protests in the Middle East. but has also decided to set up cantonments. India is using the Border Roads Organisation in constructing the ring roads by employing Indo-Tibeten police force for security. importance of the Pak-US and Afghan dialogue can be judged from the fact that in these trilateral annual talks.jsp DEEPENING MESS . and creating regional stability. ministers and other top officials of Islamabad. Indian secret agency. Why we persist in believing this despite the experience of the past is not easy to explain.telegraphindia. So these trilateral dialogue must continue and a new date must be announced in this regard very soon as coordination among these concerned states is very essential for eliminating militancy. RAW with help of some foreign intelligence agencies has well-established its networks in Afghanistan. Pakistan‘s game behaviour has continued to be unclean and malevolent.Pakistan is again exploiting India‘s eagerness for dialogue Kanwal Sibal Apropos our decision to resume a ―comprehensive‖ dialogue with Pakistan. . US war against terrorism.Dobson Debate DIP CAP State updates Indo-Pak Scenario Under the pretext of Talibinisation of Afghanistan and Pakistan. http://www. but. the question needs to be asked why we want to play the same game with our neighbour again and again when we know that it does not want to play by accepted rules. Pakistan also commits fouls with impunity. India has been running secret operations against Pakistan from its consulates in Mazar-i-Sharif. Moreover. Ekaterinberg and Sharm-el-Sheikh.com/1110309/jsp/opinion/story_13678899. It has spent millions of dollars in Afghanistan to strengthen its grip on the country. how can we ever hope to win the game? The reference to the ―Thimphu spirit‖ suggests that we believe there is a positive spirit that animates Pakistan in playing this game. New Delhi has not only increased its military troops in the counry. And wave of resentment against the US is runnning high in Pakistan and other Arab countries. or interprets the rules differently from us. Particularly. In this respect.
Indeed. besides Kashmir. Pakistan garners many advantages in responding to our overtures to resume play after periodic suspensions because of its misconduct. the game will not be called off for too long. of ―no dialogue‖ not being an option. much less act against the India-directed jihadi groups. We exhibit our great keenness to enter the field.Dobson Debate DIP CAP State updates Indo-Pak Scenario We are the ones that make all the effort to create a positive environment before each round of play. and that whatever fouls it commits or rules it transgresses. as the supposedly stronger team. despite its reputation of being unsporting. the play will then resume from a new threshold of tolerance of its objectionable acts on India‘s part. Pakistan also gets acknowledged as a credible team. Because our urge to play gets regenerated time and again. We are glad to offer to do the extra running to make the game exciting if the other side were to show some seriousness in playing straight. always assuming that the game will be played with positive intent on both sides. an agenda that has an uncanny resemblance to the ―composite dialogue‖ that we ostensibly reject. We are once again engaging Pakistan in a dialogue. Pakistan. When Pakistan resists our basic demands we gradually modify them under the cover of platitudinous references to compulsions of neighbourhood. of a stable and prosperous Pakistan being in our interest and so on — and in this way the climbdown is sought to be concealed. When teams play. After the Mumbai attack. Pakistan‘s obstinacy has succeeded in extracting a major concession from us. it feeds Pakistan‘s conviction that its misdeeds will always get condoned eventually. We have now yielded to its demand. though we are avoiding calling the renewed full spectrum dialogue ―composite‖. Siachen. We are even willing to acknowledge for discussion some imaginary fouls the adversary charges us with. and India‘s equal. the Siachen issue over which the Pakistanis feel aggrieved and want an Indian withdrawal. Our bottom line. counter-terrorism. Pakistan sees in every bout of play with an India that seems bereft of a winning playing strategy an improved chance of defeating its adversary — by scoring the goal it has long hoped for. as if description defines reality. Pakistan has made no progress in bringing to justice those responsible for the Mumbai terror attacks. it seems to . When the play stops they are disappointed and push for it to resume. Our bounden duty is to play the neighbourhood team. Indeed. is not acceptable because it relegates the Kashmir issue to the background. without learning salutary lessons from past dealings. economic cooperation and people to people contacts. We say we have no choice but to play an honest game. Pakistan has made the visit of its foreign minister to India contingent on ―meaningful‖ results. India. far from being on the defensive. as that would cover. By being invited to play. however dishonest the other side is. Sir Creek. of course. is that refusal to play the game. despite Pakistan‘s bid to vitiate the atmosphere. peace and security. As the wooed party it makes demands with regard to playing conditions. so long as play can be maintained. To top it all. has been adamant that India‘s step-by-step approach. It has insisted on the revival of the composite dialogue. with priority focus on terrorism. Meanwhile. This is an elaborate metaphor for our diplomacy with Pakistan. whatever the level of fraud and deception on the other side. we say. the cheerleaders are in the ring to make a noise. is not an option. And finally. the Wullar barrage/Tulbul navigation project. is then pressed to overlook fouls and violence and make the requisite gesture to the weaker side. We will be discussing Kashmir. implying that the onus is on us to produce results to its satisfaction.
we discover excuses for our adversary‘s inaction in order to justify resiling from our own position. The venomous head of the terrorist organization. The dialogue at the home secretaries level can be supplementary to the dialogue between the principals — in this case the foreign secretaries — with focus on evidence. modalities of exchange of information. documents. We seem to be buying the argument that even if Pakistan wanted to act on our demands it would not be able to do so in the current conditions of domestic terror and mounting extremist sentiment exemplified by the largely approving public reaction to Salman Taseer‘s killing. giving this issue the centrality that Pakistan has been manoeuvring for. is now dismissed as ―inconsequential‖. Jamaat-ud-Dawa. procedures. the spiritual architect of Mumbai. even Hafiz Saeed.Dobson Debate DIP CAP State updates Indo-Pak Scenario have now threatened that the masterminds of Mumbai like Zaki-ur-Rehman Lakhvi may be released unless a Pakistani judicial commission can come to India to authenticate Ajmal Kasab‘s confession. As usual. Show it the yellow card and wait for its initiative to resume play if it wants to extract itself from its deepening mess. Suddenly. The principals will discuss Kashmir though. the bogey man of yesterday is no longer worthy of serious notice. who advocated a nuclear strike against India a day before the Thimphu meet. and who has close links with the Pakistani political and military establishment. we feel obliged to change tack in order to clear the political decks for resuming the dialogue. The author is former foreign secretary of India . The degree of integrality of the terrorism issue to the quality and substance of the overall India-Pakistan relationship cannot be in the remit of the home secretaries. We are succumbing to these delaying procedural tactics that enable Pakistan to make the pretence of doing something in accordance with the law while doing practically nothing through legal manipulations. Because it is amply clear that the Pakistani government will not act against him. internationally. Pakistan is exploiting the dialogue game to maul us as much as it can. counter-terrorism matters and suchlike technical issues. but also regionally and. indeed. whereas terrorism is a foreign policy issue not only bilaterally with Pakistan. Why downgrade the centrality of terrorism by consigning discussions on it to the level of home secretaries? The home secretaries do not handle foreign policy.
eurasiareview. The First United States-Pakistan involvement in Afghanistan in the 1980s emerged with the Soviet military intervention in Afghanistan in1979. Afghanistan in two different decades brought about two intense proximities in United StatesPakistan military relationship. The United States and Pakistan had a strategic convergence in working together to see the exit of the Soviets from Afghanistan. Both the United States and Pakistan over the last five decades enjoyed only spasmodic proximity and that too when tactical expediencies on both sides prompted such a proximity. but not without Pakistan Army double-timing the United States all along since 2002. Tactical expediency dictated Pakistan succumbing to American dictates. Pakistan This time around.com/analysis/us-pakistan-denouement-strategic-implications-forindia-03032011/ United States –Pakistan denouement in their so-called strategic partnership currently underway was inevitable as this relationship was never founded on the basis of sound long-lasting strategic convergences or shared values. and they succeeded. The United States and Pakistan had not only different strategic agenda but one .Dobson Debate DIP CAP State updates Indo-Pak Scenario US-Pakistan Denouement: Strategic Implications For India By Dr Subhash Kapila (SAAG) http://www. both entities having been given facilities and infrastructure in Pakistan-Occupied Afghanistan till 2001. there was no strategic convergences between the United States and the Pakistan Army. The Second United States-Pakistan Involvement in Afghanistan arose from United States ultimatums and coercion applied to Pakistan to combine in US Global War on Terror against the Al Qaeda and the Taliban.
However in the opening months of 2011 this denouement has spilled out in the public domain over the well publicized case of US diplomat Raymond Davis presently in custody of Pakistan in Lahore. the muted contours of the trust-deficit between the United States and Pakistan started seeping into public domain. Post-2007 and especially after General Kayani took over as Pakistan Army Chief. Strategic implications arise for India in whatever outcome and course of action emerges from the ongoing spat between the United States and Pakistan which with each passing day is acquiring highly emotive and political overtones. The Indian policy establishment throughout this decade of 2000s kept succumbing to United States pressures to keep resuming the India-Pakistan Peace Dialogues which India kept calling off after every major terrorist strikes from Pakistan against India. . rather than being confined to an issue to be settled through quiet diplomacy. Pointedly asserted in my Papers on this issue repeatedly in the last few years was the fact that the Indian Prime Minister in pursuance of his pro-American policies was succumbing to American pressures on policies designed to appease Pakistan Army‘s strategic sensitivities. This approach was in a state of severe disconnect with Indian public opinion which wanted no truck with Pakistan until it resiled from terrorism. indulged in unabashed policies of pressurizing the Indian policy establishment to what can be termed as appeasement policies towards Pakistan Army‘s strategic sensitivities. The United States in a vain bid to keep the Pakistan Army on its right side so that it does not impede the US war effort in Afghanistan and also to keep US logistics routes through Pakistan to Afghanistan open. Till 2007 or so this trust-deficit was kept in muted contours by both sides. After all the architecture of India‘s policy formulations on Pakistan in the past decade were crafted from Washington‘s perspectives than India‘s national security interests. the last notable one being the nationally traumatic 26/11 commando-trained attack on Mumbai. United States-Pakistan denouement in their relationship was in the offing since 2007 but was kept in muted contours by both nations and more so by the United States. once again through the Taliban nurtured in Pakistani safe-havens.Dobson Debate DIP CAP State updates Indo-Pak Scenario could say opposing agenda. The past decade of the 2000s post-2001 in terms of United States-Pakistan relationship ostensibly termed as a strategic partnership witnessed a marked ―trust-deficit‖ between the United States and its Major Non-NATO Ally. Thereafter the Pakistan Army could once again reclaim Afghanistan as its strategic depth against India. Currently when the United States itself perceives that United States-Pakistan relations may have headed towards an irretrievable damage. it becomes pertinent to point out to the Indian policy establishment that its Pakistan policy postulations would need serious revision. The Pakistan Army‘s end-game in Afghanistan this time was to bide time. This decade of the 2000s also witnessed the tangential impact on India of the United StatesPakistan Army troubled relationship. induce combat fatigue in United States war effort and thereby prompt a military exit of the United Sates from Afghanistan.
keeping the Pakistan-Afghanistan border porous for Taliban operations in Afghanistan and Pakistan Army Chief‘s continued refusal to launch military operations in North Waziristan. Pakistan‘s tainted reputation as an opportunistic and readily available as a ‗rentier state‘ and a ‗regional spoiler state‘ affected its image as a dependable state and a durable ally of the United States when the Pakistan-China strategic nexus is considered. Topping all these concerns is the undeniable reality of rogue elements of Pakistan Army passing on nuclear materials for use by Islamic Jihadis as a ‗dirty nuclear device‘ against Homeland USA. Hence Pakistan Army‘s continued hosting of the Afghan Taliban Shura. if when the chips are down and Pakistan is forced into making a strategic choice between China and the United States. United States stabilization of Afghanistan and its continued embedment there is a United States strategic imperative of the United States. As reiterated in many of my Papers. United States-Pakistan Denouement: The Major Issues of Friction Strong ‗trust-deficit‘ has always hovered singularly over United States-Pakistan relationship ever since the early 1950s when both nations embarked on an opportunistic relationship. . the major issues of friction between the United States and Pakistan can be said to be existing on three major issues. The United States has had serious concerns on Pakistan Army‘s nuclear weapons arsenal safety. This is diametrically opposite to Pakistan Army‘s fixative obsession to reclaim Afghanistan for its strategic depth strategy. In the onset of 2011.Dobson Debate DIP CAP State updates Indo-Pak Scenario This Paper intends to focus broadly on the issue of overall United States-Pakistan denouement and its strategic implications for India with a discussion under the following heads: United States-Pakistan Denouement: The Major Issues of Friction Breakdown in Relations Between United States and Pakistan Intelligence Agencies US Secretary of State Recent Observations on Pakistan Analyzed United States Follow-up Pakistan Policy Options: Perspectives Strategic Implications for India Arising From United States Follow-up Pakistan Policy Options. its record of WMD proliferation to Iran and North Korea and refusal to give access to Dr A Q Khan for questioning in relation to Pakistan‘s WMD proliferation. These are as follows (1) Pakistan‘s Afghanistan policy postures and approaches to United States stabilization of Afghanistan (2) United States‘ fears about Pakistan‘s growing nuclear weapons arsenal and the security and safety of Pakistan‘s nuclear weapons (3) Pakistan Army‘s continued patronage of Islamic Jihadi outfits like the Lashkar-e-Toiba and others. Pakistan would align with China. Long term strategic convergences between United States and Pakistan which could have cemented their military relationship and led to a substantive strategic partnership have failed to emerge.
On all of the above contentious issues of concern to the United States. . carried in the media. Joint Chiefs of Staff. referring to the reported split between the CIA and the ISI. The situation in February 2011 has reached a tipping point where as the Washington Post put it that the US policy establishment has finally begun facing the harsh reality that ―Pakistan and the United States have entirely different narratives about their bilateral relationship‖ and that ―United States politicians are questioning the continued strategic utility of United States-Pakistan relationship‖. He is reported to have said: ―The United States said that once beyond the tipping point. and that the United States should not allow India to effect a presence in Afghanistan? Obviously. the United States has allowed itself to be blackmailed by the Pakistan Army establishment which not forgetting continues to exist on heavy doses of United Sates military aid and largesse.Dobson Debate DIP CAP State updates Indo-Pak Scenario On control of terrorism and restraining Pakistan Army‘s continued patronage to Islamic Jihadi outfits like the Laskar-e-Toiba. In fact the recent highest military level meetings between the US Chairman. At the beginning of 2011 it is increasingly being said in media reports that there has been a virtual breakdown in the CIA-ISI relationship to the extent that they are not communicating with each other. the situation would be taken over by political forces that cannot be controlled‖. at Oman on February 24. Revealing in this connection are the reported remarks of former Pakistan Army Chief General Karamat who was also a former Pakistan Ambassador to USA. the respective intelligence agencies of the United States and Pakistan. India should demilitarize Kashmir by withdrawing troops. Admiral Mullen and Pakistan Army Chief of Staff. the CIA and the ISI representation were conspicuous by their absence. Why is then the United States tolerating Pakistan Army‘s shenanigans? Why is it that the United States instead of ‗disciplining‘ the Pakistan Army continues to pressurize India to yield to Pakistan Army‘s dictates to the United States that India should yield on Kashmir. General Kayani. Break down in Relations between United States and Pakistan Intelligence Agencies The bedrock of the United States-Pakistan relationship. it is the Pakistan Army and its ISI which is the central actor and controlling authority. In fact this meeting though reported as reviewing Afghanistan operations was held basically to arrest the downslide in relations between the intelligence agencies of United States and Pakistan. the Pakistan Army establishment is in total defiance of the United States. irrespective of the varying intensities had been the close links and close cooperation between the CIA and the ISI.
Dobson Debate DIP CAP State updates Indo-Pak Scenario ―The United States did not want the United States-Pakistan relationship to go into a freefall under media and domestic pressures. deductively it can be stated that the downslide in United States-Pakistan relations currently underway and the lowest point that has been reached as observed by Secretary Clinton. It needs to be reiterated that Pakistan‘s foreign policy on United States. She is reported to have observed that Pakistan faces major instabilities at home and that Pakistan should stop fomenting antiAmerican sentiments and that shocking and unjustified anti-Americanism will not resolve Pakistan‘s problems. Such remarks emanating from the highest level of United States foreign policy establishment indicates that something has seriously gone amiss in United StatesPakistan relations. these remarks of the US Secretary of State were not careless remarks but made with full deliberation and for effect. It seems doubtful that the traditional close relationship between the United States and Pakistani intelligence agencies that existed in earlier years could be substantially retrieved and healed. has taken place with the full knowledge of the Pakistan Army Chief. That this criticality in United States-Pakistan relationship has emerged at a coincident moment when United States Forces in Southern Afghanistan are making headway against Taliban strongholds is ominous. This is not conspiracy theorizing. US Secretary of State’s Recent Observations on Pakistan Analyzed Reinforcing the emerging trend of US-Pak relations skating on thin ice are the recent public remarks of US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton‘s on Pakistan. Obviously. . More pointedly. The Pakistani intelligence agencies are accusing United States CIA of flooding Pakistan with agents under diplomatic cover who are more intent on acquiring intelligence about Pakistan‘s nuclear weapons arsenal and penetrating Islamic Jihadi terrorism affiliates of the Pakistan Army. This consideration drove it (USA) to ask Pak Generals to step in and do what the Governments were failing to do…‖ ―The militaries will now brief their civilian masters and hopefully bring a change in USPak relations by arresting the downhill slide‖ Obviously. Secretary of State Clinton stated that US relations with Pakistan have plummeted to their lowest point in recent years. Afghanistan and India is under direct control of the Pakistan Army Chief General Kayani. the breakdown in relations between the American and Pakistani intelligence agencies has reached serious proportions. The Davis case seems to be only a pretext for the Pakistan military establishment to a tipping point where the United States yields further to Pakistan Army blackmails or failing which the United States is forced to a military exit from Afghanistan. Therefore.
However. to make the Pakistani establishment yield on all American demands extending from the Davis episode to launching of Pak Army offensives in North Waziristan and secure logistics to Afghanistan. It is not possible to discuss all these in this Paper. the Soft Option adoption by the United States may not reduce the friction with Pakistan. It is premature to visualize military intervention against Pakistan at this stage. United States would continue business as usual with the Pakistan Army. The contextual regional security and political environment would suggest that the United States is more likely to adopt the Soft Option.off of military and financial aid. The United States would have lately gone through scenario-building exercises and war-gaming of contingencies likely to emerge from the strained relations with Pakistan. the anti-American hysteria whipped up by Pakistan‘s right wing groups affiliated to the Pakistan Army and what the Pakistani establishment proposes to do to resolve the Davis issue. at least till 2014. United States Follow-up Pakistan Policy Options: Perspectives United States follow-up Pakistan policy options in the wake of the Davis episode would necessarily be based on the consideration of anti-American stances of the Pakistan Army establishment since 2007. including cut. Pakistan would be cajoled to release Davis from captivity and his exit from Pakistan.Dobson Debate DIP CAP State updates Indo-Pak Scenario It is not without purpose that in Pakistan media reports. The United States would also have to take into account the impact of strained US-Pak relations on its operations in Afghanistan. the political heat presently in evidence at the top political levels and the CIA-ISI rupture would also be strong determinants. economic and diplomatic coercion. And its strategic implications for India cannot be far behind especially when India‘s Pakistan policy is so much enmeshed in serving Washington‘s strategic interests in Pakistan. . that the United States follow-up options essentially boil down to the ―Hard Option‖ and the ―Soft Option‘. The Pakistan Army establishment is likely to read it as American capitulation and persist in its blackmailing tactics. The Hard Option of the United States could initially involve strong use of political. The Soft Option would be to maintain the status-quo of the frayed US-Pak relationship and perpetuate the myth of a strategic partnership. Additionally. In any case Pakistan has been allowing the disruption of US logistics effort through Pakistan quite frequently. Such assertions by General Kayani can whip up nationalistic fervor and also position General Kayani in Pakistan‘s political space. Suffice it to say. It would be an extreme last resort arising more from another 9/11 against the United States. Such observations at the highest levels of the Pakistan military establishment raise serious policy and strategic dilemmas for the United States in relation to Pakistan and Afghanistan. General Kayani is being attributed as having observed that Pakistan is the most bullied ally of the United States and that ‗the real aim of United States strategy is to de-nuclearize Pakistan‘.
The United States was now susceptible to Pakistan Army blackmail for use of US pressures on India to be accommodative to Pakistan Army stances on the Kashmir issue. and increasing and qualitatively improving India‘s strategic weapons inventory. In fact Pakistan Army since 2007 has stood further emboldened under General Kayani to be more hostile to India secure in the belief of Pakistan‘s nuclear deterrence and United States keeping India pressurized against any retaliation against Pakistan.Dobson Debate DIP CAP State updates Indo-Pak Scenario As US Forces make headway in stabilization of Afghanistan. whether the Hard Option or the Soft Option. This constancy of strategic implications arise from the hostile and confrontational Pakistan Army attitudinal approaches towards India manifested as follows (1) Proxy war in Kashmir (2) Widened and enlarged terrorist attacks all over India (3) Unprovoked border incidents and clashes along the LOC (4) Pak-China strategic nexus as an anti-Indian strategy (5) Hostile propaganda internationally against India over Kashmir and alleging India‘s aggressive instincts. an inescapable strategic imperative for the United States would be for a radical transformation of its relationship with the Pakistani military establishment and the recasting of priorities in South Asia. The Pakistan Army strategy of blackmailing USA to pressurize India has been successful with the present Government in New Delhi repeatedly succumbing to resume dialogues with Pakistan after every major terrorist attack against India. enhancing India‘s war preparedness. Analytically. Talibanization of Pakistan and possibly civil war and fragmentation. Pakistan‘s five manifestations of its hostile stances against India spelt out above did not cease despite Indian Government‘s succumbing to US dictates favoring Pakistan. In terms of United States follow-up Pakistan policy options. . Strategic Implications Arising for India from United States Follow-up Pakistan Policy Options Strategic implications for India in terms of Pakistan Army confrontationist stances have been a recurrent reality independent of the state of health of US-Pak relations for over the last half a century. the more are the chances of Pakistan Army indulging in retrograde disruptive activities in Afghanistan not only through the Taliban but also through its affiliates like the Lashkar-e-Toiba This could strain US-Pak relations further. the crucial deduction that emerges is that in either case Pakistan stands threatened by the prospects of internal strife. In such an ensuing scenario where both anti-US and anti-India war hysteria is likely to be whipped up to frenzied levels. demilitarization of Kashmir and prevent India‘s political and economic involvement in Afghanistan. With the US military intervention in Afghanistan vitally dependant on logistics lines through Pakistan. unmindful of India‘s national security interests. the Pakistan Army was provided a new weapon for use against India. the strategic implications for India suggest heightened security vigilance..
the Indian Prime Minister of seven years standing has remained silent on the crucial issue as to what strategic advantages accrue to India by repeated resumption of Peace Dialogues with Pakistan under United States pressures. Today when India is strategically powerful and strong.Dobson Debate DIP CAP State updates Indo-Pak Scenario If United States adopts the Soft Option as a follow-up strategy then India can expect even much more United States pressures on India to yield on the Kashmir issue. This is all the more necessary especially when the Pakistan Army is headed by a Pakistan Army Chief who openly flaunts that he is ―India-Centric‖ and stands rated by US intelligence establishment as the most anti-Indian Pak Army Chief ever in Pakistan‘s history. Concluding Observations The United States-Pakistan so called strategic partnership has all along been a myth. India would have to enhance its security vigilance. achieve high levels of war preparedness and be politically ready for strong deterrent actions to counter any Pakistan Army adventurism.rehabilitate itself with the Pakistani military establishment. is it a strategically sound option for the Indian Prime Minister to keep acceding to repeated resumption of Peace Dialogues with Pakistan. India cannot mortgage its national security to the pro-US political inclinations of policy establishment or to US persuasive assessments fed to the Indian Prime Minister that Pakistan Army would be more forthcoming for peace with India if concessions were made on Kashmir. The United Sates in the follow-up phase would be doubly prompted to increase pressures on India to re. . It has now entered a severe denouement phase where damage control may be able to temporarily retrieve a semblance of normalcy but it will be a relationship that will continue to skate perilously on thin ice. The Indian policy establishment needs to ask itself the serious question that irrespective of the health of United States-Pakistan relations. demilitarization of Kashmir and end to Indian involvement in Afghanistan‘s reconstruction. in the event of an India-Pakistan military showdown for whatever provocation would the United States standby with India against a Talibanized Pakistan? Also another critical question as to whether the increased Indian military equipment purchases from the United States would become subject to US sanctions in the event of an IndiaPak conflict in the future? Lastly. India followed an independent policy on Pakistan. The major strategic implications that arise for India from the falling-out of the United States and Pakistan. as per Pakistan Army demands. when the very existence of Pakistan is in question? Peace Dialogues with Pakistan under US pressures can neither ensure peace for India nor swing the United States strategically in favor of India. and irrespective whether the United States adopts the Hard Approach or the Soft Approach. In the 1950s and 1960s when India was strategically infirm. It is strange that leading policy advisers of US President Obama should be writing best seller books entitled ―United States Deadly Embrace of Pakistan‖ and the US Administration in a doublespeak pressurizing India to go in for a ―Deadly Embrace with the Pakistan Army‖.
com) . He is Consultant. Strategic Affairs with South Asia Analysis Group.007@gmail.Dobson Debate DIP CAP State updates Indo-Pak Scenario (The author is an International Relations and Strategic Affairs analyst. Email: drsubhashkapila.