Search This Blog

Loading...

Tuesday, July 13, 2010

REBUTTAL TO: Balkanizing Pakistan: A Collective National Security Strategy:BY:Naveed Tajammal




By: Naveed Tajammal


(This has exclusively been written for pakpotpourri2)




Michael Hughes,maybe a Geopolitical Journalist,in the eyes of his own people however his arguments for blkanizing our state,just to stabilize Afghanistan are totally out of line,and are based, on fairy tale presumptions;His lack of knowledge and in depth study of our regional internal dynamics is evident by his methodology of approach and foul assumptions.It is very obvious this work has been done on the behest of ''Research and Analysis Wing'' Government of India.Just to very briefly clear the mind set of those who follow,like wise articles on similar lines.Firstly the the Two Entities,''Sind Wa Hind '' have existed,from the mists of Time,The main power has always been Sind,the entity of Hind a geographic name awarded to the Pagan States to our East was the work of Arab Geographers of the 8th century AD.Historically, what is now known as India has never Existed as a State.So the British did the Hindu Brahmans a favour when they handed them over a big country to run,as to,Pakistan,it is a rebirth of its old Civilization. People like Michael should understand,that,in an historical perspective,heritage and culture is ascertained through the lay of the land,the people and their language,Pakistan is indeed a new name,yet our past reflects a very old civilization senior to almost all.Throughout the vicissitudes of time it has always existed,and has given to the World what all is now attributed to the Indians,it was our universities in Taxila,Harrapa and Bahamanabad (Bahaman'nih) which gave the inventions now attributed to Iranians or the Indians.It was our ''NEEL'' plant'' miscalled indigo,which gave the various hues of colour Blue to the world.We have been a egalitarian society and still are at the grass root level.Feudalism was a British imposition on us,our language spoken by bulk of our population is again distinct from rest of the world,from the present northern ranges of Qara korum to the shores of Qech wa Makran,only one mother language still lasts,a language lives on ,in the mouth of the speakers,a living and growing form,so long as the children learn it from their mothers,political or social reasons may establish a particular form of speech in a dominant position,but insipite of this,over the times ,that has not been the case here,inspite of the turbulent times,our Language has survived.The European Philologists,have termed our language as ''Dardic'',however the basic grammar,structure and elements are that of an old Scythian language on which they all agree.This language effects all the major dialects spoken within our State,namely Kashmiri,Balti,Dardi,Potohari.Hind Kohl (again a wrong term,as our mountains are that of Indus Kohistan or the foot hills of Qara korrum) hence it should be Sind, kohi, Lhanda,Sarieki,Jangali,Vichala,Lasi,Lari,Thari,
and Bar Rohi.(G.A.Grierson,Linguistic Survey of BRITISH INDIA,1891-1921).
Michael,thinks, to stabilize Afghanistan,we must part with our lands along the present Durand line,but is he aware that the so called champions who adhere to his theory are the very same people who are but immigrants in our fair lands since 1855 only.Now, 1855 must be old for people like Michael,but for us it is only yesterday when British opened the flood gates,this lasted till 1931,so these Pushtuns may have soft spot to go back but remember it is not only they who live here, old tribes which speak the old language still form the base of the fabric in these trans-indus regions.As to the term Afghanistan, is Michael, aware that it was coined just in the third decade of the 19th century ? As was the term,Baluchistan,Punjab and Sind (as a province) by the British.Historical geography is a subject which these new geopolitical journalists must study too,before they vent their opinions to the World at large.Proposing a blkanization of our state based on half baked ideas will not do.I have already stated the coining of the term Punjab above,and it is unfair on the part of Michael to state that bulk of our Army is composed of this entity alone,in reality it is composed of all our old tribes,is he aware that only the Baluchi are more in Punjab then in the Baluchistan, as a province !
The Bangladesh episode does not fit well here in his arguments, as it was 1000 miles away in between was the land mass now called India,as to his rationale of our army build up as per his thinking that too needs a more in depth study on his part,in order to preserve our entity against a aggressor who has strangulated our water resources on which Michael for reasons known best to him is quite,reference here is to the foul play of India on the Indus Water Treaty 1960.Wherein India is in process of installing 62 major and minor Dams on our sole share of upper three rivers of the Indus basin.India already has 100 % usage of the lower three rivers of the Indus basin,India runs ultra forward policies based on a fallacious concept called ''mahabharata'',in which Indian thinkers claim,lands across the Oxus as well those of eastern Iran as their boundaries,the Tibetan land mass too falls within their ambit.
Burma like wise in the East.and in Afghanistan since the days of Zahir Shah they have invested heavily, the leased submarines from Russia shows their desperate state of affairs, a similar leasing of Air bases in Tajikistan,too.A state within which over 500 million cannot get a single meal to eat.so what do people like Michael want us to do ? Open our borders to them,to roll over ?? Now if only India had been just a nice place to live in, the 16 states which have been revolting since 1947,from Indian federation,and for which Indian Parliament enacted a law,the ACT OF 1958,based on the British Act of 1942, which was the ,'Armed Forces Special Powers Act'' .The Act gave sweeping powers to arrest and kill any suspect,however the British had given them only to officers of captain and above only,the Indians took it down to the warrant officer level, and in 1972 the daughter of Nehru,following her father;s footsteps,gave powers down to the Sepoy,in view of increasing revolts in Assam,Nagaland,Mizoram,Meghalaya,Tripura & Arunachal Paredesh, the state of Martial Law in disguise of this law exists to date,as 16 states are now directly under the Armed Forces,It was the same law used in Kashmir to kill millions since 1947, and same used against the Naxiliates, and the same used against the Sikhs, in the Operation Blue Star in 1984,since then in the Indian jails rot 54,000 Sikh prisoners.The Maoist too in the Central Indian States face this ACT.Over 200,000 farmers have committed suicide in India.India guards Kashmir with over 750,000 troops laced with latest military hardware.
Now coming to end of Michael's mudslinging on Pakistan,perhaps in the interest of all the international community which by itself is no noble beast,should go over the track record of Indian army then would it be able to understand weather the analogy of one ''Christopher Hitches", so boldly quoted by him,holds water,Indian war machine wants to become the new Reich,after all the swastika the proud symbol of the later Germany is still flown by the RS SS in India, the very organization which runs Indian army & wants India to be cleansed of all people, but the Hindu,the same agenda which the swastika followers in Germany wanted.. but geopolitical journalist like Michael need to research to know the facts.




(The writer has over 25 years of research in the area of Sindh Valley, currently known as Pakistan).




Balkanizing Pakistan: A Collective National Security Strategy


By:Michael Hughes


(This is a cross post from Huffington Post)




Breaking Pakistan to Fix It: The argument for Balkanizing Pakistan or, more specifically, fragmenting the Islamic Republic so it's easier to police and economically develop, has been on the table since Pakistan's birth in 1947 when the country was spit out of a British laboratory. And lately, the concept is looking more appealing by the day, because as a result of flawed boundaries combined with the nexus between military rule and Islamic extremism, Pakistan now finds itself on a rapid descent toward certain collapse and the country's leaders stubbornly refuse to do the things required to change course. But before allowing Pakistan to commit state suicide, self-disintegrate and further destabilize the region, the international community can beat them to the punch and deconstruct the country less violently.To quell any doubts about Pakistan's seemingly uncontrollable spiral into darkness, just recently, Foreign Policy Magazine ranked Pakistan as the tenth most failed state on earth and it would seem its leaders are hell bent on securing the number one slot - an honor it can add to their already dubious distinction as the world's largest incubator of jihadist extremism. Afghanistan will never see peace or prosperity with a neighbor like Pakistan and the U.S. will always be threatened by terrorist plots spawned in Pakistan's lawless regions - like the most recent Times Square bombing.The most popular approach to fragmentation is to break off and allow Afghanistan to absorb Pakistan's North-West Frontier Province (NWFP) and the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA), which would unite the Pashtun tribes. In addition, the provinces of Balochistan and Sindh would become independent sovereign states, leaving Punjab as a standalone entity.Balkanization is based on the premise that the weak central government in Islamabad is incapable of governing Pakistan's frontiers, which have become the number one source of regional instability. The governing Punjabi elite have neglected the other three major ethnic groups - the Sindhis, Pashtuns, and Baluchis, primarily because a majority of Pakistan's budget is spent on the military rather than economic development, schooling or infrastructure. Only 2% of Pakistan's GDP, for example, is spent on education despite the fact Pakistan's literacy rate stands at 57%.Minority groups have also been underrepresented in institutions such as Pakistan's military - which is the country's most powerful entity. Punjabis who represent 40% of the population constitute 90% of the armed forces. Pakistan's own history provides a prime case study of what happens when an ethnic group can no longer tolerate political and economic disregard. After a quarter century of strife the Bengalis rebelled, seceded and founded Bangladesh in 1971.If the Balkanization solution is ever put in motion, accusations will surely fly that it's yet another example of U.S. imperialism and neoconservatism run amok. However, this would be a diplomatic and multilateral effort, plus, it is more about reversing the iniquities of British colonialism than it is building some new world order. Inherent InstabilityPakistan's problems began when the British drew its boundaries haphazardly, which was primarily a product of incompetence and haste than maniacal design. According to an article in the New York Times last year, British colonial officer, Sir Cyril Radcliffe was given six weeks to carve a Muslim-majority state from British India although he had never even been there before. Radcliffe's private secretary was quoted as saying that Sir Cyril "was a bit flummoxed by the whole thing. It was a rather impossible assignment, really. To partition that subcontinent in six weeks was absurd." It would be a comical anecdote except for the fact that hundreds of thousands of people died in the ethnic cleansing that followed as a direct result of British carelessness.Pakistan's border with Afghanistan - the poorly-marked Durand Line - had been drawn in 1893, also by the British, but it was never meant to be a long-term legally-binding boundary. The faux demarcation split the Pashtuns in half. By reinstating the original natural boundaries, Pakistan's western provinces would be returned to Afghanistan and the Pashtun tribes would be reunited. Such a move would also remove a strategic advantage for the Afghan Taliban, who can easily blend in amongst fellow Pashtuns on the Pakistani side of the border today.The British did not only gift Pakistan with lethal boundaries, according to renowned Pakistani journalist Ahmed Rashid, Pakistan inherited a "security state" from British rule, described by scholars as "the viceregal tradition" or "a permanent state of martial law". Intellectual Christopher Hitchens asserted Pakistan has been a fiefdom of the military for most of its short existence. As was once said of Prussia: Pakistan is not a country that has an army, but an army that has a country. Hitchens also said the country was doomed to be a dysfunctional military theocracy from day one - beginning with the very name of the country itself: But then, there is a certain hypocrisy inscribed in the very origins and nature of "Pakistan". The name is no more than an acronym, confected in the 1930s at Cambridge University by a NW Muslim propagandist named Chaudhri Rahmat Ali. It stands for Punjab, Afghania, Kashmir, and Indus-Sind, plus the suffix "-stan," meaning "land." In the Urdu tongue, the resulting word means "Land of the Pure." The country is a cobbling together of regional, religious, and ethnic nationalisms, and its founding, in 1947, resulted in Pakistan's becoming, along with Israel, one of the two "faith-based" states to emerge from the partitionist policy of a dying British colonialism. Far from being a "Land of the Pure," Pakistan is one of the clearest demonstrations of the futility of defining a nation by religion, and one of the textbook failures of a state and a society.Pakistan deteriorated throughout the decades because of its focus on building the military and developing Islamic extremist groups to use as weapons in their eternal obsessive struggle against India. It's true the U.S. helped Pakistan build these groups since the beginning of the Cold War, but America learned on 9/11 they had created a Frankenstein monster that now needed to be slain.Many analysts have suggested India is less of a national security threat to Pakistan than its homegrown terrorist groups, many of which have openly declared their mission to topple the state, which would allow jihadists to secure nuclear materials. Yet, based on its strategic decision to foster extremism and its recent public support for Taliban rule in Afghanistan, it appears the biggest existential threat to Pakistan is its own political and military leaders.The Last StrawWith that being said, Balkanization does seem like an extreme step at first blush, and perhaps Pakistan should be given another chance. Yet, after considering Pakistan's historic and current relationship with Al Qaeda - it becomes much easier to justify.Since the war began in 2001 the U.S. has asked Pakistan to root out extremists from sanctuaries in a Rhode Island-sized area called North Waziristan, chief among them being the lethal Haqqani Network. However, Pakistan's army chief General Ashfaq Kayani asserted his forces were too bogged down fighting the Pakistani Taliban elsewhere in places like South Waziristan, Orakzai Agency and various districts across the NWFP.I contacted an Afghan intelligence analyst about this and he assessed General Kayani's claim with one single word: rubbish. The Pakistan army consists of 500,000 active duty troops and another 500,000 on reserve. If Pakistan truly wanted to capture the Haqqani Network they would be able to drag them out of their caves by their beards within a few days.In a movement that should have floored U.S. policymakers, Kayani was brazen enough to try and inveigle Afghanistan to strike a power-sharing arrangement with the Haqqanis. And Kayani, apparently the spokesperson for the Haqqani group, said they'd be willing to split from and denounce Al Qaeda, which is President Obama's primary rationale for the war. However, there is a higher probability of General Kayani converting to Hinduism than there is of the Haqqani Network ever being decoupled from Al Qaeda.According to the Long War Journal, Siraj Haqqani, their leader, sits on Al Qaeda's decision-making body. Haqqani's friendship with Osama bin Laden dates back to the war against the Soviets in the 1980s and it was Haqqani that ensured safe passage into Pakistan for many Al Qaeda figures after the collapse of the Taliban in 2001. An Institute for the Study of War analysis concluded that Haqqani was "irreconcilable" and negotiations with him would actually strengthen Al Qaeda and would undermine the raison d'etre for U.S. involvement in Afghanistan over the past decade.In other words, the Haqqani Network is Al Qaeda.Pakistan has had a close relationship with the Haqqanis for over 30 years, who are still seen as a crucial anti-Indian asset. So, for nine years the Pakistanis protected the Haqqanis and claimed ignorance as to the whereabouts of Mullah Omar, Osama bin Laden and the Quetta Shura. Nine years, nearly $300 billion dollars and 1900 dead coalition soldiers later, the U.S. has officially verified that the entire war effort has been focused on the wrong side of the mountains.A stable Afghanistan is in Pakistan's best interests, but this message has been preached time and again with little to no results, and the U.S. has waited long enough for Pakistan's leaders to uproot the extremists that orchestrated 9/11. But now, it appears as if the international community will have to do it for them.




(Michael Hughes writes similar articles as the Geopolitics Examiner and the Afghanistan Headlines Examiner for Examiner.com.)
--

86 comments:

  1. YASMEEN! Thank you very much for this post.

    ReplyDelete
  2. You are welcome.
    I share with readers,comment by the renowned Paul Wolf on this article:
    Paul Wolf :They wanted to do the same thing to Iraq. The argument always was, Iraq is not really a country, and should be divided up into three countries (Sunni, Shia and Kurd) according to demographics. Pakistanis need national unity. Otherwise their internal divisions will be used against them, and not just by India.
    POSTED BY YASMEEN

    ReplyDelete
  3. O' yeah... that guy was from the World Bank, huh? Anyway, Pakistan will be strong only if the dishonest part of the establishment is removed, or it changes its tyrant behavior! Look, what the secret agencies and a strong group of journalists are doing to this poor guy, Habib R. Sulemani and his family? He has written a novel, THE TERRORLAND, a fictional nexus between secret agencies and journalists. And he is being tortured along with family members.

    We’ve been maintaining this group blog but are afraid of the spies in the time of a so-called democratic government in Pakistan—it is another dark part of our history!

    Be blessed always.

    ReplyDelete
  4. No Paul is a well known anchorperson for CNBC Worldwide.
    YAA

    ReplyDelete
  5. Mr Naveed Tajammal. Thank you for taking time out to rebut Mr Michael Hughes uncalled for expression of views for breaking up Pakistan. He seems to be unaware of the basic difference between the people of Balkan and Pakistan.

    I hope Mr Hughes will use the rebuttal as a lesson in history of the region. If he thought his wishful article will cahnge the thinking of any one on this Blog he was obviously very wrong.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Naveed, you are a fine writer, rather an accomplished historian.I commend you on drawing references from earlier hostorical facts about the terretory which is Pakistan.
    However, your rebuttal to Micheal Hughes writup about Balkanization of Pakistan appears to be incomplete.You have generally focused on India and their design towards Pakistan rather than addressing point by point as raised by Micheal.For example he has critisized the political leadership in the country, who, in my opinion are the major cause of problems the country is facing.There are still differeces in the aspirations of each of the four provinces and solutions to resolve these are not yet in place.Issue Of Baloachestan, nothing is happening
    I wish you had addressed all the major points in your rebuttal for a comprehensive response.I am sure with your amazing talents, you could have done it much better

    ReplyDelete
  7. POSTING ON BEHALF OF MT HESHAM SYED:
    have tried a few times to post my comment as follows but having difficulty - may be you can help to have it posted or guide me how to do that :thanks
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Nice article Tajammal - how ever my views on the insurgencies and problems in Pakistan & of it's past , present and future is a bit different - Most of the groups what you see them are reactionary group to the attrocities of the so called civilized western world - Pakistan is a country which was dreamt to be an independant Muslim estate but it is a dream still as all policies related to this country are decided by our foreign allies ( if you can call them allies ) - There is nothing independant about Pakistan - We also use the term always that this country is safe because it has it's strategic location which interest foreign powers - in other words the survival of this country only depends on it's geographical or strategic location hence the basic ideology of this country is proven to be a HOAX only. Has Pakistan served the Muslims of subcontinent or of Islamic world ? or it has only served a few families , vaderaas , jagirdars , Defence officers , industrialists , business houses and scrouplous politicians ? Those who are contempalting to break Pakistan further ( it was already broken in half in 1971 ) may not find it also beneficial to them - It will suit them to keep a disturbed and economically crippled Pakistan for their vested interest and that is what is being pursued - This not only suits other non muslim nations but also their agents who have been and are still ruling Pakistan.
    Pakistan safety and progress depends on treating the Cancer inside Pakistan first before we react and apply insecticides to foreign germs and particles.
    What ever is the left over of Pakistan - Zinda Baad & Paindaa baad.
    Hesham Syed

    ReplyDelete
  8. US strategic objectives set up by the Department of Defense,Pentagon,State Department, CIA and DIA:
    The objective is not Al Qaeda , Taliban or Bin Laden.
    The objective is long term srategic domination of the region , control of oil and gas , through destruction of Iran,Pakistan and creating chaos and disorder in Chinese Singkiang and Russian Central Asia using Islamist proxies.
    One salient objective of the US plan is to denuclearise Pakistan .The final object being to have a secure US india base stretching from Afghanistan to Assam against China.
    The US policy of droning Pakistan and forcing the Pakistani military to take action against FATA is specifically design to bleed the Pakistani military white and destabilise Pakistan as an opening manouevre of Pakistans final denuclearisation .
    Just analyse the simple fact that the Taliban were never a strategic or even tactical threat to USA . Not before 9/11 , not after 9/11.So why USA invested so much in Afghanistan in shapes of military bases , troops and logistics ? Certainly never to destroy the Taliban ?
    Through the 2008 Elections the USA has already achieved regime change in Pakistan ! Benazir was found tricky and eliminated in JFK style ! A very typical US operation !
    What is left is the Pakistani military severely cornered with a US threat , an Indian threat and an internal US manipulated threat in shape of insurgencies in NWFP and Balochistan ! How is that before 2002 there was no insurgency and after 2002 everything changed ?
    CONTINUED.......

    ReplyDelete
  9. The exercise of denuclearising Pakistan is proceeding at a reasonable pace.While the Pakistani civilian government brought by the NRO manoeuvred by USA is fully on US payroll the Pakistani military has so far resisted but it is possible that they too may succumb within next few years.If not internally then finally externally when the USA manipulates India into a major strategic conflict with Pakistan.A manoeuvre which suits India as long as Pakistani first strike does not succeed in reducing to rubble what was once Delhi,Mumbai,Calcutta and Chennai ?
    The US sees Pakistan balkanised in the next five to ten years as an independent Balochistan, an independent Paskhtunistan, an independent city state of Karachi and an independent Sindh.A denuclearised Punjab and a Northern Areas occupied by China and Pakistani held Kashmir occupied by India.
    ANALYSIS

    1-Present US strategic position is silent registration of targets in Pakistan,China,Iran,Central Asian States.

    2-Russia,China and Iran are now irrevocably convinced that all attempts must be made to ensure that the USA fails in Afghanistan.Thus the increased attempts to logistically bolster all anti US groups.

    3-The Pakistani military also realises that the USA must remain unstable in Afghanistan and any US success in Afghanistan would mean end of Pakistan in its present shape.

    4-The USA has made an attempt to diversify its logistics into Central Asia to bribe the Central Asian Republics but the Russians know how to checkmate USA.

    5-Conversely USA will not succeed in making Afghanistan safe for its oil and gas lines unless Pakistan is balkanised.The US projection for Balkanising Pakistan is from 3 to 5 years.The first to secede in the grand plan would be Balochistan.

    6-The conventional part of the US grand manoeuvre against Pakistan would be manipulating India into a conflict with India which the US hopes would lead to a severely damaged and severely destroyed Pakistan and a less damaged India , followed by Pakistans occupation by US Indian forces and complete denuclearisation.

    7-China Russia and Iran have the potential to throw a spanner in US plans.So does Pakistan and India if they have the foresight to see US designs.

    8-Finally there is the factor X , divine will.Many times I told Nafeesa Hoodhbhoy of VOA Radio on air that USA is not God and all may not happen as USA wants.


    The USA needs to realise that in history there always has been a gap bewteen thought and action , plans and their executions,or as they say the cup and the lip ! What the USA seems to be planning is dangerous , rash and contains many seeds of failure.History cannot be unilaterally made by one state , even if it is a great power like USA ? This is the lesson of history ! A lesson that US decision makers need to digest !

    When I visited USA four times in between 1996 and 1998 I became convinced that most Americans were good Christians but the US elite was Pagan and Freemasonic at heart !

    History is made by complex forces and we hope that the USA goes back in good shape back to US mainland and leaves this region at peace . An uneasy but more stable peace like the one before 9/11.

    Man would indeed be in a poor way if he had to be restrained by fear of punishment and hope of reward after death."  --

    Albert Einstein !!!

    ReplyDelete
  10. A disturbing trend that I am noticing for the past three years is that most if not all of the voices on Pakistan's alleged balkanization have been coming from the United States. This is strange because India used to be the source of most of this propaganda.

    Some Americans and Pakistanis will justify this as a result of 9/11. That is incorrect. The hostility toward Pakistan within the US media and policymaking circles began to intensify in the months and years preceding 9/11. India and the United States forged a strategic patnership during the Clinton and Bush years. That's when US policy analysts began to increasingly 'buy' Indian strategic theories, including on Pakistan and its future. That's when we started to see US think tanks and policy experts borrow Indian phrases catchphrases about 'ethnic conflict' in Pakistan, about Kashmir and its alleged links to al Qaeda, and about India's utility as a bulwark against both China and Pakistan.

    While we have friends in the US, we need to recognize that the number of hostile elements close to policy making circles in Washington is also increasing and that these hostile elements are spreading anti-Pakistanism, or anti-Pakistan hatred through the US media.

    US officials never hesitate to dub legitimate criticism on US foreign policy in Pakistan as anti-Americanism. It is time for Pakistani officials to do the same.

    ReplyDelete
  11. To quote Imran Khan:
    “India could exploit the situation and work towards the balkanisation of Pakistan particularly in the aftermath of the recently concluded joint strategy between Washington and Delhi,” (THE NEWS).
    Khan highlighted that the US policies in Afghanistan have failed miserably, and that following those policies has buried Islamabad under huge debts.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Well analysed AQ. However, note the strong Indian lobby in Washington. One example of their influence is the strong impact they had on the making of Kerry Lugar Bill.(Ref newspapers of those days).
    I think there is a strong need for patriotic writers to form a bridge with American media people who are unbiased .
    YAA

    ReplyDelete
  13. Pakistanis might be forgiven for wondering whether, with friends like these in Washington, who needs enemies? The rumbling row over a $7.5bn, five-year US aid package is a case in point. Imperious conditions attached to the bill by a Congress reluctant to send more unaccounted billions “down a rat hole”, as Democrat Howard Berman charmingly put it, were condemned as insulting and colonialist in Pakistan.

    Yes it is very correct that USA has forged strategic links to India. Fear of China rising as a regional power and a super power has brought these nations together.
    Does making NWFP a seperate entity suit them?
    If Ahmed Quraishi sahib is reading this,I will appreciate his input.

    ReplyDelete
  14. BIENG POSTED O BEHALF OF AIR VICE MARSHAL SYED ATAUR RAHMAN:

    Yasmeen, these are my observations on the topic under discussion. You could, if you like put in your blog please.
    Tahnk you
    Ata

    Mr Tajammal has taken time out to rebut Mr Paul Wolf and has done a rather good job of defending Pakistani interest. But this has been an incomplete attempt. His article should be castigated part by part with logic and understanding. Mr Wolf’s seems to have brought out this article at the behest of the lobbies working against Pakistan. A more thorough job would be required to bring forth the Pakistani view point. My aim of writing this essay is to bring forward some of the issues involved and to recommend solutions.
    Today, it is apparent USA is doing most of the dirty work that India used to do. Ofcourse the former has unlimited funds. They all join in for different resons but they feel the problem is a common one. USA has unlimited resources. However, if India is wise it should look at its own vulnerabilities. Half of India is in turmoil and some of its states are barely under the central control. If Pakistan disintegrates, it will create a dominos effect, and many more states within the region would crumble. In India many uprisings will shake their very foundation. Can India afford this at a very critical juncture when they want to compete with China to be the regional superpower? I feel some elements in India are already realizing this factor and so might be hesitant to play the end game that US/Israeli lobbies are manipulating for their own advantage.
    Today, not USA and not India but perhaps our own government is our biggest enemy. We can well understand the dilemma of the Pakistan Army where they have to face both an external and internal enemy. The Pakistan government due to their incompetence and corrupt state cannot be trusted or relied upon. However, they too should be used just like the external powers are using them. I think that is being done as best as possible. The Pakistan Army fortunately is well informed; they deliberate, and after thoroughly debating issues take conscious and sometimes incognita measures. They walk a thin line and it is the moral duty of all Pakistanis to support them. They are doing a great job of safeguarding Pakistani interests.
    Pakistan today is a contiguous state (unlike in 1971). So it has greater cohesion and strength. Primarily we have many enemies; but we have friends too. These forces should be harnessed to thwart our enemies, which we must clearly realize are the USA, India and Israel. USA has been doing all the dirty work for Israel. There might now be a realization by the American people who are naive and follow blindly their government policies. Israelis are sitting in Western India (Kashmir) and in Eastern Afghanistan. Some of our friends should be alarmed. Our real advantage is our geopolitical location, and this has to be suitably exploited to our advantage.
    The next two years are going to be critical for Pakistan. Obama has promised the American people withdrawal of US troops from Afghanistan. This is our chance to secure our interests in Afghanistan. This government in Pakistan has to be coerced to the nation’s advantage. The same has to be done to a most inept opposition who too can hardly be trusted. The patriotic elements have no standing in Pakistani politics. So finally the Army alone is left to confront these multi dimensional problems.
    The coming two years must be carefully planned and if required heavy handed measures taken. The judiciary must be supported fully and should become a part of the solution. All countries, including the Americans are vulnerable. And it is time we state clearly the use of our assets, because if we don’t do that now, when else will we do so?
    Syed Ataur Rahman
    sar2194@ygmail.com

    ReplyDelete
  15. Yasmeen, your suggestion for patriotic writers to form a bridge with unbiased USA media is most needed and infact the only tool by which patriotic pakistani can influence the policy makers in the western world.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Thank you Zafar.Rest assured,I am already working on it.
    YAA

    ReplyDelete
  17. How do you intend to deal with a US that is directly or indirectly hostile to Pakistan?

    This is the question that Pakistani analysts and policymakers don't want to answer.

    The question is not whether we should be anti- or pro-American. We ALREADY have been pro-American for most of our modern history.

    We should never abandon the idea of building bridges through engagement. But remember that there are overriding strategic considerations guiding US foreign policy. After all, Washington wasn't dumb when it decided to double-deal Pakistan for the past 8 years in Afghanistan by strengthening anti-Pakistan forces in Kabul. That wasn't a coincidence.

    I am afraid we have to deal with this question sooner or later: What will our strategy be if the US decides to become hostile to Pakistan? Or, more accurately, if US remainds friendly and engaged on the official level but hostile on the ground in and around Pakistan?

    ReplyDelete
  18. What a brave comment Ahmed Sahib.Impressive.
    We are playing a hide and seek with US.It will be more appropriate to say,US is playing hide and seek with us.
    We well know, America has no friends,only self interests. Therefore,to fail in our own homework but expect America to look out for us is lame.
    Paul Wolf rightly said we need internal unity.THAT is what USA is cashing on.What do you say?And HOW are we to deal with USA?Internally strong or not, deal we have to. Surely and steadily the balance of US is tilting towards India.

    ReplyDelete
  19. A beautiful and historically eloquent reply by Naveed Tajammal.
    When there are problems in Pakistan many look at the government and think of the present administration in power as the state. While the head of every government boldly declares “Le etat c’est moi” (I am the state), all of us who are disenfranchised, suppressed, and repressed need to take a cold hard look at the government. We should understand the difference between he government and the state. The government could be evil but the state of Pakistan does not belong to the government, the state of Pakistan belongs to the people of Pakistan, it belongs to us.
    As for writers like Michael PAH!

    ReplyDelete
  20. An extremely interesting discussion on here.
    The question we must face:
    1-What must we, in Pakistan,on civil and government level do in order to ensure a strong Pakistan?
    2-Is our current stock of leadership upto handling the ardous task ahead of them?
    3- How do we ensure fresh leadership & a departure from heredity type of leadership?
    Expecting USA to be "friendly" to us is funny.However, the fundamentals of U.S. policy towards Pakistan must be reworked. There is no easy solution. U.S. policymakers face the difficulty of balancing long-term strategies, which would have a positive impact on underlying structural problems but which fail to sufficiently address immediate dangers, and its short-term policies, which result in increasing anti-American sentiment and are detrimental in the long term.The U.S. should stop its unilateral military strikes as soon as possible, with the realization that such actions fail to solve any short-run problems and merely exacerbate the long-term situation. Pakistan’s security concerns on both its eastern and western borders determine its strategic culture and objectives. Addressing Pakistan’s insecurities vis-à-vis India are essential to enable it to focus its attention on its western border.Progress on Kashmir is key in this regard.It must, however, recognize the limitations of its own role and its failed attempts at mediation in the past. Therefore, its policy would reap rich dividends if characterized by patience and even-handedness.

    ReplyDelete
  21. All I would like to state here is:time is running out on us. Whatever we gotta do,we gotta do quick.

    ReplyDelete
  22. This is the age of total war,with no holds barred , and we are in a classic initial stage of siege. The siege is so subtle , that we don't even seem to notice the noose slowly tightening . It is not by chance, but a deliberate planned choice that Richard Holbrook has been appointed for this region . He has the experience and the confidence of articulating the breakup of Yugoslavia, and that too , very effectively.
    while our military , under general kayani , seems to be playing its cards well it is no match for the killing machine of the Americans, in the long term .
    At the most appropriate time , when the Serbs seemed to have the upper hand, they woke up to find that their army was without any air , Armour or artillery support due to surgical air strikes of the Americans. This was the final nail in the coffin of the state of Yugoslavia.
    After that'Dayton' peace plan , was just a romantic memory ,and all this happened not under George W Bush ,the war monger , but under the smiling and handsome visage of Bill Clinton !!
    American national interests , and long term plans do not change, over a period ,due to an interim presence of a focussed nationalist like general Kayani, or a different American president .
    They seem to be laid out like the plans of all expanding empires have been, self seeking , ruthless and expansionist. Morality , plays no part in its articulation and application .
    For those of my my friends who are waiting for the Americans to go home, the news that a number of very large cantonments and larger airfields are being constructed all over Afghanistan ,may not be very pleasant .These ,major works apparently do not seem to signify any hurry on the part of the Americans to depart from this region , regardless of the draw down plan of troop levels.
    As an ill informed individual, i would take this writeup on balkanization very seriously.The author may not be as knowledgeable about this region as ''we'' are , but let us just focus on his analysis , desire and ''wish'' .
    As regards our friends the Indians , we may say all that we care to about them and feel smug. with all their shortcomings and follies , over the last sixty years they seem to have expanded , not contracted like us, if history is of any significance, or consequence.
    Lastly , while Israel, the strategic ally of the Americans in the middle east , has evolved into a viscous ''rattle snake'' , their new strategic partner India, is likely to become an unmanageable, hungry python in our neighborhood, which few will be able to tackle , least of all Pakistan, with its glorious military achievements , and exploits,over the last six decades.

    ReplyDelete
  23. all said and done,it seems our Foreign Office people should show some spine,and refute the bad press from USA.

    ReplyDelete
  24. I think,we should bring in a sea-change in our internal political situation.No political entity,religious parties included should be ignored.after all whatever may be our or the general publics' feelings to an individual leader,he or she do have a following in some corner of the masses.This needs to be done.the media needs to play a major role here by being positive and not do point-scoring by trying to wash dirty-linen of some black sheep and thus enabling the enemies of Pakistan to exploit the situation.
    Let us all unite,whether provincial/regional,religious,other bodies,labour,students,media,judiciary,military,farmers and politicians of all hues and colour.Come on to one platform and show the world that all the misgivings aboiut Pakistan in their minds is wrong.
    Shahid Rehman
    Islamabad

    ReplyDelete
  25. Naveed Tajammal has thrown a torch on our past,as yet not highlighted,which i think needs more minor details,and which should follow subsequently,to clear the FOG within our people.

    ReplyDelete
  26. People like Michael Hughes,Ahmed Rashid or Christopher Hitchens,quoted in the post article are a clueless bunch of nitwits,naveed tajammal is right when he says they are not aware of our internal dynamics,this article is a slap on their faces.

    ReplyDelete
  27. A true Nationalist speaks from within ,naveed tajammal.long live pakistan.

    ReplyDelete
  28. It was a breath of fresh air to go through this mail,indian propoganda machine led by these pen pushers should be taught a lesson from our past.
    well done naveed.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Michael’s article is clearly part of the psychological warfare and
    disinformation campaign conducted under the sinister grand scheme of
    Pakistan’s sworn enemies. What is most unfortunate is our own behavior
    that provides fertile ground for such propaganda and our gullibility
    rooted in our perpetual disunity and disillusionment with our own
    homeland.

    Naveed Tajammal’s very robust rebuttal is largely based in history or
    ‘historical geography’ as he himself mentions. But frankly I have
    difficulty with the argument that present day Pakistan in fact
    represents SINDH of the old ‘Sindh wa Hind’. That the Pakistan
    ideology, the religious make up, the preferred language(Urdu), the
    Pakistan movement’s epicenter being in Hind, the large scale
    migration, the huge sacrifices of Muslims from HIND as well as SINDH
    were all in fact TOTALLY misguided and misdirected. That in fact we
    should have rolled back the whole thing to SINDH of the old instead of
    asking for Pakistan., If we accept this philosophy, we might be
    unwittingly and indirectly supporting the diabolical argument of the
    likes of Michael, by accepting that a reversal and dismantling of
    Pakistan is the right thing to do and once that is done the geography
    should be recreated to represent the land of the ‘originals’(Indus
    persons). I may be wrong, but it seems to me this philosophy could
    then justify the rollback of Islam to the original Paganism, of
    Christianity to Judaism, of Americans to Red Indians, of Arabs to
    Assyrians, of Europeans to Vikings,Australians to Aborigines ,…… so on and so forth.

    It is my feeling that stupid articles like Michael's are best ignored,
    and accorded significance no more than the paper these are written
    on.
    HH

    ReplyDelete
  30. Great commnts all.Was this sent to Michael Hughes????

    ReplyDelete
  31. Dear HH,
    Thankyou for your comments,but as dicussed earlier,the fault was within our old leadership,of the past,for having not acquired the knowledge,readily availible even then,as most of the translations,came in the 100 years of the 19th century,it took me years collecting them,though now the originals have moved to the libraries of petersburg(russia),germany,france and britian in bulk,and some maybe in USA,while the large scale migration from india is a fact,which none can negate nor forget their sacrifices in process,But let me assure you we under no circumstances fall in any trap,if we have as a nation glimpse of our old past,and no question arises of a return to our old Pagan Past at this late stage.yes we where pagans as goes the past record of our old tribes, but of Buddhist faith and certainly not the hindu,the process of our change of faith started over 1300 years ago,from our Qech wa Mekran regions.which became the first Arab settlements.even in Amir Muawiyaha's time they took our horses, from our koh e suleman,the Sanghar breed,as it could be used unshod,the advent of islam moved the center of buddhist faith from Kotan to Lhasa,earlier it had been our northern areas,History in Reverse is being taught to us,which i have highlighted in my article,''Historical Perspective on the new history syllabus' being taught in our schools,unfortunatley,kindly reread it,if articles like this fellows even now go unchecked,then as stated by you very rightly it is,the old Psychological war at work,which effects the Weak minds in general,and so a rebuttal or the other side of the coin.we have ignored the hindu propoganda machine for long the result is their ingress in our schools, it is silly that our young ones learn the Hymns of Rig vedas,and also be taught the hindu concept of evolution of mankind and the rebirth again in the same world time and again, while they are kept clueless of what our BOOK states,the question is, indians do not teach our quranic sura's to their school going childern why are we bending over ?? had our generations been taught the true past,such like articles none would have dared to write against our very entity.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Waiting for the 'domino'! sounds very familiar , as my generation was fed, and grew up on this 'domino' theory, just prior to the break up of Pakistan.
    We were told if the Indians dare to break us up they will crumble , why ? the 'Domino effect' stupid .
    well it never happened , we did wake up in the morning one day to be told that,'sorry' half the country has gone down the toilet.
    later that evening , our second in command , a very professional and brave officer got drunk and wanted to shoot any one who told him that East Pakistan was no more .
    However , life went on ,while India remained intact , those responsible directly or indirectly for the disaster ,rapidly rose in rank and stature and served the country well.
    So much for the last debacle .
    I think we must take 'Michael', very seriously, and pay attention. I have seen this bravado before. It cannot be by chance, that Mr Richard Holbrook , has been made responsible for this region . He has the personal confidence and the experience of dismantling a very strong country like Yugoslavia . This was , militarily the strongest after the Soviet Union. It crumbled like a pack of cards .one fine morning the Serbs woke up to find that they did not have an air force, Armour , or artillery after a few surgical strikes by the Americans .All of this happened , not under a war monger like George W bush, but under the smiling and handsome visage of Bill Clinton . The American national interests , like all imperial forces ,are not spread over months or years , they out last the time spans of nationalist military leaders like general Kayani, and regardless , of who is the president of USA.
    As regards our Indian friends , we must ponder and reflect, that if 'Israel' ,the strategic ally of the Americans,in the middle east , can become a vicious rattlesnake , in most likelihood their new strategic ally ,'India' ,will soon become a very large , and unmanageable 'Python' , bred and fed by the Americans and beyond the scope and abilities of Pakistan army, particularly keeping in view its performance , and its total dependence on American military support.

    ReplyDelete
  33. Dear Aquarius
    You are on the right tangent.USA & India are perfectly on the same tangent & n sync in blackening Pakistan.
    Home Secretary GK Pillai’s comments to an Indian newspaper published on Wednesday came a day before the foreign ministers of the two countries meet in Islamabad to repair relations worsened by the attacks.
    The statement given was it is ISI behind Mumbai attack.
    Does it ring alarm bells?

    ReplyDelete
  34. Micheal, what if The US was balkanised and save the world from more pain and trouble?

    ReplyDelete
  35. Now what the Observer has said,is indeed food for thought for Michael,what if USA gets Balkanized like the USSR.

    ReplyDelete
  36. Thank you Naveed, ever so authentic. Your extensive research and unrivaled knowledge base are the stuff that never cease to turn on a student of history such as myself. Keep it up young sage.
    Very interesting discourse ,this. I liked the short, crisp comment by Observer in particular. Yes, what about you U of S.A ??
    But for a more detailed Q&A session on the subject, I plan to bother Naveed once again, soon.
    hh

    ReplyDelete
  37. Visualize the Yankees of the old 13 states on one side, the red necks holding the south,the Latino's the west with the blacks,Asians likewise in between.did we miss anyone.Michael.??

    ReplyDelete
  38. MUJTABA ,

    MAY I QUOTE MY GRAND MOTHER , SPEAKING OF THE , OLD INDIAN LADIES, EXPRESSING THEIR ANGER AND ''COMMENTING'' IN PREPARTITION INDIA ......DURING THE SECOND WORLD WAR ,

    ''ITLLY PITLLY, TERRI TOPON MAIN KERAY PARAIN''!!!

    KEEP IT UP!!

    ReplyDelete
  39. NAVEED , AS USUAL YOUR WRITINGS ARE SO FULL OF PASSION AND FAITH IN WHAT YOU BELIEVE IN THAT ONE GET LOST IN THE MANNER OF WRITING, WHILE , AT TIMES BEING UNABLE TO KEEP A TRACK OF YOUR FAST MOVING PEN .
    WHY ARE YOU WORRIED ABOUT THE FAITH? ITS NOT BEEN AROUND FOR SOME TIMES. DO NOT BE DISTRACTED BY THE RITUALS , I DONT COME ACROSS MANY TRUE BELIEVERS ,BUT ''PAGAN' YES, IN THE GARB AND WITH MUSLIM NAMES .
    SO , THE CHANGE HAS ALREADY SET IN , THAT IS WHY PERHAPS THE 'FARHANG' IS FINDING IT EASIER TO MAKE THE INROADS .
    THE PROCESS IS NOW IRREVERSIBLE BECAUSE ALL AND MOST OF US ARE NOW THE PAGAN WORSHIPPERS OF THE 'GOLDEN' CALF .
    MICHAEL CAN SEE THE 'SICK' AND 'WOUNDED' ANIMAL , HE IS MOVING IN FOR THE KILL.HE KNOWS THAT THE SPIRIT OF THE WARRIOR AND THE PREDATOR HAS GONE .
    THE WOLF PACK AND THE PRIDE OF LIONS STICK TOGETHER, NOT A HEARD OF SHEEP , FOR THEM ITS THE SO CALLED SILENCE OF THE LAMBS BEING LED TO THE SLAUGHTER, SOLD AND DESERTED BY THE HERDSMAN .

    ReplyDelete
  40. Whereas our people fight for morsels thrown by USA, they discuss our balkanisation. I would seriously heed the rising cresendo of clamour by the west to do so.
    Unfortunately,with the mentality & absolute lack of direction by our leaders, who are ONLY interested in self interest,there is absolutely no interest in developing any strategy,either long term or short term to get the country back on its feet!

    ReplyDelete
  41. I forwarded Naveed Tajammal's article to Michael Hughes after locating his email. I post his reply,which was sent to me. It is in 2 segments.
    Michael Hughes:
    First, I appreciate you taking the time to read and digest my polemic and taking the time to craft a response and to have the courage to take it to me directly. So, the following might be a bit rough but it is aimed at the message not you sir, the messenger, because I respect your right to voice your opinion (I judge the art not the artist as Bruce Springsteen once said - but of course he met the reverse - when the artist is an asshole but the work is art-label worthy):

    You know much more about the topic than I regarding Pakistan's ancient history and I cannot dispute the anthropological argument that you put forth overall. But I am sure my good Pashtun friends from Kandahar will take a second look for me. However, I do know some things. Some of the things I have learned I get from Pakistani sources as well (like Ahmed Rashid for example). I have even interviewed General Sirohey so my opinion isn't 100% uninformed (although, in all fairness, he disagrees with much of what I write). But I cannot challenge you on your command of detailed history. But I do take great exception to parts of your argument. One that is central to your entire thesis and a few others that are tangents - that I didn't think you needed to go on. tangents that weakened your credibility that if best left unsaid, your argument standalone would have even been stronger.

    (i) I find a double standard in your methodology which at first I meant to concede. But now, just like in a court of law, if one aspect of an argument is dirtied, the jury tends to question the other parts. I have studied Afghan history in a very detailed way, nearly daily, for 2 straight years, and I belong to a native Afghan think tank (granted, I am more their PR guy). So these are not only my thoughts but the thoughts of my colleagues - two of whom were born in Kandahar of a prominent family from the Mohammadzai clan. There is one statement you made that is certain to insult most Afghan Pushtuns (I'll keep them separate from the Pushtuns you know so I don't overstep my bounds).

    You argue vehemently and long-windedly about the fact that Pakistan was around long before "Pakistan" was established as a state and gave me the history of anthropology of Central Asia in the process. Then you make this statement (ever so condescendingly hence my condescending tone on this point):


    "As to the term Afghanistan, is Michael, aware that it was coined just in the third decade of the 19th century?"


    Mind you, I am an Irish kid from the South Side of Chicago, however, I am not dense and have studied Afghanistan for two straight years, and history books are history books - there is opinion and there is fact. You are entitled to your opinion, but not to your own set of facts. So your assertion about the term Afghanistan is off by over 1,000 years - which is a very long time.

    In 3 different history books I read written by regional experts - some actually born and raised in Pakistan and Afghanistan, it has been recorded that the word Afghan firs appeared in history in 980 A.D. and was standard nomenclature in the 16th century when it became the common Persian alternative for "Pashtuns" - which goes hand in hand with the Pashtun reunification theory. You cannot argue for the existence of Pakistan and Punjabs based on its history prior to its formal recognition and yet deny the same to the Afghans. Do you or don't you agree? I hope you would reconsider this statement.
    continued.....

    ReplyDelete
  42. continued.....
    (ii) Second point being I spoke to NOBODY from India about my theory. Your rant is another indication of your India obsession. I did work in India for years as was the founder of a software company with about 100 Indian personnel. For two years I worked with these people and I never heard any of them utter the word Pakistan. Reason being is that India has bigger things to worry about than Pakistan to be frank - such as becoming an economic superpower.

    (iii) Your comparison of India with Hitler Germany is fairly repulsive. And if it was out of pure emotional anger in reaction to my piece, I understand. However, if upon reflection you still feel this way, I am not sure I can take anything you say seriously because you are bound by some ideological underpinning that blinds you from any clear objective perspective.

    (iv) Ah yes... the naxalites - now you've gone into an area where I do know plenty. I at first had sympathy for the Maoist movement until one peels the onion on them. After conducting research and even interviewing an Indian Maoist leader - a professor nonetheless - I found his justification of their means weak. 200,000 farmers committed suicide probably because the Naxalites choked them off. The Naxalites are like the U.S. mafia. They are in bed with corporate India and have extorted countless rupees while providing their followers none. As an American I am all for revolution, hence we wouldn't exist. But I wouldn't want to be living in a a country with a constitution penned by the morally bankrupt Naxalites that is for damn sure.

    Plus, there isn't anything wrong with communists (I am a socialist myself - who actually dabbled with commie ideology) but I have a problem with being a Maoist - whose entire group is founded on the notion that there is no alternative to violence. It is their credo.

    Read my article about the Naxalites and explain to me how their cause is noble. The real cause is noble. India has marginalized millions and their democratic institutions are due to be roughed up a bit - by nonviolent protest I would argue. India is notoriously corrupt - especially the government. However, the Maoists have achieved quite a distinction by going out of their way to accomplish the impossible: they're more corrupt than the Indian government.

    India's Maoist Mafia: as corrupt as the government and corporations they condemn (slideshow)
    http://www.examiner.com/x-4454-Geopolitics-Examiner~y2010m5d31-Indias-Maoist-Mafia-as-corrupt-as-the-government-and-corporations-they-condemn
    END

    ReplyDelete
  43. Micheal Hughes response to Naveed rebuttal is not convincing at all.It clearly reflects that the data/information he has been fed were not from the people who have good and authentic knowledge about Afghanistan and Pakistan.
    His comments about Indian that for them Pakistan is a small fry and they have much larger ambitions,is absurd.We are all well aware about Indians obsession about any thing Pakistani.Micheal have to just read any of the blogs in any Indian news paper where their hate towards Pakistan is so evident.
    Sorry Micheal, your thesis about Pakistan is totally flawed.

    ReplyDelete
  44. Michael, can be right, or he can be wrong , depends on one's perception and world view . But Michael reflects a certain mindset, and that is a sober thing to be reflected upon .
    How many in Afghanistan or the west endorse Michael's point of view , right or wrong.
    How deep is his thoughts, and those who think like him are , impacting the perception of the west towards us . when he points towards our vulnerabilities, viz a viz , justice and human rights , we no longer have the luxury of brushing them aside . The world is now a village , the news travels, at the speed of light.
    Michael is not concerned with the history , he connecting the objective realities.
    If Michael is reading this,which he is likely to courtesy Yasmin Ali, and as he has claimed to be a socialist at heart , would he care to advice us from his objective vantage point, what is good for us , not just what is wrong with us , in the interest of peace in this region and the future of children of this part of the world .
    we are not asking for patronizing sermons ,but cold blooded analysis , as for the sake of an argument, as if he was a Pakistani , what would he like to tell us , beyond the doomsday scenarios , and the possible balkanization.what makes him so sure of this direction of history, its prime underlying causes , which he may not have covered fully in his initial analysis , and what can possibly, and hypothetically, in his views avert and forestall this eventuality.
    I as an individual believe that a person who is at times abrasive and blunt, can be wrong but not dishonest.
    As such Michael ,what again are the prime causes from your point of view, for this impending disaster, as you see it ,as an intellectual and a thinker , and what can still done to avert balkanization .

    ReplyDelete
  45. Well stated Aquarius agreed.Let me add,when people have a mindset as pointed out by you, they tend to take a one sided view. Vision becomes selective,like we see in Michael's write up.

    ReplyDelete
  46. The tragedy is, more & more people write like Michael,no meat,just talk. Research is a must before penning one's thoughts.This I find lacking in his article.

    ReplyDelete
  47. Michael Hughes' rejoinder is weak, incoherent and superficial.
    Balkanizing Pakistan is a mad man's dream, he should know. A country of 200 million people, a nuclear power, a country formed on the strenght of a well defined ideology cannot be Balkanized except by THE WILL OF ITS PEOPLE. I know he may be drawing similarities with erstwhile Soviet Union here, but that was an entirely different story if you drill down a bit. And there too, the component states WANTED separation and kind of voted to to go their own ways.
    In Pakistan, there may be some disenchantment with the state, but it is just skin deep. As long as we the PEOPLE BELIEVE IN PAKISTAN, no power on earth can force us to split ourselves.
    So dream on, Dear Michael.
    My only grouse with this discussion is ,it has given you free publicity you coud hardly EVER dream of !! Enjoy your 15 minutes of fame.
    HH

    ReplyDelete
  48. i am sure naveed tajammal will have a logical answer to the reply of michael,and soon the 15 minutes allotted to michael will be over.

    ReplyDelete
  49. first it were the british with their snooty know it all ideas, now it is the americans who think they can run the world,only problem is they have yet to learn how to read.

    ReplyDelete
  50. and these guys make the policies for the americans,wow just look at their thinktank lot,they are spoon fed.

    ReplyDelete
  51. i wonder who this michael is,weither a redneck or a yankee doodle do.

    ReplyDelete
  52. Michael, thank you for your reply. In any academic discourse one needs to verify the facts before venturing to give a point of view. As far as the voicing of your opinion is concerned, it needs more in-depth study. Furthermore, as far as the feelings of your good friends from Qandahar are concerned; if they have been fed wrong history then they, too, are at fault for having read wrong books.
    Ahmed Rashid may be an author who appeals to your perceptions and has probably resulted in your present article under critique, as well, but whatever you may have read of him, I am sorry to say that the fellow, to my mind, is equally clueless of the subject. No wonder you took the liberty of writing such a nasty piece against our state.
    Likewise you may have studied various books on the history of Afghanistan, but it seems you never took time out to study the actual books which are regarded, till now, the main reference books on the subject matter.
    It is in these books that you will find the real geographic name of this region - now called Afghanistan or the rationale of its creation by the British Empire builders. Please keep in mind, no insult intended for your faulty perceptions - as will be explained subsequently by the references in my reply - that One learns all one’s life. So take it in that spirit, like a man.
    You had written an article on the dismemberment of my state, however, your reply to my critique is based on side issues focused on ‘’Afghanistan’ and the Naxalities , as well as your displeasure why I roped in Nazi Germany with the Hindutva State of Brahmans called India. Kindly remember that it was on account of the common Swastika symbol and the desire to purge all those races which do not follow their religion or dictates.

    ReplyDelete
  53. You are further requested to reply back to my pointed critique and not to divert from the subject. Let me enlighten you on the subject of Afghanistan. To clear your mental fog, historically, the region now called as Afghanistan is known in history, as well as in historical geography, as ‘’Khurassan’’. The boundaries of the said region have varied during the Empires which held it. To answer your Qandahar friends, Ahmed khan who had been the Captain of the Guards of Nadir shah Afsar, and who on Nadir Shah’s assassination in 1747 had proclaimed himself King using the hoarded wealth of the said King – had proclaimed himself as “Badashah of Qandahar”. The Afghan entity did not exist then.
    You are further requested to read the volumes complied by A.U. AITCHISON, under the head of ‘’A collection of Treaties, Engagements and Sanads, relating to India & Neighboring Countries’’ published from Calcutta. If you study those volumes that cover the early period of the 19th century, only then will you comprehend the dates, as stated in my rebuttal.
    Next you are advised to read, “The Indian Borderland” a book by Sir Thomas Holdich, published in 1901, in which the author states on page-366, “We have contributed much to give a national entity to that nebulous community which ‘’WE’ call Afghanistan (but which afghans never call it, by that name) by drawing a boundary all around it and elevating it into the position of a buffer state between ourselves and Russia, all this has been done at great expense and with infinite pains…………..the Amir of Afghanistan since 1893 was on a RS.600,000/- subsidy from the British” (page-367). Holdich, to further explain the rationale for the creation of this new entity, states,(page-368) “The new boundary between British empire, Afghanistan and the Czarist Russia was ‘a visible expression of our present determination to set a limit to a ‘forward’ policy; and as such it may be accepted with satisfaction by large number of politicians’’ ………

    ReplyDelete
  54. Michael, keep in mind these figures, too, that are as per “The Imperial Gazetteer of In$dia”(Afghanistan & Nepal ) edition of 1885 (pages-15-16-17) the total population of Afghanistan in that YEAR was, Ghalzi(1,500,000), Tajak(900,000), Hazara (500,000), Char Aimak (180,000), Osbegs (300,000), Kizilbashi(50,000), Hindu traders(35,000), Safis, Kashmiri, Laghmani, Arab, syed, Paracha & Kafirs(60,000). The Afghan/Pushtun numbered (1,245,000). In total the figure came to 4,770,000. In the third decade or so of the 19th century the population was much less.
    After the Fall of the house of main line Timurids, the Khorassan was divided into administrative provinces or ‘Subas’, with Sarkars and Bolaks. Now you will have to study ,’’An Atlas of The Mughal Empire’ by Irfan Habib, edition of 1982. In the year 1601,the political boundaries of ‘’Khurassan’ were as, ‘Subas of Balkh, Badakhshan, Kabul & Qandahar. By 1648 the Mughals had lost Qandahar Suba to Iranian Safavids. Earlier the regions across Helmand i.e Farah, Qila Fatah and Seistan were already with Iran inclusive of Herat. And by 1738/39 the only Suba under control of Mughal was Kabul.
    Kindly now read a few other books, though I can refer many more from my personal library, however, the following will suffice for now; Tabakat e Nasiri translation by Raverty- 1881 edition, authored by Mulanna Minhaj Usman (1260AD), Tariekh e Tabri by al Tabri (900 AD) 43 volumes in English or the limited 9 volume English translation of Shah Nama e Firduasi. The answer in all these will show that the area in dispute has always been, ’’KHURASSAN’’.

    ReplyDelete
  55. WELL DONE NAVEED TAJAMMAL, THAT WILL TEACH THEM A LESSON IN HISTORY.

    ReplyDelete
  56. It is patently a biased analysis and entirely divorced from the reality. Al Qaida was not created by Pakistan; it was created by the United States and remained their darling as long as they were fighting the Russians.
    Why should Pakistan sever its relations with Haqqani spawning over 30 years? If America has come to Afghanistan in search of her enemies, then let she do this job. Why Pakistan should be accused of doing a thing, which is not its obligation. The author wants Pakistan to accomplish a task which NATO forces despite their military regalia have not been able to do for ten years now.
    In addition, what pakistan has done for America in wiping out the militants from Swat South Waziristan and elsewhere, the NATO forces cannot do for another 100 years. Yet the author suggests Pakistan' s disintegration becuase Pakistan is slow in doing a quisling's job. The author must have been paid by the orthodox Christians or Jewish-Indian lobby to float this obnoxious proposal.
    My God, he is arguing dismantling Pakistan, a sovereign country. He should know that Europe's geographical boundaries were redrawn after two world wars. Turkey is one example. So was done in case of Pakistan and India by British in 1947 has its precedents.

    Saeed Qureshi

    ReplyDelete
  57. Brilliant piece of research Naveed.Poor Michael does not know WHO he is up against!
    The most learned man of this area & age on the subject!
    Cheers Naveed!

    ReplyDelete
  58. Dear Friends
    I have forwarded the link with inputs from both Michael and Naveed Tajammal to Arianna Huffington,owner of this widely read SITE.
    It is important for such falsely based write ups to be rebutted.Not only rebutted,but the writers & SITES/PAPERS carrying these write ups to hear OUR voice.
    Best
    YAA

    ReplyDelete
  59. Dear Readers
    I had posted on behalf of AIR VICE MARSHAL SYED ATAUR RAHMAN, his views to the article. He has put Paul Wolf's name instead of Michael Hughes.
    This is obviously an error.Paul Wolf had stated to the contrary & supported us vis a vis Michael Hughes thoughts.
    For correction please.
    YAA

    ReplyDelete
  60. A STANDING SALUTE AND CHEERS TO YOU
    NAVEED TAJAMMAL.

    ReplyDelete
  61. Dear Naveed,
    I am hoping to see you once to come to Islamabad as I am told by Admiral Fasih. So I reckon a lively discussion shall ensue. I too have some study on the sub continent of antiquity as reflected in the opening paragraph of the charter of Demands, posted on this blog.
    Well written and amply researched.

    ReplyDelete
  62. "PLAY OFF everyone against each other so that you have more and more avenues of action open to you"
    That what I think reflects on the writeup of Micheal Hughes, same psychic appraoch and mindset. He has written this article as he says,out of two yrs of his slective study, in environment of his own likes and choice where he lived, alongwith all selective sources of referances provided to him by his hosts and sponsors in the region. In his love of fame as a deaf historian considering himself a prophet in reverse he has gone answering questions regarding us that ofcourse no one asked him. With cleansing mindset what they did in Bosnia & Slavs he is now trying to scare from subverion with same kind of Blakanisation.
    Mr. Micheal Hughes You are free to stick to your own opinion whatso ever but i humbly suggest you to adhere with what Naveed Tajjummul and so many others have advised you on the blog merely to change your biased view and perception about this country and her people. Mr. Micheal consumption of your's and your friends let me please tell you; Despite of may be hundereds of imperfections and heart rendering failures this land and her people within its bounds have thousands of perfections and heart throbbing reasons to remain intact and rebut all acts and all hidden and obvious intents of Balkanization.

    ReplyDelete
  63. Tanvir Sahib,
    well said,These people who live Seven seas Across,with no comprehension of our endurance,may think of our Balkanization on a faulty perception that East Pakistan fell in 1971.it fell because of the fifth columnists within the Fort,we are in a state of war since 1999, the 2001 episode came later.Balkanization of India is a thing worth thinking,as it is composed of 28 different nations,each has its own ethnic back ground,language,culture & past history,as always such was the case in the past too,in the lands of HIND,even then they gathered huge armies, but did they withstand the test of time ?remember in those times the effect of the massive elephants was beyond imagination,all arrayed in the battle field but defeat they suffered,in the final out come,so says the chronology,of the empires of Turan AND iran.
    what these ''Farangi' do not understand is the British could not break our past in the Hundred years allotted to them ,i.e, their rule on us,they tried to do away with our educational networks, but did they succeed ? the more they pressed the reaction was stronger,since our rebirth in 1947 we are in a evolution phase,this process takes its own time,the fortress is well secure,try the farangi can with their resources,but who stands after the Dust settles,time alone will tell,and then the civilzation will strike back.

    ReplyDelete
  64. I salute you for your research & your patriotism Naveed. Thank YOU Yasmeen for this blog that stands for Pakistan.

    ReplyDelete
  65. a nationalist will say,exactly what naveed tajammal has stated,but deep down when the chips fall,we all are 'nationalists'.

    ReplyDelete
  66. Ayub Khan by soliciting US aid introduced a virus in Pakistans soul which will one day destroy it.His major failure was not in getting US aid but in miserably failing to inflict a defeat on India,of which Pakistan was militarily capable at least till 1965.This happened because of poor generalship.
    Ziaul Haq introduced hypocrisy par excellence in Pakistan and in the army.Very mediocre officers were made generals.Religion was picked as a tool and the Pashtuns in particular used as cannon fodder in Afghanistan and later in Kashmir.

    The final nail into Pakistans coffin was driven by Musharraf the shamelessly opportunist social climber.His appeasement of USA from 2001 till 2008 destroyed what remained of Pakistan.His thoughtless forays in FATA enraged the Pashtun pride.His stabbing in the back of the Taliban regime to appease the USA irrevocably alienated the Pashtuns.
    The ongoing insurgency in Pakistan will continue for at least a decade or more.
    Pakistan needs very able military and political leadership.Unfortunately the military virtue of Pakistan Army was severely damaged by Ayub,Zia,and Musharraf.The political virue was destroyed by the army !

    But does that mean Pakistan should be balkanised?Wishful thinking Michael! Why do you not focus on the 20 seperatist movements in India? Their policies pro Hindu NOT secular as Indua claims herself to be?
    THEN u claim,ignoring & distorting history that you are unbiased?
    Give me a break!
    WELL SAUD ANDALEEB!

    ReplyDelete
  67. NAVID SB: above i quoted this line: "PLAY OFF everyone against each other so that you have more and more avenues of action open to you"
    I FORGOT TO INCLUDE THE REFERANCE OF THIS PUNCH LINE. (i dont know if late Mr. Howard Hughs is in anyway related to this Mr. Micheal Hughes.)

    Anyway THANX FOR YOUR KIND ATTENTION TO MY POST..GOD BLESS YOU AND ALL OUR COUNTRY MEN AND WOMEN LIKE YOU..LONG LIVE PAKISTAN & DOWN WITH ALL ENTHUSIASTS & SPECTATORS IN WAITING FOR THAT drama of BALAKNISATION..

    ReplyDelete
  68. A nexus between a belligerent Iran, a resurgent Russia and a fast growing adversary - China, is the last threat the Americans want to see in this region.
    Col Ralph Peters, supposedly Pentagon's military scholar and former intelligence official, writing in June 2006 issue of Armed Forces Journal on balkanisation of the Middle East (Blood Borders), advocates the incorporation of NWFP into Afghanistan and creation of a sovereign Free Balochistan, carved out of the Baloch areas of Pakistan and Iran. His grounds: ethnic affinity. Pakistani Balochistan is estimated to hold 25.1 trillion cft of gas and 6 trillion barrels of oil.
    In an article Drawn and Quartered Selig Harrison of the Centre of International Policy, Washington, DC, concludes that Pakistan's balkanisation is imminent owing to the rising nationalist sentiment in the Pashtun belt and growing disillusionment of the Pashtuns, Balochis and Sindhis with Punjab and Pakistan. He says that ethnic diversity threatens Pakistan's unity.
    Both Col Peters and Harrison are essentially singing the same tune and seem to be presenting a doctrine that broadly reflects US foreign policy.
    General Aslam Beg, Pakistan's former army chief, notes in an article that to pursue certain common interests with regard to Pakistan and the region, India and the US have signed the Strategic Partnership Deal the declared objective of which is "to contain and curb the rising military and economic power of China and the increasing threat of Islamic extremism in the region." General Beg says this deal has led to the creation of a joint espionage network of CIA, Mossad, MI-6, Raw and others in Afghanistan, which is engaged in activities aimed at destabilising Pakistan, Iran, China, Russia and other Central Asian states. He claims that dissidents from Pakistan are being trained at Sarobi and Kandahar for missions inside NWFP, whereas bases at Lashkargah and Nawah are being used to train dissidents from Balochistan for missions inside that province and also in support of the so-called Balochistan Liberation Army.
    Michael Hughes belongs to the same mind set as Col Ralph Peters, the US papers these days are full of the "Iranian threat" and the attack by Israel on Iran.
    Step 3?
    (First two being attacks on Afghanistan & Iraq?)

    ReplyDelete
  69. Extremely interesting view by Mehfooz.
    If Ahmed Quraishi is reading this and/or Gen Asad Durrani,may I have their views on Mehfooz's input above?
    Thank you

    ReplyDelete
  70. a very interesting debate and the comments are true thought process of our people,huffington post has backed off,it is easy to accuse but ,you need guts to face the music,when the music starts.it is shame on huffington post to print such a article.

    ReplyDelete
  71. it looks like the snake has smelled Michael Hughes
    as goes the proverb,he was dying before to give his opinions, of late he is missing from the scene of his crime.

    ReplyDelete
  72. Michael, is a pen pusher by profession,he gets paid for the write ups against our country,so does huffington post as it huffs and puffs,but yellow journalism is nothing new,farangi being past masters in this game, as long as money is doled out to them to grease their dirty palms,maybe michael seeks guidance from his mentors sitting in new delhi, or in the think tanks of usa, the nitwits never knew the old name of afghanistan,british secret service is playing foul with them,but i am sure in a day or so a long winded answer from michael party will come,lets see what story they cook up now.

    ReplyDelete
  73. I think there is rumour mill working giving the figures of untold wealth under the land of baluchistan,over sixty years have passed umpteen oil companies have staked their claims and gone broke,no one succeeded,so where is this fabulous stream of black gold hidden ?? it is just a pretext to give vent to those who harp of independent baluchistan,and how economical viable this new state will be,with this hidden wealth,it is farce and nothing more.there is no oil in baluchistan,as to other minerals well so are they else where in our north, but is it viable to extract them ? i am sure the seven ridges of suleman mountains too would have some minerals also.

    ReplyDelete
  74. I am sharing with readers a mail on this subject recieved by me by one Dr Imtiaz Hussain as requested by him:
    Dear Yasmeen
    Assalam o alaikum
    appreciate your continous endevours for homeland Pakistan.
    I m trying to put my remarks at pakpotpuri but some how those cannot be posted.
    I request you to please add my following comments in the discussion
    regards
    Dr. Imtiaz Hussain
    ____________________________________________________________________________________________________
    My message to all those who are thinking that balkanizing Pakistan, would solve all the evils of the region in particular and of the world in general, is, to please reconsider your position.
    To me America will have to stop creating monsters which in the begining are the allies and than foes to end with . it seems very clearly that winning war is not important for those who are managing the economy of USA, but HAVING A WAR IS MORE IMPORTANT FOR THEM.
    If indeed a solution is needed BALKANIZATION is needed for India, not for Pakistan. If anyone one wants the war to continue in the region at even more massive level than Pakistan will be Balkanized. However if one has to end the conflict in SE Asia than Balkanizing India is all the more important. Balkanizing India will lead to end of a very dangerous nuclear conflict looming over the region, as balkanizing India will lead to an obvious denuclearization of Pakistan and India both, however balkanizing Pakistan will unleash the real monster of India as an expansionist state and indo china conflict will be projected more horundously. And before that takes a shap India will engulf all the smaller states with in no time, leading more liberation radical movement and more so called terrorism.
    I assure those all that if you are projecting balkanization of Pakistan, you are promoters of war, which will reign in the region to lead to he ultimate much awaited destruction..
    So if you are promoting this idea in ignorance of the geo political facts which exist on ground you must reconsider your position to be on the correct path to achieve path of peace badly needed by 1.5 billion populatio of this region .....
    Dr. Imtiaz Hussain

    ReplyDelete
  75. I am sharing a mail recieved by me by Col Shahbaz. I am sharing the same with readers:
    Mr M Hughes has an interesting response to Mr Naveed's rebuttal of his original paper.
    Mr Hughes has studied afghan history for over two years with mohamandzai afghans of a
    Kandahar family,he would know better that Mr karzai is also from Kandahar afghans. If Mr Hughes had read his afghan history in depth he would know that Even the durrani tribe which laid the foundations of modern Afghanistan is herself comprises of many sub clans ,who have been fighting each other since the last two hundred years for Power;Therefore each clan give their own point of view.
    secondly his dependence on Mr Ahmed Rashid's books itself proves that he is biased for being against Pakistan&Pakistan Army. I have heard Mr A rashid in person speak in Gymkhana Club Lahore a few months ago,which was full of venom against Pak Army.
    Thirdly As Mr Hughes had EST/headed an Indian Company in India,as such his love for India& against Pakistan is understood;may be his stay in Afghanistan is part of Indian forces in Afghanistan.
    fourthly his acceptance about corruption in INDIA ????
    Lastly his views about Naxalites/Maoists gives an Indian Establishment's point of view.Mr Hughes would know better that the movement has now spread to most of the southern/eastern states in India& is spreading fast.The movement is spreading from the poor farmers of these states against the atrocities of Hindu upper castes in league with the police.
    Mr Hughes should therefore should now be writing about dismemberment of INDIA,as this movement starting from the south east will be joined by other states.Tamils have already joined the movement. In the North Sikhs& Kashmirs are also feeling cheated by the rulers comprising of upper class of UP/CP states.wheather it is Congress or BJP.
    I am attaching a speech by 6th president of US Mr john Quincy Adams on 4 july 1821 for your information/study.
    No hard feelings in intellectual discussion.
    Regards


    Muhammad Shahbaz Thuthaal

    ReplyDelete
  76. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  77. I have recieved a mail from one Mr Nasim Hassan, that I share here:
    A large number of think tank writers go to Pakistan stay there for few weeks and then become experts on South Asia. First thing that any person must know is the language. After that he must spend time in various layers of society to get a comprehensive picture. Otherwise his or her analysis will reflect the people he comes across and shares his ideas.

    On my first visit to India, I lived in five star hotels and interacted with highly educated cosmopolitan layer of the society. I thought India was great and there was no discrimination. This continued for my first three visits.

    Later on I had enough time to look deeper, talk to ordinary people and then view the lives of middle class people and their prejudices. This happened when I stayed in India for six months. This was a revelation. Human beings cannot rise above their customs, traditions and religion with very few exceptions.

    So these people do not know Pakistan at all. Pakistan must be a very strong society to absorb the Afghan refugees, heroin smuggling, massive dumping of armament since 1979 when Soviet entered Afghanistan.

    Frankly Pakistan requires a national level leader who can persuade and motivate people and not people like Zardari or the current crop. The things will change within five years.


    Nasim Hassan

    ReplyDelete
  78. I have gone through all the comments. I am happy to note that we are alive and not willing to accept any nonsence from anyone.

    I see breaking up of his own country in not too distant a future.

    IAS

    ReplyDelete
  79. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  80. I have no doubt Michael and his mindset are no more than a footnote in
    history. Unwittingly though he has triggered opening of the Pandora's
    box .

    If he and others have been following Naveed Tajammals bold, radical
    philosophy in his several write ups on the blog, it should be clear
    our designs are on claiming back and re-consolidating our lost
    civilization and geography of SINDH(from the concept of SINDH WA
    HIND).Read Naveed's articles direct, between the lines, indirectly and
    in hints...et al.SINDH is what he aims to reclaim. SINDH is much
    greater than Pakistan itself. SINDH is in simple words areas including
    Mumbai, Maharashtra and more. SINDH is BOTH Punjabs including Dilli,
    it is beyond Durand lines, it includes all THREE Baluchistans,
    Rajhastan and more, It includes entire Kashmir and beyond.
    What Balkanization of Pakistan do they talk about ? We are talking
    about reclaiming SINDH. Pakistan was only the first step in this
    direction, and a somewhat botched one at that.A raw deal that has to
    be put right sooner or later.We have set our sights much higher than
    that.

    Sorry Naveed for speaking on your behalf, out of turn. But please do
    correct me if I am wrong partly or fully. If you are thinking what I
    am thinking, please enlighten us more on your ideology and on what
    needs to be done going forward.
    Forget Balkanizatin, think re-consolidation, Michaels of the world.

    The plot thickens !!

    HH

    ReplyDelete
  81. Well said HH,
    If the Brahmans can stake a claim, on premise of a concocted theory,which,is the fallacious, story of the epic, called, Mahabharata,which has no historical grounds,in our eastern chronology, Brahmans second claim of antiquity is the ''language of their religious, transcriptions.called,''Sanskrit''.which is a creation of ''mazdakhite' dasturs and mobids,
    the same which fled the iron hand of 'nausherwan' or khusro (awal) or the first,who had buried alive up side down, mazdakh,and his
    followers,to elucidate more on this, the language of sassani court was 'pahalvi', prior to that in the 'hakamanish' era of iran, it was 'parsi',when parsi was written for religious transcriptions it became 'avesta' similarly when pahalvi is written, it becomes, 'zand'.the mobids and dasturs who fled the wrath of nausherwan came to 'surat; the port,here they went in cahoots with renegade, buddhist monks,so emerges 'brahmanism' and sanskrit' , which is a iranian language in root,based on 'avesta' of old,the point here is , if the brahman claim is aryan from the upper reaches of central ASIA as stated in their books, their language should be TURKIC, and not iranian,as is seen,the pleasure, here, is, that, ours is TURKIC,or an old scythian dialect,the mother of all sindh
    valley dialects,as stated in my reply above,our script was even found by auriel stein when he was busy hunting treasures in Turkestan, or the new Sinkiang of china.this script is old Lhanda script as goes the classification & is confined to the sind valley,hindu brahman not to be left out claim it as theirs and term it, brahmi,but leaving aside their claims, which have no grounds,as usual,our areas are, as well stated by you, the whole of afghanistan ,eastern iran,dehli along the old route of river ;jamana as it debouched in Rann of Kutch,the turkestan and tibet.remember all our old tribes are, off shoots of old turkish tribes. Buddha was a saka a old turkic tribe.

    ReplyDelete
  82. What Michale say can be summarized in one word, ' Rubbish'.

    He seems crazy and lacks knowledge. Pakistan will never break ever.

    The article reflects the re bounce of failures in Afghanistan.

    What the Americans can't do with the best sci-tech resources at their hand they want to put the blame for the same on Pakistan Army.

    Pakistan Army has done the best job and eliminated most of the American paid agents who were creating conditions for the Balkanization.

    The first round has already been won by Pakistan.

    Strategically Pakistan hold the cards to give a call, American know this.

    Before further play up they should review their capabilities, Americans have put Afghanistan at the disposal of gang leaders, they can't move without the protection of these paid stooges.

    The are carrying our operation and according to WP, they have requested local leader to provide men so that they can safely patrol in Zahri area around Kandhar.

    The under review article is articulation of oft repeated themes that Pakistan was a wrong creation, Punjabi are exploiters, Army represent Punjab, Pakistan is about to break, defame the Army and political leader etc.

    What is new about all this.

    This is surprising that instead of a strong Pakistan the writer is arguing for its Balkanization to create another Middle East.

    After World war one of the aim of allies was to break Ottoman Empire, to install their puppets in piece meal entities.

    They harbor the same strategy now for Pakistan. What they forget is that it is a nuclear power, and according to American they can not trace the exact location of these assets.

    A state having such an ultimate tool knows what is the threshold.

    Its not hidden fact now that Pakistan not only has the strike capability but possesses the tactical capability as well.

    Indian know that they can't sustain escalation, the Afghan situation is a blessing in disguise for them and in case they want to come in to arena, they would find 'old friends' to welcome them.

    The Balkanization would be a night mare for the Indians, while dealing with any Muslim entity one should remember one thing, the strong bondage factor of faith.

    It is this factor that is defeating Americans in Afghanistan and before them it defeated former U.S.S.R.

    No doubt the present political leadership is part of this scheme where a puppet regime has been placed do materialize freely the American design but unfortunate for the Americans the they have lost the correct time and space.

    They have are on extra time and are unable to hold sway on most of what they technically have occupied.

    Afghans are free to do what they want in in more than 90% of Afghanistan.

    Mi Michal Hugh is a mad dreamer, he does know even correct population ratio of Pakistan. He does know what is correct proportion of people of different provinces in the Army.

    His piece is a typical file of Indians theme now adopted by Americans probably.

    Pakistan is a Muslim state of 170 million, who if pick up a stone, if the need be can make the difference, well it is not Banana state.

    The above all this, according to a recent poll conducted in America, people want the American back by the given date irrespective whether it stabilizes or not.

    The best solution is to end the occupation and not to occupy and break states to further complicate and devastate the region.

    American can not handle the job in hand, it must not ask for more, otherwise it would be a recipe for its own break up.

    ReplyDelete
  83. National boundaries are not forever. They have changed in all continents and in all times. In the Subcontinent, that has happened twice in the last 63 years. Before the Soviets withdrew from Afghanistan, there was much talk about the occupiers dividing the country along the Hindu Kush- some even arguing that that was the only chance for the Lion of Panjsher to become a King. Ever since, balkanisation of Afghanistan has remained one of the possible “solutions” amongst the nova strategists who have jumped on the Afghan bandwagon. One can hardly blame them. Even some in our own country are ignorant about the deep rooted sense of Afghan nationhood. Despite their ethnic feuds, they remain Afghans. Another point often ignored is that none of the country’s neighbours savour the thought of any part of Afghanistan falling in its lap.
    Pakistan, too, shares a bit of that luck. Commitment to the country may be weaker in some regions than in the others, but at the very worst Pakistan remains their least bad choice. About the Pashtuns, even though they do not wear patriotism on their sleeves, there never was any doubt. In the meantime they are all over the place (Karachi is the largest Pashtun city in the world). Even our tribesmen have more stakes in a country where they have better (pro rata) chance of becoming federal secretaries, three star generals, even ministers. The new and the old Sindhis have suffered conflicts and grievances. One group feels hurt because of its sacrifices at the time of the partition and the other because (along with the Bengalis) the movement was more passionately routed there than in other parts of the country. All the same, the tumultuous route to, and an uncertain outcome of, any other course compel them to willy-nilly continue on the same.
    The Baloach got the rawest of all deals in this country. During the last ten years, their sense of alienation has further aggravated both due to the external and internal factors. Nevertheless, Demographic vulnerabilities and tribal divisions prevent them from pursuing alternatives. And before one forgets, like in case of Afghanistan, no neighbour of ours is terribly keen to incorporate any of our disenchanted people, if for no other reason than out of fear that we might join them and destroy them from within.
    The main thrust of Michael Hughes’ treatise, however, is a bit different. He is not suggesting an implosion but a partition imposed from outside. Though he didn’t allude to a methodology, I would not know of any, other than a massive internal subversion or external aggression. After Iraq and Afghanistan, if anyone still had the stomach for such ventures, it would finally give us a chance to wage a successful Jihad. Till then Mr Hughes will have to remain in the same league as Bernard Louis and Ralph Peters, merely another “cartographic terrorist”.

    ReplyDelete
  84. well said, sir's,(TJ & MAD).
    If i may add a few more lines,the basic fault with american think tanks remains on their reliance on the people who are a clueless lot, they have no study of the regions on which their expertise is sought,however they are the,''ANOINTED FAVORITES',
    but sadly the ''BRAINS' who run the american think tanks,fail to perceive that,this lot on whom they rely upon,are driven by their own inner devils,which thrive, on encouraging confrontation between various groups,they want impositions/give recommendations for wrong sanctions, like i said on personal WHIMS.the ''result'' when it unfolds, is as they have MISREAD',LOCAL DYNAMICS.and ignored the Reactions,by over estimating the power of american money, and its related military intervention capabilities,now the best part, these so-called experts,have meanwhile totally neglected the value of CONVICTION,LOYALTY AND THE FAITH OF THE NATIONS, as they themselves are by birth, FREE THINKERS.
    the chronology of american blunders are in front of us, one need not rub that point.

    ReplyDelete
  85. This is a BS article. I read first few lines and realized it's all lies. Bhutto, Jinnah, etc were all recent converts. Go read their family history. Chandragupta Maurya united India that even included Afghanistan. So your claim that pak was never part of india is the biggest BS. The concept of nation state is only 300 years old so your claim that India never existed before is stupid because most of today's nation states did not exist before 300 years ago. They were all ruled by many kings. By telling stupid lies, you can't justify the existence of the fascist state of pakistan.

    ReplyDelete
  86. We need proactive poloicy by our foreign office to react to anti Pakistan comments from USA, India and any other country. Our media has grown up well and I appreciate our writers who are at the forefont to tackle the challenges posed by anti Pakistan media from abroad and some biased writers. Balkanization of India will start with the independence of Kashmir, there is no way stopping it, the next will be Khalistan and will finish up at Nagaland.The excursions around the world will land USA in the same situation faced by Soviet Union.

    ReplyDelete