Hindustan’s Geo-politic Strategic Mold:

Only When United, India has Prospered

The latest in Punjabi trial balloons are sports meets between Punjabi athletes of India and Pakistan. From time to time we have Punjabi Pakistanis coming and enjoying hospitality of their counterparts and friends in India and then north Indians mostly from Punjab doing the same in Pakistan. But, as throughout history, those who resided in now Punjab Pakistan have quite often stabbed Hindustan in the back and continue to do so even now as pawns in the imperialist game.
After the partition of Hindustan in 1947, Pak sent in raiders into Kashmir, after the 1965 probing of Brahmin/Hindu nerve first in Kutch, invaded Kashmir and in 1999 the Kargil invasion by stealth. And of course since mid-1980s under that Mullah in uniform Gen Zia-ul Haq, Pakistan has been bleeding a hapless India with what is called a thousand cuts.
Now as in history , rulers have failed to provide basic security to the people of the subcontinent, from West /Saudi financed and CIA/ISI trained and associated terror group attacks in India and US drone and special services attacks on Pakistanis. In Hindustan’s history a few tens of thousands horsemen looted India at will and after the coming of the sail, a few ship loads of sailors masquerading as traders, took over the country and looted its resources.
Before the arrival of the British East India Company in the late 18th century, the sub-continent's share in world manufacturing was 24.5 percent in 1750 (32.8 percent for China). But by the time the British had finished with India, the sub-continent's share had fallen to 1.7 percent (in 1900) and that of Britain increased from 1.9 percent (in 1750) to 22.9 percent (in 1880) - Rise and fall of Big Powers by Professor Paul Kennedy.
The later invaders from north west beyond the Hindukush, established kingdoms in Hindustan and stayed put in India and created monuments like the Taj Mahal which attract millions of foreign tourists and dollars. They brought in many aspects of civilization, especially from Persia.
That tragedy of the loot by the rulers still continues with corrupt Indian political elite, entrenched in power like Mafia, robbing people of their lands, forests, and national assets like Telecom spectrum. With a bigger scam a day emerging in Incredible India, the ruling coalition in league with the opposition have undermined almost all institutions in India and continue to shamelessly rob Indians. Yoga Guru Ram Dev was constrained to declare that the Indian political and corporate elites have looted India more than the British did. For more read Incredible Scam-a-day India.
After reading this piece a Pakistani friend, expert on strategic and military affairs remarked that the almost total corruption across the border further undermines the two-nation theory.
But first let us get the fundamentals correct.
Hindustan’s Weakness
Great speculators in metaphysics and matters of soul, throughout history Indians guided by Brahmin/Hindu advisers and teachers have rarely shown strategic thinking or acumen and ruthlessness to implement strategic decisions barring some exceptions. Also something goes wrong in the sycophantic climate of Delhi and Hindustan, whether the leaders are Hindus or Muslims. In the history of Hindustan, there have been very few rulers with strategic thought, comprehension and skills. Say, like Mauryas who had their capital at Pataliputra but kept the crown prince stationed at Ujjain to guard against ingress from the Hindukush and meet the invader on the route chosen i.e. Sindh- Saurashtra or Punjab and the Himalayan foot hills. Brahmins then routed and squeezed out Buddhism and brought back apartheid like caste system, an ingenious scheme to keep the Hindu polity and society divided in order to rule over it thus using the divide and rule policy used by imperialists since Achamenaen Persians use against Greek colonies in western Asia Minor (Turkey).
So were the early Moghuls recently arrived from Afghanistan and Turkistan. Akbar having built his beautiful capital at Fatehpur Sikri spent a decade near Lahore watching and guarding against Mongols and others milling across the Hindukush. He did not trust the people of Punjab. The British of course knew and know all about strategic theories and skills but their objective was to loot and rob Hindustan. While no incursions were allowed into Hindustan the country and people paid a heavy debilitating price.
Nevertheless only when the subcontinent was united, not prone to raids and invasions from without and at peace within that it was prosperous, under Kanishka ruling from Peshawar or under the Moghuls.
In modern times we had Indira Gandhi, who instead of mopping around the world against refugee influx from East Pakistan and its adverse strategic consequences, took advantage of the situation and broke up Pakistan into two. But she was firm ruler over India, now much maligned by pigmies in the opposition, who have transformed India into a banana republic. Before the British occupation, there were some other strategic thinkers like Maharaja Ranjit Singh and Tippu Sultan but their canvas was rather limited.
A  wag once observed  that except for the legendry King Porus who put up a valiant fight against Alexander the Macedon, the area between Peshawar and Panipat has always remained ‘porous’ for invaders from north west. Survival against all odds is the quality of the people in the region.  A trait they share with people in the path of invading armies say in Romania and Palestine. They make for dynamic, hardworking good managing directors but not perspicacious enough to be the chairmen of the board. They did not establish a large enough kingdom. Rajiv Gandhi had pointed during the Pakistan supported insurgency in Punjab that the only state in the region was founded by Sikh Maharaja Ranjit Singh, at Lahore.
The people dominating Pakistan, though out history have felt jealous of the richer rulers of Hindustan with their capital on river Yamuna, whether in Delhi or Agra. The religion was immaterial. They had encouraged tribes from central Asia, when Chauhans were ruling Delhi; later invited the Moghuls when Afghans were ruling Delhi .Then they invited Pathans and Persians when Moghuls were in decline. For its strategic defense, Hindustan should control Kabul if not Kandahar as well as was done by early Moghuls. Once Kabul and Kandahar were lost, Hindustan became a plaything of invaders.  And the Punjabi people joined in the loot and robbed the invader if he failed.
The British, past masters in strategic thought and skills exploited the same Hindustan’s strategic geo-political mold, taking advantage of an Indian leadership deficient in strategic thinking and skills (few Indians were allowed in the Political department dealing with such matters) and before being forced to quit in 1947 partitioned India to keep India and Pakistan squabbling like cats as in the fable. 
Anglo-American Monkeys Keep Sub-continent Cats Squabbling

Make India a Sponge to Protect West from US Stirred Muslims!                
The rulers in Pakistan starting with Ayub Khan became willing tools of the divide and rule policy. In the Middle East, the British and now USA have employed the same divide and rule policy successfully.
In a well-researched book 'The Shadow of the Great Game: The Untold Story of India's Partition', retired Indian diplomat Narendra Singh Sarila, who was briefly ADC to the last Viceroy, Lord Lois Mountbatten, documents how the British leadership across the political spectrum, Conservatives and Labour, intrigued, told lies to divide the Indian subcontinent and created the state of Pakistan. Because Mahatma Gandhi with this opposition to violence and war, and emphasis on peaceful means to resolve all disputes and Jawaharlal Nehru with his non-real politic idealism and vision of creating friendship and understanding among colonized and exploited people of Asia, Africa, Middle east and elsewhere, would not join any western military pact to protect from the Soviet Union, the oil resources in the Middle East still controlled and dominated by Western powers.

After WWII, the British realized that they had to get out of India, but the subcontinent was a vital strategic asset, so till the end London tried to keep India as a dominion like Australia or Canada, to keep it as – "a base for Britain to continue their domination of the Indian Ocean and the oil-rich Persian Gulf with its wells of power," says Sarila. But as the "Congress party of India would not play the great game with Britain against the Soviet Union," so the British decided to partition India.

The ultimate object was to retain at least some part in the North-West of India, "for defensive and offensive action against the USSR in any future dispensation in the sub-continent". And Britain knew that this could be best achieved by having a willing and subservient Pakistan as its client. So the only way -- was to use Jinnah to detach areas of India, which border Iran, Afghanistan and Sinkiang and create a new state there. The author also traces the roots of the present Kashmir imbroglio and how the matter was dealt with in the UN to help out ally Pakistan. 

The book sends out a cautionary signal to present-day Indians; to avoid misplaced idealism, superciliousness and escapism, to which some of their ancestors fell prey. New Delhi is now being seduced by Washington (ask US allies Turkey and others have been let down in post-cold war period) into a nuclear agreement to enmesh India into US spider's web, which would adversely affect the security of billion plus Indians. Ask the proponents of the agreement, especially Indian diplomats who served in Washington and who are propped up like puppets on India’s uninformed and ill-informed celebrity and trivia obsessed TV channels to mouth Washington’s policies and objectives.
Did George Bush achieve anything in his disastrous (as declared by US strategic expert Brzezinski) tenure except getting India in its non-proliferation scheme to brow beat Iran. But Washington has failed, with India thoughtlessly creating animus in Tehran. Washington has only ended up by destroying Iraq the only possible rival to counter Iraq. Baghdad is now ruled by Shia Iraqis and almost takes advice if not orders from Tehran. As late as this month a former Indian ambassador to USA wrote in Indian (or rather American) Express to obey Washington’s dictates  regarding Iran, whose stand on enrichment of Uranium for power generation is allowed by NPT which it has signed. Most non-aligned countries support Iran on the issue. What is the standing of India there now, whose support India would need to become a permanent member of UNSC.
For sold out Indians read my piece of 17 December, 2010 along with a similar piece from Hindu, Decline, Degeneration & Sellout of Indian Media and so called Intelligentsia. On British and US scheme on Kashmir there is another fine book by another retired Indian diplomat C. Disrupt.
War and Diplomacy in Kashmir 1947-48 

Dasgupta's reflections in his introduction bear quotation in extenso: "The conflict which broke out between India and Pakistan in 1947 was unique in the annals of modern warfare: it was a war in which both the opposing armies were led by nationals of a third country (Still to depart colonial power). British generals commanded the armies of the newly independent states of India and Pakistan... While it was unique in this one respect, the first Indo-Pakistan war was also a typical Third World conflict from a broader perspective. External factors tend to play a major part in wars between medium or small states. Their dependence on major powers for military supplies, economic assistance and diplomatic support makes these states vulnerable to external pressures. Thus the positions taken by the great powers can influence the duration, intensity and even the outcome of such conflicts. The Kashmir war of 1947-48 is one such example. For both India and Pakistan, Britain was the leading overseas partner in trade, industry and finance. Both countries turned to Britain for military equipment, spares and oil supplies. The war was unique only in the extent to which the two states were vulnerable to British influence on account of the presence of British officers at the senior most levels of their armed forces. These officers were in a position to directly influence the course of the war through the advice they tendered to their respective governments and the manner in which they implemented - or ignored - government directives." 

The point to be noted is that there is a tacit agreement that the US (and UK) would keep the Kashmir pot boiling. Two years ago an uncouth British Foreign Secretary David Milliband made a statement in India that to avoid terrorist attacks like 26/11 India must resolve the Kashmir issue. He should have been escorted out by his ears. Such regular statements by USA and UK provide oxygen to terrorists’ cause and encourage them. What if India stated that terror attacks in north Ireland would cease if London gave in to the demands of Irish Republican Army.

Disgruntled Kashmir elements are trained, equipped and financed by Pakistan for its own ends, when it is quite clear that Islamabad has no intention of agreeing to an independent Kashmir. Why go far? Just look at the terrible conditions in Pak occupied Kashmir ruled from the interior ministry of Pakistan. 

Kashmiris are being exploited like the Kurds of Turkey, Iran, Iraq and Syria in history by neighboring states and outside powers like Britain, Russia and now USA. A very senior member of the Kurdish National Front told me that USA is not taking any action against the Marxist rebels PKK so that it can use it as pawns against Turkey. Five years ago, Turkey had almost broken relations with Israel because Tel Aviv was training Kurds in north Iraq for possible action against Turkey and other neighbors Iran and Syria.

Many ignorant Indians, especially from the north (Punjab, preferably from Lahore) believe that the partition could have been avoided in 1947. Such colossal ignorance about history! 

The White Christian Europe divided and destroyed the composite five century old Ottoman Empire using religion, ethnicity and the language divide, even fooling the Arabs whose Caliph, the Ottoman Sultan was resident in Istanbul. See how they have been further divided, bullied, humiliated, destroyed and exploited since WWI.
In 1990s, non-Orthodox Christian US and NATO powers destroyed the multi-lingual, multi-ethnic and multi religious south Slav Republic of Yugoslavia consisting of Serbs, Croats, Kosovars, Macedons and others, who followed many religions. The Imperialists would do anything to gain control.

US led illegal invasion of Iraq in 2003 and brutal occupation has destroyed a united secular Iraq of Shia and Sunni Arabs and Kurds, Turkmen and others.

Seeing the level and the kind of discussions in India , the author feels dismayed that Indian media and think tanks remain brainwashed, even generationally i.e. those whose fathers studied in British schools and universities or British style institutions in India, finding their heroes in Clive, Hastings, Curzon, Churchill, Blair and now Bush and Obama. This hold true at places like India International center , unfortunately at defense institutes, where long retired Air Commodores and Rear Admirals, relics of colonial mind set hold sway .Even at the Indian Council of World Affairs, where in 2009 policies of Obama was praised after his now forgotten speech that US cannot war against Islam (what is it doing in the Middle east). My observation that he is a product of Chicago Jewish Democratic machine, who was granted 500 million dollars by the very banksters, who have brought about the decline of America and who is following their dictates brought a howl of protests from the usual suspects attending such indoctrination there and elsewhere. But then in the words of Indian PM said, 'We Indians love you' to George Bush
Will Hindustan be ever free from the pernicious indoctrination by the white race, which still continues and has perhaps entered the DNA of the English speaking Ignoranti?
Hindustan’s Geo-politic strategic mold has been exploited by outsiders. It started with the British, who passed on the torch to the new lords USA .Even China continues to exploit the same geo-political mold.
The inhabitants of the region i.e. Pakistan for their short term gains have allowed the foreigner to dominate their policies, but it has left Pakistan literally in the hands of Jihadis, with its Kalashnikov culture and narcotic trade and addiction. It survives on infusions of money from outside. No wonder it has become a state living at the mercy of USA, UK, China, Saudi Arabia and others. If the Jihadis took over Pakistan, where would the so called liberal beer drinking intelligentsia of Pakistan go? Iranians after the Khomeini revolution migrated to USA and France. Will the Pakistanis be welcome in USA with the bias against Muslims after 9/11. Yes, Saudi Arabia is there, which provided refuge to the likes of  late Idi Amin and Nawaz Sharif. But the whole area could be in turmoil soon.


Herpes Indpakster 
Therefore so many Indians, politicians, journalists and even diplomats, who should be more  hard headed, tend to suffer from this viral like disease which can be called Herpes Indpakster (not herpes zoster) which when it flares up brings delusions of going down in history by changing the course of India Pakistan relations. A smile from late Gen Zia ul huq or Nawaz Sharif or late Benazir Bhutto, weakened their immune mechanism and the latent virus gets reactivated. In zoster variety there may be spontaneous recovery in a couple of months, here it takes the form of Pakistan firing, intrusion in Kargil or an attack by terrorists in Jammu and Kashmir ,on Indian parliament and 3 day rape of Mumbai in November, 2008. In olden days a US deep briefing or a leak did the same. However neuralgia may persist for months and even years and can be reactivated by another smile.
But all the patients do very well. Diplomats get out of turn promotions and get good postings, others get rewarded and decorated and become public figures, members of parliament and lions on the Delhi’s cocktail circuit. So we have Indo-Pak border lamp lighting Kuldip Nayars, senior diplomats who retire with Pak counterparts to calm retreats (in nearby Rajasthan) to cut the Gordian Knot of Indo- Pak dispute. It makes good copy and sells. There was the story of the negotiators’ mother tongue being Punjabi, lingua franca of Pakistan’s dominant clique which eased the process after 1987 tensions. If languages matched; Viola, Eureka.
 It was claimed that the Punjabi speaking Indian Prime Minister, Inder Kumar Gujaral born in Jhelum (now in Pakistani Punjab) and Punjabi speaking Pakistani counterpart Nawaz Sharif could resolve the disputes between the two countries because of similar mother tongues. (Why are then so many disputes between Arabic speaking Muslim states?) Was not there once a Jullunder (in India) born, Delhi educated President General Zia ul Huq, who while courteously escorting the Indian journalists to their cars after giving them a sumptuous chicken curry meal or innocently coming down for Cricket matches in Jaipur, was  planning operation ”Topaz” and laying the foundations of future insurgency in Jammu and Kashmir.
The same kind of tactics were used to hoodwink Indian PM Manmohan Singh, when at Sharm-el Sheikh, Baluchistan was included in the joint statement as result of mis-drafting as covered up by Shankar Menon, now National Security Adviser. Same lack of resilience allowed Indians to allow China change its claim from suzerainty into sovereignty in 1950s without sorting out the borders.
The pernicious caste hierarchy exists in Pakistan too .the pecking order is Asraffs (migrants from Arab countries, Iran, Afghanistan and central Asia) followed by high caste converts like late Fazli Hussein, premier of united Punjab (a Rathore Rajput convert), Jats and then come others like Khatris. So a smile to Indian Khatri by Zia or even Sharif thrills the former. The claim of Pakistanis that they are mostly descendants of migrants, even if it mattered, is spurious .Most are like the rest of north Indians –the Mediterranean type.
So are the Turks .In my pioneering article ,while still posted in Ankara, on the influence of Turkic languages on Hindustani, I had written that the percentage of Turks who originated from central Asia was less than 15%  created some anger in right wing media and circles but no one came with proof to challenge this fact.

Wrote Saleem Sahzad in Asia Times in 2009, “Before the partition of British India in 1947, Punjab was seen as a loyal colony of the British and their recruits fought against the Afghans. After partition, Punjabis were seen as usurpers who divided the Pashtun tribes in the name of a new country called Pakistan. To many Afghans, Punjabis are opportunists and while they claim to be Muslims, their culture is a blend of Hinduism and Sikhism.” The counterpart Punjabi speaking Hindus in India express touching faith in Pakistan’s democracy and indulge in border candle lighting.  They also enjoy each other’s chicken tikka kebak and beer laced hospitality during not so secret various channels of diplomacy during which they visit their ancestral homes.

The author remembers an Afghan diplomat, related to the ruling dynasty and the Jihadist telling him that Punjabi Pakistanis were trying to teach Afghans how to fight when they had never fought themselves and were ruled mostly by outsiders. Historian Khuswant Singh wrote that Punjabi and Sikh forces were defeated by troops from Bengal, Bihar and Orissa under British officers.

Extracts form Al Qaeda, Taliban and the Military in Pakistan - "What is most important to the history of the world? The Taliban or the collapse of the Soviet empire? Some stirred-up Moslems or the liberation of Central Europe and the end of the cold war?"." Nonsense--" added Brzezinski when asked in 1997 "If Islamic fundamentalism represents a world menace today." Brzezinski was President Jimmy Carter's National Security Adviser.

"The United States has supported radical Islamic activism over the past six decades, sometimes overtly, sometimes covertly," and is thus "partly to blame for the emergence of Islamic terrorism as a world-wide phenomenon." Robert Defuses 

“The grip of conservative Islamism on both sides of the Afghanistan-Pakistan border is the legacy not just of George Bush, of course, but decades of US meddling in the region, and its sponsorship of the anti-Soviet mujahedeen in the 1980s in particular. -- a byproduct of the systematically counter-productive nature of western policy across the wider region since 2001. After seven years of lawless invasion and occupation, the war on terror is everywhere in ruins.

“The limits of American military power have been laid bare in the killing fields of Iraq; Iran has been transformed into the pre-eminent regional power; --- a resurgent Taliban is leading an increasingly effective guerrilla war in Afghanistan; and far from crushing terror networks, the US and its allies have spread them to Pakistan--- Pakistan is being ripped apart by the fallout from the Afghan occupation. If the US escalates, the impact will be devastating-- The country now shows every sign of slipping out of the control of its dysfunctional civilian government - and even the military that has held it together for 60 years, “Seumas Milne in The Guardian 5 March, 2009.
Wrote Ahmed Rashid in his book 'Descent into Chaos', Afghanistan is once again staring down the abyss of state collapse, despite billions of dollars in aid, forty-five thousand Western troops, and the deaths of thousands of people. The Taliban have made a dramatic comeback.... The international community had an extended window of opportunity for several years to help the Afghan people—they failed to take advantage of it. -- Pakistan...has undergone a slower but equally bloody meltdown.... In 2007 there were 56 suicide bombings in Pakistan that killed 640 people, compared to just 6 bombings in the previous year...”

Conflict Between Rulers and Clerics

Which way the Sunni terror monster turn!  

Historical background and parallels; Of the oldest of the three revealed religions, Judaism’s only state since ancient times, Israel, founded on leftist tenets has since morphed into a rule by Zionist-Military oligarchy. Christians after centuries of warfare in Europe managed to create secular polities which are still underpinned if not haunted by sectional religious ideologies. In the last of ‘the Book’ based polity Islam, the lines between the Mir and the Pir, the temporal ruler and spiritual ruler still remain blurred, contested and changing.
After the 1979 revolution in Iran, Shias created the ideal but mythical office of Imam in the person of Ruhoallah Khomeini. The status of the Imam was evolved into the doctrines of intercession and infallibility, i.e., of the faqih/mutjahid. But the Iranians have since found that a system based on the concepts of 7th century AD was inadequate to confront and solve the problems of 21st century. Nevertheless, like the first Imam Ali, Iran is ruled by the supreme religious leader, Ali Khameini, who incidentally is Azeri Turk. The cement keeping Iran united now is its common heritage and Islam. 

In Syria the ruling Shia Alewite elite, 12% of the population has been staunchly secular under the Assads since four decades. In Lebanon the Hezbollah, which coordinates with some secular strands, combines in Hassan Nasrallah, the powers of both a military and spiritual leader. To understand the evolving situation around Pakistan and Afghanistan we might look at somewhat similar situations in Islamic history.
Prophet Mohammad was both the religious leader and military commander. But the Arab Caliphs lost out on power by 10th century to the Turkish slaves from central Asia who formed the core of their fighting forces .The Turks raised the minor title of Sultan to a high rank who literally became a protector of the Caliph, left with only spiritual powers. Even this role was seized after the fall of Cairo in 16th century to the Ottoman Sultans based in Istanbul.
After the defeat of Byzantines near lake Van in 11th century, the Seljuk hordes established a Rumi Caliphate at Konya in the center of modern day Turkey but they had to brutally suppress religious leaders’ rebellions many times .To keep out the energetic soldiers and freelance militias instigated by fanatic religious leaders, Konya sent them out as Ghazis to harass neighboring Christian Byzantine territories. Out of these freebooters emerged a small band led by Ertugrul, whose small principality was expanded by his son Osman (Othman) and descendants into Europe right up to the gates of Vienna and along South Mediterranean up to Morocco and east up to Iran border and Oman on the Indian Ocean.

Rise and Fall of Janissaries in Ottoman Empire

As Iran became a barrier to the recruitment of slaves from non-Muslim Turks from central Asia, a practice which the Arabs had followed ,the Ottoman emperors , who succeeded the Seljuk Turks in Anatolia as Turkey was then known, finally conquered the Byzantine empire and converted Constantinople, into its capital, Istanbul. They added minarets and Mihrab to the 6th century Basilica and made it into a mosque. (Kemal Ataturk made it into a museum.)The Ottomans then started recruiting Christian young boys mostly from Balkans but even from Anatolia for its armed forces and top civil service cadre known as ‘Devshirme’ system.
Beginning with the forced recruitment from Christian prisoners taken as booty after the battle, the system progressively developed into a privileged and influential warrior force that converted young Christian boys to Islam and instructed them in the Turkish martial arts. Unlike feudal levies Janissaries owed loyalty to the Sultan only. Regimented training and strong moral codes transformed the Janissaries into more than an impressive military force, a political entity of such unchecked power (shades of ISI) that they unwittingly contributed to the very downfall of the empire itself.  The Janissaries were an important factor in the military expansion of the Ottoman Empire ranging from the 1453 capture of Constantinople to the battles against the Austrian-Hungarian Empire.
The next couple of centuries saw the growth of the power of the Ottomans, but a succession of uprisings by Janissaries resulted in more power flowing into their hands. The first Janissary revolt occurred in 1449 and served as a model for many later revolts, each of which brought them more power and pelf. The Janissaries reached such an enviable state of influence by the late 1600s that the Ottoman bureaucracy was effectively held hostage to their whims and demands. A mutiny led to change in the policy of the politicians. Eventually, the Janissaries started to engage in successful coups to topple even a Sultan who was not receptive to their specific desires. They put their own self-interests first and placed obstacles in the path of modernizing the army.
In 1807, the Janissaries revolted against Sultan Selim III, and replaced him with Mahmud II. Mahmud II finally decided that the Janissaries had to be decimated in order to preserve the empire. In the summer of 1826, when the Janissaries staged another uprising, the rest of the army and the people were ranged against them. The Janissary force finally faced either death or retreat and exile. The survivors were banished and their wealth taken over by the state.
Like the Konya Sultanate the Pakistanis under its religious President Zia-ul- haq with financial support from US led West and Saudi Arabia and other Muslim states trained and sent Jihadist and militants’ aka modern day Ghazis into Afghanistan in 1980s, who forced the Soviets exit from Afghanistan. Eventually the Communist edifice under mined by Slav nationalism and Orthodox Christianity collapsed by the beginning of 1990s.
Would Pakistan succeed in destroying the Taliban!
A conglomerate of various militias, free-booters, religious fanatics, nationalists and tribal chieftains classified as Al Qaeda, Taliban, Pakistani Taliban etc., are somewhat like the Janissaries of the Ottoman empire, their most effective strike force which terrorized European Christians and helped extend the Ottoman empire into Europe. But soon instead of terrorizing the enemies of the Ottomans, they terrorized the Sultans. Finally the Janissaries had to be destroyed. Would Pakistan be able to do the same i.e. destroy the Taliban.
The tensions between the ruler, the clerics and religious warriors i.e. Mirs and Pirs have still not been separated in Islamic world. It is in reverse gear even in modern Turkey, the only secular Muslim nation, with the ascendancy of the ruling religious AK Party with billions of Saudi investment in Turkey and direct gifts to the party. Support of Saudi finances to Madrassas and mosques remains the major obstacle in the modernization of education and of Islamic societies. 
The Poisonous Pentagon 
Unless the corrupt Saud dynasty in axis with Wahahbi ideology which finances extremist Islamic groups all over the world and promotes Salafist ideology and keeps the Sunni Ummah backward disappears, there is little hope of the Muslims to escape their current miserable situation. Extremist groups and ideology will not stop exploitation of Arab and Muslim energy resources in the Middle east and elsewhere by the West. But then there is a pact by which US protects the Saudi Dynasty for in exchange for free oil exploitation. How come no regime changes in Saudi Arabia which have taken place or organized all over the Arab and Muslim world. Thus the poisonous Pentagon of US (UK/Israel) - Saudi-Wahabbi-Pak Army-ISI  - remains a dilemma and curse on the people mostly Muslims extending from Bekka valley to Pakhtunkhawa.

Prof Paul Keneddy in his recent essay admits that "the Afghanistan-Pakistan entanglement is an issue so vexed and complicated that it would have tested the wisdom of the greatest leaders and strategists of the past. It is not totally fanciful to imagine Augustus, William Pitt the Elder, Bismarck or George Marshall pondering over a map which detailed the lands that stretch from the Bekaa Valley to the Khyber Pass. None of them would have liked what they saw." Look at the distances, the awful topography, the willingness of the other side to accept appalling casualty rates, make a limited war—a finely calibrated war—something of a nonsense. Kennedy after talking to those with Afghan field experience feels that US "at least cannot "win" in the sense that knee-jerk congressmen and rabid Murdoch newspapers understand that word, a victory grotesquely skewed by their habit of invoking American football language: smash, overrun, crush, annihilate." 

"Pulling out should not be construed as appeasement since US "would not be the first to leave those wretched mountains and their defiant tribes to their own devices; indeed, we would simply join that long list of former occupation armies which eventually thought the better of it and made for the exit. -- A three-time British Prime Minister and four-time Foreign Secretary Lord Salisbury once observed, nothing is more fatal to a wise strategy than clinging to the carcasses of dead policies." Yet , Kennedy feels ,"few administrations have the resolve to let go; and frankly, in the case of Afghanistan, a mushy compromise—half-concealed withdrawal—might be the least-worst way to go, at least for now. But, not forever."

The history, culture and civilization of the people of south west Asia is entangled, intermeshed and interconnected. Many times unhappy, more so after the arrival of the firangis aka Europeans. Watch this space for what might transpire. Last attempt was made in August 2010: Confusion at the End of Afghanistan Tunnel!   


More by :  K. Gajendra Singh

Top | Analysis

Views: 3324      Comments: 1

Comment The piece at the beginning of the article is very good and spot on.

18-Jan-2011 12:37 PM

Name *

Email ID

Comment *
Verification Code*

Can't read? Reload

Please fill the above code for verification.