REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

On Pakistan and Afghanistan

POSTED BY: NIKI2
UPDATED: Tuesday, March 7, 2023 13:48
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 1842
PAGE 1 of 1

Wednesday, March 20, 2013 7:16 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


From testimony by Peter Bergen delivered to the House Foreign Affairs Committee on March 19, 2013:
Quote:

The news from Pakistan is generally bad news.

In the past week, which was far from atypical, suicide bombers attacked a court building in the northwestern city of Peshawar taking hostages and killing four people.

In the southern city of Karachi the director of a renowned social program working in the megacity's poorest neighborhoods was shot and killed. And gunmen kidnapped two female Czech tourists in southwestern Pakistan.

But this past week also saw more than a glimmer of good news from Pakistan: Saturday, March 16 marked an extraordinary moment in Pakistani history, as this is the first time a civilian government has served its entire five-year term (from 2008 to 2013). And, for the first time in its history, the Pakistani military appears unwilling to mount a coup against the civilian government. The military has successfully executed three coups and attempted a number of others since Pakistan's independence in 1947.

Today the army understands that the most recent coup by General Pervez Musharraf who took power in 1999 has tarnished its brand.

Musharraf hung on to power for almost a decade and his imposition of emergency rule in 2007 triggered massive street protests and eventually his ouster.

On Saturday, Musharaf announced he is returning to Pakistan from self-imposed exile on March 24 to run in elections that are to be held two months from now.

In a telling sign that Pakistan is moving into something of a new era, Pakistani military officials are not supportive of Musharraf's return and nor is much of the Pakistani public.

On May 11, Pakistanis will go to the polls to elect a new civilian government for a five-year term, and there is now a good prospect for continued, uninterrupted civilian government until at least 2018.

In terms of Pakistan's long-term health and stability, the fact that the country is in an unprecedented era of lengthy civilian rule will help erode the Pakistani military's present position as having uncontested supremacy in all matters that relate to the country's national security, in particular its relations with India and with Afghanistan.

The military has backed insurgent and terrorist groups in India and Afghanistan to maintain its perceived interests in these countries. A more confident civilian Pakistani government will, hopefully, over time be less likely to support these militant groups.

Another great opportunity (and potential peril) will present itself in Afghanistan, when Afghans go to the polls in April 2014 for the third presidential election since the fall of the Taliban.

If that election is perceived as being relatively free and fair this would go a long way to ease tensions in the Afghan body politic, increase Afghanistan's overall security and reassure both Afghan and outside investors that the country has a promising future.

On the other hand, if the 2014 election is seen as unfair, corrupted and is deeply contested, this would likely precipitate a vicious circle of conflict, deteriorating security and capital flight.

The United States, therefore, should do everything it can to provide technical and security assistance to make these elections go as well as possible.

But unlike what happened in the run-up to the 2009 Afghan presidential election, U.S. officials should not get involved in privately backing certain candidates. This private support had the unintended effect of splitting the opposition to Afghan President Hamid Karzai, as key leaders of the anti-Karzai opposition all believed they were "America's candidate." It also deeply alienated Karzai, whose occasional diatribes against the United States are best understood as due to his lingering resentment over this issue.

A key aspect of U.S. and NATO planning for the Afghan presidential elections in April 2014 is that given the fact that there are no discernible front-runners to succeed Karzai, there may be no clear winner who attains more than 50% of the vote, which under Afghan electoral laws would necessitate a runoff election between the two leading candidates.

Security, technical and economic assistance for the Afghan elections should be prepared to extend into summer 2014, because it is not clear as yet when that runoff might be held.

Last year the United States and Afghanistan negotiated a Strategic Partnership Agreement, which ensures America will continue to play a supporting role there until 2024.

Whatever the final decision is on troop levels, the key point is that the Obama administration and other U.S. officials should emphasize very clearly that the thousands of American soldiers who will remain in Afghanistan are there to support the United States' long-term partnership agreement with Afghanistan -- and that its life extends well beyond 2014.

This is important to emphasize, because Afghans have been understandably confused by some of the different signals the Obama administration has made about its commitment to Afghanistan in the past.

A key issue facing the Afghan government as the United States draws down its forces is how will the Afghan economy fare? Should the economy collapse, the Afghan government's ability to deal with security issues would be substantially eroded. Already, rents in Kabul are tumbling and nongovernmental organizations are laying off staff.

Surprisingly, however, a rigorous and comprehensive World Bank study last year found that Afghanistan will continue to have a healthy growth rate, dropping from its present robust 9% a year rate "to closer to 5% on average until 2018." (The U.S. economy's yearly growth rates over the past four years have been around 2%.)

The economic contraction as the United States draws down is likely to be less severe than might be supposed, partly because the hundreds of billions that the U.S. military has spent in Afghanistan over the past decade is spending that almost entirely benefits the United States.

The World Bank study points out that "military spending by the United States (and other countries) finances the salaries of military personnel, investments in weapons equipment and systems. ... The impact of its withdrawal is therefore likely to be muted."

One indicator of the increasingly Afghan-led nature of the fight against the Taliban is the fact that some 300 Afghan soldiers and policemen are now dying every month in the war, while in January three U.S. soldiers were killed, which was the lowest number of any month during the previous four years.

On Afghanistan, Pakistan has some important common goals with the United States, NATO and Afghans themselves. Pakistan does not want to see Afghanistan collapse into a renewed civil war, which would destabilize Pakistan, nor does it want to see the Taliban in charge of the country again.

These basic shared goals, no civil war and no Taliban control of Afghanistan, can help to create the conditions for a successful post-2014 Afghanistan

Pakistan also wants a Pashtun-led government in Kabul and for the Taliban to have some representation in the south and the east. These are also goals the Afghans can live with.Lots more at http://www.cnn.com/2013/03/20/opinion/bergen-pakistan-afghanistan-hope
/index.html?hpt=hp_t3


Just...interesting...

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, March 20, 2013 7:36 AM

PENQUIN11


Afghanistan is bound to have a civil war, likely a never ending one if I had to take a guess. The problem with Afghanistan is that it really should be 3 nations: Tajekastan, Baluchistan, and punjabistan... Pakistan has the same problem, the northern part of Pakistan that borders Afghanistan needs to be included in Baluchistan....

God knows those people love to kill each other.

"But who prays for Satan? Who, in eighteen centuries, has had the common humanity to pray for the one sinner that needed it the most?"- Mark Twain

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, March 20, 2013 9:06 AM

BYTEMITE


Quote:

Originally posted by penquin11:
Afghanistan is bound to have a civil war, likely a never ending one if I had to take a guess. The problem with Afghanistan is that it really should be 3 nations: Tajekastan, Baluchistan, and punjabistan... Pakistan has the same problem, the northern part of Pakistan that borders Afghanistan needs to be included in Baluchistan....




Huh. I actually agree with this. The majority of the problems in that region, apart from resource issues, is that different tribes who have historically been at each others throats are being forced to kinda not really cooperate due to the national boundaries we've set up. So one group gets into power and really tramps down on the other group, in order so they can be seen as having control of the recognized borders of the country by the international community.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, March 20, 2013 11:08 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


Very good, Penguin. I agree, but only because both countries are still too hard to govern so tribal leadership is the only thing that works, and HAS worked for thousands of years. Dunno Pakistan that well, but in Afghanistan, until there is INFRASTRUCTURE and it's possible to get from one place to another quickly and easily, I don't see how central government can work--even if/when they ever DO get out of the bakshish mentality!

When we lived there, you couldn't even get around most places...roads built by Westerners disappeared in the sand within the year. I know it's changed dramatically, but the fact is they still are a long ways from the twentieth century, or even the nineteenth, in most parts of the country.

I've preached over and over about how the harsh climate/terrain created most of the mentality in Afghanistan...it's not that they love to kill each other, it's far more nuanced than that. I dare anyone to try and bring a country forward 2,000 years in a mere fifty, and that's what I've watched happen.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, March 20, 2013 1:05 PM

FREMDFIRMA



From the Article:
Quote:

March 16 marked an extraordinary moment in Pakistani history, as this is the first time a civilian government has served its entire five-year term (from 2008 to 2013).

This is momentous, as they're willing to hand back the reins, which is a rarity amongst those who've had it in their recent history.

Quote:

And, for the first time in its history, the Pakistani military appears unwilling to mount a coup against the civilian government. The military has successfully executed three coups and attempted a number of others since Pakistan's independence in 1947.

Also progress, although I think that unwillingness is kind of tenative.

Quote:

On Saturday, Musharaf announced he is returning to Pakistan from self-imposed exile on March 24 to run in elections that are to be held two months from now.

Okay, this just *reeks* of American lets-install-another-puppet-dictator to me, a foul stench which has pervaded the middle east for far too long, and has had, will have, enormous blowback effects for some time to come.
And frankly, I think we had a lot to do with the assassination of Benazir Bhutto as well, something that due to our own nasty previous history everyone on the planet suspects us of whether we really had anything to do with it or not.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassination_of_Benazir_Bhutto

Not to mention a rather sordid history of espionage and sabotage against their country.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raymond_Allen_Davis_incident

Mind you, that incident finally exhausted a tenative remnant of cooperation dating back to 1993, as the Pakistani ISI was very helpful in helping our Diplomatic Service capture Ramzi Yousef back in 1995 in regards to the 1993 WTC Bombing(1) - that COULD have eventually resulted in using our resources to help these people clean out entrenched radicals and nutjobs, but our support of Musharaf soured that deal a bit, and our post 2001 conduct made it a dead letter as every time we go Godzilla on the middle east, they start to see these guys as the only possible bulwark against our aggression instead of the menace that they truly are.

Unfortunately, despite being a menace the fact is that the radical nutjobs *are* in truth an effective bulwark against American aggression, and so long as we present a greater threat, they'll not help us run these guys to ground.

Anyhows, that whole business of Musharaf announcing his return and whatnot looks to have the slimy fingerprints of our own alphabet boys all over it, and even were it not true (I suspect it is) they'd still suspect us as they have real cause to be suspicious.

Quote:

In a telling sign that Pakistan is moving into something of a new era, Pakistani military officials are not supportive of Musharraf's return and nor is much of the Pakistani public.

But you can bet your ass certain Corporations and Agencies here are all but celebrating the notion, yes ?

Quote:

The military has backed insurgent and terrorist groups in India and Afghanistan to maintain its perceived interests in these countries. A more confident civilian Pakistani government will, hopefully, over time be less likely to support these militant groups.

We coulda had that at any time, simply by not threatening those interests.

Quote:

If that election is perceived as being relatively free and fair this would go a long way to ease tensions in the Afghan body politic, increase Afghanistan's overall security and reassure both Afghan and outside investors that the country has a promising future.

On the other hand, if the 2014 election is seen as unfair, corrupted and is deeply contested, this would likely precipitate a vicious circle of conflict, deteriorating security and capital flight.

The United States, therefore, should do everything it can to provide technical and security assistance to make these elections go as well as possible.


Bull. Fucking. Shit.
What the United States SHOULD do, is stay as far the hell out of it, away from it, as extremely as possible, we're NOT seen as an honest broker cause we really ain't, and our involvement tends to perpetuate rather than forestall disasters.

In fact, that very suggestion in this article strikes a raw note, comes off as more than a little out of place, and from my perspective says... "provide technical and security assistance to make these elections go HOW WE WANT THEM TO GO." (i.e. installing Musharaf)

Quote:

But unlike what happened in the run-up to the 2009 Afghan presidential election, U.S. officials should not get involved in privately backing certain candidates. This private support had the unintended effect of splitting the opposition to Afghan President Hamid Karzai, as key leaders of the anti-Karzai opposition all believed they were "America's candidate." It also deeply alienated Karzai, whose occasional diatribes against the United States are best understood as due to his lingering resentment over this issue.

In other words, let's not get CAUGHT this time...

Karzai was a puppet, a total crook we all but force-installed over the will of the people he'd be ruling, with a little support from the scum who'd be benefitting most from that rule, but the problem came up with the folk opposed to him were more.. erm.. "useful", to the agendas of those who initially propped him up and he was left to his own devices and swinging in the breeze with a fistfull of empty promises, just like every other cretin we've propped up over there - that he's kinda pissed about it is par for the course, although it's ironic that his increasing opposition to our gamesmanship has won him support from folks who initially despised him, even if that opposition is based in spite rather than benevolence - at least he's *willing* to oppose us, although that almost never ends well for them who do.

Quote:

A key aspect of U.S. and NATO planning for the Afghan presidential elections in April 2014 is that given the fact that there are no discernible front-runners to succeed Karzai, there may be no clear winner who attains more than 50% of the vote, which under Afghan electoral laws would necessitate a runoff election between the two leading candidates.

Security, technical and economic assistance for the Afghan elections should be prepared to extend into summer 2014, because it is not clear as yet when that runoff might be held.


Uh huh... "technical and economic assistance" my entire ass, cheating and bribes would be more honest, cause that's what they mean here - either as a threat to put Karzai in his place, or to remove him and foster his replacement with someone more amenable to our whims.

Quote:

Last year the United States and Afghanistan negotiated a Strategic Partnership Agreement, which ensures America will continue to play a supporting role there until 2024.

Whatever the final decision is on troop levels, the key point is that the Obama administration and other U.S. officials should emphasize very clearly that the thousands of American soldiers who will remain in Afghanistan are there to support the United States' long-term partnership agreement with Afghanistan -- and that its life extends well beyond 2014.

This is important to emphasize, because Afghans have been understandably confused by some of the different signals the Obama administration has made about its commitment to Afghanistan in the past.


Propaganda doublespeak - we've occupied a country which don't want us there, strongarmed and threatened them into an "agreement" with our weapons jammed down their throat, and in doing so not only violated all our assertions to them, but also our Governments promise to us about not getting involved in that mess longterm, our people don't want our troops there, their people don't want our troops there, most of our troops don't wanna be there....
So ask, who benefits ?

Quote:

The economic contraction as the United States draws down is likely to be less severe than might be supposed, partly because the hundreds of billions that the U.S. military has spent in Afghanistan over the past decade is spending that almost entirely benefits the United States.

The World Bank study points out that "military spending by the United States (and other countries) finances the salaries of military personnel, investments in weapons equipment and systems. ... The impact of its withdrawal is therefore likely to be muted."


That is who benefits - the big Corpies and the Military-Intel-Industrial Combine, and not anyone else.

We need to get OUT of there, and get our hands OFF - we're like a stupid monkey who can't get his hand out of the jar with the banana, who refuses to LET GO.


Byte
Quote:

The majority of the problems in that region, apart from resource issues, is that different tribes who have historically been at each others throats are being forced to kinda not really cooperate due to the national boundaries we've set up. So one group gets into power and really tramps down on the other group

And then the others gang up on them and hell breaks loose, of course.


All in all, that article, while managing to SOUND "hopeful", is in fact all but outright suggesting we continue the same dumbfuck policies which have blown up in our faces every single goddamn time since the 1950's.

Lemme ask you this one - do you really want Musharaf, or really, any one of our little propped up dictator punks who all but inevitably turn on us after we leave them hanging, in charge of a country with NUCLEAR WEAPONS ?
Especially when there's a certain cabal within those propping these shitheels up which is all but desperately jonesing for WWIII and a nuclear exchange ?

I do not.

-Frem
(1) - Despite the FBI providing the bomb and an expert to wire it up for them, guilt for the plan itself and willingness to carry it out does fall on Yousef, and his uncle, KSM.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, August 29, 2013 12:17 PM

JAYNEZTOWN


Judge overturns jail term for Pakistan doctor who helped find Osama bin Laden
http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/08/29/20244189-judge-overturns
-jail-term-for-pakistan-doctor-who-helped-find-osama-bin-laden?lite

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan -- A doctor who was jailed for 33 years for helping the CIA find Osama bin Laden had his prison sentence overturned by a local judge Thursday.
Shakeel Afridi was arrested for treason last year over his role in a CIA-backed fake polio vaccination campaign which he used to collect DNA samples from bin Laden and his family in order to prove the al Qaeda leader's whereabouts to U.S. authorities

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, November 8, 2021 1:10 PM

JAYNEZTOWN

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, April 8, 2022 2:09 PM

JAYNEZTOWN


Stash of assault rifles, body armor, passports with multiple visas, and sham uniforms found in penthouse of 'fake' Homeland agents - including one with 'links to Pakistani intelligence' - who 'infiltrated Biden, Kamala and Jill's Secret Service details'

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10700055/USSS-agents-Biden-Ka
malas-probed-fake-DHS-agents-showered-gifts.html


A motion for detention of the two men who were arrested for impersonating federal agents includes a slew of damning evidence, including images showing several different passports, visas and IDs.

The prosecutors are requesting Arian Taherzadeh, 40, and Haider Sher-Ali, 35, be detained due to a slew of evidence found in a raid of their units in a luxury apartment building in southeast Washington, D.C.

'They are not law enforcement agents, and they are not involved in sanctioned covert activities,' the motion for detention filed Friday claims. 'Neither Defendant is even employed by the United States government.'

'But their impersonation scheme was sufficiently realistic to convince other government employees, including law enforcement agents, of their false identities,' the memorandum added.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, March 7, 2023 1:48 PM

JAYNEZTOWN


Pakistani Taliban attack Karachi police station

North-west Pakistan in grip of deadly Taliban resurgence
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/jan/31/terrorists-north-west-pa
kistan-deadly-taliban-resurgence


9 policemen killed 13 injured in suicide attack in Pakistan's restive Balochistan
https://www.theweek.in/wire-updates/international/2023/03/06/fgn21-pak
-2ndld-blast.html


Pakistan's resurgent militancy is a 'Frankenstein monster' of its own creation, experts say
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-02-22/pakistan-under-taliban-attacks-
amid-rising-poverty/101999490




Pakistan suicide bomber kills 9 police officers
https://www.bangkokpost.com/world/2521589/pakistan-suicide-bomber-kill
s-9-police-officers

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

YOUR OPTIONS

NEW POSTS TODAY

USERPOST DATE

OTHER TOPICS

DISCUSSIONS
In the garden, and RAIN!!! (2)
Thu, March 28, 2024 11:50 - 3410 posts
Elections; 2024
Thu, March 28, 2024 11:18 - 2071 posts
BUILD BACK BETTER!
Thu, March 28, 2024 11:16 - 6 posts
Salon: NBC's Ronna blunder: A failed attempt to appeal to MAGA voters — except they hate her too
Thu, March 28, 2024 07:04 - 1 posts
Russia Invades Ukraine. Again
Thu, March 28, 2024 05:27 - 6154 posts
Russian losses in Ukraine
Wed, March 27, 2024 23:21 - 987 posts
human actions, global climate change, global human solutions
Wed, March 27, 2024 15:03 - 824 posts
NBC News: Behind the scenes, Biden has grown angry and anxious about re-election effort
Wed, March 27, 2024 14:58 - 2 posts
RFK Jr. Destroys His Candidacy With VP Pick?
Wed, March 27, 2024 11:59 - 16 posts
Russia says 60 dead, 145 injured in concert hall raid; Islamic State group claims responsibility
Wed, March 27, 2024 10:57 - 49 posts
Ha. Haha! HAHA! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAAHAHA!!!!!!
Tue, March 26, 2024 21:26 - 1 posts
You can't take the sky from me, a tribute to Firefly
Tue, March 26, 2024 16:26 - 293 posts

FFF.NET SOCIAL