I've kept quiet over the past few weeks with all this crap flying around about the countless problems plaguing Pakistan. But I really need to let out some steam.
It's such BS how the image of Pakistan succumbing to extremist forces is being paraded around in the MSM. This recent piece* by a NY Times writer really set me off.
The main themes you'll find in most reports are these three:
"Oh my, look at how close the Taliban forces have gotten to Islamabad - only 100 miles away!"
"The Pakistani nukes are in danger of falling into the hands of Al-Qaeda."
"Pakistan has given up control by signing over the Swat valley to the Shariah. The Shariah is taking over the world! "
Outright fear mongering at its worst.
Look, I'm no fan of the Pakistani government. They are crooks to the highest degree. They've stolen from the population as well as from the international community. Shame on them and shame on the world for continuing to support them.
And I'm also no fan of the nation of Pakistan, as so many Pakistani nationalists who live and die for the nation. Zaid Hamid is one character who at first impressed me, but recently I'm getting very tired of his pro-Pakistani, pro-army stance riddled with Zionist and Indian paranoia. These folks have gone off the deep end, referring to Pakistani forces as the real mujahideen.
But let's get real here folks. Pakistan is (and sadly always will be) the same useless country of corrupt feudal lords and army generals. The country is not losing control to anyone. The army is the seventh largest in the world. They have an established federal infrastructure with semi-stable governmental services. Police run the streets, not gangs or warlords. Legal cases are settled in courts, not by local mafias.
So what's with all this propaganda painting Pakistan with the same brush as failed states Afghanistan and Somalia?
First, I'm convinced the powers-that-be desire for a more controllable Pakistan. And the best way to achieve said desire is to either break it up or declare it a failed state. Both options would result in an outside presence needed to oversee the nation.
The other possibility is along the lines of Pepe Escobar's theory that all eyes are on the main prize: resource-rich Baluchistan. This theory includes the chess-game going on between the US, Russia, and China.
Regardless of the various theories posited to explain the outside presence, it's painfully clear that America is screwing things up, what with the careless drone bombings and the recent findings of them using white-phosphorous.
And that's why I love how this picture of a US soldier in Afghanistan perfectly sums up America's poorly planned presence in Af-Pak. Just like this fool who didn't consider using a weight clip to hold the plates. Idiot.
It's really too bad that so much international politics is hamstringing this region. I really would've liked to have seen how far the Afghan Taliban could have gone with their project from the late 90's.
======
*The author basically served as a mouthpiece for the liberal elites of Pakistan. Fearful of losing their lavish secular lifestyles, they're coming up with this crap:
"All the world's achievements for the past 500 years are at risk"
"Once you bring Islam into politics, it's hard to handle..You don't have the tools to control it."
For them (Islamists) "laughter is not permitted, not even a full smile"
"This is really a war for the soul of Pakistan"
Huh? You mean the soul of Pakistan was never threatened by the gross economic disparity that you thrive off of? The soul of Pakistan was never threatened by the institutionalized cronyism fueled by your greed? Ya, it's just now that some folks up north are fed up with the ineffective local government and are calling for Shariah courts that you fear for the soul of Pakistan.
Get real you losers.
10 comments:
Brother Naeem I love your post here! I've also been getting fed up with the constant Western MSM barrage of fear mongering towards Pakistan (the latest fear mongering over a Muslim country coming out from those idiots).
I also agree with you that America is trying to break Pakistan's back through instigating civil war, which it hopes will eventually lead to the dissolution of Pakistan (so they and India can take over Balochistan). The other option I've heard these fools trot out is allowing the (corrupt) "democratically elected" government of Zardari's fail so another military dictatorship could take over. Zardari the traitor has also slowly started to make treaties with America over handing over Pakistan's nukes to them further neutralizing the country! Here's the link: http://www.boston.com/news/world/asia/articles/2009/05/05/pakistan_us_in_talks_on_nuclear_security/
One question I have though is over the motivations of the Pakistan's military and ISI in participating in this latest civil war exercise for America. I keep reading that the ISI helps the Taliban (and other such groups) as a way to keep Afghanistan under their indirect control and as a way to fight the Hindu military in Kashmir. The parts of Afghanistan that have been taken over by the Taliban in other words are indirectly under Pakistan's watch so that India wouldn't try to gain influence in Afghanistan as a whole (a prospect I understand is unbearable since that would give India a strategic advantage). So why are they fighting the Taliban (and related groups) now? Or is just a show of force (to extract billions more from America and to pretend that they've defeated the Taliban on their side so America can get off their backs)? Surely the Pak military and ISI is aware of America's intentions to break away Balochistan. That's where China is trying to develop the Gwader port. So I guess I'm just trying to make sense of what's going on in the Pak military circles. Finally another speculation I've heard is that Al-Quaida may instigate another terror attack upon India in order to get the Pak military out of Swat (if the Pak military is really fighting over there and not just pretending to). Insha'allah I'm praying for America to eventually lose in this and every other part of the Muslim world, which I feel it will eventually do. That's because conquering and stabilizing foreign lands is never easy especially when you're facing a deep recession and when other nations (Russia, China, even some members of the EU) are trying to foil your plan.
There is no doubt that Pakistan will be balkanized (if not already).
let's hope the Pakistani people have more braincells than the Arabs or at least they will learn from their mistakes.
At the end, please remember to make Dua' to your brothers and sisters in Pakistan and elsewhere, ameen.
Just sayin hey to my brother from another mother, sorry been busy, but im keeping up with the blog
AA- Anon,
Good question. In order to understand the stance taken by the Army/ISI, we must distinguish between the various strains of the Taliban. The ISI supports the Afghan Taliban, because they have no expansionist aspirations. However, the Pakistani Taliban is a different beast and is intent on bringing down the Pakistani government.
Of course, as you mentioned, the need to build up the Taliban bogeyman threat by the ISI/Army is a sure-fire way of getting billions of international money.
Thank you Brother Naeem for the answer. In addition to what you said I found some other piece of info:
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/KE12Ak02.html
According to this article the ruling class and politicians are slowly becoming divided over how to deal with the Taliban. It seems quite a few politicians are against appeasing America and destroying the Taliban completely. Also it seems as though Zardari is getting ready to call off the attack soon so that he can tell the Americans he did his job. In reality the Taliban will rally again and continue with their attacks. So in my opinion it seems Pakistan just wanted to get America off its case by showing that it was chasing away the Taliban from Swat. If this is true then it's good because it'll prove to the Americans that they can never win a counterinsurgency war in that region (I don't believe they've even won in Iraq just temporarily stabilized it through blandishments, which the Iraqis are increasingly becoming frustrated by).
I think the most interesting aspect of this whole mess is how quickly people assume Pakistan is exactly like other chaos-ridden nations, where militancy and gangs of vigilantes rule. I think this has alot to do with the fact that American media loves to make other countries look like cesspools of chaos.
Hmm. BrNaeem, what exactly is your opinion on the Taliban?
Also, what do you think is a practical solution to Pakistan's political problems?
-The Muslim Kid-
AA-
@Anon, thanks for the Atimes link. Interesting article, but I'll withhold any doomsday judgment until the dust settles. Its too early to make such foolish statements like 'The previous fear of the "Talibanization" of Pakistan could possibly become reality.'
That's exactly the opposite of what I'm saying.
@Sophister, indeed the media and US government thrives off such infantile characterizations, primarily as it boosts their own morale.
@MK, what's my thought on the Taliban? Depends on who you're referring to. Afghan Taliban had done an admirable job in bringing about some semblance of peace and security to war-ravaged Afghanistan, all while ending poppy-seed cultivation.
On the other hand, I'm not very sure about Pakistani Taliban. Their purpose is not very clear and whatever it is, its unrealizable. Pakistan does not have a governance vacuum (like Afghanistan), so their presence is not really necessary.
And then of course, you inject all the outside interference that is bent on destabilizing Pakistan and you really don't know who really is the Pakistani Taliban and what they're hoping to achieve.
Read this in the BBC today.
Only 38% of northern Pakistan under government control.I think Pakistan IS facing problems. First, because of a corrupt and ineffectual government, there IS a power vaccum in parts of the country, especially Balochistan. Second, the Pashtuns have been taken advantage of by the ruling class (Punjab/Sindh) for so long that the government is not popular there at all.
I see lot of parallels with 1971 and again Pakistan is involved in a military offensive against her own people. Most likely if this sustains, Pakistan will further break up. The only thing working for Pakistan is that there is no India in the middle.
well well well, look who is here:
The problem seems to lie in a five-letter word - China. The malaise bears a striking similarity with the early 1980s when the Jayewardene government in Colombo took to the free market with gusto, was favorably inclined to accede to the setting up of a Voice of America transmitter within earshot of India, was reportedly allowing in Israeli intelligence specialists, and was toying with the idea of leasing out Trincomalee's fine natural harbor and its vast "oil farm" built by imperial Britain during World war II as a naval base for the Americans.
The supreme irony is that today Delhi is not going to lose sleep over any of those daredevil things that Jayewardene likely contemplated. Today, a quarter century later, India has not only taken to the market, but the current government in Delhi, which is about to complete its term, subscribed to the Washington consensus even after the Americans began losing faith in it.
The Israelis of course are all over India, with the visiting Israeli army chief taken to Kashmir last September on a counter-insurgency tour and Indian space scientists launching away Israeli "spy" satellites. India today not only desires a strong US naval presence in the Indian Ocean (as a "counterweight" to China) but aspires to be the US Navy's preferred partner. If Indians don't care to listen to Voice of America, it is merely because they have chosen to watch CNN. Source: Nepal's Maoists cry Indian foul playBy M K Bhadrakumar
http://atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/KE15Df02.html
Post a Comment