Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
May 8, 2009
The India Problem

American officials want Mr. Zardari and the Pakistani Army to move troops, including the country’s 11th Infantry Division, from Lahore and the eastern part of the country, where the army has been preoccupied with India, toward the western border, where the government is battling Taliban insurgents.
Emphasis on Al Qaeda at Three-Way Talks , NYT, May 7

Pakistan's 11th Infantry Division is stationed in Lahore, Punjab, right next to the border with India. Obama may have given order to Zarari to move the division. Zardari may give that order to Kayani, the Pakistani military chief. But Kayani will not obey it for very good reason.

India's elite land forces, capable of hitting deep inside enemy territory, have begun exercises in Punjab along the Pakistani border.

The Ambala-based Kharga Corps, a rapid-action force of 15,000, is equipped to operate behind enemy lines and to carry out a proactive strategic role.

"A large number of tanks, infantry combat vehicles, artillery guns and specialist vehicles continued these maneuvers by day and night under near warlike conditions," according to the ministry's statement. "A parachute drop by airborne troops and other heliborne operations was also undertaken to supplement the offensive by the mechanized forces."

Indian defense forces have been preparing for operations behind enemy lines and incorporated a new military doctrine to this effect in 2004. The Army has 5,000 elite soldiers, trained at unknown locations by Israeli troops, who can swiftly enter enemy territory and even operate behind enemy lines, Indian Army sources said.
Elite Indian Troops Practice Strategic Operations, Defense News (via WPR), May 4

If the Obama administration were seriously concerned about the well-being of Pakistan, it would have some tough talks with India. Not only about large scale maneuvers next to Pakistan's border, but also over its role in Afghanistan. Instead the administration does not care about any Pakistani national self-interest but pushes it to neglect its own security.

That conflict will have to be resolved. Either by a change in the administration's approach to the problem, or by violent means. The second way is currently more likely.

Comments

b-
Damn you’re a newshound from the best bloodlines!
Something stinks in the curry. To me it looks like there is gonna be another war, the reasons: Mumbai attacts (blamed on radical muslims from Pak), worsening internal conflicts (the control of Pak’s nukes in the balance) and the increased pressure from the U.S. Axis of War Criminals to force Pakistan to jump through invisible hoops.
I’ll have to be honest, as a knuckleheaded american I’ve viewed Pakistan with fear and distrust (thanks to the MSM that keeps us so well informed)… it wasn’t until I’d heard we’d been rendering prisoners there that I really started to wake-up to the idea that not everything was as they’d been telling me. How is it a country can be an “enemy” yet they’d be willing to do our dirty work for us? Doesn’t make sense, just like Syria was supposed to be helping us by jailing the Disappeared … aren’t these guys the bad guys too?
I’d say India, America, UK, Israel are making their play… for what? I don’t have the slightest idea. I don’t think they can even hide behind the guise of nation building anymore… killing and looting is all that seems to come from these actions… I can’t even buy into controlling Carbohydrates:) as a valid reason because I think the world is pretty close to having other sources of energy and this makes the control of oil nothing more than control of pollution.
I’m not a very deep thinker, peace seems the easiest way to live, at least from my point of view. I guess that’s while I’ll never make it in politics.

Posted by: DavidS | May 8 2009 14:14 utc | 1

I am not quite sure I understand – US needs to talk tough to India?
1) The same country which suffered 26/11 planned by ISI and executed by Let and yet showed considerable restraint and not retaliated even slightest except talk a few tough words?
2) The very same country which has been the target of numerous bombings in public places in cities like Bombay, Bangalore, Jaipur and many more – all done by ISI through their cells like Indian Mujahadeen and SIMI?
3) The country which fought three wars with Pakistan all of which were started by Pakistan?
And what mischief is India doing in Afghanistan? built a 215-km long Delaram-Zaranj highway which has been handed over to the Afghani govt? On the same lines, do you protest 1) the gigantic and ever-increasing military and economic aid that USA has been gifting Pakistan for over 60 years now? 2) China’s military aid to Pakistan and its building the Gwador port in Pakistan?
I concur with you with your reports of ‘opinion-shaping’ about Pakistan in recent media articles and the exaggeration of the mortal threat posed by Taliban to USA but why must India be penalised because USA wants Pakistan to fight Taliban (which was created by the USA via Pakistani madrassas and Saudi money)? Why must India be punished for US empire-building dreams or its ambitions in the Great Game or an oil pipeline or whatever its actual goal is in Afghanistan?

Posted by: Confused | May 8 2009 14:30 utc | 2

Confused – Dont bother explaining facts here. We know FACTS have an anti-Pakistan bias.

Posted by: deldel | May 8 2009 14:42 utc | 3

I have absolutely no desire to explain anything except request that leave India out of this muddle. It has nothing to do with whatever grand plans USA (and/or UK and Israel) may have in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Posted by: Confused | May 8 2009 14:56 utc | 4

Well Confused I think India is part of the muddle whether it likes it or not. This has more to do with its proximity to China than anything else.

Posted by: dh | May 8 2009 15:28 utc | 5

Proximity to China? I am sorry I dont quite understand how proximity to China drags India into this matter.
Yes India has physical proximity to the Pakistan-Afghanistan region and a history of a fight with Pakistan over Kashmir but it has no secret evil designs or hand-in-hand conspiracy with USA. India is too busy in itself (have a look at the circus of the on-going elections) and short-sighted (unlike China which has been so proactively gathering natural resources and building economic ties) to a part of any grand conspiracy.
India has a number of faults but a look at the history will tell you that its been on the defensive mode wrt to its fight with Pakistan (it cannot even defend itself adequately!) ISI and Pakistani Army has been exaggerating India’s ‘aggression’ and RAW’s ‘tactics’ to maintain its raison d’être.

Posted by: Confused | May 8 2009 15:56 utc | 6

The Great Game has always been about keeping Russia…and now China out of the Persian Gulf. India and China may be friendly neighbours, I don’t know, but strategically India is seen by the US as an ally. That’s why Pakistan is so important. India’s problem is to stay neutral and uninvolved.

Posted by: dh | May 8 2009 16:11 utc | 7

The Great Game has always been about keeping Russia, and now China, out of the Indian Ocean and the Persian Gulf. That’s why Pakistan is so important. China and India may well be friendly neighbours…I don’t know…but India is seen by the US as a strategic ally. Seems to me India’s problem is staying neutral and uninvolved.

Posted by: dh | May 8 2009 16:16 utc | 8

US may (does it?) see India as a counter-weight to China in the region but frankly India is too insignificant, unfocused and self-involved to ever be one!
India historically has been non-aligned on an average and in the current scenario is neutral and involved in whatever US does in Pakistan-Afghanistan. Why make India a villain in this American drama to appease Pakistan? USA can use any other technique to make them happy and get their dirty work done.

Posted by: Confused | May 8 2009 17:04 utc | 9


Seems to me India’s problem is staying neutral and uninvolved.

Good point. But the US is not letting it to. Case in point, Iran. Against our best interests, we voted with the nutter anglo saxon countries against Iran.
That was stupid.
After the 26/11 incident, we’ve decided that Pakistan dismemberment is worth the thoughtless post split mess. So, we will dance to US machinations. But from India’s POV, that’s one less country to worry about and besides China is super massive huge.
Currently we’re spending money like water for subs, frigates, airplanes, Phalcons from Israel and coastal craft.
Not good.
And all the while, we’re Israel’s top defence purchaser from Barak systems to a whole bunch of radar stuff.
Again, not good as it sends a message to the Middle East where our preferences lie.
All in all, we’re playing with an open hand and everyone can see what the cards are.
That’s it. Make or break strategy.
Stupid fellas, no one seems to have learnt from Pakistani support in the 70s,80s to USA and what became of it.

Posted by: shanks | May 8 2009 17:11 utc | 10


Seems to me India’s problem is staying neutral and uninvolved.

Good point. But the US is not letting it to. Case in point, Iran. Against our best interests, we voted with the nutter anglo saxon countries against Iran.
That was stupid.
After the 26/11 incident, we’ve decided that Pakistan dismemberment is worth the thoughtless post split mess. So, we will dance to US machinations. But from India’s POV, that’s one less country to worry about and besides China is super massive huge.
Currently we’re spending money like water for subs, frigates, airplanes, Phalcons from Israel and coastal craft.
Not good.
And all the while, we’re Israel’s top defence purchaser from Barak systems to a whole bunch of radar stuff.
Again, not good as it sends a message to the Middle East where our preferences lie.
All in all, we’re playing with an open hand and everyone can see what the cards are.
That’s it. Make or break strategy.
Stupid fellas, no one seems to have learnt from Pakistani support in the 70s,80s to USA and what became of it.

Posted by: shanks | May 8 2009 17:14 utc | 11

It has nothing to do with whatever grand plans USA
Well, this isn’t true at all. India has enormous interest in cooperating to reduce jihadist insurgencies in northern Pakistan and Kashmir.
Over and over we witness how the naive binary preferred by our host Empire/other is betrayed by the complicated conflation of multi-lateral interests. And they all don’t dig “the taliban.”

Posted by: slothrop | May 8 2009 17:25 utc | 12

“Why make India a villain in this American drama to appease Pakistan?”
Perhaps you should address that question to the Indian government? I don’t think India wants to get dragged further into the mess but factions on both sides seem to be provoking it.

Posted by: dh | May 8 2009 17:37 utc | 13

India had been buying military equipment from Russia but that does not make it a communist or a supporter of communism ideology. On the same lines, India looks at its needs while buying military equipment from Israel and that does not mean it supports Israeli occupation of Palestine. Infact there was an uproar in Kerala recently when one of the election candidates Shashi Tharoor made a pro-Israel comment.
India needs to deal with power shortages for its 1.3-billion-plus population- there are so many villages without electricity even today and even cities face daily power outages. India needs the nuclear deal to meet these shortages while US wants to make money from selling nuclear reactors – in the meantime India has signed nuclear reactor deals with Russia and France. It was a bad deal for India agreed – didn’t get much while gave away too much!

Posted by: Confused | May 8 2009 17:51 utc | 14

Of course India is involved in Afganistan and Pakistan and their intelligence agenies are deliberately destabilising Pakistan. The US is encircling China and is trying to break up both Pakistan and China using the National Endowment for democracy. India is the ally of the United States and has of course been helping in any way it can.
China is well aware of India’s involvement in destabilising Tibet and allowing US funded Tibetans in exiles to operate a government in exile. I wonder how India would like it if China hosted governments in exile for groups that want to break away from India. Hypocrisy abounds!

Posted by: India is involved | May 8 2009 17:58 utc | 15

India has an interest in ‘jihadist insurgencies in Kashmir’ and has nothing to gain or lose from ‘jihadist insurgencies in northern Pakistan’. On the other hand, I doubt US and NATO’s actions (esp the drone attacks indiscriminately killing civilians) will reduce any ‘jihadist insurgencies’.
“Why make India a villain in this American drama to appease Pakistan?” is meant for people who believe that US ought to ‘tough talk’ with India to appease Pakistani Army.

Posted by: Confused | May 8 2009 17:59 utc | 16

I understand. It’s not easy being neutral. Especially when some people only see the world in terms of good guys and bad guys.

Posted by: dh | May 8 2009 18:00 utc | 17

Confused, I for one would appreciate a briefing from you on the Indian elections, and a lot less of this pointless back and forth chatter on the “Great Game”. Both India and Iran are building roads and railways in Afghanistan, we hear nothing of this. The Indian elections are a month long, we haven’t seen 5 minutes on the Western MSM, only a dog-and-pony show Karzai-Zardari ‘bruther’ can’t we all get along, with Holbrooke, $10,000 MILLION more of our life savings bleeding into the endless DoD black sewers.
How about it, b, give Confused a showcase: The India Elections.

Posted by: Shah Loam | May 8 2009 19:06 utc | 18

Indian intelligence and govt has been unable to protect its citizens in their homeland – surely you give them too much credit when you say they are ‘deliberately destabilising Pakistan’!
India has recognized that Tibet is a part of China in return of China’s recognition that Sikkim is a part of India. India has given refuge to the Tibetan exiles (esp. because India is the birthplace of Buddhism) but has consistently refused to get involved in the Tibetan affairs. Very recently, India refused Dalai Lama and his retinue to visit Tawang (a place of huge significance for the Tibetans during their marking the 50-year anniversary because Tawang was Dalai Lama and party’s town of entry into India) to ensure its impartiality in the politics between China and Tibetan exiles.

Posted by: Confused | May 8 2009 19:07 utc | 19

Shah Loam I would love to but don’t think I have the expertise! Do you have any specific question I can try to answer?

Posted by: Confused | May 8 2009 19:56 utc | 20

Here’s 2c worth of geo-strategy for you schmucks: this is about natural resources exploitation!
There are three routes to the Indian Ocean: through Iran; through Baluchistan to the Chinese-built port of Gwadar; and/or through the Indus Valley of Pakistan to Karachi.
[In 1958, the Gwadar enclave was transferred to Pakistan. It was made part of the Balochistan province in 2002. Balochistan has always been a part of Afghanistan, and only ceded temporarily to Pakistan by the British in 1947, but if Balochistan secedes, they are by law re-adsorbed back into Afghanistan, but let’s not go there. Pashtoonistan, (FATA) was also temporarily ceded to Pakistan by the Brit’s Durand Line, for that matter, and now that the Raj is gone, FATA belongs to Afghanistan.]
Anyway…
Iran and India are cooperating on road and rail corridors into Afghanistan, but it’s a doomed mission. Amer-Zion will maintain and increase sanctions against Iran, there is no possibility of international financing for a bulk ore-oil terminal, and zero possibility of materials transport if they did (export credit is ‘shut in’).
That leaves Balochistan or Karachi. Obama/Gates/Clinton have realized the US can’t possibly maintain a secure corridor through Balochistan into Gwadar, even if they manage to get Balochistan to secede and rejoin Afghanistan, it just ups the GWOT2.
Also, bluntly, ISAF forces and US:EU taxpayer funding would end up as the security forces for a successful Chinese iron-copper ore railway system to their Gwadar port.
Ain’t gonna happen…
That leaves Karachi. A Khyber Pass railroad has been the dream since the Raj, but it’s not the railroad Amer-Zion is after! America produces none of it own steel or copper, with the exception of sheet metal mini-mills for Detroit and that’s going away. All US steel and copper products come from China (and India) overproduction. Amer-Zion has zero interest in Afghanistan’s iron-copper deposits, massive as they are, but would make every attempt to block China’s use of a Pakistan corridor by making the Pakis our ‘joined-at-the-hip’ blood-brothers. Hence the ‘Big Mission’.
I mean, look at all the Af-Pak media coverage, it’s simply astounding!!!!!!!!!!
No, Amer-Zion wants an oil-gas pipeline through the Hindu Kush, over the Khyber Pass and down the Indus Valley to Karachi. It doesn’t matter if the actual Afghan oil and gas make it that far, it’s traded one-for-one with Iranian Pars gas, for example, once it’s in the pipeline, the point of origin becomes a credit system.
http://www1.american.edu/TED/iranpipeline.htm
http://www.heritage.org/research/asiaandthepacific/bg2139.cfm
http://www.heritage.org/research/asiaandthepacific/images/bg2139_map1.gif
There you go. Great minds think alike. ‘Quetta, or Bust!”
There are now thought to be huge Afghan reserves of oil and gas!
http://www.azom.com/news.asp?newsID=5071
Either they go out west through the Stan’s through Russian pipelines to EU, or southeast through Pakistan. Amer-Zion would NEVER let the oil and gas get dinged from transit fees by Russia and Ukraine. Cold War.
So those poor, poor folks living in Swat Valley, fabled ‘Land of the Hindu Kush’ aka FATA, 1% Talib and 99% Pastuns from Pashtoonistan, are in their way.
FATA sits astride the Khyber Pass oil-gas-ore corridor.
All of Pakistan must be mobilized to crush the Talib and turn Pashtoonistan into a refugee camp, using Amer-Zionist’s model for Palestine or Nigeria, for that matter.
Obama just bought and paid for his own Little Oil War.
It’s not about Al Queda-Taliban-Paki-Nukes, it’s about Khyber Pass Oil Corridor!

Posted by: Col. Ollie Tafferty | May 8 2009 20:03 utc | 21

I should probably add for those who have been asleep during the ‘aughts’, that Hamid Karzai used to consult for UNOCAL on the TAPI pipeline way back in the Papa Bush days, and Karzai’s new running mate in the August selection is a Hindu Kush warlord who will be able to secure the pipeline route as far as Kabul.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090504/ap_on_re_as/as_afghanistan
There’s your New Boss: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohammed_Fahim
Like most of Afghanistan’s ruling elite, Fahim is an expatriate who fled the country during the Soviet occupation. Fahim actually joined the Soviets as a collaborator, beginning his career as a Soviet-trained intelligence officer in the KHAD secret police.
So you got your good cop Hamid schmoozing with Obama, and your bad cop Fahim assassinating the opposition.
Nice operation you’re running there. I mean, you can hate the Amer-Zionists for their psychopathic and genocidal ethos, but it’s just business, and they are very clever, deliberate and powerful.
And, not to put too sharp a point on it, it’s not they’re money they’re spending.
IT’S OUR GRANDCHILDRENS’!!

Posted by: Col. Ollie Tafferty | May 8 2009 20:20 utc | 22

Also, frankly, as far as ISI-DIA-IISO-CIA, the black ops merc shows are an independent profit center to the Neo Great Game. They enjoy 1) taxpayer funding; 2) full intel; 3) freedom from oversight; and 4) massive profit potential by creating terrorist events.
Think about it. These mercs are crawling all over the world, bombing up new business.
It’s just merc politics, not geo-politics, though it serves at their Lord’s pleasure.

Posted by: COT | May 8 2009 20:28 utc | 23

Just a few days ago I posted this on TPMcafe.
Pakistan, outside the box
By Amitai Etzioni – May 6, 2009, 4:27PM
I don’t agree with Prof. Amitai Etzioni on linking India to this whole issue. The effort is to bring India in to the conflict to increase the scope of the conflict, not resolve it. There is no way the US can mediate or resolve the long simmering conflict in the Subcontinent.
The Pakistan army with active connivance of the US has come up with this excuse that the Indian army on the Eastern borders somehow is a stumbling block for the Pakistan army to deploy troops on the western borders.
For almost four years the Bush admin tried to -or at least pretended to- force the Pakistan army for more deployment on the Western borders. We heard many excuses then but not this one. This excuse emerged right after the Obama admin took over or just days before his was sworn in.
Imo, the US is not looking to end its involvement in Afghanistan but the whole game is to extend it. We will continue to see more excuses, more obstacles and some more posturing. Of course, the ever-present threat of Nukes hanging over the western world from the So-called Islamic world will always come in handy.
Let me say this that the US has no way to resolve the conflict between India and Pakistan in a short period of time.It might take years of diplomacy to make both paries agree on some solution and sell the solution to their own populations.
Prof. Amitai Etzioni, can the US wait that long for the Pakistan army to show up on its western borders? Is this not just another ploy to add some longevity to the Afghan war?

Posted by: Hasho | May 9 2009 5:28 utc | 24

@ Col Ollie #22
I’m sorry, but I cannot find a confirmation of this statement:

[In 1958, the Gwadar enclave was transferred to Pakistan. It was made part of the Balochistan province in 2002. Balochistan has always been a part of Afghanistan,

that is that Gwardar and Balochistan has always been part of Afghanistan — that Afghanistan was deprived of access to the sea in 1958. It doesn’t seem to be correct is the best I can say.

Posted by: Chuck Cliff | May 9 2009 20:02 utc | 25

Mark Twain (1835-1910) lecturer; He had remarked on Kipling’s poem: “The White Man’s Burden has been sung. Who will sing the Brown Man’s?” blamed the white man who, in the name of civilization and “the white man’s burden,” impoverished many peoples in the world. The poverty of India suffocated Mark Twain. In his book Mark Twain in India, Keshav Mustalkik noted of Twain’s observation:
The white man’s tools were whiskey and wine and tobacco offered with the fetters and hanging pole and noose; the white man’s world was death and murder coupled with the commandment Thou Shall not kill. Mark Twain angrily said, “We are obliged to believe that a nation that could look on, unmoved, and see starving or freezing women hanged for stealing twenty-six cents’ worth of food or rags, and boys snatched from their mothers and men from their families and sent to the other side of the world for long terms of years for similar trifling offenses, was nation to whom the term ‘civilized” could not in any large way be applied.” The result of ‘civilization’ was the extermination of the savages. These are the humorous things in the world – among them the white man’s notion that he is less savage than the savage.”

Posted by: Uncle $cam | May 12 2009 8:17 utc | 26

Debord:
“The root of the spectacle is that oldest of all social specializations, the specialization of power. The spectacle plays the specialized role of speaking in the name of all the other activities. It is hierarchical society’s ambassador to itself, delivering its official messages at a court where no one else is allowed to speak. The most modern aspect of the spectacle is thus also the most archaic.”

Posted by: anna missed | May 12 2009 8:46 utc | 27