http://www.nytimes.com/2011/
http://www.southasiaanalysis.org/papers44/paper4360.html
24 02 2011
[Are the US/Pakistani militaries preparing to clean-up the awful mess that they have made in Pakistan?]
The amazing "Sec/Def" Bob Gates..., acknowledges just how much the Pak Army has cooperated with American direction lately, moving six divisions from the eastern border with India to the Durand Line, in order to fight America's terror wars.... With the sudden exposure of America's underhanded war raging within Pakistan and Afghanistan, by the Raymond Davis double-murder charges, American hypocrisy towards USA's most loyal ally is suddenly thrust to the forefront... The brutal killing of three or more Pakistani citizens by American CIA agents is something that happens nearly every day, in the hidden corners of Pakistan, Afghanistan, Lebanon, Palestine, Syria....with the Infamous white House Murder INC, and its subsidiaries worldwide...., all the way to Argentina... (SEE: General Kayani Must Not Blink and Pakistan’s Taliban Are CIA). Now that it is happening in the heart of Lahore, in broad daylight, the world gets to see with its own eyes, that American leaders are no longer concerned with keeping their criminal wars and extra-judicial assassinations secret....
http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=23453Sources reveal that tracking chips ("sim cards," SEE: Paramilitary Pretense, Who Controls the Predators?) were found on Raymond Davis.... These chips have been linked to Predator drones, used to assassinate targeted Pakistanis... The fact that one or more of these were in the US agent's belongings, confirms that he was connected to the CIA murder program, which have stopped since Davis' arrest.
First we see the American drone murder of five Waziri tribal leaders near Wana, now we learn of the attack upon a tribal Jirga in Miramshah... In both cases, non-combatant tribal leaders were meeting, exercising tribal democracy, when Hellfire missiles blew the assemblies apart. It is part of the pattern that has long been established in this war--Americans attack peaceful tribal's because they are peaceful. No deals with the Pak Army are acceptable to the NATO powers. If the Army gains the cooperation of any major tribe in the region, American missiles soon follow. When Pakistan surrendered Davis, it surrendered its sole opportunity to challenge the American-dictated status quo--that the Americans could tell the Pak Army and the Pak govt what to do and then back-up their words with air power or their network of subversives throughout Pakistan (some, or all of them called "Taliban"). The US wants every able-bodied male in Pakistan's tribal region (perhaps in the entire country) to take-up arms and fight back. If this were to happen, it would justify any imaginable military action in "self-defense" against them.
The Army has long known all of this; it is just now becoming apparent to the rest of us. If the Army does not let the US run all over them, then the US imperialists will simply use more force. No matter what your leaders say to reassure you, Pakistan, the US Special Forces, with all of the air cover in the world, is coming to your neighborhood very soon. Your greatest dilemma is, do we take up arms against this advance before, or after it becomes a "fait accompli"? Taking-up arms in holy war now, will exhaust whatever remains of hope for finding common cause in pursuit of some kind of peace.
My point is this: If you give-in to the impulse to react violently to American violence, then you only quicken the day when American forces will be free to use ALL of their violence. The Pak Army had an ace-in-the-hole with Davis, which it threw away for a few more empty Saudi and American promises. It might not be too late, yet, to democratically turn the tide in Pakistan's favor, but that will require hands that are holding signs, instead of guns. There must be some honest leader left in Pakistan, who has not yet sold his sole to the devil. Someone must stand-up for whatever remains of Jinnah's Pakistan.
All of you must stand-up together and demand of whatever passes for a govt, that it do the right thing, for once. Doing the right thing requires leadership, standing out in the front, forming the words that must be spoken, if Pakistan is to remain as a country....
http://www.dawn.com/2011/02/18/probe-finds-connection-between-davis-drone-attacks.html
Meanwhile, the USA is in deep secret negotiations with the Top Leadership of the Taliban....
http://janashah.com/2011/02/06/raymond-davis-had-contacts-in-south-waziristan-and-certain-madrasas/
Until the Sec/Def and his boss are ready to shut-down America's secret war upon the people of Pakistan, Afghanistan, Lebanon, Palestine, Iran etc, all patriotic citizens everywhere should stand together to guarantee that US/Israeli big wars and assassinations come to a halt....
ISLAMABAD – Pakistan is beefing up its arsenal of nuclear-capable missiles by embracing China as its new strategic arms partner and backing away from the U.S., analysts have told Fox News.
Pakistan earlier this month test-fired a nuclear-capable missile from an undisclosed location – the second in a month of try-outs for its short-range surface-to-surface Hataf 2 class rocket, co-developed with the Chinese. It was the latest in a series of arms collaborations between the two nations, which view their strategic partnership as a counterweight to a boldly confident India, which has American support.
Read more ....
Comment: The Pakistanis see China playing a crucial role in developing their nuclear industry, and the Chinese look at their rivalry with India when cementing these Pakistani ties.
As for the U.S. .... we can only complain and express our concerns on where all of this is going.
The facts of the incident that sparked all this are now fairly clear. Davis, in a rental car, was driving around in Lahore in areas where foreigners scarcely ever venture, tailed by two ISI auxiliaries on a motorbike. After an hour or more of trying to shake them off, they both came abreast at a stoplight. He pulled out a gun and, firing through his windscreen, shot them both. Accounts differ as to whether they made any threatening gesture, but one was killed as he was trying to run away.
The backup van that Davis called for came roaring up the wrong way on a one-way street, ran over a cyclist, killing him, then turned around and roared off. Davis was arrested, and weapons, ammo and other paraphernalia were found in the car. On his cell phone were numbers that were later traced to phones in the tribal belt where the Taliban operate, while his camera had pictures of religious schools and military sites.
After some initial fumbling, the US embassy declared him a diplomat on staff with diplomatic immunity, and demanded he be turned over to them. When this didn’t happen, Washington jumped in with both barrels blazing, cancelling meetings and threatening all sorts of reprisals if Davis wasn’t released, including Congressional hints of aid being cut off.
The Zardari government, whose desire to please and placate the US comes second only to its agenda of robbing the country blind, wanted to comply but had to tread warily because of the public outcry over the matter (intensified by the suicide of the wife of one of the men killed). Its strategy was to have the foreign ministry certify to the courts that Davis did, indeed, have diplomatic immunity, but this ran into a roadblock when ministry staff refused to endorse this position, based on the record. (It is being said that the military’s opposition to his release stiffened their spines!)...
The US, concluding that playing the heavy wasn’t achieving much, sent in the ‘good cop’, in the person of Senator Kerry, co-author of the 7.5 billion Pakistan aid bill. He expressed public regret for the deaths, held out the assurance that Davis would be criminally investigated back in the US, and met with the principal Pakistani players. His whirlwind one-day tour didn’t achieve much beyond smuggling out of the country on his plane the three Americans who had been in the backup van (and were being sought by the police and the courts).
Some mysteries still shroud the affair. One, the subject of considerable speculation in Pakistan, is: What was Davis up to? (There are two versions as to whether this is still a mystery to the ISI; one is that he ‘sang’ under interrogation, while the US claims that he made no statement). His undoubted links to people in Taliban territory have spawned the allegation that he was arranging Taliban bombings in Pakistan (it is a settled belief among most Pakistanis that the US wishes to destabilize the country in order to grab its nukes). A more sophisticated version of this is that he facilitated the attacks that had taken place on some ISI targets and the army’s GHQ at the behest of former Afghan intelligence chief Amrullah Saleh (fired by President Karzai at Pakistan’s insistence). While most believe that this was done under CIA orders, some think Davis may have been freelancing for Saleh.
A more ‘innocent’ explanation for these contacts is not being considered, at least publicly. They may merely have been informants that he and his colleagues had set up in the tribal areas to relay information for drone targetting. Incidentally, ever since his arrest drone attacks in the tribal belt have ceased. This may be due to a US desire not to further inflame Pakistani public opinion, or it could be because target information has dried up, or both.
The second mystery in the affair relates to the very odd US reaction. The SOP in such cases is to say nothing in public while working backdoor channels to quietly sort out the affair and get your Joe back (even in kidnappings this is the standard practice). Why did the US adopt such a public and heavy-handed approach? Conspiracy theorists incline to the belief that the US was petrified at the thought of what Davis might reveal under interrogation, and wanted to have him released immediately. Or, failing that, to at least make him feel that they were fully on his case, thus fortifying his resistance to questioning.
An alternative explanation is that the US thought that Pakistan and its government were so “bought” that an order (Jump!) would be enough to obtain compliance. When this didn’t happen, they got angry (!) and tried to browbeat them into submission. Considering some of the other US foreign policy moves, especially recently, this may not be too far from the truth. Viewed from the pinnacle of Washington, the world often looks very different from how it appears at ground level.
So, how is it all going to end? The Pakistani government may be able to get its foreign ministry to tell the courts that Davis enjoys diplomatic immunity, and should be set free. Whether the courts will accept this is another matter; already the former FM is threatening to appear in court and contradict that. Another possibility is a ‘prisoner exchange’ with Dr Aafiya Siddiqui (jailed by a US court for 86-years, but widely believed in Pakistan to have been railroaded). This may mollify public outrage at Davis’s release. A third possibility is that Davis will go to prison for the murders but, after a suitable interval, will develop a life-threatening ‘malady’ (that seems to afflict sensitive prisoners in Pakistani jails when it becomes inconvenient for the government to hold them) thus leading to his repatriation on ‘humanitarian’ grounds.
As for the long-term fallout from this sorry saga ‒ stay tuned....
Because war is in the genes of every great power... Why did Hitler take on not only Britain and America, but also Soviet Russia? Because, he knew that without settling scores with these nations, he would never be taken seriously... He would be laughed at as a joker and made fun of, as Charlie Chaplin did in his film.
http://www.organiser.org/dynamic/modules.php?name=Content&pa=showpage&pid=385&page=6
Forging Trust in US/China ties...?
http://www.tribuneindia.com/
January , 2011
I was flattered to see myself quoted by Nathan Hodge today in a Wall Street Journal survey of defense industry financial results. One of my comments in particular may have reminded some readers of an old debate about the nexus between geography and national strategy. I said, "If China comes to dominate the Western Pacific, it will control the industrial heartland of the global economy." Heartland is the term that British geographer Halford Mackinder coined in 1904 to describe what he called the "geographical pivot of history." In Mackinder's conception, the globe contained three great land masses -- the "world island" (Eurasia and Africa), the "offshore islands" (Britain and Japan), and the outlying islands (Australia and the Americas). He believed that whoever controlled the central region, or "heartland," of the world island, stretching from Siberia to the Persian Gulf, would dominate the world.
I was thinking of Mackinder when I used the word heartland to describe the Western Pacific region -- not because I believe in geographical determinism, but because the East Asian littoral really has become the center of the global economy. China, Japan, South Korea and Taiwan produce most of the world's steel, computers, cell phones, commercial ships and any number of other key industrial items. America and Europe are fading factors in global industrial production. The implication of this for America's security should be clear: China doesn't need to extend its influence to every corner of the globe to be the dominant power. It need only dominate its region, and it will control the global economy. That presents U.S. leaders with an unusual challenge, because trying to maintain American influence in China's backyard would have been tough even without huge budget deficits and trade imbalances. Halford Mackinder may not have gotten the zip codes right, but a century after he propounded the notion of a global heartland, it actually exists -- with China at its center....
Competing visions and expectations complicate China-US ties. They need to try and walk in each other’s shoes....
http://news.in.msn.com/international/article.aspx?cp-documentid=4934153
http://therearenosunglasses.files.wordpress.com/2011/02/from-dictatorship-to_-democracy.pdf
http://www.nolanchart.com/article8375.html
.....
"This is a brilliantly written and clinically analysed paper by Dr. Kapila UNITED STATES-PAKISTAN DENOUEMENT: STRATEGIC IMPLICATIONS FOR INDIA exposing the inability of our rulers to either comprehend what our national interests are, let alone deal pro-actively to promote these interests. "
So true! Besides, why does the GoMMS links and allows India's destiny to be held hostage to Pakistani Army/ISI machinations? A stable Pakistan has always created instablity in the region (post 1989 flushed with American arms and Soviet exit, they started jihad against India).
An unstable Pakistan (battiling the jehadi-blowback within, with relentless U.S. military pressure) is what keeps Pakistan all tied-up within. It is best for them to stew in their own juice (with apologies to Kao).
If you wish to test the viability of the stability/instability thesis, wait until the Americans exit AfPak (if they do, which is another question). Stable and flush with U.S. arms, Pakistanis will unleash jihadis against the Afghans and India and spread the virus of Islamic fundamentalism all over again in South and Central Asia.
In any case, the writer (Stewart, was it?) in the last Stratfor/CIA Disinformation...... article was literally begging Pakistan to give us another patsies laden 9/11..... Such is our deadly embrace of Pakistan. There is no riddle in what Riedel writes. This has been consistent U.S. foreign policy towards the subcontinent for the past sixty years (go back to Albright's father!).
Unless India comes with a game-changer (and no, handing Kashmir over to Pakistan is not one of them), India ALWAYS will be the collateral damage in any USA-Pakistan bonhomie. No softs and hards about it!
As horrible as this video is (and the alleged Pakistani army torturing Pashthus cannot be verified), I would like us Americans watch our tax dollars support to a terrorist army! (warning: graphic, and moderator, please delete if found offensive). It is a Sunday, a day for prayers, and as an American, I seek forgiveness for my money directly funds these terrible atrocities.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?
(e)SP_A0012_edited.jpg)
To realign its regional strategy, the US would have to drop its Israel-centric foreign policy and readjust relations with the Arab states, Turkey, and Iran.The pro-Israel Lobby dominates the White House and the Congress. Thus, given present US domestic politics, it is likely we will stay wedded to our mutual suicide pact with Israel. Other major powers -- China, Russia, EU states, Japan -- can make adjustments. As they are less constrained by international Zionism, they may be in a position to exploit new opportunities offered by the "winds of change" in the region.
http://www.veteranstoday.com/2011/02/19/how-zionism-infiltrated-the-us-exclusive-interview/
The fact is that the Arab "Street" (public opinion) despises US foreign policy. We just vetoed a UN resolution condemning Israeli illegal settlements. What signal does that send about Obama and about the US to the Arab Street?
Obama seething over Clinton, Biden, and Gates backroom foreign policy....
February , 2011 -- Hillary Clinton on her way out; Obama has lost faith in her loyalty to him
Our normally reliably informed sources are reporting that President Obama, upset that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton had urged him, under false pretenses, to name as the president's special envoy to Egypt, Frank Wisner, Jr, has strongly privately suggested that Clinton ought to submit her resignation. Obama has also, according to our sources, offered the Secretary of State job to Senator John Kerry (D-MA), who has signaled his willingness to accept.
Clinton, Vice President Joe Biden, and Defense Secretary Robert Gates, according to a New York Times report, backed the naming of Wisner, a long-time CIA agent-of-influence who has operated under State Department official cover as a diplomat for decades, is a close personal friend of Egyptian ex-President Hosni Mubarak, a relationship developed when Wisner served as President Reagan's ambassador to Cairo.
Obama, according to our sources, was unaware of Wisner's close ties to Mubarak and was shocked to discover that Clinton, Biden, and Gates were aware that Wisner was offering lightly-conditional U.S. support to Mubarak, while Obama was urging a quick transition of power. It was the vote of confidence in Mubarak from the trio of Clinton, Biden, and Gates that delayed, for an entire day, Mubarak's previously-reported departure from office. Mubarak was given the false impression by Wisner that the Egyptian leader had the full support of Clinton, Biden, and Gates and, therefore, the president also. It was not the case.
It turns out that Clinton, Biden, and Gates were following the dictates of key players in the pro-Mubarak Israel Lobby in Washington and the Council on Foreign Relations in New York rather than from the policy-makers in the office of the President. We have also learned that Obama is scaling back Biden's involvement in fundamental foreign policy issues, preferring his interaction with key foreign governments, especially those in the Middle East, to be limited to public diplomacy and social functions.
Gates has announced he is leaving his post during 2011, however, Obama now needs Gates's continued support to shepherd a Defense budget, minus key pet weapons systems, through a hawkish Republican House of Representatives.
However, it is Mrs. Clinton who has earned Obama's focused anger. The White House was shocked when Wisner, after having returned from Cairo, told the Munich Security Conference by a video-link from New York that a temporarily leadership role for Mubarak was required during the transition phase in Egypt. Wisner also echoed the views of the Israel Lobby that America's primary position in post-Mubarak Egypt was a firm commitment to the peace treaty with Israel and freezing out the Muslim Brotherhood from any political power. Except for the peace treaty issue, Wisner's comments largely contradicted Obama's policy but reflected those of Clinton, Biden, and Gates.
White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs told a news conference: "Former Ambassador Wisner is not an employee of the government . . . his views on who should or shouldn't be the head of Egypt don't represent the views of our administration." But unbeknown to Obama and Gibbs, Wisner's views did represent those of a significant faction of the administration.
What infuriated Obama was Clinton's brash lie after she listened to Wisner's video speech in Munich, enunciating views that she supported: "Oh, we all respect Frank and his service for many years, and appreciate his travel to Egypt. But he does not speak for the administration." Clinton had also stated in Munich that the administration supported the Muslim Brotherhood's participation in the Egyptian political dialogue but she covertly was undermining any role for the Muslim Brotherhood in encouraging Wisner's comments to the security conference.
Obama was also irked by Wisner's comments -- and Clinton's covert support for them -- to the Munich conference, made to key American allies and showing them that the United States appeared to have different policies on the events unfolding in Egypt. Witnessing America's schizophrenic foreign policy in Munich were British Prime Minister David Cameron and German Chancellor Angela Merkel. Obama was required to personally call both leaders, as well as others, to explain that what Wisner stated publicly and what Clinton reportedly said privately were not the president's policy. Obama has let it be known that he will not be embarrassed again by Clinton and that is what is prompting his desire for her resignation and her replacement by Kerry. Obama relied on Kerry to interface with Egyptian leaders to fully delineate Obama's policies amid the confusion created by Clinton, Biden, and Gates....
http://truthjihad.blogspot.com/2011/02/mossad-agent-mike-harari-implicated-in.html#comments
....A bump in the road says DC luminaries....
Meanwhile, South Asia is turning into An alarming powder keg...
....