The big news out of Washington this morning was that the White House has confronted Pakistan about their lame efforts in going after terrorists within their borders:
President Bush has decided to send an unusually tough message to one of his most important allies, Gen. Pervez Musharraf, the president of Pakistan, warning him that the newly Democratic Congress could cut aid to his country unless his forces become far more aggressive in hunting down operatives with Al Qaeda, senior administration officials say…
American intelligence officials have concluded that the terrorist infrastructure is being rebuilt, and that while Pakistan has attacked some camps, its overall effort has flagged…
For the time being, officials say, the White House has ruled out unilateral strikes against the training camps that American spy satellites are monitoring in North Waziristan, in Pakistan’s tribal areas on the border. The fear is that such strikes would result in what one administration official referred to as a “shock to the stability” of General Musharraf’s government. [Link]
<
p>I find some humor in the fact that Bush is telling Musharraf to be worried that the Democrats will be more stern than him. It is a little like a mother saying, “you better shape up or you will be in big trouble with daddy.”
<
p>The Blotter reports additional details:
In a highly unusual move, the deputy director of the CIA, Stephen R. Kappes, was flown to Pakistan to personally present President Pervez Musharraf today with “compelling” CIA evidence of al Qaeda’s resurgence on Pakistani soil, U.S. officials say.
Kappes joined Vice President Dick Cheney for the surprise showdown meeting in Musharraf’s office in Pakistan.
The CIA evidence reportedly included satellite photos and electronic intercepts of al Qaeda leaders operating in Pakistan. [Link]
<
p>
Of course, we all know that if El General goes down then things could get a lot worse in Pakistan. And so the dance continues (at least until daddy comes home).
the role of communist politicians in over throwning Shah (all of them were executed by Ayatollah Khomeini immediately), and oil politics
Nice reminder. The revolution now attributed solely to the cassette insurgency by Khomeinie and his Islamist allies was in reality a much more complex affair with large sections of Iranian society (like communists) who had nothing to do with the Islamists but participated in the revolution neverthelesss.
At the risk of bringing down the exalted tone of the debate – am I the only one who read Abhi’s article and immediately imagined Dubya saying “somebody going to get hurt real bad” in a Russell Peters-esque accent?
I agree that the war on terror is going to last decades. The closest historical analogy I can think of is the Hundred Years’ War. There was no defined beginning or ending but it was a series of short lived conflicts that had a common thread.
As much as I hate to recall the sophistry of Tom Friedman, I really do think a lot of this depends on how the West, India, and China start dealing with the problem of excessive oil consumption.
RC
Thanks for your followup and comment. I think there is a long history of fudging/amnesia in american society about parts of its past. I notice that americans of indian descent are no exception to this. You dont have to be a chomsky-bhakta to realize that some US actions have had appalling consequences, especially in the third world.
I think there is a long history of fudging/amnesia in american society about parts of its past.
Everybody does it. Its not an American thing exclusively. The Pakistanis have amnesia over the Bangla massacre, the Turks have amnesia over the Armenia massacre, the Israelis have amnesia over everything about them etc………
I also feel that Pakistan’s government often gets unfairly singled out by the Western media. In particular, I think our medias usually portray Pakistan in really simple black and white “dictator = BAD!” terms without trying to analyze why the government does the things it does.
Western countries, as well as the citizens of Pakistan, are safer with Musharraf in power than with any of his clear opponents. The US is not going to sit by and let a fundamentalist government take control of a nuclear-armed state. If it looks like that’s close to happening, then our brothers and sisters in Pakistan are going to suddenly start dealing with the same cluster bombs and depleted uranium shells raining down on the other side of the border. I don’t want to see that happening. But the West has almost no choice but to intervene militarily if al-Qaeda affiliated elements get ahold of a working weapons arsenal, especially after the recent freaking-out over Iran’s very small first steps to get there.
Keeping a secular, pro-Western government in power in Pakistan needs to be a huge strategic priority — it’s MUCH more important to Western security than fighting the Taliban or bringing a working democracy to the Mad Max landscape of Afghanistan. So if Musharraf doesn’t feel like he can commit resources to his Western border without endangering his regime, the regime wins. If the US wants to seal off the Pakistani border, we have to do it ourselves. And perhaps we could, if the bulk of our force wasn’t tied down in a completely unrelated conflict in the Middle East.
Thalasa your dimag is a khalasa you have not refuted the point over money transfrers, and travel docs of 9-11,7-11,fudged shoe bomber, and padilla all pointing to a nexus in these 3 countries. The same 3 countries who recognized the taliban.
No watching geo, ptv does not make me into an expert other than picking up spoken punjabi and urdu and seeing the difference in attitude in the groups of pakistan, But subscrbing to 4 newspaper and more than 100 feeds keeps me fairly informed.
Only as long as we accept these words as the only terms of the argument. The Global War on Terror (GWOT, for the Bushies) could be “over” tomorrow. This whole affair is a rhetorical construct, not a military operation. With or without a GWOT, American troops will be engaged in lethal operations abroad to protect American interests–they always have and they always will, and this is the normal (if unfortunate) practice of any powerful country. The only difference between now (under the GWOT) and the past (no GWOT) is that the US has decided to provide rhetorical cover for its military operations. At any point this cover can be lifted, or the terms changed, and it has nothing to do with the number of soldiers deployed or the nature of their activities. So the GWOT will last only as long as American voters want it to.
Al_Mujahid_for_debauchery
Agreed, I have never suggested otherwise. But in these discussion lists we are more likely to encounter “explanations” for US actions than other countries.
What? Before the times reporter Carlotta Gall got beat up in pakistan, nothing in times was critical about musharraf and was often repeating the line that musharraf wanted them to repeat which is that he is keeping a lid on things. eg ABC news coverage of palestinan election had a commentary by him where he said us should recognize hamas as the elected representative & the dumbasss bimbo did not have the sense to ask him about what about pakistan.
No one in the western media apart from hitchens and wall street journal have raised the question of using airplanes to bomb and shell rebels in balochinstan.
On a side note, does anyone know how many/which countries in the world are receiving “aid” from the US?
There’s usually never any smoke without a fire.
Ritam wrote:-
The worst offender is Israel.
Ritam wrote:-
Havent you been following the thread, there are those who fervently believe that some of these countries have nothing to do with terrorism.
Do not twist my words. I said nothing of the sort. I said that there is no proof that UAE and Saudi Arabia are state sponsors of terrorism and I stand by my statement.
By your logic countries like Malaysia, Britain, Egypt are also terrorism sponsors given their citizens have been involved in acts of terrorism. There’s a world of difference between citizens in their individual capacity working as terrorists and the entire state machinery supporting terrorist acts.
As long as the War on Drugs, War on Poverty and all other Wars on Eternally-Unsolvable-Problems last.
M. Nam
Here\’s a few dated resources for those who want to explore this topic stephen schwartz book on sauid role{link}
9-11 commision report, Its a pain in the gand to read but if you are following this topic closely you know its been edited to remove saudi role…{link}
who knows saudi arabia might be the mecca for terrorist related funding
dont know why the links got screwed up http://www.amazon.com/Two-Faces-Islam-Fundamentalism-Terrorism/dp/1400030455/sr=1-1/qid=1172698860/ref=sr_1_1/105-5281626-2341226?ie=UTF8&s=books
http://www.gpoaccess.gov/911/index.html
Sriram, you’ve hated to mention Tom Friedman on more than one occasion so I think you’ll enjoy a parody of the specious one.
As long as the War on Drugs, War on Poverty and all other Wars on Eternally-Unsolvable-Problems last.
Well put. When Moornam is not being a Hinduvta flag bearer, he actually does make some good points!
Ok, my bad SM folks. I forgot the very first advice in your note to commenters. I’ll refrain from feeding the trolls.
India used to suffer famine conditions frequently, more than a million folks died just in early 1940s. That has been the thing of the past after India attained Independence due to help from many places and more importantly United States. Now India is self sufficient in food production and even exporting food grains. What exactly is the “long run” ??. I know that many “five star activists” / “NGO” live off other people’s problems. I find nothing wrong with that too.. If you can shoot some “videos” of starving kids in Somalia and make money off it, go ahead.
Sheesh. A guy disappears for a few months and comes back, and…well. Nothing’s changed at all.
Well, almost nothing. The overall coherency of the debate seems to have lost some ground. But what it’s lost in grammatical correctness and the proper placement of articles, it seems to have gained in sheer emotional volume.
Anyone feel like it’s kind of shrill around here? A little louder, please, the neighbor’s dog hasn’t started barking yet.
Welcome home, Salil.