Friday, September 5, 2008



Dear Manzer,
Here are the questions. Do you think it would be possible to get it by Tuesday, Oct 9?

1. The newly appointed army chief Lt General Ashfaque Kiani is said to be a close ally of Musharraf. What would be the effects of this appointment to Musharraf (if he gets elected as president) and to Bhutto who might become the prime minister? (meaning that Musharraf is also making sure that he would still hold control of the army despite stepping down) What are the tactics?

There is no guarantee that Kiani would do exactly what Musharraf says. Musharraf would lose the institutional power to manipulate army appointments. He may influence some but his hold on the army will be weakened.Kiani is from Jhelum, a district which was loyal to the British against Muslims so he will be loyal to USA in the fight against Muslims in Waziristan! However a Punjabi chief from Jhelum , an area famous for being parochial would certainly favour his Potohari kinsmen. Generally the best tactic to control the army is to remain the army chief and have a Vice-Chief as Zia adopted in 1978. If Musharraf relinquishes COAS post he would definitely lose control over the army. If not initially then at least in next one year from the time he relinquishes charge. In case, martial law is imposed by Kiani, this would be the exit of Musharraf since he would be placed in a situation like Maj Gen Iskandar Mirza in 1958.

2. Benazir has been saying that during Musharraf's rule that extremism and violence have gone up. In your opinion, doesn't this coincide with the aftermath of 9/11, where the American government was and is still on the prowl to fight terror, which to many Muslims and others, it seems (again) one of America's bad foreign policy? And we are seeing the extremist groups in Pakistan and Afghanistan picking up arms in the name of fighting the West. Do you think it is a big business scam or there is seriously an anti-American feeling among the Pakistanis? What could be done since the Pakistani government doesn't have control over the tribal areas and production of arms are rampant in these areas too, which to some is a traditional trade/occupation passed from generation to generation?

Benazir is not in touch with ground realities.She is playing like Musharraf guaranteeing USA that she is good collaborator and dog catcher for USA. The USA wants to destroy Pakistan from within so Benazir is being seen as a good option by USA. She is like Rani Jindan of Punjab who was afraid of the Sikh Army and conspired with her lovers General Tejh Singh and General Lal Singh both Hindustani Hindus to get the Khalsa destroyed by treachery. Col Malleson a British writer admitted that but for treachery the Sikh Army could have destroyed the British Army at Moodke and Ferozshah battles in 1845-46. Benazir if she comes will not succeed in reducing militancy. Rather it will receive a boost. She is making very stupid statements that she would welcome US strike on Pakistan's soil if Osama is there. It will not be surprising if she is administered coup de grace by a common soldier like Indira Gandhi IN 1984. Musharraf, Benazir and his leading generals are into business scams. It is the regular business of Pakistani politicians to do business by promising they will be good collaborators of USA. I am sure that they are all on paid retainers by CIA. This way American tax payers money is saved as USA will weaken Pakistan from within and thus spend less on the so called war on terrorism.

3. Benazir had said Musharraf is not doing much in the tribal areas. These areas are certainly difficult to govern and certainly Benazir or Nawaz would have a hard time trying to rein in control in these areas, if they are in office. What is your opinion? What could be done? What are the challenges facing the new prime minister and president?

Without security in tribal areas not much can be done. The main challenge of new PM and President would be to wage war against the tribesmen and Al Qaeda and this would be a tough affair. The Pakistan Army would be losing more credibility and Pakistani leaders would gain great credibility in US eyes.

4. As you know, the American government has a say in how the political situation would pan out in Pakistan. They are believed to be the ones who are pulling the strings from behind. What do you think the American government wants now, judging from current events and statements by Musharraf and Benazir? Hence, where is democracy when it's controlled by a velvet glove from America? More so when America is pumping billions of dollars every month in the name of fighting terrorism.

The USA wants a real good collaborator and they have identified Benazir as one, as good as Musharraf.

5. It seems that the only thing that works in Pakistan is the triple A's -- the Army, Allah and America. With regards to the Army, they not only have power over arms but also on businesses. What is your comment on how it has impacted the country and moving forward, what would be the likely scenario or would it remain the same as before? Could you comment on the influence of religion and extremism in Pakistan?

All along Pakistan has been a US vassal. The Army is a trade union of generals mostly from humble background who make big money after usurping power. However in the eyes of the Pakistani populace, at least a large segment of the army has lost a great deal of credibility. It appears to be the grand US design also. The army is now the main business complex. Actually it is an army with a state not a state with an army.

6. What do you think of the funding from American to fight terror in Pakistan? Do you think it should be stopped? Or it's just another avenue to keep the businesses going including the extremist groups that have been cashing in as well. Do you have statistics on how much the Americans are pumping in a year to Pakistan in the fight on terror? What is the estimated funds that the extremist groups are getting and where is the source coming from?

Good for army generals and corrupt politicians. Naturally the USA should adopt this cheaper option since the Pakistani Army is much cheaper to use than the US forces. Good as well as cheap pointer dogs as the Washington Post said. They have a tradition of being good Christian collaborators from time of 1857 specially the Punjabis from North of River Jhelum and Pathans specially Khattaks who are good mercenaries. The extremist groups are getting much less but they are more motivated so less corrupt. The army is less motivated and highly corrupt. The soldiers being used to fight the militants don't have motivation and are not militarily very effective. I did a study for a client about militant funds. At least 60% are donations from good Muslims while 40% are coming through smuggling drugs/tyres/spare parts etc. As I wrote in an article published in 2003 in NATION, 10 Million USD per month are sufficient to keep the US Army bleeding in Iraq and Afghanistan for 200 years. According to my estimate Taliban and Al Qaeda budget in Afghanistan is like 1 to 1.5 Million USD per month. Suicide bombers families have been paid 2 to 5 Million Rupees in many cases not because the bomber wanted but to motivate people that they gain not only in the next world but here too. In Iraq the militants are getting funding well over 10 Million USD from philanthropist Arabs.

7. Would this be a likely scenario: Benazir as PM, Musharraf as President? What would this mean to the country in terms of the quality of leadership, the fight on terror, and development for the country as a whole in terms of economy, health, infrastructure and education?

They will constantly fight and conspire against each other and there is a 60% chance that there would be a showdown within one year. And then the USA will go for a Martial Law option and good Hayata type army chief from the martial collaborator races in between River Jhelum and River Indus. That appears to be the US game plan , extensively war gamed.

8. What would be the immediate tasks that the new PM and president should focus on?
Reconciliation and less emphasis on the power of the army to bring about a military solution.More emphasis on Soft Power, better intelligence gathering.

9. The protests that we are seeing are mainly confined to the lawyers, lawmakers and journalists, which are considered the elite groups in the country. Some were said to be paid to carry out these protests against Musharraf and there were those who enjoyed the limelight from the media. Besides, the number of protesters are small, around 100 or so. The common people are nowhere to be seen. In fact, I have a feeling that Musharraf is widely popular amongst the common people. What is your take on this? Are these protests genuine? Do you think the media has been biased?

The common people are apathetic. They are more worried if they will have something to eat the next day. But remember the Bolsheviks with just a hard core of 10,000 captured power in Russia.


Zeemax said...

Thanks. Much of what you had foreseen has come true.

My only disagreement is with #9. I think Lawyer's movement is genuine, and supported by a fed-up Civil Society, though it is now defeated.

But your conclusion startled me. I didn't know that the Bolsheviks were just 10,000. But then again, the 20/80 corporate principle applies everywhere. 20% of people get 80% of the results.

pavocavalry said...

thanks for reading and commenting sir

Majumdar said...

Amin sahib,

10 Million USD per month are sufficient to keep the US Army bleeding in Iraq and Afghanistan for 200 years.

Should be music in the ears of China and Russia.

good Hayata type

Pardon my ignorance but who is a Hayata type person?


Majumdar said...

Amin sahib,

But remember the Bolsheviks with just a hard core of 10,000 captured power in Russia.

The real danger of course is that USA may before abandoning its stooges in Pak Army would remove the N-arsenal before decamping which would leave Pakistan vulnerable to external as well as internal shocks.


pavocavalry said...

by hayata i meant ahmad hayat of wah , orderly officer of brig gen nicholson at delhi....a good mercenary general and these are in plenty in barani areas of punjab and khattaks yusufzais kakars in pashtuns

pavocavalry said...

i think that if US destroys one pakistani city , pakistani leadership would surrender all weapons and some US guarantee also that india will not attack pakistan....all these are realities likely in next 5 to 10 years....the good thing is now russia and china has entered the arena...after all the americans are active in chinese sinkiang from afghanstan and even pakistani northern areas...this i had predicted many years earlier....its logical

Majumdar said...

Amin sahib,

What exactly does USA want to do in NWFP-Afghanistan region. What are its objectives and what are the possible pay-offs?

the good thing is now russia and china has entered the arena

Good from whose POV, if you can clarify, sir!


pavocavalry said...

What exactly does USA want to do in NWFP-Afghanistan region. What are its objectives and what are the possible pay-offs?

US AIMS AS I ASSESS ARE STRATEGIC......CHINA , IRAN,PAKISTAN......DOMINATION ....... already there is a full fledged insurgency in pakistan the aim i to use the punjabi army against pashtuns.....divide paskistan.....put the pashtuns under one state so that the USA has no problem in crossing borders

the good thing is now russia and china has entered the arena


Good from whose POV, if you can clarify, sir!

pavocavalry said...






pavocavalry said...

16 Nov 2003


A.H Amin

While human history has continously oscillated between order and disorder , peace and war , the post 9/11 may be said to represent the watershed between the age of strategic stability which started from 1945 and a transition to a many decade ,perhaps century long period of strategic anarchy !

War as a sublime activity has witnessed a stark transition from rationality to madness from9/11 ! The Nero at the apex of the whole exercise is Emperor Bush the Second who more than any Al Qaeda terrorist , has made this world , a far more dangerous place for USA , primarily because of lack of knowledge and a myopic worldview which is based on a very narrow perception of history and human civilisation ! Alas Bush is a teetotaller and does not have that coup d oeil which distinguished great warlords like Winston Churchill reinforced by many pints of finest beverages of Scotland ! Here we have a scenario of a warlord , who has naieve strategic perception and is manipulated by cheap consumerist aides motivated by business interests or narrow beliefs in Christian resurgence or Zionist supremacy ! Thus the age of strategic uncertainty and anarchy !

If Field Marshal Foch's ideas on strategy are to be applied here , all anti American forces , have a grandstrategic opportunity to humble USA at a nominal cost in the entire region between Casablanca in the West till Sakhalin in the East, with additional reinforcement from sabotage missions launched in theentire tract from Los Angeles till United Kingdom ! American interests and American installations are located in such a widespread area that USA with its entire might cannot defend all of its many assets at all times ! Thus the truth in the adage that he who defends everything defends nothing ! Foch's two cardinal principles of strategy applied wisely in this scenario i.e " Economy of Force" and " Denial of freedom of manoeuvre to the enemy" can easily bring USA to a long term strategic grief ! Already some results are evident in many Quixotic Blackhawks reduced to molten metal in the entire deathland between Tikrit and Karbala !

The age of strategic anarchy may thus unfold in the following stages or phases ; i.e (1)Initial attrition of US forces in Iraq,Afghanistan and Korea (2) A period of spilling out of the conflict into new theatres by the USA in search of a centre of gravity like Iran,Syria ,Pakistan,Saudi Arabia.Something like Napoleons attack on Russia or Hitlers Case Blue which envisaged a dualoffensive towards Stalingrad and the Caucasian Oilfields (3) A period of intense attrition in the new theatres chosen by USA (4) a period of USA's exhaustion , something close to Clausewitz's concept of culmination point of a great power and begining of decline of the New Christian Roman Empire of USA (5) A period of exploitation of USA's exhaustion by other major players like Russia,China ,EU etc !

Initial attrition may last from 1 to five years ! Possibly Bush's successor Democratic or Republican may be unable to initiate a policy of disengagement ! The USA is in position of a man holding a wolf by the ears ! It may be difficult to kill this wolf , but it is fatal to leave it ! All that the anti US forces ,open or covert need to do it is to assist the wolf ,create new breeding areas for the wolves , increase their birth rate !

In the second phase of spilling out USA has to suffer greater losses both material and moral ! Greater casualties ! An attack on Iran via Pakistani Baluchistan or via Azerbaijan or via the cosatal Persian Gulf ! A Possible denuclearisation of Pakistan ! A crusade against Syria with an American general walking haughtily till the masoulem of Salahuddin Ayubi in his boots and telling the sleeping Lion of Islam like earlier French generals who occupied Syria after 1918; Salahuddin I have come back to avenge the defeat of Crusaders !

Intense attrition wouldtake place in the next third phase , with either USA destroying all its enemies or arriving at its culmination point ! A start of a period of decline , the ebb of the tide that started gaining strength from WW 1 !

The fourth phase would be either USA's victory , perhaps a Pyhrric one or an ignominous withdrawal ! The Barbarians as theUSA perceives its Islamic enemies wouldthen regroup and counter attack !

The fifth phase would be open exploitation of USA's exhaustion by China and Russia hopefully with a more resolute leader who drinks a lot of Vodka and has zeal and the killer instinct of a Peter the Great or Stalin !

The wholeprocess of these fivestages may vary from anything between 5 years to 100 years ! The stakes are high , the battle field vaster than any other battlefield in human history and the shades too many for the strategists eyeto perceive or comprehend !

The present third world war which started with 9/11 has no centreof gravity,no fixed battlle lines , it is hundred dimensional,no rules , no morality ,no boundaries and no tangible end in sight !

One thing is clear ! USA's cheap consumerist society has a great deal of military muscle but a pathetic strategic vision ! We salute the new age of Strategic anarchy !

Majumdar said...

Amin sahib,

What does USA gain by denuking Pakistan? Is it that it does not want to see a nuclear armed Muslim state on the fear that it will be an Islamic bomb in the hands of some oil rich ME state? Or is there something that I am missing?

Regarding its China plans. Sure both China and India are engaged in battling insurgency (X/J&K) but both countries being populous are rather callous towards loss of life unlike the Yanks. They can keep battling insurgency for decades without batting an eyelid. But Yanks are getting bogged down and spending atrocious sums of money, no?

Pak gameplan: What if Pak chooses to play possum. Simply roll over play dead and say to US "OK invade FATA, if you want to and if you dare". Wouldnt that kind of call US's bluff?


pavocavalry said...

ANYTHING IS POSSIBLE IS POLITICS ,the underlying not expressed position in pakistan is a seraiki speaking PM (seraikis are not punjabis) a sindhi speaking baloch president and a punjabi chief...the punjabis being the majority do not like this.....the army is now a controversial party since its percieved in pashtun areas as anti pashtun.....traditionally the mughals alienated pashtuns and they lost against the punjabis are alienating pashtuns their juniour partners...this is not acceptable if pakistan has to stay in one piece...the americans are strategically barren