Saturday, March 28, 2009

... and 'Pin-the-tail-on-the-donkey' continues ...

While the American President pulls over to the kerb having lost his map:

To his own nation, Mr Obama said: "The American people must understand that this (economic support) is a down payment on our own future."

His adversaries move into overdrive:

NEW YORK: Taliban leaders based in Pakistan have closed ranks with their Afghan comrades to ready a new unified offensive in Afghanistan as the US prepares to send 17,000 more troops there this year, the New York Times reported Friday.

The newspaper said that in interviews, several Taliban fighters based in the border region said preparations for the anticipated influx of American troops were already being made.

A number of new, younger commanders have been preparing to step up a campaign of roadside bombings and suicide attacks to greet the Americans, the fighters said.

The report said that the Taliban fighters sounded confident and predicted that 2009 was going to be a ‘very bloody’ year.


1. How is throwing aid money at the Pakistani Government for ROZ etc, going to make any difference to the now united front of the Afghan/Pakistan Taliban? Are they all going to switch to day jobs making widgets in Waziristan?

2. The "Down payment on our future" refers to the 'Al-Qaeda' threat to US/Pakistan. But didn't the Americans conclude just a few days ago it had been seriously damaged and no longer effective? Then which 'Al-Qaeda' is this one?

Americans are still pinning the tail everywhere on the donkey except on its behind - and Pakistan isn't helping them to the correct spot either. Why should they? They know where the tail belongs and they will pin it there when it suits them.

Saturday, March 21, 2009

Tariq Ali - On developments in Pakistan - 19 Mar 2009


Destabilizing a country of 175 million to sustain occupation of a country of 30 million - typical American logic.

The geographical location of USA makes this kind of adventurism possible. Protected by oceans around two ends and the Monroe Doctrine for the rest, its mainland has little to fear from blowbacks.

Tuesday, March 3, 2009

So did they use the sea-route or not?

The controversy over the Naval Chief's categorical statement that the sea-route was not used by the Bombay attackers, VS. the PPP Interior Minister's announcement it was!

Host: Syed Talat Hussain
Guests: Gen Retd Hamid Nawaz, Brig Retd. Simon Samson Shroff


Pakistan played a master stroke by accepting "Some part of the plan was hatched in Pakistan". This is what was said. No more and no less. At the same time, a list of 30 questions was given to India to answer re the involvement at their end, and to hand over specific information about certain Indians involved in the execution of not only the recent attacks but many other on Muslims e.g. the Train firebombing of returning Pakistanis and the Malegaon mosque blasts in which a serving Indian army colonel has been found to be implicated.

It was to relieve international pressure and to grab the initiative, and to put the ball back in India's court. Now, India finds itself in a quandary what to do. It's like saying "Okay so you said we did it, fine we did it if you say so, but now please tell us who helped us at your end?" India is finding that question very difficult to answer, and in the meantime all pressure and threats of Indian retaliation have vanished.

I believe these people were likely Assamese - where there're several insurgencies - because their physical characteristics were quite typical of people from that region. Nowhere in Pakistan do people look like that and certainly not the people of Pakistani Punjab/NWFP from where they're claimed to have come.

The biggest proof however is that two attackers were interviewed live at different locations and both were speaking Marathi - an Indian dialect which is spoken nowhere in Pakistan. The Indian dossier released contained the alleged code words used during the sea journey, and all those words were in a Bombay style Hindi dialect.

It has been said they were tutored to speak in such manner by their handlers (though I find it unbelievable people would feign any accent when prepared to die hours later), there was no need to use a foreign tongue for codewords while at open sea in private communication.

All these factors just simply do not add up. It's a chess game where the purpose of a move is only revealed in its outcome.