Unflinching Idealism ... since 1997 Follow Us on TwitterRead Chowk on Facebook

Forgot your password?
Forgot your username?
Create an account



 

Today@Chowk

Yesterday
Yazan created a new topic Rochdale sex abuse is nothing to do with race in the forums. 09:49 PM
Yazan created a new topic Rochdale sex abuse is nothing to do with Arny ace in the forums. 09:44 PM
Yazan created a new topic 6 Ways That Food Is Being Used As A Weapon Agains in the forums. 05:30 PM
Yazan created a new topic What’s with the South Asian inferiority complex? in the forums. 02:02 AM
Yazan created a new topic how many Likes in F.B. lingo for Clifton bridge. in the forums. 01:35 AM
 

GHQ Attack-Serious Questions

by Agha Amin October 13, 2009 10:19

The enemy is not in Waziristan or Afghanistan. The enemy is our own damn inefficiency and complacency. It merits serious thinking at all plains , tactical,operational and strategic.

GHQ Attack-Serious Questions

The attack on Pakistani GHQ raises more serious questions about Pakistan Army's military effectiveness and potency than answers.

The most crucial and grave question is that the Pakistani military seems to have lost in a great degree its coercive value amd moral deterrence. Something which is the foundation of any political system and on which all agree starting from Freud, Aristotle, Plato down to Marx Lenin Mao and Khomeni.

Once General Musharraf decided to make a U turn under coercion by USA the army lost its moral credibility in the eyes of a large section of Pakistani populace, not the majority but a sizeable minority far more effective in tangible potency than a far larger minority.

The first most serious question is not from where the threat originated but how did a small minority of a few handpicked young men developed the resolution to attack the citadel of Pakistani military,the GHQ ? Its an intangible question but far more serious than whether these men had their organisational centre in Wazirstan or Afghanistan.

The second serious question is the response to the attack. Or one may say the lack of response!

If ten or so armed men can terrorise and paralyse a half a million plus armys headquarter for 22 plus hours the issue is strategic rather than tactical! If ten civilians trained by irrational mullahs can penetrate a citadel hitherto considered impregnable and unpenetrable and 1600 officers inside it are like chicken in a babr wired coup at mercy of ten armed and highly motivated men then the situation is grave,not routine.

In a nutshell the serious aspects of the issue are :--

The most serious threat to Pakistan is internal and not external.

The military has lost its strategic and coercive deterrent value.

That ten armed civilians penetrated a military headquarters guarded by an infantry battalion and a similar number of DSG soldiers is a serious strategic imbalance.

That 6 plus armed men were roaming the GHQ for many hours and had the opportunity to kill many generals,an opportunity that they for some mysterious reasons chose not to exercise is a cause of grave strategic concern.

The fact that the perimeter guarding battalion 10 Punjab although it killed some four intruders failed to hold the few attackers from penetrating the GHQ is a grave matter.

The fact that the battalion plus DSG soldiers although armed with G 3 and SMG rifles just bolted away is a grave matter.

The fact that it took more than 18 hours and the fact that SSG troops had to be brought from some 70 miles away to redeem the situation is ironic par excellence.

The fact that Pakistan's enemies both state and non state are so ineffective still is the only consoling part of the issue.

Here is a case of a military machine :--

Fighting a civil war with serious internal fractures.

A military machine which has lost a great degree of its coercive value.

Lack of initiative in the officer rank and lack of forethought in not allowing the some 1600 officers in GHQ not to carry weapons.

The primacy of non state actors in Pakistan.

Sad is the story. Hilarious are the praises being heaped on the military's response. Where is the honour and dignity of danger in overcoming six well motivated irregulars by a commando force outnumbering them by 100 to 1. This is not a criticism. I am not a paid journalist. This is a call for reflection. Serious reflection and serious inner thinking that may be the spur to serious reorganisation in the Pakistani military. The enemy is not in Waziristan or Afghanistan. The enemy is our own damn inefficiency and complacency. It merits serious thinking at all plains, tactical,operational and strategic.



Please login to comment

comments / interact  

 
#283 Sanatani October 26, 2009 01:06
Re: # 265

Progressive as in Benazir setting up the Taliban???

Tahmed please enlighten us as to who are the progressive forces and any progressive act they have done.

Sanatani

 
 
#282 SPY October 23, 2009 11:27
Re: # 270 nkg says: "contrary to the believe that, civilian govt. in Pakistan is far more useless than Military Govt....

The Civilian Govt. has to keep anti-india sentiments alive to garner vote, but not the military one.... "

Nkg your view is complete contrast to the view expressed by Pew#266. I do not have any specific views on the Pak govt to be democratic or militry based, as it is for the Pakis to decide.

It does not matter who is in control, as long as the Pak decision making is driven by the zero sum game with India. All I am interested is that the Pak ideas engine that fires up ideas such as 93Mumbai, 99Kargil, 99Kandhar, 2001Parliament, Mumbai26/11, how that can be stopped.

 
 
#281 SPY October 23, 2009 11:12
Re: # 271 tahmed32:

We have gone thru this blow-hot-blow-cold ewlationship before. No different this time also.

"How, e.g., do you propose "nip in the bud" evil plots being brewed by the Pakistani state?"

- Please re-read my statement. It talks about "Ensuring" (strengthen - first stage), this capability, but not "executing" (protection/defend - second stage). There is a difference. I am in no way suggesting that India go ahead and "pro-actively (attack - stage three)" do what the Pak state/non-state actors are doing currently. Currently India is always reacting/defending (stage - zero), from a position of ill-equipped/ill-prepared to face the threats knowing fully well how much love the Pakis have for them.

- Pak encroched into Kargil, India only defended and pushed back the encrochers to the LOC. India has never done nor do I suggest India do a Kargil onto Pak. All I meant was that Indian security should have been foolproof enought, not to let Pak get such ideas. Simple.

"I dont see any Pakistani equivalent of an arjun or a jay (i.e. someone obsessing 24/7 about how India is evil)"

- Ahhh...that is the gem of self-praising. There are enough numbers of persons of this category from both countries. You probably do not feel the presence of such Pakis, probably because you are also one of them and cannot make the distiction. The ideas of "nuclear wasteland", "fight in panipat", "redirect the talibans to kashmir" are all very pious thoughts made by the Pakis for which the Indians must be greatful. But do you notice these Indians can only express empty threats on the net, but your average Kasabs really get fired by such passions and make an unsuccessful attempt to achieve it. The 93Mumbai, 99kargil, 99Kandhar, 2001Parliament, Mumbai26/11, etc. are not very old. You cannot find equivalent of them done by the Indians.

- Secondly you conveniently remain silent on India's main concerns i.e. how you/Pak plans to stop future such events.

- In fact if an educated Paki (of 3rd category - as you defined) like you can get so agitated so easily and make such threats, how do you convince me with the past events looming so large, that the average Pakis are different and peace loving, friendship seeking with India etc. In fact I should be complianing to you for the problems created to India, rather you are complaining for showing you your real position.

"And of course the difference between a democratic government vs a dictatorship totally escapes you."

- You are fully right. Are you referring to the differences between:

(a) India (democratic) and Pakistan (dictatorship) or

(b) Pak democratic govt and Pak dictatorship govt.

- But why should I worry about these differences. You be what you want to be and I have always maintained that is none of my business. So why should I ever worry about the differences. Why are you dragging me into this matter, when I want to be completely away. I have my opinions on this matter but like I said earlier also that I donot gain any satisfaction, win, lose feeling expressing them.

- But do you realise when some Indians like you mentioned, get too much involved into the nitty-gritties and do talk about such Indo/Pak differences and want to show India look better and Pak look poor, most Pakis/you dislike them. But now you are having a problem even for the "non-interferrence though process" that I follow. I dont know if you have realised by now my basic thought process of - "Pak's past/present/future is fully in the hands of Pakis and India/Indians have no/little influence on it's govt/image/problems/solutions etc." But frankly speaking many times I find the Pakis themselves not living upto the good image that I hold for them.

"If the Pakistani state really wanted, it could turn India into a nuclear wasteland in a matter of a few minutes. So get real, man!"

- I presume you must be regretting for making this statement and showing your true colors and intentions. Now I dont know which facet of your to believe "Pak friendship hand" or the above one. The time taken to move from one end to another has been pretty short.

(As for "image" - what kind of an "image" do you think India has? That of "India shining" as you imply, or "India the poverty-stricken" whose current economic growth looks good only compared to its miserable performance earlier.)

- I am in full agreement of your statements above. Your statements show your frustration rather than a mature respose. I have never commented about Pak's image as good or bad, all I have said it is in your hands and the events happening in your country. The same statement is fully true for India/Indians also. Again you are dragging me into a complete non-issue from my side.

So how do feel now....

 
 
#280 tahmed32 October 22, 2009 06:15
SPY #268 Your basic point seems to be that "India the dosiers were definitely much cheaper way of putting Pak in the dock", that Pakistan has a poor "image", and that the Pakistani people "Pak society and Tahmed know exactly what is their society the root cause for churning terrorist (LeT)". That I have "have conveniently built a whole castle on the foundation that a strong civil govt in Pakistan is good for India and the Indo-Pak relationship." and that "India's security is strong enough to "detect and nip in the bud" any potential sinister effort of the Pak state or non-state actors. "

I cant imagine a more unrealistic, and frankly absurd, set of statements.

How, e.g., do you propose "nip in the bud" evil plots being brewed by the Pakistani state? If the Pakistani state really wanted, it could turn India into a nuclear wasteland in a matter of a few minutes. So get real, man!

Working backwards from their - as for what the two populations think, I dont see any Pakistani equivalent of an arjun or a jay (i.e. someone obsessing 24/7 about how India is evil).

As for "image" - what kind of an "image" do you think India has? That of "India shining" as you imply, or "India the poverty-stricken" whose current economic growth looks good only compared to its miserable performance earlier.

And of course the difference between a democratic government vs a dictatorship totally escapes you.

I could go on - but your post is so absurd that I would rather do something more useful.

Ciao.

PS: Thanks for not abusing.


 
 
#279 nkg October 22, 2009 06:14
SPY...

contrary to the believe that, civilian govt. in Pakistan is far more useless than Military Govt....

The Civilian Govt. has to keep anti-india sentiments alive to garner vote, but not the military one....

 
 
#278 Pew_Research October 22, 2009 06:00
Re: # 267 Krishna

1. Terrorism

2. Trade

3. Kashmir/Siachin

4. People to people links/cultural exchanges

 
 
#277 SPY October 22, 2009 03:22
Re: # 266 Pew / Tahmed32: Good you people enlightened me about some of the World courts and their scope etc. Although interesting but you people digressed too much.

Coming back where it all started - "strained Indo/Pak relationship: its past and future", I see this time to be no different from the earlier times. Although the path travelled (war-mongering vs dialog) is different, but the relative positions are same (i.e. each country is at opposite ends), so the end result is the same. But yes for India the dosiers were definitely much cheaper way of putting Pak in the dock, than the militry build up done last time. For Pak the continued stalling of the action against mumbai conspirators is seen as victory, without realising the depth to which their nation's image has fallen. (tahmed - besides the weekly blasts, the mumbai 26/11 and saeed proceedings are some events that paint your country's image and not the bigotted hindus).

Secondly you people are mixing two very different issues: a strong Indo-pak relationship and strong Democratic govt in Pakistan. You have conveniently built a whole castle on the foundation that a strong civil govt in Pakistan is good for India and the Indo-Pak relationship. All these are independent of each other.

The presence of strong or weak, democratic or militry ruled govt in Pakistan, it is entirely in the hands of Pak people. India can be a rallying point for the Pak masses for a short duration during Indo-pak conflict, but not a decisive factor of Pak govt making. Maybe the USA and Saudi have some remote controls but definitely not India. It is false pat on the Indian back for strengthening the Pak civil govt, when no tangible results are coming out. Nobody in Pak cares about these Indian efforts.

From India's point of view, what can be controled to ensure that India's interests are secured and maintained:

a) Ensure India's security is strong enough to "detect and nip in the bud" any potential sinister effort of the Pak state or non-state actors.

b) Indian accepts Pak hand of friendship/dialog or continues to stay cool as presently

c) Presence of strong/weak, civil/militry govt in Pakistan, with or without Indian govt help.

None of these options is 100% foolproof or would work in isolation, but when it comes to putting my money, I would go with option (a). I would like to know where Pew would like to put his money.

As for Pak, it is said in our society that a wife knows exactly (99.9%) the fidelity of her husband or a parent knows the doings (well behaved or going astray) of a teenage child. Applying the same logic, I am sure the Pak society and Tahmed know exactly what is their society, the root cause for churning terrorist (LeT) and how it can be resolved/fixed. That does not require any Indian support to Pak govt or friendship hand or Indo/Pak talks etc.

As one of the British minister said that resolving Kashmir issue would not resolve the Indo-Pak conflicts. The LeT would not start driving taxis after the kashmir issue is resolved. Tahmed finds it hard to have a look at his society that generates LeT or find ways to put a stop to it altogether, but cannot overlook the stumbling block in India's refusal to have dialog. The first option requires introspection and self-correction, while the second is conditional and requires action from the other party (India). Very convenient.

Despite all your polite discussions on the net, the bottomline remains "On the ground it is still a zero sum game". Untill the realistic issues/problems are not identified head on and resolved, the Indo / Pak relationship would remain the same.

 
 
#276 krishna_abcd October 21, 2009 20:29
#266 Pew_Research

[I agree with you that the civilian government in Pakistan needs to be strengthened, and India should do whatever it can to do so.]

Since Tahmed is finding it inconvenient to answer, maybe YOU can tell me. WHAT IS IT India should be having a "dialogue" with Pakistan about? What is it India should be doing? Or not doing?

 
 
#275 Pew_Research October 21, 2009 17:32
Re: # 265 Tahmed

I agree with you that the civilian government in Pakistan needs to be strengthened, and India should do whatever it can to do so.

 
 
#274 tahmed32 October 21, 2009 17:18
PewResearch #263 We can go on this subject till the cows come home. The bottom line that remains is - the Zardari government is asking for a dialogue with the Indian government with a improving relations. And the Indian government is refusing to go down this path. And this at a time when the progressive forces in Pakistan are stronger than they have ever been in a long time.

You may or may not disagree with me when I say that the Indian government is merely using mumbai as a pretext. And even if you disagree on this point - it does not change the basic point I was making - i.e. that instead of treating Pakistan as a monolith ruled by some kind of an Inner Chamber in the ISI, the Indian government would serve the interests of India better if it distinguished between the progressive vs retrogressive forces in Pakistan. This is simply smart politics.


 

Article Categories



Article Interatcs

#283 Sanatani
#282 SPY
#281 SPY
#280 tahmed32
#279 nkg
#278 Pew_Research
#277 SPY
#276 krishna_abcd
#275 Pew_Research
#274 tahmed32
#273 ajeya
#272 Pew_Research
#271 Pew_Research
#270 ajeya
#269 ellora
#268 tahmed32
#267 nkg
#266 chaltahai
#265 Pew_Research
#264 tahmed32
#263 Pew_Research
#262 SPY
#261 nkg
#260 ellora
#259 Pew_Research
#258 krishna_abcd
#257 ajeya
#256 Pew_Research
#255 ajeya
#254 ajeya
#253 tahmed32
#252 Pew_Research
#251 Pew_Research
#250 Pew_Research
#249 Pew_Research
#248 tahmed32
#247 tahmed32
#246 krishna_abcd
#245 krishna_abcd
#244 krishna_abcd
#243 tahmed32
#242 krishna_abcd
#241 krishna_abcd
#240 tahmed32
#239 Pew_Research
#238 krishna_abcd
#237 krishna_abcd
#236 Pew_Research
#235 tahmed32
#234 Pew_Research
#233 tahmed32
#232 Arman.Zain
#231 tahmed32
#230 chaltahai
#229 tahmed32
#228 tahmed32
#227 ajeya
#226 ajeya
#225 tahmed32
#224 SPY
#223 SPY
#222 Pew_Research
#221 ellora
#220 tahmed11
#219 masadi
#218 rf786
#217 KHYBER
#216 hamidm2
#215 Pew_Research
#214 ahmedmadani
#213 rf786
#212 meenug
#211 tahmed32
#210 tahmed32
#209 tahmed32
#208 tahmed32
#207 ahmedmadani
#206 a_r_j_u_n286
#205 a_r_j_u_n286
#204 Pew_Research
#203 masadi
#202 Pew_Research
#201 masadi
#200 masadi
#199 masadi
#198 akcheema
#197 Urstruly
#196 hamidm2
#195 ajeya
#194 ajeya
#193 chittagong
#192 ellora
#191 pavocavalry
#190 ajeya
#189 tahmed32
#188 tahmed32
#187 tahmed32
#186 tahmed32
#185 malikrashid
#184 hamidm2
#183 Faruk
#182 ajeya
#181 bubba
#180 tahmed32
#179 tahmed32
#178 Faruk
#177 pavocavalry
#176 Sidhu_Jyatha
#175 dost_mittar
#174 Faruk
#173 ajeya
#172 SPY
#171 Sidhu_Jyatha
#170 pavocavalry
#169 giani_240
#168 giani_240
#167 Sidhu_Jyatha
#166 Sidhu_Jyatha
#165 a_r_j_u_n286
#164 pavocavalry
#163 ahmedmadani
#162 Sidhu_Jyatha
#161 Sidhu_Jyatha
#160 ahmedmadani
#159 Sidhu_Jyatha
#158 a_r_j_u_n286
#157 a_r_j_u_n286
#156 nkg
#155 masadi
#154 Urstruly
#153 tahmed32
#152 Diesel
#151 tahmed32
#150 tahmed32
#149 tahmed32
#148 a_r_j_u_n286
#147 dost_mittar
#146 bubba
#145 Pardesi
#144 cowardchickenhawk
#143 anil
#142 iron_mask
#141 Maharana
#140 iron_mask
#139 Pardesi
#138 ajeya
#137 Maharana
#136 iron_mask
#135 iron_mask
#134 Pardesi
#133 Pew_Research
#132 chaltahai
#131 iron_mask
#130 dost_mittar
#129 Pew_Research
#128 iron_mask
#127 dost_mittar
#126 Pew_Research
#125 hamidm2
#124 ajeya
#123 iron_mask
#122 tahmed32
#121 sattar2
#120 Pew_Research
#119 tahmed32
#118 tahmed32
#117 tahmed32
#116 Dana-e-raaz
#115 cowardchickenhawk
#114 Sidhu_Jyatha
#113 Pew_Research
#112 pavocavalry
#111 Pew_Research
#110 a_r_j_u_n286
#109 a_r_j_u_n286
#108 a_r_j_u_n286
#107 pavocavalry
#106 SPY
#105 iron_mask
#104 SPY
#103 SPY
#102 tahmed32
#101 Sidhu_Jyatha
#100 SPY
#99 bulleya
#98 cowardchickenhawk
#97 Sidhu_Jyatha
#96 Sidhu_Jyatha
#95 kuppuswamy
#94 Urstruly
#93 Sidhu_Jyatha
#92 nkg
#91 bharat25t
#90 zeemax
#89 a_r_j_u_n286
#88 tahmed32
#87 CoolAL
#86 a_r_j_u_n286
#85 a_r_j_u_n286
#84 tahmed32
#83 anil
#82 ana
#81 chaltahai
#80 ajeya
#79 ajeya
#78 fullyautomatix
#77 jang
#76 CheGuevara
#75 iron_mask
#74 iron_mask
#73 tahmed32
#72 AlephNull
#71 tahmed32
#70 tahmed32
#69 tahmed32
#68 AlephNull
#67 ajeya
#66 NangaPir
#65 Pew_Research
#64 tahmed32
#63 ajeya
#62 Pew_Research
#61 tahmed32
#60 ajeya
#59 swapnavasavdutta
#58 ajeya
#57 ajeya
#56 Matrix
#55 rf786
#54 tahmed32
#53 fuzair
#52 zeemax
#51 SPY
#50 Pew_Research
#49 a_r_j_u_n286
#48 a_r_j_u_n286
#47 SPY
#46 SPY
#45 zeemax
#44 SPY
#43 dude40000
#42 meenug
#41 tahmed32
#40 tahir
#39 SPY
#38 dude40000
#37 HPsauce
#36 HPsauce
#35 a_r_j_u_n286
#34 HPsauce
#33 a_r_j_u_n286
#32 a_r_j_u_n286
#31 HPsauce
#30 a_r_j_u_n286
#29 a_r_j_u_n286
#28 a_r_j_u_n286
#27 tahmed32
#26 a_r_j_u_n286
#25 taritheGman
#24 peonofthewest
#23 taritheGman
#22 tahir
#21 tahir
#20 tahmed32
#19 tahir
#18 SPY
#17 SPY
#16 SPY
#15 Matrix
#14 SPY
#13 Urstruly
#12 ahmedmadani
#11 a_r_j_u_n286
#10 RiazHaq
#9 giani_240
#8 ahmedmadani
#7 cowardchickenhawk
#6 iron_mask
#5 iron_mask
#4 giani_240
#3 ellora
#2 CreateAlpha
#1 ellora

Copyright © 1997 - 2010 chowk.com. All Rights Reserved. Reproduction of material on any www.chowk.com pages without prior written permissions is strictly prohibited.