Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The End of Baloch insurgency?:Malik Siraj Akbar

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • The End of Baloch insurgency?:Malik Siraj Akbar

    Since its beginning in 2004, the Pakistan's Baloch insurgency is caught up in the worst infighting ever known to the general public. Different left-wing underground armed groups that had been fighting Islamabad for a free Baloch homeland have now started to attack each other's camps. If the infighting exacerbates, Islamabad will have solid reasons to rejoice the end of one of the two deadly insurgencies it has been facing for nearly a decade (the other being the Taliban insurgency).

    Overshadowed by the deadlier Taliban insurgency, the Baloch resistance did not draw ample attention in the national media but it was certainly a matter of deep concern for the past three consecutive governments. The Baloch insurgents had attacked almost all prime installations of the Pakistani government, including the military cantonment in Quetta, Balochistan's capital; important government buildings and killed senior government officials.

    The Baloch had confronted the Pakistani state on at least four occasions in the past. The Pakistani government adopted numerous approaches to undermine the Baloch resistance but none of these approaches fully worked until infighting crept the ranks of the Baloch. In the past, Islamabad carried out military operations, bought the loyalties of rival tribal chiefs or empowered the so-called moderate leadership of the Baloch and also sponsored religious extremist groups in order to counter the Baloch nationalists. All such policies failed to completely uproot the resistance in the mineral-rich region. There has only been only one antidote to the Baloch movement: Infighting.

    On November 3, the United Baloch Army, an underground armed organization, said the Baloch Liberation Army (BLA), another armed group, had killed one of it its commanders, Ali Sher, and detained four of its 'freedom fighters'. This was an unprecedented development as the Baloch insurgents had never attacked each other in the past although half a dozen armed groups have been operating separately for a decade to challenge the Pakistani state. The killing of a fellow Baloch commander comes in the midst of a call two days earlier by two most important pro-independence Baloch political organizations, the Baloch National Movement (BNM) and the Baloch Students Organization (BSO) that appealed to all the armed groups to refrain from fighting each other. The BNM and the BSO provide support for the call for a free Baloch land among the people through political rallies and distribution of literature among the masses. In the process of their overt public support for the idea of a free Balochistan, the BNM and the BSO have lost the largest number of political activists in Pakistan's brutal crackdown against the Baloch political activists.

    Unlike the past resistance movements, the ongoing Baloch resistance had created serious challenges for Pakistan for at least four reasons.

    First, it lasted longer than any of the past resistance moment. Second, the armed struggle reached the breadth and width of Balochistan. It was expanded from rural mountainous regions to the city centers. Third, the movement involved Baloch women and children who supported the armed groups through regular protest rallies. Fourth, the Baloch resistance drew more international attention than ever before. In 2012, the U.S. Congress convened a hearing on Balochistan and supported the demand for a free Baloch land. The conflict in Balochistan has drastically influenced India-Pakistan relations as Islamabad has accused New Delhi of supporting the insurgency in Balochistan.

    What suddenly caused the dramatic fall of a movement that was otherwise capable of giving Islamabad a serious headache?

    While the state-sponsored killing of a top Baloch tribal leader, Nawab Akbar Bugti in August 2006, had escalated the insurgency, the natural death of another veteran nationalist leader, Nawab Khair Bakhsh Marri in June 2014 has caused the dramatic decline of the Baloch separatist movement.

    Widely perceived as the godfather of the Baloch armed movement, Mr. Marri was a Marxist who ardently advocated the idea of a free Balochistan. I met and interviewed him at his Karachi residence in 2008. He was old and frail but said there was no way the Baloch could coexist with Pakistan. Marri was believed to be running the Baloch armed group, the Baloch Liberation Army. Islamabad had already pitted his pro-Pakistan tribal rivals against him to weaken his political position. After his death, differences broke out even among the Marri brothers on the question as to who would succeed the senior Marri. It is believed that the BLA and the UBA are loyal to two warring Marri brothers.

    Currently, there is persistent tension between the two groups as to who can join and lead these organizations. In the past, the Baloch armed groups drew their manpower from the largest Baloch tribe, the Marris, only. There has been disequilibrium in the recent past as non-tribal activists from other parts of Balochistan have also joined these groups. Differences exist on how much to trust the newcomers and how much authority they should be granted. Besides the UBA, the BLA has also been criticized by another armed organization, the Lashkar-e-Balochistan, which, a recent statement published in Urdu language newspaper Daily Tawar, said the BLA was more active on social media than the actual battleground. The BLA is the oldest and the most dangerous among all Baloch groups operating in Balochistan.

    Meanwhile, on another front, Baloch armed fighters struggling inside Balochistan have come out against those Baloch politicians who are currently living in exile. Those risking their lives in the battlefield in Balochistan against Pakistani forces feel somewhat betrayed that some other leaders are enjoying 'comfortable' lives in western capitals and capitalizing on their struggle. An awkward series of public allegations was seen in Balochistan's local Urdu newspapers last week between Dr. Allah Nazar, the supposed head of another Baloch armed group, the Baloch Liberation Front (BLF) and the Khan of Kalat Mir Suleman Dawood, a daydreamer who perceives himself as the future king of a free Balochistan. Mr. Dawood, living in exile in the United Kingdom, has been instrumental in reaching out to American and western parliamentarians to get their support for a free Balochistan.

    The armed resistance gained enormous public support in mid-2000s because of Pakistan's excessive use of force against the Baloch masses. But the insurgents failed to utilize this time to come on one single platform to put forward their demands. More and more armed groups emerged among the Baloch which made it almost impossible for them to properly coordinate with each other. The armed groups alienated the fellow moderate Baloch political parties by questioning their patriotism and commitment to the 'national cause'. Human rights groups criticized the Baloch armed groups for killing numerous non-Baloch citizens under the allegations of spying for the Pakistani government while ordinary Baloch citizens also became victim of their attacks on similar unsubstantiated allegations.

    After one year of continued fighting, the Baloch insurgents appear frustrated with the lack of international support for their movement. A decade later, even not a single country supports the free Balochistan movement. The Baloch fighters seem jaded with how moderate political parties, such as the ruling National Party of Dr. Malik Baloch, the chief minister of Balochistan, capitalize on their hard work and gain political power. Islamabad's counter-insurgency policy can hardly be credited for pushing the Baloch insurgents to this level. Frustration, suspicion, infighting and division are the common features of the end of a guerrilla fight. Perhaps that time has come in Balochistan.
    After one year of continued fighting, the Baloch insurgents appear frustrated with the lack of international support for their movement. A decade later, even not a single country supports the free Balochistan movement.

    [MENTION=17351]Friends of Baloch[/MENTION]
    Last edited by tripledouble; 11-23-2014, 10:11 AM.
    "I bow to no one, except ALLAH. I dont bow to punjabay, do not bow to kabulay and afghanay, do not bow to faujay and mullay, do not bow to asfandyarwalay and petty khanays...i am traitor to all of them." - Smartay

  • #2
    Baloch insurgency was non existing always until musharaf strikes of akbar bugti

    anyway Baloch has long realized that,the only state they can call home is Pakistan.
    "[B][SIZE="3"]Seer Speen Wazeer[/SIZE][/B]"

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Da Bannu Mazdigar View Post
      Baloch insurgency was non existing always until musharaf strikes of akbar bugti

      anyway Baloch has long realized that,the only state they can call home is Pakistan.
      Yes but their militant activities increased because of Indian and American support, a severed Pakistan suits India and America's Neo-Con agenda
      "I bow to no one, except ALLAH. I dont bow to punjabay, do not bow to kabulay and afghanay, do not bow to faujay and mullay, do not bow to asfandyarwalay and petty khanays...i am traitor to all of them." - Smartay

      Comment


      • #4
        1. The Baloch insurgency was the main threat to the existence (notice I use the word "existence" carefully, and also the word "was" rather than "is") of Pakistan i.e it staying in one piece.

        However this insurgency definitely seems to have died down - though I could be completely wrong.

        I have asked a Baloch figure I have email contact with two times and he (an objective guy) has said the insurgency is active or in his words "booming".

        However on Balochwarna I do not read of any frequent operations and I am sure they would make mention of them if there were.

        2. The Baloch nationalist threat is the main threat to Pakistan's unity as Pashtuns are seduced by false talk of Muslim brotherhood and Muslim unity. I say *false* since if it comes down to crucial issues Punjabis will choose their own interests above that of Pashtuns e.g. banning Pashtun IDPs from Punjab i.e. banning one group of Muslims from the territory of another group of Muslims in the "land of the pure" or the "fortress of Islam" i.e. Pakistan.


        Despite all the lip service to Islam ethnic self-interest will always prevail in Pakistan as we saw in 1971 when west Pakistanis chose ethnic self-interest above Muslim unity when they refused to let Muslim Bengalis run the government as they saw them not as "Muslims" but as racially inferior Bengalis, thus Pakistanis chose ethnicity above religion in 1971.

        Also most Pashtuns believe it is not in their interest to break from Pakistan as there is no alternative. They believe they would be stuck in a landlocked state with no access to the sea and it is better to try and stay in Pakistan and make it work.


        3. If the Baloch insurgency is indeed dying out, then Pakistan is here to stay.

        Its "existence" may be ensured, but Iraq exists too, so officially does Syria, so does Afghanistan. None of these states have officially broken up.

        However the militants of the Tehreek i Taliban i Pakistan, who believe in Pakistan's territorial integrity may continue to destabilize Pakistan.

        Also Pakistan's corrupt politicians i.e. PML-N, PPP, MQM etc will all continue to ruin Pakistan.

        So we might just see Pakistan as it is now, in one piece but unstable.

        I have absolutely no idea what will happen to Pakistan in the long-term.

        It seems like the US which keeps Pakistan afloat and sponsors its army does not want to see the break up of this important proxy state of theirs.
        * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

        Comment


        • #5
          Baloch insurgency started because Baloch never felt part of Pakistan, they probably still dont. Why would anyone want to be part of the country which robs and steal their resources and in return they get nothing. They are probably going through a peaceful phase, but if the Punjab government doesn't do anything for them, the insurgency will be right back

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by tripledouble View Post
            Yes but their militant activities increased because of Indian and American support, a severed Pakistan suits India and America's Neo-Con agenda
            India Support does exist and i am not sure about america

            Baloch today are well integrated into the Pakistani society,so with the integration of them into the Society,less than 500 BLA followers doesn't pose any threat.

            I have firm contact with Naaz Gul baloch aswell as Nawab siraj raisani and on ocassion have shared their message's on @Pakistan Defence Page.

            Don't worry,Balochistan is all set to remain with us.

            The only part we should worry about is how to remove Noora kushti,Zardari and the fake bhutto's,asfandyar wali,Diesel group.PMLN Q is already a past tense.and yes the noora licker mehmood achakzai

            Leave ttp to army,the damage ttp has recieved is beyond any repair
            "[B][SIZE="3"]Seer Speen Wazeer[/SIZE][/B]"

            Comment


            • #7
              For Bengali Tiger from a Baloch

              "[B][SIZE="3"]Seer Speen Wazeer[/SIZE][/B]"

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Karachi View Post
                Baloch insurgency started because Baloch never felt part of Pakistan, they probably still dont.
                That's because it's a remote deserted area but the government is now trying to connect them with the rest of the country, also most Baloch live outside Balochistan, there are large Baloch communities in Dera Ghazi Khan,Rajanpur,Jacobabad and Muzzafargarh, most of these Baloch settlers now speak Seraiki and Sindhi.

                Why would anyone want to be part of the country which robs and steal their resources and in return they get nothing.
                Do you know that Pakistan only gets 20% of natural gas from Balochistan, infact Sindh produces and supplies 70% of natural gas in Pakistan and Punjab produces around 18-19%, almost equal to Balochistan -this resources thing is a myth, the fact is that many Sardars also get royalties and kickbacks from the gov.
                They are probably going through a peaceful phase,
                Peaceful?They're fighting with eachother and killing their own rebels now.
                but if the Punjab government doesn't do anything for them, the insurgency will be right back
                What can "Punjab" government do?This is not Shahbaz Sharif's duty, stop using Punjab as a euphemism for Pakistan, the responsiblity lies on the whole country including you Muhajirs who dominate the bureaucracy and are the staunchest singers of Pakistanism.

                Even Muhajir,Sindhi settlers are being killed by Baloch rebels, they see you the same as Punjabis, so distancing yourself from them is pretty poor.
                "I bow to no one, except ALLAH. I dont bow to punjabay, do not bow to kabulay and afghanay, do not bow to faujay and mullay, do not bow to asfandyarwalay and petty khanays...i am traitor to all of them." - Smartay

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Bengal_Tiger View Post
                  1. The Baloch insurgency was the main threat to the existence (notice I use the word "existence" carefully, and also the word "was" rather than "is") of Pakistan i.e it staying in one piece.

                  However this insurgency definitely seems to have died down - though I could be completely wrong.

                  I have asked a Baloch figure I have email contact with two times and he (an objective guy) has said the insurgency is active or in his words "booming"
                  He's a good salesman.


                  2. The Baloch nationalist threat is the main threat to Pakistan's unity as Pashtuns are seduced by false talk of Muslim brotherhood and Muslim unity. I say *false* since if it comes down to crucial issues Punjabis will choose their own interests above that of Pashtuns e.g. banning Pashtun IDPs from Punjab i.e. banning one group of Muslims from the territory of another group of Muslims in the "land of the pure" or the "fortress of Islam" i.e. Pakistan.
                  Even Sindhi nationalists didn't allow IDPs to go to Sindh, they had their concerns, also in 1947 after partition when millions of Muhajirs came to Pakistan, their buses were turned away from NWFP(now KPK) and they had to settle in Punjab and Sindh, so this is like karma now.


                  Despite all the lip service to Islam ethnic self-interest will always prevail in Pakistan as we saw in 1971 when west Pakistanis chose ethnic self-interest above Muslim unity when they refused to let Muslim Bengalis run the government as they saw them not as "Muslims" but as racially inferior Bengalis, thus Pakistanis chose ethnicity above religion in 1971
                  Bhutto was indeed racist, & so were many army generals.



                  3. If the Baloch insurgency is indeed dying out, then Pakistan is here to stay.

                  Its "existence" may be ensured, but Iraq exists too, so officially does Syria, so does Afghanistan. None of these states have officially broken up.
                  Syria and Iraq are in civil wars and the kurds have better militias than baloch, they also have more unity and a big educated expat community.
                  However the militants of the Tehreek i Taliban i Pakistan, who believe in Pakistan's territorial integrity may continue to destabilize Pakistan.
                  No, TTP don't recognize borders, they want a khilafat.

                  Also Pakistan's corrupt politicians i.e. PML-N, PPP, MQM etc will all continue to ruin Pakistan.
                  Yes, that's why Imran Khan is the best man for PM.

                  So we might just see Pakistan as it is now, in one piece but unstable.
                  maybe

                  I have absolutely no idea what will happen to Pakistan in the long-term.
                  God knows.
                  It seems like the US which keeps Pakistan afloat and sponsors its army does not want to see the break up of this important proxy state of theirs.
                  Not true at all, America and other western powers want to break up Pakistan and Iran and create new states, it's part of the neocons "New Middle East" agenda, the dismantling of two Islamic Republics with nukes will benefit them and the setting up of secular Pro-Israeli Pro-West puppet state like Balochistan will benefit them, even the Khan of Kalat says he will recognize Israel and supports the right for a Jewish state in Palestine

                  Pakistan may have been a colonial creation but these new states are the new colonial creations by western powers, they keep changing their agenda and allies, like they did with Saddam and Qaddafi.

                  If western powers can create a state like India(the british did) then break it up in 1947, they can also break Pakistan up and create new proxy states like Balochistan.
                  "I bow to no one, except ALLAH. I dont bow to punjabay, do not bow to kabulay and afghanay, do not bow to faujay and mullay, do not bow to asfandyarwalay and petty khanays...i am traitor to all of them." - Smartay

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by tripledouble View Post
                    That's because it's a remote deserted area but the government is now trying to connect them with the rest of the country, also most Baloch live outside Balochistan, there are large Baloch communities in Dera Ghazi Khan,Rajanpur,Jacobabad and Muzzafargarh, most of these Baloch settlers now speak Seraiki and Sindhi.


                    Do you know that Pakistan only gets 20% of natural gas from Balochistan, infact Sindh produces and supplies 70% of natural gas in Pakistan and Punjab produces around 18-19%, almost equal to Balochistan -this resources thing is a myth, the fact is that many Sardars also get royalties and kickbacks from the gov.

                    Peaceful?They're fighting with eachother and killing their own rebels now.

                    What can "Punjab" government do?This is not Shahbaz Sharif's duty, stop using Punjab as a euphemism for Pakistan, the responsiblity lies on the whole country including you Muhajirs who dominate the bureaucracy and are the staunchest singers of Pakistanism.

                    Even Muhajir,Sindhi settlers are being killed by Baloch rebels, they see you the same as Punjabis, so distancing yourself from them is pretty poor.

                    post sources for your figures instead of speaking out your _ss all the time

                    Also I am using the term "punjab" because I personally believe Punjabis are taking revenge on the Baloch. In ancient times Baloch raiders use to raid Punjab and steal from them, now Punjabis are doing the same thing to baloch. This is a very ancient enmity between the two. You just have to study history to know what is going on. This is the reason Punjab wants to keep Baloch and even Pashtun for that matter under them. They know the history, and they dont want Baloch and Pashtuns to be in power again

                    also (muhajir) pakistanism is different from punjabi dominated pakistanism, everyone knows that. muhajirs want their own kind of pakistan

                    I dont prescribe to any kind of pakistansim personally, since whole thing is stupid and nationalistic
                    Last edited by Karachi; 11-19-2014, 11:16 AM.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Well it is true that 70% of active natural gas reserve's are in Sindh but we can't forgot that Sui Gas has served Pakistan for more than 3 decades,also the possibility of huge reserve's in Balochistan.



                      On Gross level,Pakistan does has significant Natural gas reserves and the success rate is as high as in the middle eastern countries as per indipendent reports

                      "[B][SIZE="3"]Seer Speen Wazeer[/SIZE][/B]"

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Da Bannu Mazdigar View Post
                        For Bengali Tiger from a Baloch






                        from the same nazgul baloch to you.




                        "To burn always with this hard gemlike flame, to maintain this ecstasy, is success in life."





                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by DaZahroJaam. View Post
                          from the same nazgul baloch to you.




                          well she's a patriot.what else can you expect
                          "[B][SIZE="3"]Seer Speen Wazeer[/SIZE][/B]"

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            [MENTION=18008]tripledouble[/MENTION]

                            He's a good salesman.
                            1. He's an ex-Pakistani military officer of Baloch background who writes online and is relatively well known. His email is available on the internet and I have emailed him a few times. I am not a friend by any means I just ask questions.

                            Maybe the Baloch insurgency is dying who knows.

                            I am only here to speak objectively.




                            Even Sindhi nationalists didn't allow IDPs to go to Sindh, they had their concerns, also in 1947 after partition when millions of Muhajirs came to Pakistan, their buses were turned away from NWFP(now KPK) and they had to settle in Punjab and Sindh, so this is like karma now.
                            2. The Sindhi nationalists did this but this disproves the idea that Pakistani nationalists like to propagate that Pakistanis are not divided by ethnicity but have allegiance to a supra-ethnic religious bond, whereas "evil" Bengalis were loyal to their ethnicity first and foremost.

                            If anything out of all the constituent Muslim groups of pre-71 Pakistan, it is Bengalis who are the most loyal to the concept of Muslim unity, even today on a micro-level (i.e. person to person level) but have been vilified by Pakistani nationalist/Arab/"Islamist" propaganda as "traitors" and "collaborators" with Hindus.

                            Pashtuns can also be racist in that they consider themselves superior to Indic peoples and even amongst themselves there is a lot of tribal tension, "za yam Afridi", "za yam Khattak" etc. You are totally right Pashtuns would not welcome large scale migration of Indian-origin Muslims/Mohajirs to Pashtun areas though they expect the same in terms of Karachi.

                            Also in the 1990s there is the famous Riffat Afridi scandal when Karachi was bought to a standstill with a Mohajir marrying a Pashtun Afridi girl.

                            A Pakistani Muslim girl married a Pakistan Muslim boy, but in the actual world of Pakistan it was unacceptable as it was Pashtun marrying Mohajir. Not to say that intermarriage does not take place, but Pakistan is no way the Utopian Islamic paradise that some portray it. I know you have never propagated such unrealistic ideas and have always been honest, I am pointing out to the large silent readership of this forum.

                            I could elaborate on this more but it's a very important point for me due to the widespread vilification of Bengalis as not being loyal to Islamic unity as propagated in the Pakistani and Arab media.




                            Bhutto was indeed racist, & so were many army generals.
                            3. Racism towards Bengalis was not just confined to Bhutto and generals it was a general West Pakistani dislike of "inferior Bengalis", which exists today. This however is not due to Pakistani nationalism or anything but essentially part of a wider racial hatred for darker Bengalis by the people of northern India and north-west India (Pakistan) and exists be it amongst Muslims or Hindus towards Bengalis be they Hindu or Muslim.

                            The northern Indian Muslims have historically always despised the Bengali Muslims and always "betrayed" them i.e. worked against them e.g. in 1905 when the Indian Muslims did not want Bengalis to form a majority-Muslim east Bengal which is actually the precursor to the modern state of Pakistan.

                            The contempt with which Paksitanis hold towards Bengalis can be seen in Karachi where even Pakistani friends of mine have expressed regret at the humiliating treatment towards Bengalis.

                            There is no easy solution, but there are good people and bad people, good Pakistanis and bad Pakistanis e.g. good Pakistanis such as Ansar Burney, Maulana Edhi, Hamid Mir, Asma Jahangir, bad Pakistanis such as Hamid Gul, Imran Khan, Niazi, Bhutto etc.



                            Syria and Iraq are in civil wars and the kurds have better militias than baloch, they also have more unity and a big educated expat community.
                            4. Syria is de facto divided though with the government running what really matters, the capital and the coast, the disunited rebels control some rural areas, desert etc, but nothing major.

                            I would say the Pakistani state is stronger than both Syria and Iraq in terms of its control of its territory.

                            Aside from the Baloch rebellion - which might be dying - there is no serious threat to its territorial integrity unlike Syria or Iraq where there is the KRG and the Sunni tribes, who other Sunni Arabs such as Saudi want to see secede from pro-Iranian, Shia controlled Iraq.


                            No, TTP don't recognize borders, they want a khilafat.
                            5. That is their ultimate goal but even their very name, the "P" in Pakistan, means that they recognize the physical reality of a Pakistani state and have a degree of loyalty to it e.g. they will fight India if it attacks Pakistan.

                            They do believe in Pakistan's territorial integrity as in they do not wish to see it break up in to smaller pieces.

                            They may want to see it part of a bigger state, the "Khilafah", but that is not the same as the secessionism of the BLA.



                            Yes, that's why Imran Khan is the best man for PM.
                            6. Imran Khan is supported by the Pakistani military-intelligence nexus and has been close to Hamid Gul in the past and is also close to former ISI chief, Shuja Pasha.

                            Khan is pro-Taliban, pro-Jamaat, anti-Bangladeshi and though he tries to cover it is actually against Pashtun nationalism but in favour of a pan-Pakistani nationalism which in the long term erodes Pashtun culture and identity as has taken place in Mianwali and other places.

                            Khan has a lot of deficiencies as a politician, we can speak about that on another day or you can open a specific thread about that.



                            maybe
                            7. Pakistan in the 60s was flourishing. It was more advanced than South Korea or Malaysia who looked up to it. If it had continued on that trajectory it would be more like Iran or Malaysia rather than being more like Iraq or Afghanistan.

                            Then there was the Zia period and the problems that it brought. I am very religious but the pseudo-shariah of the "Islamists" is not from the Quran and actually contradicts some of its core tenets. Many of the ahadeeth and "fiqh" of the classical jurists has rabbinical/Judaic influence.

                            Prior to Islam, Judaism for instance was the first or second biggest religion in Iraq i.e. Babylon where the Jews had been exiled to.

                            The pseudo-Islam that we have seen for the past 1,400 years is misogynistic and regressive and actually contradicts the Quran in many ways.

                            Musharaff - though I do not like him - was a very good ruler and would be remembered as the second greatest leader after Jinnah if it were not for what happened in 2007.

                            2007 is the year when Pakistan's problems really started e.g. the lawyers movement, Lal Masjid and the huge upsurge in Taliban violence. Prior to that everyone loved Musharraf. He revived the economy, was a nationalist, engaged in infrastructure projects and locked up vicious terrorists like the anti-Shia Sipa i Sahaba.

                            Post 2007 Pakistan, a country which was once ahead of Malaysia and South Korea, has been a mess. What will happen to it relates to point 8.


                            God knows.
                            8. Yes, only Allah ta'ala knows.

                            However with the possible fading away of the Baloch rebellion its territorial integrity is hugely strengthened.


                            Not true at all, America and other western powers want to break up Pakistan and Iran and create new states, it's part of the neocons "New Middle East" agenda, the dismantling of two Islamic Republics with nukes will benefit them and the setting up of secular Pro-Israeli Pro-West puppet state like Balochistan will benefit them, even the Khan of Kalat says he will recognize Israel and supports the right for a Jewish state in Palestine

                            Pakistan may have been a colonial creation but these new states are the new colonial creations by western powers, they keep changing their agenda and allies, like they did with Saddam and Qaddafi.

                            If western powers can create a state like India(the british did) then break it up in 1947, they can also break Pakistan up and create new proxy states like Balochistan.

                            9. a: On a personal side note I have actually met the Khan of Kalat and shaken hands with him.

                            A Baloch secretly told me many Baloch actually laugh at him and look down on him because in real terms the late Khairbaksh Marri and Ataullah Mengal had more influence than a comparative "nobody" like the Khan.

                            b: Pakistan was created by the British and so were its army and ISI.

                            The Americans are the inheritors of their Anglo-Saxon cousins the British.

                            The US can financially pull the plug on the Pakistan project if it wanted to, the Sindhi-dominated PPP and Bhuttos would be more than happy to be rulers of a 50 million strong Sindh which they can dominate and not have to share power with others such as the PML-N or Pakistan military.

                            I also knew an Abbasi who was related to one of the previous Pakistani finance ministers and he himself told me how much influence the US has over the Pakistani government and army.

                            The US does want to promote divide and rule in Muslim south-west Asia ("greater Middle east"), however the US knows its time - like its predecessor the British Empire - is coming to an end but anyway it wants to cause as much suffering and upheaval in the middle east as possible as it is doing in Syria, Iraq etc.

                            There is so much I could say but suffice to say the US has killed more people than the Nazis and carried out horrific war crimes.
                            Last edited by Bengal_Tiger; 11-19-2014, 04:41 PM.
                            * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Lol...a bangali nationalist blaming others for being nationalists.Double standards.
                              sigpic"When it is said to them: "Make not mischief on the earth," they say: "Why, we only Want to make peace!" (2.11)

                              And when it is said to them (hypocrites): "Believe as the people (followers of Muhammad Peace be upon him , Al-Ansar and Al-Muhajirun) have believed," they say: "Shall we believe as the fools have believed?" Verily, they are the fools, but they know not."(2.13)

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X