Pakistan won't hand suspects to India

[Career Prole]

Source: AFP

ISLAMABAD (AFP) – Pakistan said Tuesday it would not hand over any suspects in the Mumbai bombings to India and warned that while it wanted peace with its neighbour, it was ready for war if New Delhi decided to attack.

The remarks come amid mounting tensions between the nuclear-armed neighbours after India said it is keeping all options open following last month's carnage in Mumbai, where 172 people were killed and more than 300 wounded.

"We do not want to impose war, but we are fully prepared in case war is imposed on us," Pakistan Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi said.



Read more: http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20081209/wl_sthasia_afp/indiaattacks

---

Ah, damn it. Can you guys ever ratchet it down?

[Skittles]

1. fucking pissing contest

:puke:

[cosmicone]

3. huh?

India asking to have the terrorists handed over is a pissing contest how?

[tekisui]

5. It's not that simple.

The evidence, as of yet, that is was LeT is flimsy. Pakistan raided their camp, capturing the leader at great risk to stability in Pakistani Kashmir. It could be potential civil war in Pakistan. They are treading carefully. If Pakistan handed them over to India, rather than try them in Pakistan, it would surely ignite the region.

[Adsos Letter]

7. tekisui...

how dare you present the complexity of a given situation! Don't you know msm only wants us to deal in simplistic explanations? :D

:hi:

[ohio2007]

8. They are playing brinkmanship with their own lawless territories and want India

to stand down as the Pak civil war may ignite and push the country back into the dark ages.

The Indian govt managed to stand down in Dec 2001 but how many more straws can the 'freedom fighters' pile on before they get their wish ?

[EFerrari]

9. India is not that far behind Pakistan in the radicalization of its populace.

[varun]

11. OK...let me get this straight

If Mexico was harboring terrorists and sending them to US every month to kill and bomb innocent Americans - what do you think the American public would have done?

I think the threshold of India's patience will wear thin very soon....nukes or no nukes

[EFerrari]

16. Did you misplace your post? I didn't speak to that issue at all. n/t

[sledgehammer]

28. Slight inaccuracy in your analogy...

Pakistan is not "sending them" to India, certainly not these days. I know most Indians may think otherwise, but this is not the case.

Regardless, I do agree that India's patience will wear thin if no action is taken by Pakistan. Pakistan has arrested some of the people and clamped down on their camps pretty quickly. But more needs to be done.

BTW, if Musharraf was in power, he would have given his standard inflammatory responses and things would be much worse. I don't like Zardari one bit, but I think he's genuinely interested in working with India.

I see this as a rare opportunity for Pakistan and India to foster true cooperation. On the flip side, failure would be disastrous for both sides.

[cosmicone]

13. With all due respect, you don't know much about India...

India has a chaotic, albeit cartoon-style democracy with hundreds of parties. It also has strife between diverse groups of people. However, the violent incidences of home-grown extremists are far far below what would be expected of a country with 1.1 billion people. India is economically, educationally and technologically far far more advanced and most Indians are tolerant of the diversity. While there are some comical separatist movements in parts of the country, they don't pose any threat until the ISI arms and funds them like in the state of Assam.

Pakistan has remained a bitter, tin-pot, theocratic and backwards country which has only survived on handouts from US and now China. It has never had a stable democracy and no democratic institutions to speak of. The entire raison d'être for Pakistan is envy, jealousy and hatred of India.

The sooner Pakistan disappears via balkanization, the better of the world will be.

[tekisui]

17. The level of home grown extremist violnce in India is quite high.

Over 4,000 a year for the past 14 years.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x4604389

[cosmicone]

18. Again, that data includes most of the violence

perpetrated by the ISI through Indian and Bangladeshis.

Furthermore, 4,000 deaths in a country of 1.1 billion is not all that much. Gun-nuts in the US kiss proportionately the same number of people.

[EFerrari]

20. That's very interesting. Do you have a source where I could read more about that?

[sledgehammer]

21. Comical is...

...blaming everything (including Assam???) on ISI. You overestimate ISI's power, interest, and influence. They don't deserve that much credit.

Most of the terrorist groups are rogue outfits now, with little or no ISI support. They had much more support back in the day, but things have changed.

Pakistan has started tackling these groups after serious domestic and international problems (Lal Masjid, Marriott bombings, 9/11, etc) and suffered a lot in the process. The Mumbai attacks and India's subsequent pressure will speed things up hopefully. It's in Pakistan's best interest.

A torn-up India is not in Pakistan's interest at all. India's stability and economic progress is good for Pakistan. The Pak govt has even pushed Kashmir to the back-burner, after (foolishly, IMO) making it the center point of foreign policy for 50+ years. Pakistan-India relations have been pretty good over the last few years and most Pakistanis are looking to keep it that way.

Pakistan was not a "backward" country until the mid-80s when religious influence started taking over. Before that, Pakistan was considered much more economically and socially progressive than India. However, Zia empowered the mullahs, and the US supported the Mujahideen with weapons, and it's all been downhill from there. And at the same time, India blossomed and has become the world power it is today.

[cosmicone]

29. Pakistan has never had democratic institutions which prospered

Remember Ayub Khan? Yahya Khan? Remember how the Punjabi Pakistanis oppressed Mujib-ur-Rehman when he was elected PM and then killed 3 million Bangladeshis while raping a million girls and women there as young as 7?

It was balkanization step number 1 (separation of Bangladesh) which gives Pakistanis the heartburn and which made them want to exact revenge by trying to dismember India.

ISI is still the most powerful organization. Daniel Pearl was killed because he was close to spilling the beans on the ISI-Al Q'aeda-Lashkar e Tayyaba axis.

Taliban was the creation of ISI ("Strategic depth policy") and several divisions of Paki troops acting as Taliban were rescued from Mazar-e-Sharif by the allied forces upon begging by Musharraf.

Pakistan remains a dangerous and illegitimate state created by the brits who had no business being there. The world will be at peace when there is no more Pakistan and only Sindhudesh, Baluchistan, Pakhtoonistan and West Punjab -- all small and all powerless.

This also makes the Kashmir problem go away once and for all.

[sledgehammer]

32. Don't think that India is at a higher moral ground

No country is devoid of blame in world affairs. Perhaps India should have practiced Gandhiji's peaceful teachings. Maybe that would have avoided Indian army rapes and murders in Kashmir. Or Indian govt and RAW's support of Tamil Tiger rebels, who have killed thousands and thousands of people in Sri Lanka? Or what about the brutal suppression of Sikhs and the massacre at the Golden Temple? Or the state administrations involvement in the Bombay and Ahmedabad riots?

See how easy it is to assign blame from the past? So stop living in it, and move on.

India is an influential and successful country, and a testament to democracy. It is in a position to make things better in the world. If your hate is reflective of Indian mentality, I feel sorry for India and the region.

[cosmicone]

35. Wait a minute

India never supplied the Tamil Tigers and instead sent peacekeepers to Sri Lanka to stop hostilities -- Rajiv Gandhi was assassinated by the Tamil Tigers because of his unwillingness to support terrorism?

Sikhs were not massacred in the golden temple and India does not repress sikhs. The military operation carried out on the golden temple was led by a Sikh commander and the troops were >35% sikh. You also forget that India has a sikh prime minister hahaha.

India is not satisfied with LoC being the de facto border. Indians want ALL of Kashmir that was land-grabbed by Pakis. Pakistanis need to get over ALL of Kashmir.

[sledgehammer]

36. You accuse others of not knowing much about India...

...perhaps you should brush up too. Since your facts are limited, I would advise you to use the google to search the Internets, it will help you.

India initially supported the LTTE. Basically helped create it. Then they fought against it, which is when LTTE killed Rajiv. (http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/FC26Df04.html)

Not sure what word you would use for Golden Temple other than massacre. Thousands were probably killed - men, women and children. And Sikhs were seriously oppressed in the 1970s and 80s, so much so that they wanted their own country (let me guess - it's all ISI's fault? So is global warming, right?).

Good luck with getting all of Kashmir - haven't made an inch of progress in 60 years besides terrorizing millions of innocent Kashmiris and denying them a UN-mandated vote to choose between Pakistan and India. Once again, see how easy the blame game is?

Look, all countries are guilty of violence. I respect India a lot and see them as a model for democracy and economic progress. But arrogance in policy and attitude will lead to disaster.

Thankfully, your belligerency seems to be in the minority when compared with people I know. That is reason to give me optimism.

[cosmicone]

37. I am not belligerent at all

I grew up in India and go there every two-three months on business. I have also been to Pakistan, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh several times.

The UN-mandated vote to choose was conditional upon Pakistani withdrawal from all areas. Read up the UN resolutions. Since Pakistan never left the occupied areas, such a vote cannot be held.

The "sikhs" who were claiming independence, particularly Bhindranwale, were supported by the ISI and they had no support amongst Indian sikhs. When the operation Blue Star killed TERRORISTS, the Khalistan problem went away, never to be heard of again. No sikhs before or after have asked for independence -- it was all generated by ISI and Ollie North (remember him?)

Kashmir is a state of India and has a DEMOCRATICALLY ELECTED state government. The last time, voter turnout was >60%. The Indian forces are there to maintain law and order against TERRORISTS sent in from PAKISTAN. Very few Indian Kashmiris support terrorism and a very small minority would want to join Pakistan. Who in his/her right mind would want to join Pakistan for heaven's sake?

Once Pakistan ceases to be powerful and the ISI is internationally hog-tied, the Kashmiris in Pakistani part would want to join India for better opportunities and peace.

[sledgehammer]

38. You tend to easily forget India's responsibilities...

The UN mandated resolution required BOTH sides to withdraw their armies from Kashmir, not just Pakistan. Pakistan has never received any assurances that India will withdraw the bulk of its forces from Kashmir (one soldier for every handful of civilians). So it's basically a stalemate.

Let me help you here a little bit. The reason why India shows total disregard for the UN SC resolutions is because Indira Gandhi and ZA Bhutto (somewhat weakened after the defeat of Pak Army by India, and the subsequent loss of East Pakistan) agreed at Simla to resolve Kashmir bilaterally and without outside interference. Pakistan later tried to get UN/other countries involved, but India holds firm that Simla supersedes the UN resolutions (India's stance makes sense to me). So now you have something real to use in future discussions. BTW, Simla also encouraged both sides to accept the LOC is a de facto border until further resolution.

I never knew ISI was so powerful that it has dictated nearly every major event in India. You are probably their best advertisement, but you really are giving them way more credit than they deserve. You actually sound like deluded Muslims who are convinced that everything in the world is a Zionist conspiracy, and refuse to accept faults within themselves. For you ISI is the bogeyman. It's laughable, seriously. No one in Pakistan has much regard for the ISI, yet you make them sound like the most powerful cabal on earth.

Yes, I'm sure all those children who died in Bluestar were terrorists too. Evil, evil children! You could call the operation successful because it ended the Khalistan Liberation movement, but it was done brutally - that's all I'm trying to say on that. Same with Kashmir - India has brutally oppressed a separatist movement. The response has been severely unequal, just like the example you gave of West Pakistan's brutality against East Pakistan (and I totally agree with you). But violence is almost always wrong and should be used as sparingly as possible, whether it's India or Pakistan or the US, and I think Gandhiji would agree with me (I wish more Indians would follow his example).

(BTW, how does growing up in India and visiting other S. Asian countries not make you belligerent? I didn't get the reasoning. Your posts seem excessively aggressive and hostile.)

[cosmicone]

47. Khalistan was not a legitimate movement at all

because a vast majority of Indian sikhs didn't want it. It was a terrorist organization funded and armed by Pakistan to avenge the loss of Bangladesh. The khalistan terrorists killed over 100,000 innocent Hindus. They put the children and women in harm's way. It was not "brutally" crushed as only Pakistanis would claim but the problem was firmly dealt with. It is not unlike the David Koresh situation in the US.

I never said every terrorist incident in India is related to the ISI. However, Indian security forces routinely catch Pakistani origin RDX, weapons and spy-logistics from peasant-terrorists who could only have gotten the sophistication from a state sponsored body and many of them confess to being trained by the ISI.

You are ignoring a vast number of media releases from India just to make your point.

[sledgehammer]

48. Interesting choice of words...

"100,000 innocent Hindus"? Were the Muslims, Christians, Parsis, etc. they killed not innocent, or were none killed at all, or are you only concerned about Hindus? Speaks volumes about your mentality.

Just like many Muslims need to get over their Zionist/Mossad fixation, you really need to get over your ISI fixation. India has some homegrown problems it needs to address. Blaming Khalistan, Assam, etc. on ISI is convenient, but it's flawed and counter-productive.

Sidenote: BTW, who's to decide a legitimate movement? Was Bangladesh a legitimate movement? Was the Southern Confederacy legit? Is Assam rebellion legit? Was Quit India legit? Is LTTE legit? That's all highly subjective. Usually the victors inscribe legitimacy (or lack thereof) into the history books, so I guess it depends on who succeeds. The US Civil War is an interesting exception - the vanquished have written way way more than the victors.

[cosmicone]

52. I respectfully disagree

A "legitimate" separatist movement is one which has the support of an overwhelming majority of the people it purports to free. Thus, Bangladeshi "muktibahini" was legit but KZF (Bhindranwale's terrorist outfit) was not. "Quit India" movement was legitimate SOLELY because it sought freedom from a foreign colonial occupying power. The definition of legitimacy is not subjective at all.

I am not "obsessed" with ISI. I only state established facts. Even the CIA is now exposing its protégé the ISI which was clearly culpable in the bombing of the Indian embassy in Afghanistan just a few months ago. The British government has also known for years the links between ISI and terrorist outfits: http://www.rediff.com/news/2002/jun/11war4.htm

Further: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2002/may/25/pakistan.india

The links have been questioned as recently as July:
http://www.indianexpress.com/news/Annoyed-by-ISI-information-leak,-Bush-asks-Gilani-who%92s-in-control/343043/

I am not saying there would be no terrorism in India once Pakistan is balkanized and ISI disappears. What I am saying is that it would be vastly reduced and most of the separatist movements would go away due to lack of funding, arms and logistical support.

It is in the best interests of the world for Pakistan (which is an illegitimate state created by the brits) to be balkanized and weakened into oblivion. Fortunately, that is also a view of many sindhis, baluchis and pakhtoons who feel oppressed by the Pakistani punjabis (who control the military and the ISI) and their obsession with, envy of and competition with India.

[sledgehammer]

54. Then what about the Southern Confederacy?

The vast majority of the people they purported to free supported it. And in today's world, what about LTTE? Or the PKK? Legitimacy is highly subjective.

Every intelligence agency in this world has its hands pretty dirty. CIA, Mossad, RAW, ISI, MI5, whoever. But to keep pointing a finger elsewhere, and not pay attention to the three fingers pointing back at oneself, is a dangerous path to tread.

[cosmicone]

55. Using logic,

The confederacy was legitimate except for their desire to hold slaves which was illegal at the time around the world.

If an overwhelming majority of citizens of any state want to secede from the union, it would be a legitimate movement.

The PKK is a complex story because they are an ethnic group which is a minority in every country they reside in, and they reside in 5 countries. They are ethnically labeled as homogeneous but they are not. They speak Turkish, Azeri, Arabic and Persian. Many are shia or sunni. Thus "kurdish" is a label like "latino" rather than a specific group geographically located in a single area.

The LTTE is also not legit because an overwhelming majority of tamils do NOT support it.

Most intelligence agencies have performed dirty tricks, however, only ISI has deliberately targeted innocent civilians for its agenda.

CIA, Mossad, MI6, RAW or KGB don't engage in operations with a specific purpose of killing innocent civilians to cause terror like ISI does.

Logic is your friend. :)

[sledgehammer]

56. Logic may be your friend...

...but facts and research are apparently not. Actually, even logic fails you. Supporting any group/movement with arms and money puts you in the same boat as anyone else. In the end, lots of innocents are killed directly and in the crossfire.

Everyone has got their agenda, no one enjoys a high moral ground. I think ISI is an incredibly problematic organization, but it's in the same ball park as CIA, RAW, Mossad and the gang. They all fund violence to achieve their agenda, and they all target innocents through their proxies.

I would think you are aware of some of RAW's activities, but if not, see these links:

http://www.globalsecurity.org/intell/world/india/raw.htm
http://www.cfr.org/publication/17707/raw.html

I wouldn't take them as gospel, but it gives you some idea. In any case, you see RAW and all other intelligence organizations besides ISI as blameless, so I won't waste my time anymore with facts and logic on that.

Also, LTTE may be less popular now, but it enjoyed overwhelming support back in the day. Owning slaves was not illegal in the United States at the time of the Civil War (what does "illegal around the world" have to do with it?). PKK enjoys significant support among Turkish Kurds, who are its primary audience.

So legitimacy is always going to remain subjective, it's never a matter of black and white. Bush made that policy mistake - you're with us, or against us. It's not that easy. There's a lot of gray area.

[sledgehammer]

51. All in good humor...

Enjoy! ;)

[cosmicone]

53. hahahahahahahaha

That is hilarious -- although, I'm not a Nobel winning scientist yet. You'll have to wait 3-4 years ;)

[JI7]

40. you sound like the Freepers cheering on war in Iraq, Iran and everywhere else

[closeupready]

50. Right out of the neocon playbook.

:puke:

[ohio2007]

58. The number of militant attacks on civilians prove otherwise.

Civil war in India isn't on the horizon while Pakistan has already lost 1/3 of their country to the parallel government,
and besides,
how many Hindu sleeper cells with Indian passports do you think are operating in Pakistan ? I'm sure they must # in the thousands and eagerly await for the order to strike back ;)




http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/asia/article5316934.ece

[samsingh]

49. how is this a pissing contest? Pakistan is harboring terrorists and

threatening to escalate.

how would they feel if someone did this to them?

[acmavm]

2. Yep, don't work together, just shit in each other's Post Toasties.

That'll work.

:sarcasm:

[EFerrari]

10. Pakistan offered a joint investigation. I don't know what that means, though,

i.e., if that was a bona fide offer or if it was pro forma or if it was simply CYA.

[cosmicone]

14. How come you're such an apologist for Pakistan?

Just curious

[EFerrari]

19. Hugo Chavez recruited me for the ISI.

[cosmicone]

30. Que bueno!!

Puede hablar el español y el urdu tambien? ;)

[Odin2005]

4. Uh-oh.

This got really explosive all of a sudden! :scared:

[Kalyan]

6. Let me understand

Let me understand ...

A thief comes and robs my place and hides in the closet of meighbour. when i ask my neighbour to hand him back, he tells me that he wants my friendship but wouldn't hand the thief back to me.

So, either the neighbour doesn't want friendship or doesn't want to hand the thief. He can't have the cake and eat it too (unless the US govt decides to interfere!)

Paki FM is damn stupid. They shouldn't have arrested the head of LeT. Under what laws did they arrest him? If Pakistan can hand over US terrorists post-9/11, why can't they hand over Indian terrorists post-11/26?

Pakistan has publicly confessed to harbour at least the following Indian terrorists:
1. Dawood Ibrahim (he is wanted by Interpol, CIA and a dozen other global agencies as well)
2. Tiger Memom (mastermind of 1993 bombay blasts. He was sentencted to death in absentia by Indian court)
3. Kandahar released terrorist. Between those three, they are convicted of masterminding the 2001 Indian Parliament attack, partially funding 9/11 to the tune of $100k, killing Daniel Pearl and recruiting underage boys to fight in Kashmir.

Pakistan is the hotbed of terrorism and unless their situation is addressed, the world won't see a dip in terrorism activities.

Also, the Paki govt officials should watch what they are speaking. They are on the brink of bankruptcy and India today has enough clout in multinational agencies to arm-twist them into shame.

[cosmicone]

15. Bravo! n/t

[sledgehammer]

25. Agreed mostly...

But if the Kandahar guys were so dangerous, why did India let them go?

I know the situation, I know the lives at stake in that hijacking. India had almost no choice. But that should make you understand the complexity in arresting and detaining such figures, and how Pakistan has to balance that as well.

One flight was held hostage and India relented. The entire country of Pakistan is held hostage everyday, and yet Pakistan is fighting extremism day in and day out, and suffers constantly. And in Pakistan it's not just a military battle, it's a social and educational battle which complicates things tremendously.

Pakistan's reaction post-Mumbai has been positive. Let's see where it goes from here.

[EFerrari]

27. Arm-twist the "Pakis"?

What a sadistic, bigoted fantasy. Enjoy your stay.

[jberryhill]

59. The problem is...

The thief has five other friends in your neighbor's house with their guns pointed at your neighbor's head.

Your neighbor's refusal to hand over the thief isn't necessarily out of any great love for the thief, but he has other problems, which are not necessarily best solved by your lobbing grenades into his house.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

12. pakistans civil authorities are too scared of their milititants, indias government is too busy

blaming pakistan for its own shortcomings as well.

[sledgehammer]

22. Yes, this has been a problem

Public reaction to cracking down on these religious nuts has been pretty strong. But it's dwindling. The economy is so trashed that people are much less concerned.

Plus, Musharraf was considered a US puppet, so when he took action the reaction was stronger. The current govt is popularly elected, and the opposition supports them in the fight against terror. Also, religious parties are virtually powerless now.

Pakistan has been taking steps. It's not easy to battle terrorism anywhere. But Pakistan has suffered a lot, and will suffer more. Regardless, the crackdown needs to continue, and I think you'll see waning support for these religious freaks and their ideals.

[JI7]

41. indian govt is full of blagojevich types

[Bhaisahab]

43. Dude, we invented the blagojevich type n/t

[sledgehammer]

23. Zardari's Op-Ed in NY Times

By Zardari in today's NY Times (see below). It's very well-written. I have almost zero respect for the guy, but he seems genuine on his approach toward his neighbors. He's not a nationalist, he's not an Army guy. So he doesn't have to resort to decades-old rhetoric.

I doubt Pakistan will ever hand over the suspects to India. It's easier to just lock them up in Pakistan. Even for India, it'll be a nuisance to keep them and try them. But India should make sure that the network/infrastructure of these groups is proactively dismantled by Pakistan. It's in Pakistan's best interest too.

*****************************

The Terrorists Want to Destroy Pakistan, Too

By ASIF ALI ZARDARI

Published: December 8, 2008

THE recent death and destruction in Mumbai, India, brought to my mind the death and destruction in Karachi on Oct. 18, 2007, when terrorists attacked a festive homecoming rally for my wife, Benazir Bhutto. Nearly 150 Pakistanis were killed and more than 450 were injured. The terrorist attacks in Mumbai may be a news story for most of the world. For me it is a painful reality of shared experience. Having seen my wife escape death by a hairbreadth on that day in Karachi, I lost her in a second, unfortunately successful, attempt two months later.

The Mumbai attacks were directed not only at India but also at Pakistan's new democratic government and the peace process with India that we have initiated. Supporters of authoritarianism in Pakistan and non-state actors with a vested interest in perpetuating conflict do not want change in Pakistan to take root.

To foil the designs of the terrorists, the two great nations of Pakistan and India, born together from the same revolution and mandate in 1947, must continue to move forward with the peace process. Pakistan is shocked at the terrorist attacks in Mumbai. We can identify with India's pain. I am especially empathetic. I feel this pain every time I look into the eyes of my children.

Pakistan is committed to the pursuit, arrest, trial and punishment of anyone involved in these heinous attacks. But we caution against hasty judgments and inflammatory statements. As was demonstrated in Sunday's raids, which resulted in the arrest of militants, Pakistan will take action against the non-state actors found within our territory, treating them as criminals, terrorists and murderers. Not only are the terrorists not linked to the government of Pakistan in any way, we are their targets and we continue to be their victims.

India is a mature nation and a stable democracy. Pakistanis appreciate India's democratic contributions. But as rage fueled by the Mumbai attacks catches on, Indians must pause and take a breath. India and Pakistan — and the rest of the world — must work together to track down the terrorists who caused mayhem in Mumbai, attacked New York, London and Madrid in the past, and destroyed the Marriott Hotel in Islamabad in September. The terrorists who killed my wife are connected by ideology to these enemies of civilization.

These militants did not arise from whole cloth. Pakistan was an ally of the West throughout the cold war. The world worked to exploit religion against the Soviet Union in Afghanistan by empowering the most fanatic extremists as an instrument of destruction of a superpower. The strategy worked, but its legacy was the creation of an extremist militia with its own dynamic.

Pakistan continues to pay the price: the legacy of dictatorship, the fatigue of fanaticism, the dismemberment of civil society and the destruction of our democratic infrastructure. The resulting poverty continues to fuel the extremists and has created a culture of grievance and victimhood.

The challenge of confronting terrorists who have a vast support network is huge; Pakistan's fledgling democracy needs help from the rest of the world. We are on the frontlines of the war on terrorism. We have 150,000 soldiers fighting Al Qaeda, the Taliban and their extremist allies along the border with Afghanistan — far more troops than NATO has in Afghanistan.

Nearly 2,000 Pakistanis have lost their lives to terrorism in this year alone, including 1,400 civilians and 600 security personnel ranging in rank from ordinary soldier to three-star general. There have been more than 600 terrorism-related incidents in Pakistan this year. The terrorists have been set back by our aggressive war against them in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas and the Pashtun-majority areas bordering Afghanistan. Six hundred militants have been killed in recent attacks, hundreds by Pakistani F-16 jet strikes in the last two months.

Terrorism is a regional as well as a global threat, and it needs to be battled collectively. We understand the domestic political considerations in India in the aftermath of Mumbai. Nevertheless, accusations of complicity on Pakistan's part only complicate the already complex situation.

For India, Pakistan and the United States, the best response to the Mumbai carnage is to coordinate in counteracting the scourge of terrorism. The world must act to strengthen Pakistan's economy and democracy, help us build civil society and provide us with the law enforcement and counterterrorism capacities that will enable us to fight the terrorists effectively.

Benazir Bhutto once said that democracy is the best revenge against the abuses of dictatorship. In the current environment, reconciliation and rapprochement is the best revenge against the dark forces that are trying to provoke a confrontation between Pakistan and India, and ultimately a clash of civilizations.

Asif Ali Zardari is the president of Pakistan.

[EFerrari]

24. Thanks for posting this, sledgehammer.

:)

[sledgehammer]

26. No problem! n/t

[cosmicone]

31. This is typical Pakistani leader bologna

for decades Pakistan has managed to hunt with the hounds while running with the hares.

Pakistan has too large a military and intelligence agencies for a country that size legitimately needs. It had driven Pakistan into bankruptcy while the generals live a high and mighty life.

Pakistan should not get any support from the US - not even paperclips -- until it abandons terrorism, closes all terrorist camps, hand over all known terrorists to world powers where they are wanted for crimes and downsizes its military/intelligence apparatus.

One more thing -- Pakistan should just get over Kashmir.

[sledgehammer]

33. Pakistan is pretty much over Kashmir

When's the last time Pakistan has made a serious effort to discuss it? They've comfortably left it to the backburner. The LOC has almost become a de facto border - this is a huge change in Pak policy, and India's economic and strategic power has a lot to do with it.

It's easy to forget how much Pakistan has suffered in this War on Terror. Yes, it's the hotbed. But it's also the battleground.

Couldn't agree with you more about Pak Army generals.

[sledgehammer]

34. Also...

Did you ever hear Mush talk this way? Or Nawaz Sharif? Or even Benazir?

I haven't at least. This is a big change in rhetoric. And in the right direction.

[fujiyama]

39. I agree that this is a very eloquent op-ed

and sounded very sincere.

I'm still skeptical of his ability or willingness to get anything done though. The simple fact is, that the ISI is still exporting terror whether Zardari likes it or not. Yes, the government "cracked down" on a few people today, but knew all along where these people were. And even then, these groups will change their name and their government will wink and all will be good. Zardari needs to show some concrete and PROLONGED efforts here. A few arrests here or there won't do it. Unfortunately for him, the military and intelligence units are so radicalized...and my guess is he has even less support (and possibly less control of) in the military than Mushy even did.

India is understandably getting very impatient with this bullshit. Obama's greatest challenge will be applying the right amount of pressure on Pakistan to produce some Goddamn results. Bush obviously never held them accountable for anything and squandered billions on military aid which went to their war machine to target India and a lot of wasted political capital in propping up that tin-pot Mushy. If we want to look like we're serious about bringing peace to the region, we need to wake the fuck up and change course drastically. Zardari's rhetoric has been encouraging but the two countries need to get an extradition treaty in place and Pakistan needs to hand over many of those on the top 20 list. That would be a real sign of good faith. At the minimum Pakistan needs to arrest these people, and not simply have them under "house arrest". Start with some like Dahwood Ibrahim.

Obama seemed to get it during the election. This region by far going to be Obama's greatest foreign policy challenge. With political pressure building, India won't sit around taking these hits too much longer and no country will have any moral authority to tell it not to act either. The major powers in the UN Security Council are complicit in creating the Pakistan mess we're in anyways. The US, UK, and China are mainly responsible for propping it up all these years. But never mind, if India does "act", tensions are building to a point where it's almost certain there won't be another conventional war between the two. Pakistan knows it cannot win a conventional war, has never pledged a "no first strike" nuclear policy, and basically has nothing to lose with a crumbling economy and a constant state of near civil war on the east...

[sledgehammer]

42. Yes, the Bush-Mush policies were disastrous

As if the Army didn't have free reign already, Bush's pumping of billions with no accountability made things incredibly worse. The Army will do its level best to ensure Pak-India tensions remain because it justifies the disgustingly high Army budget. That's why it has supported the terrorist groups.

I do see the op-ed is sincere, and am optimistic that Pakistan is taking a different road. Mush never made sincere efforts to address the Pak-based groups - his focus was only Al-Qaeda because that was what Bush wanted. In the meantime, groups like Laskhar, Jaish, etc continued to grow unabated, and Mush turned a blind eye. Mainly because he didn't want to piss off any of his Army buddies.

The current Army Chief (Kayani) is a more practical guy than Mush. He is responsible for working closely with the Indian Army to prevent a conflict in Dec 2001. So with Zardari and Kayani, and the opposition behind the govt, this is Pak's shot to address terrorism with sincerity and might.

At the same time though, results can't be expected overnight. An effective action takes time and thought (something the US did not learn before starting two wars). The complexity for Pakistan is enormous, especially since religion is woven tightly into society, and because these groups have also done a large amount of charitable work domestically (earthquake relief, schools, etc. a la Hamas and Hezbollah - so there is some popular support in that regard).

Pakistan is risking a lot and it will continue to suffer greatly. But the long-term reward will hopefully be worth it. Pakistan just needs cooperation from India/US etc at this time, especially since this is a new administration. But if Pak does not start delivering soon enough, then India will act as it wills (and rightly so). The signs look good so far.

[Dorian Gray]

45. That's a great

Op-Ed.

[Dorian Gray]

44. They won't hand over the suspects?

Pakistan? What the hell?

[sledgehammer]

46. There is probably enough on them...

...to try them for crimes committed in Pakistan itself, now that Pakistan is forced to act. So Pakistan's best move would be to jail them for life based on those charges, and then also throw in charges like Mumbai in there as well.

Trust me, India does not want these people in their country. At least one of these guys (Masood Azhar) was in an Indian prison a while back. But his sympathizers hijacked an Indian Airlines flight and forced Azhar and two others to be released by the Indian govt. Similar things could happen. Even some Indian Muslim militant groups (e.g. SIMI) could get energized.

Imprisoning the leaders is one thing, dismantling their infrastructure is another. It's the latter that's going to be tougher for Pakistan to do. India should place a lot of emphasis on it and demand results.

[Dorian Gray]

60. It's all so complex

Thanks for explaining that bit to me.

[ohio2007]

57. U.N. Security Council Sanctions Lashkar Members ( LOOKOUT,here comes the UN )

The United Nations Security Council placed financial sanctions on four members of the Pakistani militant group Lashkar-e-Taiba, as well as the charitable organization that Indian and U.S. officials say serves as Lashkar's financial front, according to the U.N.

Included on the new Security Council blacklist announced Wednesday are Hafiz Saeed, the leader of Lashkar-e-Taiba; Zaki-ur-Rehman Lakhvi, its chief of operations; and two finance officials, Haji Mohammad Ashraf and Mahmoud Ahmed Bahaziq.

The Security Council amended its 2005 blacklisting of Lashkar to include the charitable foundation Jamaat-ud-Dawa, which operates openly inside Pakistan and enjoys significant public support.

snip

Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari said this week that he would ban Jamaat-ud-Dawa if given conclusive evidence of its links to the Mumbai attack. The Pakistani leader is expected to face a considerable public outcry in Pakistan if he takes any action against the organization.

The U.N. sanctions against the Lashkar-e-Taiba members and Jamaat-ud-Dawa were taken through a Security Council committee charged with cutting off funding for al Qaeda and the Taliban as well as their affiliates. Member states of the U.N. are required to freeze the assets of any organization or individual named on the terrorism blacklist and to deny travel visas to blacklisted people

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122895332614496341.html