News What Are the Implications of the Recent Security Developments in Pakistan?

[rootX]

Why should the Free World provide Islamic theocrats with humanitarian aid?

Any source that someone (non Islamic) has supported Islamic theocrats?

 

[General_Sax]

Any source that someone (non Islamic) has supported Islamic theocrats?

http://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/hamas_obama_gaza_plan/2009/03/03/187876.html

http://www.worldbulletin.net/news_detail.php?id=38156

http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/51/115.html

http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/ahead%20away/1440925/story.html

 

[Astronuc]

http://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/hamas_obama_gaza_plan/2009/03/03/187876.html

http://www.worldbulletin.net/news_detail.php?id=38156

http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/51/115.html

http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/ahead%20away/1440925/story.html

Those are not very reliable sources. Two concerning Gaza refer to US funds/support to the Palestinian Authority and Fatah. Fatah is rather secular, as opposed to Hamas which supports a more religiously oriented government. They raise the concern that funding to PA or Fatah might eventually benefit Hamas.

In Afghanistan and Pakistan, money has been given to the governments and/or to the people, who are not involved in militancy. The goal is to support the average citizen so they can provide for their families, and so they are not dependent on the militant organizations like Taliban and al Qaeda. The problem with giving money to the government is that very little money goes to the people because of the corruption.

In the Calgary Herald, the article talks about the Canadian government withdrawing support to CAF, which is not a theocracy, but apparently does support Hamas and Hezbollah, and certainly that is problematic. I don't think the Canadian government intended to support Hamas and Hezbollah.

 

[General_Sax]

Those are not very reliable sources. Two concerning Gaza refer to US funds/support to the Palestinian Authority and Fatah. Fatah is rather secular, as opposed to Hamas which supports a more religiously oriented government. They raise the concern that funding to PA or Fatah might eventually benefit Hamas.

In Afghanistan and Pakistan, money has been given to the governments and/or to the people, who are not involved in militancy. The goal is to support the average citizen so they can provide for their families, and so they are not dependent on the militant organizations like Taliban and al Qaeda. The problem with giving money to the government is that very little money goes to the people because of the corruption.

In the Calgary Herald, the article talks about the Canadian government withdrawing support to CAF, which is not a theocracy, but apparently does support Hamas and Hezbollah, and certainly that is problematic. I don't think the Canadian government intended to support Hamas and Hezbollah.

As long as Hamas oversees the relief effort in the Gaza, any humanitarian aid directed to the region is supporting a theocratic organization.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/01/24/hamas-says-it-will-overse_n_160618.html

Afghanistan and Pakistan both conform their societies, or portions of their society in Pakistan's case, to sharia law. IMO, this places them in the theocracy category.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitution_of_Afghanistan#Judicial_Branch_and_Court_System

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/2958316.stm

As for the CAF, I'll admit that my case is weak, but I do think that the situation illustrates just how theocratic organizations deceive the west into providing them with support.

 

[rootX]

As long as Hamas oversees the relief effort in the Gaza, any humanitarian aid directed to the region is supporting a theocratic organization.

So, you are suggesting that we should take down (eliminate) Hamas before supporting Palestine people?
Or in general, we should take down (eliminate) a theocratic organization before supporting/helping people in that region?

While, I do agree that some of aid end up in the wrong hands but the most important thing is that this wins the support of normal people so helps in eliminating the wrong/outdated elements in their society from the roots IMHO.

 

[General_Sax]

So, you are suggesting that we should take down (eliminate) Hamas before supporting Palestine people?
Or in general, we should take down (eliminate) a theocratic organization before supporting/helping people in that region?

While discussing this very issue with my friend he pointed out that just because Hamas says it will oversee the relief effort doesn't mean it will happen.

I'm suggesting that we should offer no help whatsoever to people who elect Jihadists to represent them.

While, I do agree that some of aid end up in the wrong hands but the most important thing is that this wins the support of normal people so helps in eliminating the wrong/outdated elements in their society from the roots IMHO.

You're assuming that this aid will win the support of the normal people. If these people subscribe to a Jihadist philosophy, then there is no chance that they will support the Kuffar.

 

[Gokul43201]

I'm suggesting that we should offer no help whatsoever to people who elect Jihadists to represent them.

Why limit this to Jihadists? Why not throw in dictators, communists, hippies, vegetarians, Rastafarians, alcoholics, womanizers, embezzlers, perjurers, warmongers, peaceniks, illiterates, Ivy-leaguers, Trust Fund babies, hedge fund managers, atheists, fundamentalists, homophobes, homosexuals, ... etc.? I am not being rhetorical; I am being literal.

Bin Laden justified the killing of civilians on 9/11 by the argument that they are the people that elected imperialist, meddling warmongers and mercenaries to represent them. This is essentially a logical extension of the argument you made above. Do you see similar merit in this argument?

 

[General_Sax]

Why limit this to Jihadists? Why not throw in dictators, communists, hippies, vegetarians, Rastafarians, alcoholics, womanizers, embezzlers, perjurers, warmongers, peaceniks, illiterates, Ivy-leaguers, Trust Fund babies, hedge fund managers, atheists, fundamentalists, homophobes, homosexuals, ... etc.? I am not being rhetorical; I am being literal.

With the exception of communists and some dictators, the groups you mention haven't clearly stated that they intend to rule the world. This is why I wouldn't extend my rhetoric to these peoples. I am firmly opposed to the idea of cultural relativism, and don't believe you can place hippies in the same category as jihadists.

Bin Laden justified the killing of civilians on 9/11 by the argument that they are the people that elected imperialist, meddling warmongers and mercenaries to represent them. This is essentially a logical extension of the argument you made above. Do you see similar merit in this argument?

The Wahhabi Doctrines justify the killing of civilians. Are you implying that Bin Laden terrorist attacks are driven by a need for revenge against the ". . .imperialist, meddling warmongers and mercenaries to represent them."? As if the west has brought this upon themselves. Should we operate in a way that wouldn't offend the Islamic extremists, and thus be dominated by them? I for one am willing to support the efforts of the free world.

 

[Astronuc]

Religious Violence and Political Turmoil in Pakistan
Broadcast - FRI FEB 27, 2009 - after Pakistan government had reached agreement with Taliban to allow Taliban to control the Swat Valley.

http://www.kcrw.com/news/programs/tp/tp090227religious_violence_a

Recently the Pakistani army/government has moved against the Taliban in Swat.


Ahmed Rahsid has written several books and many articles on Central Asia, including Pakistan and Afghanistan.
http://www.ahmedrashid.com/publications/

 

[Astronuc]

Taliban Stir Rising Anger of Pakistanis
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/05/world/asia/05refugees.html

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan — A year ago, the Pakistani public was deeply divided over what to do about its spreading insurgency. Some saw the Taliban militants as fellow Muslims and native sons who simply wanted Islamic law, and many opposed direct military action against them.

But history moves quickly in Pakistan, and after months of televised Taliban cruelties, broken promises and suicide attacks, there is a spreading sense — apparent in the news media, among politicians and the public — that many Pakistanis are finally turning against the Taliban.

The shift is still tentative and difficult to quantify. But it seems especially profound among the millions of Pakistanis directly threatened by the Taliban advance from the tribal areas into more settled parts of Pakistan, like the Swat Valley. Their anger at the Taliban now outweighs even their frustration with the military campaign that has crushed their houses and killed their relatives.

“It’s the Taliban that’s responsible for our misery,” said Fakir Muhammed, a refugee from Swat, who, like many who had experienced Taliban rule firsthand, welcomed the military campaign to push the insurgents out.

. . . .
The prospect of Shariah was alluring, said Iftikhar Ehmad, who owns a cellphone shop in Mingora, the most populous city in Swat, because the court system in Swat was so corrupt and ineffective. But the Taliban’s Shariah was not the benign change people had hoped for. Once the Taliban took power, the insurgents seemed interested only in amassing more, and in April they pushed into Buner, a neighboring district 60 miles from Islamabad.

“It was not Shariah, it was something else,” Mr. Ehmad said, jabbing angrily at the air with his finger in the scorching tent camp in the town of Swabi. “It was scoundrel behavior.”

Daily life became degrading. A woman was lashed in public, and a video of her writhing in pain and begging for mercy stirred wide outrage. Taliban bosses ordered people to donate money. Cosmetics shops and girls’ schools were burned.

By the time the military entered Swat last month, local people began leading soldiers to tunnels with weapons and Taliban hiding places in hotels, the military said. “These people, six months back, weren’t willing to share anything,” said a military official who was involved in planning the campaign. “Gradually they’ve been coming out more and more into the open.”
. . . .

The tide is turning for some who supported the Taliban. It's about time.

 

[LowlyPion]

The tide is turning for some who supported the Taliban. It's about time.

Maybe they are discovering that the Devil they know may not be as bad as the Devil that would replace him.

 

[Astronuc]

Maybe they are discovering that the Devil they know may not be as bad as the Devil that would replace him.

I think it more the case that the people are finally aware of the reality of the Taliban and al Qaida.

Pakistanis avenge mosque blast, attack Taliban
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090607/ap_on_re_as/as_pakistan

ISLAMABAD – Hundreds of Pakistanis banded together and attacked Taliban strongholds in a troubled northwestern region to avenge a deadly suicide bombing at a local mosque, a top government official said Sunday.

The incident Saturday underscored a swing in the national mood toward a more anti-Taliban stance — a shift that comes as suicide attacks have surged and the military wages an offensive against the Taliban in the Swat Valley.

Some 400 villagers from neighboring Upper Dir district, where a suicide bomber killed 33 worshippers at a mosque in the Haya Gai area on Friday, formed a militia and attacked five villages in the nearby Dhok Darra area, said Atif-ur-Rehman, the district coordination officer.

The citizens' militia has occupied three of the villages since Saturday and is trying to push the Taliban out of the other two. Some 20 houses suspected of harboring Taliban were destroyed, he said. At least four militants were killed, he said.

The government has in the past encouraged local citizens to set up militias, known as lashkars, to oust Taliban fighters.

. . . .

In addition to other books I've read about the region, I just started reading Ahmed Rashid's books, Taliban and Descent into Chaos.

Taliban: Militant Islam, Oil and Fundamentalism in Central Asia
https://www.amazon.com/dp/0300089023/?tag=pfamazon01-20

Descent into Chaos: The United States and the Failure of Nation Building in Pakistan, Afghanistan, and Central Asia (Hardcover)
https://www.amazon.com/dp/0670019704/?tag=pfamazon01-20


One of the many problems is one of educating the people and overcoming endemic corruption in the various governments.

 

[AhmedEzz]

You seem to have more of an understanding on this issue than most of the people here, including myself. Maybe we should actually try and understand something before we jump into stupid conclusions and instead of revising our grounds, we hold-on to our opinions regardless. Is this a general approach you take in life?
Do you think its important to read books in order to understand a political situation? Is it worth the effort and time?

 

[Astronuc]

You seem to have more of an understanding on this issue than most of the people here, including myself. Maybe we should actually try and understand something before we jump into stupid conclusions and instead of revising our grounds, we hold-on to our opinions regardless. Is this a general approach you take in life?
Do you think its important to read books in order to understand a political situation? Is it worth the effort and time?

I'd prefer to be there in person - and I'm working on that possibility. Books, reports and news reports are a poor substitute but will have to suffice until I can witness in person.

 

[AhmedEzz]

are you THAT interested?

 

[Astronuc]

are you THAT interested?

Yes, definitely. I learned about the Karakorum and Hindu Kush about 40 years ago, and it's been one my destinations (particularly Swat). I've been following developments there for more than 30 years, and I was concerned about the Soviet invasion and US response. What has happened since was forseen in the mid-80's. The western intelligence services were concerned about 'blowback', but the priority then was to derail Soviet expansion - and so the western governments continued to meddle in places they did not understand. However, the US administrations (from Reagan on) didn't forsee the rise of al Qaida and greatly underestimated it until Sept 11, 2001.

There are many good, hardworking people from the west (individuals and NGOs) who do good work in Central Asia, but the western political establishment and their misguided actions seems to overwhelm those few.

 

[Astronuc]

Ground offensive begins in Pakistan al-Qaida haven
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091017/ap_on_re_as/as_pakistan

DERA ISMAIL KHAN, Pakistan – More than 30,000 Pakistani soldiers launched a ground offensive against al-Qaida and the Taliban's main stronghold along the Afghan border Saturday, officials said, in the country's toughest test yet against a strengthening insurgency.

The United States has long pushed the government to carry out an assault in South Waziristan, and it comes after two weeks of militant attacks that have killed more than 175 people across the nuclear-armed country. That has ramped up pressure on the army to act.

Pakistan has fought three unsuccessful campaigns since 2001 in the region, which is the nerve-center for Pakistani insurgents fighting the U.S.-backed government. It is also a major base for foreign militants to plan attacks on American and NATO forces in Afghanistan and on targets in the West.

After months of aerial bombing, troops moved into the region Saturday from several directions, heading to the insurgent bases of Ladha and Makeen among other targets, intelligence and military officials said on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the topic or because they were not allowed to brief the media.

They said the operation was expected to last around two months.

Pakistani army spokesman Maj. Gen. Athar Abbas confirmed Saturday evening that a full-fledged ground operation was under way and said that it aimed to "uproot" the Pakistani Taliban. He said it was too early to discuss what sort of resistance the army was meeting.

. . . .

Pakistan Attacks Show Tighter Militant Links
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/16/world/asia/16pstan.html

The government was comfortable while the jihadists remained in the FATA, but now that attacks have occurred in Rawalpinidi, Lahore and elsewhere, the Pakistan army is forced to act. At some point, Pakistan and India will have to normalize relations and resolve their dispute over Kashmir, which should be an independent state.