The chance we did not miss

Published: May 25, 2012

The writer served as director-general of the ISI from 1990-92 [email protected]

How things have changed between the US and Pakistan? Only a year ago, if someone like David Ignatius, a reputed opinion-maker on the American strategic circuit, had admonished us, we would all have scrambled to the nearest bomb shelter. When he did so on the 17th of May, through the good offices of The Washington Post, no one here seems to have noticed. He argues, rather ingeniously, that Pakistan failed to exploit Nato’s presence in the region to clobber its tribal areas into the mainstream; and thus missed the chance of a lifetime. Since the thesis has failed to cause any rumpus in our country, prudence demands that it should be ignored. Some of us have the impudence not to let go.

Let’s assume that we could have tamed these wild tribesmen with help from our allies (we are still on the ‘Major Non-Nato’ list). With Pakistan’s writ in the frontier regions then becoming as good as it is in Karachi and Balochistan, an opportunity indeed seems to have been lost. But there still is room for a consolation prize, perhaps even more gratifying because of its sheer enormity. The presence of the world’s mightiest alliance in Afghanistan gave us another chance as well: to gang-up with the tribesmen, once again, and defeat yet another superpower. That is the chance we did not miss. It may not be all for the good, but it feels good to think about it.

But before being carried away by some amorphous notions of victory, let’s take another look at Mr Ignatius’s thesis. He has obviously read all about the British failures to pacify these ‘badlands’ and, therefore, seems to understand that a soft approach is not going to work. With their kith and kin fighting an occupation across the borders, our tribesmen were not likely to respond kindly to our pleas not to join the battle, or abandon their obligations just because at that very time we thought of taking up the unfinished agenda of their special status.

Mr Ignatius, therefore, suggests a more kinetic, or ballistic, approach to bring them around.

He believes “modern communications and transportation” would have accomplished what the British could not. He knows, of course, that all this fancy stuff did not help “the most potent army in history” to alter the ways of the Afghans, but still believes that Pakistan could do it better; because it is such a “wonderful nation”. Right now I am only wondering, why he and the West are so obsessed with the status of our tribal areas!

If it is to establish the writ of the government, then let me remind them that even if it existed anywhere else in the country, like in Karachi, Rawalpindi or Abbottabad, it has only helped those seeking safe havens. The ‘lawlessness’ of these areas, considering that their laws are implemented more strictly and equitably than ours, I suspect, is more like giving the dog a bad name before it is hanged.

Failure in Afghanistan may be due to flawed American strategies, or because the Afghans resist till the bitter end, or possibly a consequence of Pakistani support for the Taliban; the desire to embroil Pakistan in a war with its tribesmen, and in due course also with the Afghans, is understandable. This deadly nexus that has made a habit of taking on superpowers, at times even getting away with pretensions of victory, must be busted.

Let me cast the first prick, though only to deflate the pretension part. Resistance by the Mujahideen may have precipitated the Soviet downfall; the implosion of the empire had long been underway. The Taliban might have received help from the Pakistani side of the Durand Line, but that was not decisive. America was defeated in Afghanistan by the American Army. More about that some other time.

Published in The Express Tribune, May 25th, 2012.

Reader Comments (59)

  • Maria
    May 25, 2012 - 1:14AM

    Welcome back sir! Missed your writing!

    Recommend

  • Falcon
    May 25, 2012 - 1:34AM

    Interesting article. I agree that integration of tribal areas into the state has been long pending but now is not the right time because this will be locally perceived as new front of war on terror where Pakistan becomes the front face and therefore a victim of more violence. That is why they say that prepare for war during peace times. We should have realized this geographical vulnerability long ago but we didn’t. Now, we will have to wait for some more years after US leaves the region (hopefully) before we can start working on the idea of integrating tribal areas into mainstream.

    Recommend

  • John B
    May 25, 2012 - 2:16AM

    What does the author mean , America was defeated in Afghanistan? Did he expect a formal signing of surrender document by Taliban bandits with US?

    The last phase of the war is in N. Waziristan. America got what she wanted out of Afghanistan. Reduce and Eliminate the threat coming out of AFG, hold the fort, get bin laden and make sure PAK does not speak in fork tongue any more. For the next 10 years US will be breathing down the PAK neck from Afghanistan. Even if PAK says the truth, no one will believe PAK for the next twenty years.

    I have been saying for awhile that the AFG-PAK is the new Korea and PAK has to decide whether she wants to be N or S Korea. Recent developments have indicated that she wants to be N.Korea and that is where it stands.

    Recommend

  • Imran Con
    May 25, 2012 - 2:19AM

    “Right now I am only wondering, why he and the West are so obsessed with the status of our tribal areas!”
    I wonder. Could it be the militants and people getting tired of dealing with those tribal areas while you cry foul?

    Recommend

  • Babloo
    May 25, 2012 - 2:20AM

    Its the policies trhat Mr Assad Duranni argues for and supports that has reduced Pakistan to a state infested with militant groups, where the state is essentially bankrupt. Why does someone not hold men like Assad Duranni , who represent the arny and ISI and its policies that have decimated Pakistan, accountable for its actions and propoganda ?

    Recommend

  • Ahmed Khalid
    May 25, 2012 - 2:29AM

    Rather than us taming the frontier tribes who have remained uncultured for centuries, we (the punjabis and Sindhis) who claim a 5000 year old indian subcontinental civilisation got tamed ourselves!! By them!! Can anyone honestly claim that Karachi is less prone to barbaric bloodshed than mingora or bannu?

    Recommend

  • kaalchakra
    May 25, 2012 - 2:31AM

    Incredible! We get to hear from some of Pakistan’s greatest heroes! Sir, this is a stupendous work of wisdom, of the calibre of Ejaz Haider works. How many of us wish Professor Sir Syed Hafiz Sahib would himself share his views with his admirers here. At this rate, we might be fortunate enough to hear from him.

    Recommend

  • Mujtaba Sarwar
    May 25, 2012 - 2:39AM

    Interesting read. I wonder if Ignatius has read this response.

    Recommend

  • Babloo
    May 25, 2012 - 4:09AM

    Absurd bogus logic with no relation to reality.

    Recommend

  • Iron hand
    May 25, 2012 - 4:41AM

    America has not been “defeated” in Afghanistan. America has simply realized that it can’t remake a culture in it’s own image, can’t impose civilization on the uncivilized, and can’t afford to maintain an unpopular occupation indefinately. Defeat implies a military loss, which is laughable. America could “defeat” Afghanistan in about 3 days and colonize the whole place in about six months if it chose to, but then again, the whole point of this is to put an end to the terrorist threat, not colonize foreign lands like the British of old. Anyway, patting yourself on the back about “winning” is rather juvenile, don’t you think?.

    Recommend

  • pmbm
    May 25, 2012 - 5:41AM

    we continue to depend on what others want us to do or not do. May be some day there will be enough honest and sincere souls from 180 million folks to think better for ourselves.

    Recommend

  • Rajendra Kalkhande
    May 25, 2012 - 6:27AM

    Pakistan never lost a war. She defeated India in all the wars. She did not loose even Bangla war. She defeated USSR and now the US and NATO. This is how myths are sold as history in Pakistan.

    Recommend

  • vasan
    May 25, 2012 - 6:46AM

    This baloney of America lost the war in Afpak border has to stop. They killed OBL right in the middle of Pakistan. That was the victory medal. The fact they want to withdraw from Afganistan indicates that war objectives were achieved and the new govt in Afganistan has signed on the dotted line to tow american line. What more do u want. Taliban was not the declared enemy of America in this war. The number of soldiers lost by America and the number of people and soldiers killed in Pakistan for supporting America in the war gives an idea who lost and who won.

    Recommend

  • Arun
    May 25, 2012 - 6:55AM

    It is this glorious thinking that has led to the unbroken series of Pakistani victories – in Kashmir in 1948, then in the plains of Punjab in 1965, in East Pakistan in 1971, in Kargil in 1999, the victory of its Taliban allies in Afghanistan in 2002, and its heroic capture of Osama Bin Laden in 2011.

    Recommend

  • Shyam
    May 25, 2012 - 7:24AM

    What is the Pakistani definition of defeat and victory? American army chased away the taliban who have been hiding in the caves ever since. They killed the leader Osama bin laden and yet Pakistanis seem to remain in delusion that America ‘lost’ the war. The same way perhaps that Pakistan ‘defeated’ India in 1971

    Recommend

  • Abdul Haque
    May 25, 2012 - 8:12AM

    And this is one of the ‘sane’ ones! Pakistan has had it…

    Recommend

  • Abdul Haque
    May 25, 2012 - 8:16AM

    Or shall I say, ‘relatively’ sane?

    Recommend

  • Ashiq hussain
    May 25, 2012 - 8:18AM

    Can you explain losing Siachen to India while defeating USSR in Afghanistan…Pakistan couldn’t take an inch from India but brag about defeating USSR and now America.

    Recommend

  • Mahakaalchakra
    May 25, 2012 - 8:30AM

    USA will quickly regain whatever it lost, if any; Pakistan however will not be able to arrest its slide to the south to become like North Korea, another all-feather friend of China.

    Recommend

  • Afghan Perspective
    May 25, 2012 - 8:44AM

    Wild Tribesmen: Please respect us. We are not wild people. This has not been decided by academicians which culture is superior and what is meant by progress and development. So Gentlmen, dont insult us in public forums.

    Recommend

  • May 25, 2012 - 8:48AM

    Reading all these words make me realize how lucky is India. It got away with dealing with these badlands, had Pakistan not been created.

    This area has always been volatile and there is no forceable solution to it. If you think of Alexander and the Mughals who have tried to invade into India, it was always from these regions. Many Afghan lords used to invade areas that now comprise of Pakistan, loot, rape and get away back to their safe havens in areas what now constitute Afghanistan.

    At one go, all that trouble was packaged and sent off to Pakistan. Even today Afghanistan is an unstable, violent land. Thankfully, special thanks to Jinnah, Pakistan acts as a gracious buffer against the chaos in Afghanistan for India. India just has to close its borders with Pakistan now and all trouble in Afghanistan will be soaked up by Pakistan.

    How wonderful Pakistan is.

    Recommend

  • A Mad.
    May 25, 2012 - 9:01AM

    Mr Gen you also have misread David Ignatius’s article. Its focal point was that Pakistan will face Pakhtunistan movement somewhere near 2016 or -17 if it does not integrate FATA. And Ignatius believes chance of integrating FATA has been blown up which implicitly means that they will create hurdles for Pakistan if it tries it. In my opinion CIA in connivance with NDS has drafted maps of Pakhtunistan and Ignatius article is a first step towards proper implementation of this new aspect of great game. I also believe that if U.S has not yet pondered such machination the people of your ilk will compel her to ponder it without any reluctance. So keep writing and therefore pushing U.S towards that end.

    Recommend

  • Mirza
    May 25, 2012 - 9:16AM

    After the paid agents failed to cover up the umasked facts now the spy master is himself out. The ET should maintain its standards.

    Recommend

  • NKS
    May 25, 2012 - 10:25AM

    If the Americans are staring at defeat in Afghanistan then they can blame themselves because they refused to make Pakistan pay a price everytime an Afghan Taliban attack on their forces was traced back to Pakistan.

    Recommend

  • Polpot
    May 25, 2012 - 10:45AM

    Delusional 9 on the Richter Scale
    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    Recommend

  • Disco
    May 25, 2012 - 10:59AM

    I can already see you’ve hit a nerve with our Indian readers and their sympathisers amongst us. Always enjoy your writings Sir.

    Recommend

  • Salman
    May 25, 2012 - 11:08AM

    LOL looks like these Indians are more interested in Pakistani foreign policy and issues then the Pakistanis itself. They are coming out from their holes like ants :d posting and liking everything against Pakistani interest :d

    Recommend

  • Arifq
    May 25, 2012 - 11:43AM

    UN Mandated forces arrived in Afghanistan to track down perpetrators of 9/11 attacks, to a great extent there has been success but with passage of time the game plan seems to be lost on all parties including the honorable Durrani sahib.

    Recommend

  • Zalim singh
    May 25, 2012 - 12:02PM

    @ Lt-Gen (retd) Asad Durrani

    You have some sense of Humor. Americans were in Afghanistan just to kill Bin-Laden. They achieved the goal. So how is this a defeat? Acoording to me it is a grans victory.

    Pakistanis are in denial most of the times. You claim you defeated India in 1971 and 1965 wars also.

    And also you guys were dependent upon US aid for the last 64 years. Your country and army cannot survive without this dole-out. Pakistan is what it is- due to American help. Even the salary you have enjoyed must have been from US aid.

    Jis thali mein khate ho, usi mein chade.

    Recommend

  • wisdom
    May 25, 2012 - 12:37PM

    @Salman:
    Is that the best you can do to hear the truth.

    Recommend

  • Lobster
    May 25, 2012 - 1:46PM

    Seems like Indians are more offended than the American themselves. Even people in Americans and NATO countries have admitted their failure in what was their declared objective i.e. to eliminate Taliban and Al-Qaida from Afghanistan. If they have won, what are they accusing Pakitan for?

    Recommend

  • Polpot
    May 25, 2012 - 2:12PM

    @Salman: LOL looks like these Indians are more interested in Pakistani foreign policy
    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
    Its a non stop soap…..get addicted to it.

    Recommend

  • Cautious
    May 25, 2012 - 3:18PM

    Is the author trying to justify the two faced approach that Pakistan has taken or is he just picking on Mr. Ignatius? The fact of the matter is that the USA would have put ground troops into the tribal territories and fought this battle by itself (with tacit Pakistan supervision) and that would have improved Pakistan’s standing in the World and may have forced the militants to take Islamabad seriously.

    Recommend

  • Parvez
    May 25, 2012 - 3:36PM

    Looking at this in terms of victory or defeat, black or white, right or wrong is quite one dimensional and if I may say, rigid in outlook. If you insist on claiming a defeat for the US then you must look around yourself, as it has to be a Pyrrhic victory for the people of Pakistan.

    Recommend

  • faraz
    May 25, 2012 - 3:36PM

    @Arifq: What UN mandate? Are you kidding? UN security council didn’t authorize any country to invade Afghanistan. Correct your knowledge!

    Recommend

  • Milestogo
    May 25, 2012 - 4:46PM

    There is no doubt in my mind that Pakistan has again defeated a superpower. Now the next question arises – how will the spoils of this victory be shared?

    Now that Pakistan has defeated USA, it’s time to attack kuffar – all kind of kuffars and spread Islam in this world.

    Recommend

  • David Smith
    May 25, 2012 - 4:51PM

    The General in his labyrinth. What Ignatius probably meant was that with the enormous resources at hand, Pakistan could have taken advantage to develop the Pushtun areas in Pakistan thereby extending its influence there and perhaps integrating it with the rest of the country gradually.
    The General’s premise, not surprising for a former ISI chief, is that the Pushtuns see NATO’s war in Afghanistan as being against the Pushtuns, whereas enough scholarship exists to indicate the overwhelming number of Pushtuns do not support the Taliban. The Peshawar and Quetta shuras and the Haqqani network are the creations of Pakistani intelligence (to retain so-called strategic depth in Afghanistan) and are generally hated by the Pushtuns.

    Recommend

  • May 25, 2012 - 5:05PM

    “The presence of the world’s mightiest alliance in Afghanistan gave us another chance as well: to gang-up with the tribesmen, once again, and defeat yet another superpower. That is the chance we did not miss. It may not be all for the good, but it feels good to think about it.”

    A TIN SOLDIERS’ GLEE IS SO EVIDENTLY VISIBLE HERE THOUGH HE IF ALSO AWARE THAT “It may not be all for the good” A war won that is not all for the good is no use.

    Recommend

  • Menon
    May 25, 2012 - 5:14PM

    You folks in Pakistan keeps on saying US failure in Afghanistan and loosing the Afghan war, etc. Watch for a decade or two, Afghanistan is going to be a thriving democracy, and a strong regional power and ally of the US and that my Pakistani friends is scaring the dickens out of you. So, you want to propagate this failure/loosing myth.

    Keep deceiving yourselves and the population. It has served well for Pakistan in the past and it will serve as well for Pakistan in the future.

    You are taking on a country and its resilient population that rebuilt todays Europe, Japan, Korea, Taiwan after WW II singlehandedly. You are underestimating our capability immensely.

    Recommend

  • Basit
    May 25, 2012 - 7:15PM

    Excellent article and rather amusing to see Pakistani and Indian commentators who are still in awe of the American “might” trying to make the losing argument that the US has won the war in Afghanistan when Americans themselves have admitted defeat and even attached a timetable so that they can stop the killings of their servicemen not just by Taliban but also their Afghan allies.

    What a “victory” when you are killed by the same people you are training.

    Recommend

  • Asad Durrani
    May 25, 2012 - 10:47PM

    @Maria: Thank you Maria. You have always been a source of strength.

    Recommend

  • Asad Durrani
    May 25, 2012 - 11:14PM

    Thank you all who have appreciated the piece. Those who disagreed out of conviction are certainly within their right to do so. And then there are always some who are driven by an agenda. The vicious or intemperate language gives them away (yes, it happens when some raw nerves are hit). Best is to ignore them. Nothing would exasperate them more than stewing in their own juice.

    An interesting discussion on who won or lost. According to Kissinger, to win the insurgents only have to survive. The Taliban are not only still around and going places; they get protection money- 143 Million Dollars last year alone- from the NATO convoys.

    Recommend

  • Mirza
    May 25, 2012 - 11:19PM

    The US has never been a colonial power and never said they wanted to occupy it for good. Even when they leave, they would not leave by surrendering. They would be there and in control and the drones would be flying more and more. The US would leave Afghanistan the same way they left Iraq, not in the hands of dictators or terrorists. Keep dreaming. Recommend

  • David Salmon
    May 25, 2012 - 11:44PM

    @faraz: I refer you to UN Resolution 1386 (2001), which authorized the International Security Assistance Force, and UN Resolution 2011 (2011), which is the most recent resolution extending the authorization for another year. The US and NATO forces are part of ISAF.

    Recommend

  • kaalchakra
    May 25, 2012 - 11:56PM

    Even Pakistan is still there and gets transmit monies to fight the very forces that… It’s clear that Pakistan has won against the US on all sides.

    Recommend

  • Hussain
    May 25, 2012 - 11:59PM

    @ Salman
    Its evident from history that Indian have always bowed before the victorious powers. Today they are speaking for American interest, is pretty natural. They were doing the same towards USSR during her heyday.

    Recommend

  • Mirza
    May 26, 2012 - 12:14AM

    @Hussain:
    It is ironic that you should say this. No invader in history has been engaged in the area now called Pakistan. From Gaznavi, to Gauri, Babar, Abdali to Durrani, they all passed through Pakistan without any resistance. Most of them were only engaged in Pani Put, and where is this place in India or Pakistan? And I do not want to start the ethnic debate but Ranjeet Singh could never make Delhi’s Jama Masjid a stable for his horses. I can give many more examples but this should suffice.
    Regards,
    Mirza

    Recommend

  • John B
    May 26, 2012 - 12:16AM

    Who won or who lost concept is a high school kid idea of playing a game. In the game of international politics, the one who remains standing and the one who blows the whistle controls the game.

    As per the authors’s subscription to H. Kissinger’s view, does he acknowledge then that TTP and BRA won over PAK?

    H Kissinger’s view of annihilating insurgents is an old school approach. Today’s patriot is a tomorrow’s insurgent and tomorrow’s insurgents are next year’s ruler,and today’s ruler is a tomorrow’s fugitive. Please ask Mr. Musharraf or Nawaz Shariff, or Gilani, or Zardhari. The author should know better.

    Whatever the motive of PAK in the Afghan conflict, it was ill conceived, poorly executed, and an opportunity lost for PAK, economically and politically.

    As much as the author would like to state the positive importance of PAK, the present US administration has made PAK irrelevant for AFG and the policy will continue whoever takes the reign next year.

    Recommend

  • ayesha_khan
    May 26, 2012 - 5:36AM

    @Hussain: “Its evident from history that Indian have always bowed before the victorious powers. Today they are speaking for American interest, is pretty natural. They were doing the same towards USSR during her heyday.”

    I know you like to believe such myths. But these myths are not based on facts. Here are some facts that you can independently verify.

    It is Indians – whether Hindus. Muslims or Sikhs of Indian national congress who went to jail for many years to fight the British empire. Not a single Muslim League leader went to jail even for one full day to fight the British.

    Who fought in 1857 – Bahadur Shah Zafar, Tatya Tope, Rani of Jhansi. All from the area that is now India. What about of Siraj Ud Daula and Tipu Sultan also India. Yes Ghauri was finally victorious but he was defeated many times by Prithviraj Chauhan. Never did he encounter any resistance in the area that is currently Pakistan.

    Even today check out India and Pakistan’s voting record in the UN (after US was the only superpower). How many times has India voted differently from US and how many times has Pakistan voted differently?

    Recommend

  • Lala Gee
    May 26, 2012 - 2:38PM

    @John B:

    “Whatever the motive of PAK in the Afghan conflict, it was ill conceived, poorly executed, and an opportunity lost for PAK, economically and politically.
    As much as the author would like to state the positive importance of PAK, the present US administration has made PAK irrelevant for AFG and the policy will continue whoever takes the reign next year.”

    Pakistan has only one and only one motive in Afghanistan. And that is a safe western border by having a non-hostile, preferably friendly, regime there so that we can focus all of our resources and energies to fight the challenges posed by an eight times bigger enemy on the eastern border. Regarding your statement of the lost economic opportunity, Pakistanis have seen the double game of USA to use Pakistan against India to get India in his camp, and use India to to control Pakistan, so many times for such a long time, that even a kid knows very well the real intentions of USA. Pakistan’s betterment has never been the goal of US policy, otherwise we were much better placed to become like South Korea. How many American companies ever installed their fabrication plants in Pakistan like they did in South Korea, or how much American FDI was poured in Pakistani companies. Rather, they used the aid to reward their puppets installed in the Pakistani governments who sent all that money back to the western banks. The only objective of US is to use Pakistan to achieve its strategic goals and then discard like a used tissue paper.

    Look at what the double game USA played with us in Afghanistan. They promised us, while asking Pakistan’s help, that no hostile government towards Pakistan would be allowed to form in Kabul, but they just did the opposite and a hostile government of Northern Alliance was installed in Kabul. Then they invited the Pakistan’s arch rival India in Afghanistan and gave them a free hand to destabilize Pakistan by supporting TTP and BLA insurgents as they did in 1970-71 in East Pakistan. And you say we lost the opportunity and have courage to blame us for the double game.

    Recommend

  • Lala Gee
    May 26, 2012 - 2:59PM

    @ayesha_khan:

    “It is Indians – whether Hindus. Muslims or Sikhs of Indian national congress who went to jail for many years to fight the British empire. Not a single Muslim League leader went to jail even for one full day to fight the British.”

    Only a fool would prefer to go to jail for achieving something which could have been achieved by following the law and without going to jail. Jinnah was highly cultured and educated person having top most legal expertise. He never let anyone around him violate any law, the reason for not any leader of Muslim League going to jail. This is something of a pride rather than a point of demerit.

    Recommend

  • Lala Gee
    May 26, 2012 - 3:51PM

    @Mirza:

    “No invader in history has been engaged in the area now called Pakistan. From Gaznavi, to Gauri, Babar, Abdali to Durrani, they all passed through Pakistan without any resistance. Most of them were only engaged in Pani Put, and where is this place in India or Pakistan? And I do not want to start the ethnic debate but Ranjeet Singh could never make Delhi’s Jama Masjid a stable for his horses. I can give many more examples but this should suffice.”

    It looks like you are speaking on behalf of Indians today while you pretend to be a Pakistani in your other posts. However, as you are an incarnation of omniscience, may I dare to ask, who were the rulers of the areas currently part of Pakistan in the times of “Gaznavi, to Gauri, Babar, Abdali to Durrani”, where were the capitals, and how many Muslims lived in the Pakistani areas before these conquers invaded India. And more importantly, whose responsibility is to decide where to fight the battles. Is it the responsibility of public or the ruler? Regarding Ranjeet Singh, no one has the divine mandate to rule indefinitely. Muslims ruled India for around 1000 years, then the British came along and ruled India for about 200 years. Ranjeet Singhs era was rather a very limited one spaning only a few decades. Whatever is your point, you miserably failed to make.

    Recommend

  • Hussain
    May 26, 2012 - 4:08PM

    @ Aysha_Khan and Mirza

    You are right, Alexander was finally intercepted and returned from Jhelum, a plateau in Tamil Nadu. White Huns to Kushans were blocked at Taxila, a small town in Orisa. Bhagat sigh and his comrades were born in Faisalabad a district of Jharkhand. Ranjeet sigh belonged to Gujranwala, 50 Km north of Calcutta. Persian books written by Northern invaders are replete of cautions that if you survived the resistance of Hindukush mountains, Delhi is yours. These mountains were the real cushion for Indian subcontinent against the central Asian tremors and twisters, are located in southeast of Bihar, above the Ganges.

    Recommend

  • Lala Gee
    May 26, 2012 - 5:29PM

    @A Mad.:

    “Mr Gen you also have misread David Ignatius’s article. Its focal point was that Pakistan will face Pakhtunistan movement somewhere near 2016 or -17 …..I also believe that if U.S has not yet pondered such machination the people of your ilk will compel her to ponder it without any reluctance.”

    As I remember, previously the year of Pakistan’s disintegration was set a 2012. Even after wasting 1,400 billion US dollars and thousands of dead soldiers, you didn’t learn a damn thing from this region. Anyway, we Pakistanis firmly believe that unless God wishes so, no one including USA could cause any harm to Pakistan’s integrity. India was successful in creating Bangladesh for two reasons (apart from somewhat illogical union in the first place): 1) Geographical distance, and 2) Pakistan was not a nuclear power then. And look what India achieved. Added one more hater of India in the region and we are still on good terms with Bangladeshis.

    Recommend

  • Hella
    May 26, 2012 - 5:50PM

    @Lala Gee, Read your history again. Muslims ruled only North India for about 600 years. Even Mughal rule at its peak never ruled South India. Also all Muslim rulers ruled from Delhi and became Indians. They did not return to Persia,Turkey, Central Asia or Afghanistan. Only the marauders like Ghori, Ghazni, Abdally, Nadir Shah & finally the British returned back to their native lands. Unfortunately the marauders (including British) are heroes in Pakistan.

    Recommend

  • Lala Gee
    May 26, 2012 - 9:48PM

    @Hella:

    “@Lala Gee, Read your history again. Muslims ruled only North India for about 600 years. Even Mughal rule at its peak never ruled South India. Also all Muslim rulers ruled from Delhi and became Indians. They did not return to Persia,Turkey, Central Asia or Afghanistan. Only the marauders like Ghori, Ghazni, Abdally, Nadir Shah & finally the British returned back to their native lands. Unfortunately the marauders (including British) are heroes in Pakistan”

    I am very happy that you unconditionally accepted all Mughals including Aurangzeb Alamgir as Indian, though most Indians I met despise and consider them as invaders. During their peak, Mughal empire covered almost all of the Subcontinent up to Kabul except for a fraction of south India. Anyway, you also need to study carefully the Atlas of India, and especially the map of Mughal Empire (1526-1857), at wikimedia.org. It has numerous maps of the Subcontinent covering from pre-historic period to the recent times. Just check when India became what India is today. During all of her 5000 years of history, it was never never a single state known as India. Even during the British rule, it was divided into dozens of princely states. It became India what India is today only after May 14, 1954.

    You like it or not, all Muslim conquerors are heroes of Pakistani Muslims. As for as the marauders are concerned, nowadays the Indian government and public seems to be in love with the descendants of Afghan and British marauders. Indian government is spending billions in Afghanistan and signing strategic agreements with them. The same is the case with the descendants of British marauders. Check the comments section and see how vocal supporter the Indians are of America, a country primarily ruled by British Americans (please don’t tell that Obama is an African and President of USA as I already know that).

    Recommend

  • Faesal
    May 27, 2012 - 8:21AM

    The comments section is heavily infested indians who seem more offended by the writing then american themselves.

    Recommend

  • observer
    May 27, 2012 - 1:34PM

    @Lala Gee

    During all of her 5000 years of history, it was never never a single state known as India. Even during the British rule, it was divided into dozens of princely states. It became India what India is today only after May 14, 1954.

    Even the nation states of Europe were not there till the 19th Century. And Saudi Arabia and Iraq etc also took their present shape during colonial rule. So what exactly is your point?

    Whether under one political dispensation or not the Indian subcontinent has been known as India since at least the days of Alexander when his envoy Megasthanese wrote Indica.

    Al Beruni too wrote about Al Hind. So were these people referring to a nonexistent entity.

    And what exactly is this reference to May 14,1954. India became independent on 15th August 1947, it adopted its constitution on 26th January, 1950. What exactly happened on 14 May, 1954?
    The only reference that I can find says that 90,000 Muslims registered with the Government of Pakistan to RETURN to India.
    http://www.hindu.com/2004/05/14/stories/2004051400950902.htm

    Recommend

  • May 27, 2012 - 5:58PM

    @Hussain: Dear Hussain love you reply.

    Recommend

More in Opinion