Curse of Balochistan
A growing tree of divergent views where Owls exchange, defend and debate their understanding of the world and truth.
No one can ever blame Pakistani media for suffering from ‘Attention Deficit Disorder’, rather it often suffers from ‘Obsessive Compulsive Disorder’. Admittingly, most of their obsessions are not devoid of a good reason; nevertheless, every now and then it does indulge in mass-hysteria. An imminent American attack(s) on the Pakistani soil is the latest example of such hysteria. If you were to pick a Pakistani paper or observe its electronic-media, you would be deluded in believing whole world is holding its breath over the “Pakistani-American War”.
Hysteria aside, the odds of Iraqi modeled or even Libyan modeled American invasion are slim to none. For the curious minds, America will not invade for the following reasons: it cannot afford an invasion for three reasons: 1) Scarcity of funds. 2) Little to no public appetite for another military conflict. 3) Global recession.
American public debt is already tipping the scales around $14.7 trillion, which is almost as its GDP ($15.2 trillion). American Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates the costs of both Afghan and Iraq Wars will be $2.4 trillion, or around one-sixth of the total American debt. Growth of American economy (approx. 1.4% GDP) is dismal at the best. Add the Libyan war costs and ever-rising oil prices, and you get a perfect recipe for a prolonged economical recession. Meaning, America is simply out of cash to start any new wars.
Unlike third-world despots, who couldn’t care less for the public opinion, American presidents still care and abide by the popular public sentiments. Currently, American public is no mood to support new wars. In a recent Washington Post/ABC poll, over 70% of Americans said they want President Obama to withdraw troops from Afghanistan. It’s not only American populace that are suffering from the war-fatigue, even the rank-and-file of the American military, most of whom are on their third or fourth tour of duty are increasingly voicing their frustrations with the longest war in the American history. According to a The Military Times survey, “Less than 50% of U.S. troops believe Afghanistan war is winnable.” If American military personnel are losing the will to fight the Taliban, then only a most foolish military commander would dare to push its men in a new Af-Pak quagmire.
In this age and time, no one nation can afford to wage a war unilaterally. Only coalitions have been able sustain full fledge wars. Even the closet American allies, Canada and UK have openly expressed their desire to pull out of both NATO led wars, Afghan and Libyan wars. Well over 80% of Canadians want their troops to be brought home, at the earliest. Even back in 2006, Bloomberg reported, in just 5 years, the financial cost to the UK of the Afghan war was more than £4.55 billion ($9 billion). Experts believe UK’s ailing economy can no longer sustain the Afghan war, not to talk of a new war with Pakistan.
Ironically, a typical gung hoe American political party, the Republicans tied their own hands from financing any new conflicts. Their Political strategy of downsizing the government and national debt has boxed it into opposing any significant military adventurism. Republican obsession with funding cuts was highlighted when its leader Eric Cantor said they would tie hurricane and earthquake Disaster Aid to spending cuts. By all accounts, the odds of appropriating funding for a war by a party obsessed with playing the financial card and that too in the middle election season are far and few.
However, despite all the odds against the war, like apprehensive public mood and tough American economy, doesn’t mean President Obama would not be tempted to order limited scope shoot-and-scoot military strikes well inside the Pakistani territory. America will attack Pakistani interests in the same manner that it had been doing for a while.
Smack within the rough presidential election year, President Obama who is suffering from the all time low approval ratings is in a desperate need of bunch of rapid victories, like the Osama-bin-Laden killing to prove his mantel as of a resolute Commander-in-Chief. What better way for President Obama to earn quick political mileage than bunch of small military victories via drone attacks and/or special operations strikes on Pakistani interests?
Unlike, Pakistani hysteria of imminent American invasion, one would be hard pressed to find a single person in the US who thinks America is about to attack Pakistan. Why not? Because it’s the economy stupid!
Osama bin Laden’s death has opened hell’s gates on Pakistan. One would be hard pressed to find an American commentator who missed the Bash Pakistan Bandwagon. Their most prevailing argument revolves around, we give Pakistan billions of dollars every year and look how they repaid us? They cheated on us by sheltering world’s most wanted terrorist.
To begin with, President Obama said, “it's important to note that our counterterrorism cooperation with Pakistan helped lead us to bin Laden and the compound where he was hiding.” Did President lie about Pakistani cooperation or do the Pakistan Bashers suffer from selective amnesia?
Yes, it’s true Pakistan is an American Foreign Aid recipient, it’s true Osama was caught hiding in Pakistan, but would it be prudent to ignore the larger picture of how much Pakistanis had been helping America? Absolutely not. Well it’s high time to place things in its right perspective.
According to the US Census Bureau, between 2001-08, Pakistan received an average of $.768 billion per year, or a total of $3.841 billion in economic and military aid from the US. While Pakistan claims, the War on Terror has cost it $35 billion, or about $4 billion per year. It might be worth noting that during the same time US gave India $.988 billion, Egypt $8.530 billion, Israel $13.030 billion and Afghanistan $20.801 billion in Economic and Military Aid. Can the same critics point the last time any of these allies delivered anything worth mentioning to the US for the billions upon billions of dollars they received?
Let’s rewind couple of decades back when the Free-World lead by an American-Pakistani coalition drove the last nail in Soviet Union’s coffin; resulting in the fall of the Berlin Wall. Was it the Israel (largest US military aid recipient) that pushed Soviets over the cliff? No, it was the Pakistan.
During the first Gulf-War who sent its troops against Saddam? Was it India? No. It was Pakistan.
Who was the part of peace keeping force in Bosnia? Was it India or Israel? None. But it was Pakistan.
Who pulled the American troops out of raging battle in Somalia? Were they Afghans or Egyptians? Try again. It was the Pakistani Army.
Who saved the American allies in the deep jungles of Africa? Yup, Pakistanis did.
Who trained American Special Forces in high altitude warfare; Afghans, Indians or Israelis? Only Pakistanis did.
Let’s take a gander over what Pakistan had been doing since the 9/11. Since the day one Pakistan literally handed over Navy and Air Force bases (like Omara, Pansi, Shamsi and Jacobabad) to the US, exclusive air corridors, and land transit right to the coalition, ISAF.
It wasn’t the Afghans, British, Egyptians, Indians, Israelis or the Saudis who had consistently captured and handed over some of world’s most wanted terrorists. It is the Pakistanis who had come through time and again. To name the few Pakistan handed over to the US: Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, Abu Zubaydah and Abu Faraj al-Libi.
Between 9/11 and 2009, Pakistan lost 78 military officers and 2,273 soldiers to the War on Terror, additionally they killed or captured 17,742 militants. During the same time ISAF lost about 1,500 personnel. By any measurement Pakistani military has lost more men during the war than rest of the coalition members combined.
Between 2004-11, at least 2,290 Pakistanis died from 234 American Drone strikes. According to the Brookings Institution, for every militant killed through drone strikes "10 or so [Pakistani] civilians" are killed. Can the critics name a single other sovereign nation with a proven capability to shoot down drones who has allowed such deadly attacks?
Some of the (modern) Joseph McCarthies don’t want to miss the Pakistan bashing train, because they don't want to appear out of the loop; while others like the Congressman Peter King have deeper political agendas, like expanding their fear-cult following. Regardless of their motivation, voices in the media are chanting unanimously to punish Pakistan. The last time Pakistan was heavily sanctioned, it became a nuclear power and diverted the extremists to Kashmir. This time, Pakistan would likely replace the US with China.
Everyone, including Pakistanis are jubilant over Laden’s killing; however, nearly all feel cornered and insulted over extremely harsh American reaction to its embarrassing security lapse. They retort, were the CIA or FBI in collusion with the Al-Qaeda when the jetliners flew into World Trade towers on the 9/11 or was it also an unintentional security lapse? If American sleuths could be forgiven for failing to prevent the 9/11 attacks, then why there is a mob bent on publicly lynching Pakistan for a similar blunder?
Prudence requires, a well balanced analysis of Pakistan’s intelligence failure, to prevent future security lapses. Undue antagonization and public humiliation of Pakistan, a reliable and time-tested American ally, would most likely result in undesired results.
Source: The News
As expected, Osama’s death has opened on endless worldwide debates on if, who, when and why killed Osama bin Laden? While the debate is hot, based on circumstantial evidence, one might as well ponder over some questions and theories.
Here is food for thought. Xe/Blackwater executed the Get-Osama operation and not the Navy Seals. Why use Xe? Plausible deniability, in case the operation goes south.
Where’s the proof of Blackwater’s involvement? American government claimed that two Chinook/Sea Knight and two Blackhawk/Seahawks (standard transport air-assets used by the SEALS) took part in the raid. It admitted losing one Seahawk during the operation. However, on a close study of the pictures of the helicopter wreckage, the claim falls flat on its face.
Why did the Americans went through the trouble to burn the wreckage of the crashed helicopter? Obviously, they didn’t want the world to find out the identity of helicopters that took part in the raid. Widely available pictures of the tail section of the crashed helicopter clearly do not match with any model of CH-46/Sea Knight or UH-60Seahawk. Neither helicopters come with split horizontal stabilizer nor do they come with tail-rotor disk. However, the boom (a much smaller and lighter to be of a UH-60), stabilizers and quad tail-rotor configurations match with the modified S-76 helicopters that Blackwater frequently used in Iraq. Contrary to rumors of supposed stealth helicopter (Comanchi or Silent Hawk), the pictures suggest the wreckage to be of a S-76, and certainly not of Blackhawk’s. Hence, Blackwater’s culpability.
One also has to question the need for the Pakistan Army to evacuate the wreckage covered under the tarps? Clearly, they had an interest in covering something more than mere identity of the helicopter wreckage. Like, Blackwater is running wild in Pakistan with the full knowledge and probably tacit consent of the Pakistani military.
Mystery deepens, considering, in less than 24 hours of Osama’s killing the American government announced a rather hasty burial of his body in the Arabian Sea. Earlier, within 12 hours of Laden’s death, President Obama confirmed Osama’s identity, citing, among others, a DNA test. However, the problem remains, there is no scientific method that can positively confirm a DNA test within 24 hours. In reality, a paternity DNA tests take at least 2-3 days and an extended family testing takes 5 weeks to confirm a match. Was it a slip of tongue or did President Obama purposely misstated? Hopefully, time will uncover the mystery.
Everyone seems to be focused on the question, why the American government wouldn’t publicize pictures of Laden’s body and put the mystery to rest? Answers could range from: disbelievers would never be convinced, he isn't killed and in custody for interrogation, or body still in custody for further tests.
Finally, why would Obama go through so much trouble to open Pandora’s Box? Simple answer, to save the American economy from an imminent collapse. Three wars are literally sucking life out of the American economy. It is estimated that in addition to secret funds, currently US is spending over $1 trillion/yr on military through appropriated and discretionary funds. As of March 25, 2011, total American Public Debt Outstanding was $14.26 trillion. Cutting military spending to half alone could amount to 25% reduction of yearly deficit.
Osama’s death will hopefully serve as a closure to the American public, which will allow Obama to windup and initiate American exit from Afghanistan by 2012. Just in time for the next presidential elections!
Shortest line-of-sight distance between Afghan border and Abbottabad is about 120 miles. Meaning it would take close to one hour flight time each way, even if CH-46/Shinook’s would fly from point A to point B at its max cruise speed of 137 ml/hr.
Meaning, Americans were in the Pakistani airspace for at least 2 1/2 hours.