Plans
For Disintegrating Pakistan
Are Now Up For Debate
By Abid Ullah Jan
21 November, 2007
Countercurrents.org
Frederick
Kagan and Michael O’Hanlon presented their strategic plan for
disarming Pakistan in the New York Time on November 19, 2007. Written
with imperial arrogance and colonial mindset, this piece cannot be contemptuously
dismissed because the duo is a respected pair of neocons. O’Hanlon
is the cheerleader of surge in Iraq and with Brookings and New York
Times standing behind them, there is good reason for Pakistanis and
their corrupt leadership to wake up.
This back-of-an-envelope
military planning from neocon analysts is part of the plan under which
support is extended to dictatorial and corrupt regimes in Pakistan so
that it could lead to chaos and anarchy, and the way is paved for an
invasion and neutralization of the military power of Pakistan. The objective
remains the same as it was in the case of a wars on Iraq and the plans
for a war on Iran. Only the strategy for neutralising the military power
of Pakistan is different.
The plan is published in
the NY Times with the intention to garner unwarranted attention. For
one thing, since the White House regards the Surge as a stunning success,
it’s natural that Kagan and O’Hanlon will receive a sympathetic
ear.
And though their counsel
is singularly lacking in rational approach and denies the right to self
defense and self determination to yet another nation, a president with
little interest in the rights and freedom is unlikely to notice its
absence.
Kegan and O’Hanlon
don’t have a plan other then the dream of American military salvation
through collaborators and traitors referred to in the op-ed as pro-America
moderates. In their rumination, presented a s a plan, the duo says:
“Given the degree to which Pakistani nationalists cherish these
assets, it is unlikely the United States would get permission to destroy
them. Somehow, American forces would have to team with Pakistanis to
secure critical sites and possibly to move the material to a safer place.”
What kind of Pakistanis are they expecting to team up with the invading
armies?
In their wishful thinking
the authors of the plan for invasion of Pakistan assume that Pakistan’s
military will be totally in favor of the invasion and support the invading
armies: “So, if we got a large number of troops into the country,
what would they do? The most likely directive would be to help Pakistan’s
military and security forces hold the country’s center —
primarily the region around the capital, Islamabad, and the populous
areas like Punjab Province to its south.”
The plan is not sure how
American forces will be welcomed by Pakistan army, but says “somehow”
the invading armies “would have to team up with Pakistanis.”
Somehow is how in search of a plan. However, that is not a matter for
concern for warlords in the US and other Western capitals who believe
as long as the objective is clear (target Pakistan’s nuclear power),
the how aspect will be taken care of somehow. However, we know from
the Us experience of mass killings to the level of genocide in Iraq
that it is not always as simple to invade a country as easily and these
warmongers present.
Of course there are sellouts
everywhere and the greedy and opportunist Pakistani generals may already
have revealed the locations of critical sites to their overbearing American
masters. Still the scenario of invasion and capturing the prized weapons
would not be as simple as we read in the pages of the New York Times.
No matter what the sold-out generals may have done at the top level,
the idea that the Pakistani military as a whole will cooperate or any
faction within it would in effect hand over the prize jewels of Pakistan’s
national defense for American safekeeping — even if that was in
“a remote redoubt within Pakistan” — is laughable.
The junior officers have
no option but to obey their commanders at the top. However, when they
realize that their top leadership is colluding with the United States
for invading Pakistan and destroying of removing its nuclear weapons,
the revolution/revolt in Pakistan army would be nothing less than hell
for a few generals at the top. The US warmongers might see up in smoke
all the military discipline we see now. They might see the traitors
hanged in the streets in Pakistan. There can be little doubt that American
officials have already been provided with multiple assurances that the
Generals command is the last command and everyone else down the ranks
will obey. However there is no guarantee that the thousands of juniors
officers would remain loyal even when they see the writing on the wall.
As David Sanger and William
Broad noted in the New York Times (Nov 18, 2007) a U.S. sponsored, post-9/11
plan to safeguard Pakistan’s nuclear weapons, “has been
hindered by a deep suspicion among Pakistan’s military that the
secret goal of the United States was to gather intelligence about how
to locate and, if necessary, disable Pakistan’s arsenal, which
is the pride of the country.”
So, it would seem that while
Washington indulges in hair brain schemes for safeguarding Pakistani
nukes, Pakistan’s military is not as concerned about the myth
of these weapons falling into the hands of militants as they are fearful
of America using Pakistan’s engineered instability as a ruse for
implementing a unilateral disarmament scheme.
Kagan and O’Hanlon,
sensing that pro-American Pakistanis might be in short supply, have
nevertheless devised a Plan B — sort of. This one requires, “a
sizable combat force — not only from the United States, but ideally
also other Western powers and moderate Muslim nations.” The American
warlords are confident that the “longstanding effectiveness of
Pakistan’s security forces,” will provide sufficient time
for a U.S.-led coalition to be deployed. They must remember that no
“moderate Muslim” state came to help the US in its war for
chemical and biological weapons in Iraq. How and from where would they
come to the rescue of the Islamophobic allies in the case of a new war
on a nuclear armed Muslim state?
Now we get to the really
interesting passage, indicating that the Iraq war supporters have made
great progress on the Middle East plan in which Pakistan is also divided
with parts of it going to Afghanistan and the emergence of an independent
Baluchistan: “…if we got a large number of troops into the
country, what would they do? The most likely directive would be to help
Pakistan’s military [assuming it is working with the invaders]
and security forces hold [just] the country’s center — primarily
the region around the capital, Islamabad, [Pakistan’s Green Zone]
and the populous areas like Punjab Province to its south. [Leaving Baluchistan,
NWFP and Sindh alone for redrawing the new Middle East map, which interestingly
included South Asia as well. See Ralph Peters, Armed Forces Journal
- June 2006]
The war rhetoric surrounds
the slogans that the “task of retaking any such regions and reclaiming
custody of any nuclear weapons would be a priority for our troops.”
Hoever, the reality conceded by the authors is telling. They are simply
bringing the grand design for undermining Pakistan – of which
supporting tyrannical rule in Pakistan was one of the key components
for seeding crisis and chaos - to the forefront for discussion and consensus
building. Now all those Democrats who said Iraq was a distraction from
the war on terrorism will be forced on board. Who could guess a few
years ago that an engineered, chaotic fall of Musharraf would provide
such a golden opportunity to the warlords in Washington?
In the plans of American
warlords, the time for Pakistan is up. It is up to Pakistan’s
religious, military and political “leaders,” who have facilitated
the neocons plans thus far, to take a note of the impending war on Pakistan,
make necessary course corrections, or get ready to be decimated with
the rest of their countrymen or hanged in the streets in case they survive
the shock and awe.
Abid Ullah Jan
is the author of The Musharraf Factor: Leading Pakistan to its Inevitable
Demise.
Leave
A Comment
&
Share Your Insights
Comment
Policy
Digg
it! And spread the word!
Here is a unique chance to help this article to be read by thousands
of people more. You just Digg it, and it will appear in the home page
of Digg.com and thousands more will read it. Digg is nothing but an
vote, the article with most votes will go to the top of the page. So,
as you read just give a digg and help thousands more to read this article.