Following is a chat log between a Pakistani and an Indian who became friends on the net sometime before the Mumbai Attacks. They both teach us something very valuable. May Allah incite such spirit amongst all of us.

[The chat has been pasted as is, devoid of any additions or rectifications, except for the change of names]

Anand: busy ho?

Ahmad: not much

Ahmad: kee haal hai twada

Anand: k bro

Anand: ind-pak bhai bhai

Anand: kya ho raha hai waha pe

Anand: across the border

Anand: tension hain?

Ahmad: tension on and off scene
still better situation than before

Anand: cool

Anand: zadari kaisa hai?

Anand: usa aur india ke allegations on the bombay blasts, have turned against pakistan

Anand: with all due respect bro

Anand: its a sensitive issue

Ahmad: I understand that the sentiment in india at a lot of places is going against pakistan.

its also a good oppurtunity for right wing extremists to avail

everyone in pakistan is disgusted by the attacks. we’ve been experiencing this for years now so one can understand.

it just happened a coupe of months ago at marriot in islamabad.

what i’ve read until now
they the allegations have come mostly from india

the US has played neutral and have diffused the issue.
it has also been stated by indian officials that they never said that it was organized by the Pakistan per se, but a terrorist group which is known to have operatied from pakistan

however, that has still been unclear. evidence is still being awaited.
some say they’re from hyderabad deccan
some say they were from mossad

Ahmad: whoever they are
ones thing for sure. such people are a danger to everybody and can spark other bloody battles

Ahmad: how are things in your city..?

Read more »

In the 9/11 terrorist attacks on twin towers in New York in which about 3000 persons died, no Afghan or Pakistani was involved. All the 19 perpetrators of the crime were Arabs, mostly hailing from Saudi Arabia. Yet the wrath of USA fell on Afghanistan for a bizarre reason that the so-called master mind behind the attacks was Osama bin Laden based in Afghanistan. Mullah Omar kept requesting that proof of his complicity should be furnished to enable him to hand over his guest but none was provided.

Terrorism became a buzzword and the fuming sole super power pounced upon militarily extremely weak and economically impoverished Afghanistan with utmost ferocity and decimated it. The whole world including UNSC supported the ghoulish invasion and its occupation under the hope that it would help in eliminating global terrorism.

Iraq too was pulverised on a cooked up story of WMDs and linkage with Al-Qaeda. Both charges turned out to be totally fabricated. Saddam as well as UN inspectors kept saying till the last that there were no WMDs, but Bush and Blair ignored them as well as world protests and went ahead with the second invasion without UNSC blessing. After destroying the two countries, USA is now bent upon destroying one of its close allies Pakistan which had played a key role in ousting Taliban and in getting Karzai elected. Without Pakistan?s all out military support, it may not have been possible for US-NATO forces to stay in Afghanistan for that long.

In case of Afghanistan and Iraq, both Mullah Omar and Saddam Hussein refused to buckle under US repeated threats followed by troop mobilisation. Instead of submitting to US diktat they opted to fight the aggressor well knowing that they were non-nuclear states and their conventional means were no match to the military prowess of sole super power duly aided by all the advanced nations of the world. In our case, we had nuclear weapons and adequate conventional means to defend our homeland. However, our commando General who never tired of bragging about his boldness, turned into a kitten when he received a phone call from Washington. He hastily threw in his towel and provided US spy agencies and its military forces large-scale facilities to make easy USA task of achieving its long term objectives. He justified his cowardly act of ditching the friendly Taliban and befriending USA on the premise that had he not done so Pakistan for sure would have been destroyed. Read more »

The army is now called a state within a state, supporter of nuclear proliferation, permeated by fundamentalists and militants in its ranks and file and an institution that pursues big business rather than focus on its primary mission.

Despite suffering over 1,500 dead (the highest figure for any army) in this war, it is still accused of playing a double game. American organisations that once praised now call it ill-organised and badly trained to fight counter insurgency operations in FATA. The hardest criticism has come on the ISI. It is repeatedly accused of hobnobbing with militants and supporting Al Qaeda. This is the outfit busy in unravelling the plethora of intrigues played by diverse actors against the sovereignty of Pakistan operating with the tacit consent of US and Afghanistan.

Methodically, a new theme is being developed. Pakistan’s obsession with India and Kashmir does not allow it to focus unilaterally in FATA. The Taliban in this context are being described as a strategic asset of Pakistan army for its security objectives. The latest accusations to surface relate to the diversion of US funds for building up capabilities against India. No reference is being made to the fact that the mishandling of the situation in Afghanistan in fact adds to Pakistan’s security concerns.

The praetorian mindset within the Pakistan army has made matters worse for the country. The last two military coups of Pakistan got legitimised due to US geo-strategic interests in the regions. 9/11 was an opportunity for an otherwise besieged General Musharraf to get the Americans off his back and use them as erstwhile allies. The short-sightedness of his policy meant that the Pakistani military has been drawn into a most hostile environment – such as in FATA and Swat – where states and a maze of non-state actors compete for influence. The surveillance, intervention and connections of competing actors in the region are so effective that it leaves the local troops with little operational initiative. Read more »