‘Pakistan cuts troops on Indian border’

Khaleej Times ^ | 7 November 2007 | correspondent

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

NEW DELHI — For the first time in 60 years, Pakistan has considerably reduced the number of troops along the heavily guarded border with India.

The matter has come up in the Cabinet Committee on Security headed by the Prime Minister Dr Manmohan Singh.

Turmoil in Pakistan and unrest in its western areas, have resulted in Pakistani troops being pulled away in large numbers from the border areas adjoining Jammu and Kashmir, Punjab, Rajasthan and Gujarat.

Reports quoting intelligence agencies said here yesterday that the aggressively positioned eastern frontier areas adjoining India have become extremely thin. Pakistani troops that otherwise are positioned to counter Indian forces, have been moved out to Waziristan and the Federally Administered Tribal Areas on the western borders, reports said.

Intelligence officials have been quoted as saying that strain is starting to tell on the regular Pakistan army with tensions mounting in the north west frontier. “The very sign of pressure building up against Pakistan is that their forces which never compromised on its eastern border have been moved out leaving the border areas along India lean and lanky,” said top officials.

Some 38,000 troops from key border installations have been repositioned, the Caninet Committee has been told. It is said as many as 15 Infantry Brigades of Pakistan army have been repositioned on the border areas of north west frontier to fight Taleban.

Many reserve troops and units that were on duty on the borders at Indo-Pak Line of Control have been moved out. Even soldiers from the elite strike corps that are trained to slice into India in the event of war along with reserves with the army GHQ in Rawalpindi have been mobilised. However, this doesn’t indicate that Pakistan’s eastern border has been left totally unattended.

The thinning of troops indicate that Islamabad is quite apprehensive about internal developments more than any untoward events unfolding with India. Officials were quoted as saying that Islamabad isn’t worried with New Delhi that has seemingly been sympathetic with the situation in its neighbour that forced President Pervez Musharraf impose 'emergency' last Saturday.

“For them the priority is surely the western flank that has brought them more trouble as of now. With Indo-Pak peace process still on, Islamabad can at least trust its new found camaraderie with New Delhi,” officials said. Latest inputs have shown that the Mangla-based Army Reserve North (ARN) and Multan-based Army Reserve South (ARS) too have been repositioned, said Indian Express newspaper.

“They have been dispatched to Peshawar or Quetta for deployment along the troubled Afghan frontier. Units from the Force Command Northern Area (FCNA) that controls Pakistan’s Azad Kashmir region and forces from the dual-role XI Corps in Peshawar — tasked with defending the Afghan border have also been moved to fight the Taleban,” said the report.

The reports quoting valid details, point out that written instructions were sent by Pakistan Army GHQ to all formation commanders to determine the quantity of forces each unit could relieve for deployment along the Afghan border and even the hinterland. After that a classified list of ‘extra troops’ was drawn up by GHQ based on an internal audit that was carried out by all formations.

Top US-based defence analysts watching developments in India and Pakistan, have warned that this pressure on Pakistani armed forces could lead to an ‘abnormally high percentage of Pakistani troops on active duty’ — a factor that is dangerous, as it can ‘crack open’ the army against President Musharraf himself.

“Intelligence data says that out of the 66 Infantry Brigades (about 1.65 lakh troops) in the Pak army, 33 brigades are currently on active duty. Of these, 18 brigades (45,000 troops) are deployed for counter-terror operations. With half its troops committed to active duty, the army is finding it hard to rotate and relive formations,” said reports.

“It is a major operational constraint. In the event of war, the whole army gets mobilised but in an ideal scenario, one-third of the troops should be on duty, while the rest are in transit or in a peace area. In long term, it will get increasingly difficult to manage the already strained forces,” top officials were quoted as saying.

On this scenario, strategic affairs expert Stephen Cohen has pointed out that “the (Pakistani) army might lose its coherence. It is a multi-ethnic army, derived from the old British Indian army, and from time to time it, like its predecessor, has had ethnic-based mutinies (the most notable being the revolt of the Bengali elements of all three services in 1970).”

“At present, about 18 per cent of the Pakistan army are Pushtuns or of Pushtun-origin. There are reports of officers refusing to attack targets, and the astonishing case, still unexplained, of nearly 300 officers and jawans surrendering to the militants in Waziristan — where they are still being held hostage,” Cohen wrote for Brookings Institution explaining that America was in for a tough ride with developments in Pakistan.

[jveritas]

The annihilation of Al Qaeda should be our priority.

[Prophet in the wilderness]

" I recall some little publicized but very high-level visits from the US government to both India and Pakistan, about the time the liberation of Afghanistan commenced. I don’t think it was a courtesy call. I think the Bush administration deserves a lot of credit for getting the Pak-Indian peace process off the dime, enabling both to assist in the WoT. "

And the Democrats in Congress want to trow a monkey wrench in the works to ( FUBAR ) it all up, just like they did with Turkey... and in 1979 with the Shaw of Iran.
More and more time goes by, the more I am convinced that the Democrats are aiding and helping our enemy.

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

There is a book (now available in paperback ):

***********************

Unholy Alliance: Radical Islam and the American Left
(Hardcover)
by David Horowitz

********************************************************

And reviews:

****************************************

Editorial Reviews

Rich Lowry, Editor National Review

David Horowitz is synonymous with pyrotechnics. A historian and polemicist of the first order, he is paid the ultimate compliment --This text refers to the Hardcover edition.

Davis Hanson, Author, Ripples of Battle

An original look at those who want us to fail in the Middle East, both at home and abroad. The --This text refers to the Hardcover edition.

***********************************************************

See all Editorial Reviews

Fascinating Analysis of Leftist Goals, August 13, 2006

Reviewer: N. Sincerity - See all my reviews

A former 1960s radical, Horowitz is well-acquainted with the Leftist mindset. In this book, he strives to explain the modern alliance between left wing progressivists and radical Islamofascists. He argues that this alliance is based on a common desire to destroy Western capitalism. Leftist sympathy with Islamofascist ideas makes no sense from an intellectual point of view, given that countries ruled by radical Islamists are among the most racist, sexist, theocratic states in the world today. However, Leftists have recognized that they can benefit politically from destructive terrorist attacks on the Western world. A West under attack can be made to turn on its leaders in fear and desperation (as they did in Spain after the Madrid train bombings). Only once people reject current government structures can the Left execute its anti-capitalist revolution and build a new reality that mirrors the Leftist view of utopia.

The complete and utter idealogical hypocrisy of the Islamofascist-Leftist alliance is distressing, but as Horowitz reminds us,

Leftists radicals truly believe the ends justify the means.

***************************************

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

From the Blogosphere(CQ):

A Bhutto 'Ultimatum'?

*************************EXCERPT*****************************

Benazir Bhutto has issued an "ultimatum", in the wording of the BBC, warning Pervez Musharraf that she plans to demonstrate on Friday against his rule by emergency decree. Telling Pakistanis that "We are under attack," Bhutto hopes to generate a large enough protest to get Musharraf to reverse the decree and restore democracy -- but perhaps not large enough to dislodge him entirely:

[FARS]

Thanks for the ping.

[Marine_Uncle]

"See #9....Anbar all over again?"
Thanks for the series of pings. Have to leave for work shortly so will pick up later on this.

[Marine_Uncle]

I believe you are right on. Washington has had a lot to do with easing of tensions between the two countries. And it is to India's benefit for as many al Qaeda and Taliban to be killed or captured in Pakistan. Or so it could seem in my limited scope. The quieter and democratic Pakistan gets, the less the Indians have to worry about a bunch of crazies living next door.
Perhaps to some degree a new level of diplomatic discourse shall take place between the two countries where both seek common grounds. Of course like many countries, say Iraq, the have a problem with small groups that always want to stay isolated and cause border problems/disputes, e.g. the Kurds.
It will be interesting to see where this all leads in the weeks to come. Perhaps Mussharaf will come to the point of letting US air power perform more open actions on his side of the border.

[Marine_Uncle]

Regarding Bhutto. She is going to screw things up royally by all indications. This is a real bad time for the Pakistan military to even have to consider divided loyalties. She should understand many elements in the Pakistan society are working with the Islamo facists organizations. And the military must take adequate measures not only in physical attacks on the al Qaeda and Taliban cells along the border areas but within the interior of the country that most probably operate almost freely.
To force the military and police to have to deal with a crowd of one million protestors while they should be preparing to go agains the Islamist goons looks akin to some asshole like Harry Reid saying we have to cut off funding of US troops during the surge.

[sukhoi-30mki]

The Supreme Court judges who were seized had few if any sympathies to the Islamists.The fact is that the Judiciary has never had any clout on the way the Army & it’s ISI have acted against anything-this can in no way be compared to US judges who have hindered the US WOT.

[sukhoi-30mki]

And your point is??The fact is that the Chief Justice asked the Government to give reasons for the disappearance of peoples-supposedly taken into custody.Which is not the same as releasing terrorists.The fact remains the internal security apparatus in Pakistan has had far more autonomy & freedom of operations than most other countries can dream about,inclu. the US.The Supreme Court or judiciary have barely had any real influence on them-

Which does not mean that I am a fan of the Chief Justice-he has been accused of nepotism by several quarters & has his own vested interests to keep.Only that he is no worse than Musharraf.

[G8 Diplomat]

First of all I was referring to the link to the Flopping Aces article, not this article, and second, my point is that you can say I ignore stuff that doesn’t fit my opinion in the Friend or Foe article, but are you ignoring stuff that doesn’t fit yours in the Aces on?

I see Musharraf as not someone to be trusted blindly, but an ally nonetheless. You seem to see him as an enemy, but when there’s an article speculating on how he might be fighting AQ, there’s silence from the Musharraf is an enemy camp.

[sukhoi-30mki]

To be honest-I don’t seem him as anything.The problem is far more serious than just one man or what he will or won’t do.As far as I see it,the problem is with the very nature of Pakistan-since the Army has been in power for so long,they are responsible for the mess it is in be it Islam or insurgency & disenchantment in Baluchistan.Musharraf has shown no inclination to deal with these problems other than pay lip service to the US & flinging over a few terrorists when Condi Rice comes visiting.He will back America as long as he doesn’t earn America’s wrath on his Army-he will use the Islamists against India & anyone else as long as they serve his army.It’s about as simple as that.I frankly don’t think anyone in Pakistan in the current picture-the Army/Lawyers/Politicians are the answer.

[G8 Diplomat]

Musharraf has shown no inclination to deal with these problems other than pay lip service to the US & flinging over a few terrorists when Condi Rice comes visiting

Yes, that is true. Which is why he shouldn't be trusted blindly. Sometimes he shows a resolve to go after terrorists, sometimes he doesn't. It could be because he knows if he does there is a great possiblity he will be assassinated. Or maybe not. It's hard to know the rationale behind Pakistani politics.