How To Make Peace With Pakistan

Normalized relations with Pakistan will add 1% to India's growth rate, and Modi is all about economic growth. But that normalization is no easy task since Pakistan is not exactly a democracy. So one has to be careful. One has to be realistic. One can not close the doors of engagement, but one also has to be tough.

The latest salvo from Nawaz Sharif is that there can be no peace talks unless India is willing to talk about Kashmir. That is posturing. He needs to do that to stay credible inside Pakistan. He can not act too eager for peace and still stay viable inside Pakistani politics. Just like Modi had to act tough for a year. He needed to do that. To send a clear message to Pakistan that he means business, but also to send a message to the home audience, that he is tough with Pakistan.

Peace with Pakistan is hard because Pakistan is not a democracy. The army is not subservient to the Pakistani parliament. The ISI is a three headed hydra. Only one of the heads might be answerable to the parliament. The hardliners inside the ISI and the army need to keep the conflict going. If there is peace, they become irrelevant. And so they seek for opportunities to stoke the fire. When peace attempts are made, they feel the need to scuttle the efforts. Nawaz, frankly, does not have the power to make peace. He can not give you what he does not have.

Any genuine peace effort from India's side has to be multi-dimensional. When Modi meets and talk to Nawaz, high ranked army people on both sides also should meet and talk. The army people should try to set up things like hotlines. Both are nuclear powers after all. Seeking to establish hotlines might be one way to stoke Pakistan's nuclear ego.

Another place where Nawaz is powerless is Pakistan truly has a major domestic terrorism problem. The Pakistani people are at the receiving end of it, the Pakistani army is, the Pakistani establishment is. And it does not help that some elements of both the ISI and the army nurture, aid and abet some or many of those same terrorists. Nawaz could not halt domestic terrorism inside Pakistan even if he wanted to, and he is trying his best, or as much as his limited powers allow. Pakistan can not help India with something it can not help itself with.

There is no state that America can expect will take care of either the ISIS or the Al Qaeda. These are not state actors. And they have to be dealt with directly. Similarly, India has to do the best it can to stay one step ahead of the various terror outfits. You try to prevent attacks, you nab them when you can, you try to infiltrate them, you hit back when you can, you cooperate with powers like America on things like intelligence sharing. Pakistan can not help you with something that it can not help itself with.

Having said that, it is an open secret that the inferior Pakistani army relies on terror groups to make its point when it feels the need. You can not ignore that.

Peace with Pakistan is not like Reagan meeting Gorbachev. Nawaz has parallel power centers all around him, several of whom don't think of him as their superior or boss. India has to move ahead with that knowledge.

• Moving from a position of strength is key. There are elements on the Pakistani side, many of them not in Nawaz' control, that simply do not talk the language of reason. 
• Not engaging is not an option. 
• A multi-pronged approach to peace talks is key. The parallel power centers will only respond to direct engagement, and even then they will play hard to get. Think about it. Why will they negotiate away their central place in Pakistani society? 
• Because there is no immediate solution to terrorism, one has to keep expectations low. Peace with Pakistan will be a slow process. Larger tectonic forces are at play. Think of it as Climate Change. It is complex, and Nawaz can not help you. So suggesting he does not want to is a lame excuse. Maybe so. Maybe he does not want to help. But he can't even if he wants to. 

In the short term I am pessimistic about the prospects. Larger global forces are at play. And those forces will have to align in a certain way for India and Pakistan to see genuine peace. Scapegoating Kashmir is one way to go about it. But it really is about the terrorists. Kashmir is not why they exist. And Modi-Nawaz handshakes will not make them go away. 

A sophisticated engagement where you are plain realistic is perhaps the way to go. Keep expectations low, but stay engaged at multiple levels. And seek small areas of cooperation like, hotlines between the two armies, perhaps even information sharing on terrorists, and there the US might have a role. 

Like Yaser Arafat said about Israelis, "We are practically cousins!" 

India succeeding to make peace with Pakistan is about if Pakistan can become a full democracy where the army and the ISI come completely under the Pakistani parliament, and if the world makes progress with dealing with terrorism, whose only solution I think is a total spread of democracy across the Muslims world, where, ironically, both India and Pakistan are in a very good position to play a decisive role. 

Maybe that higher purpose will bring Modi and Nawaz closer together. 

Curiously India has excellent relations with Afghanistan, Iran and several other states in the region. 

Does it help to realize that the partition was Britain's fault? No? 

Climate Change, Terrorism, Poverty, World Government

English: Global climate change 2000-2009 and 1950-1980/ Русский: Изменение средних температур за периоды 2000-2009 и 1950-1980. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Why is it not surprising that all of the global problems only have global solutions? Terrorism is a big problem, but compared to Climate Change, it is a small problem. Poverty is someone else' problem, except it is not. Disease is Ebola. You don't want that.

On Climate Change, there are points of no return. Nature does not hold back. It does not care. It does not care about intelligent life. Or unintelligent life. The threat is very real. The time pressure is very real.

Time for a genuine world government is not 50 years from now. It is today.

After gays, it is guns. That next big liberal goal, to move from insane gun proliferation to sane gun control. On gay marriage they were the party of stupid. On guns, they are the party of insane. That is on the domestic front. On the global front, a 90% reduction in the US defense budget over a 10 year period will just make it an exercise in reallocation of resources. It does not have to be painful economically.

Rule of law within nations, rule of law between nations.

Climate Change does not have any other solution.

Related articles

• Liberia confirms third Ebola case in new outbreak
• Media Hypes Resurgence of Ebola and Ebola Vaccine Trials
• Second Ebola case in Liberia raises fears of resurgence
• Liberia feels the sting in Ebola's tail
• Ebola Vaccine Potential in Turmeric Curcumin
• New Test Diagnoses Ebola in Minutes
• Liberia investigating animal link after Ebola re-emerges
• Liberia announces fresh Ebola death
• Ebola: Lagos State Government Raises Alarm

2001, 2002, 2008: Cycle Of Violence

September 2001: 3,000 dead.



February 2002: Gujrat Riots



2008 Mumbai Attacks

ISIS Holds Territory

Khobar Towers bombing in Dhahran, Saudi Arabia on 25 June 1996. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

The Al Qaeda never did. It was like a parasite. The host was Taliban.

The ISIS is not a state, the way you and I think about states. For example, it has no desire to join the United Nations. It is a terrorist organization, pure and simple. The virus has mutated.

ISIS Territory Is The New Rwanda

ISIS commanding territory, and generating huge daily revenues from oil and drug trafficking and what have you has got to be on the radar.

It was only a matter of time. These attacks were going to come.

When the fight between capitalism and communism started, it did not end with communism losing. Capitalism itself morphed. It digested some elements of communism. There were things like the welfare state.

Islam seeks respect. We want to move towards a world where Muslims are not living in the slums of democracies. They are in the mainstream. But that has to be brought about by the forces of democracy.

ISIS is a physical attacks problem. I am no military expert.

ISIS can not be allowed to hold territory. ISIS can not be allowed revenues. Right now it is collecting millions per day.

ISIS is going to force the US to think maybe Arab monarchies are anachronisms.

The US is not exactly winning the War On Terror right now. This is a new virus. And it is deadlier than the Al Qaeda. Bin Laden's death was but a blip. Now it looks like.

The bottom line is this is an ideological struggle. An ideological struggle with clear physical components. But primarily an ideological struggle. This is a war of words first and foremost.

These guys will not stop at anything. If they can build a dirty bomb, they w-i-l-l detonate it. That is how clear they are in their intentions. If they can't bring that dirty bomb to America, they will detonate it in Africa, or in some Arab country. That event will make 9/11 look like a picnic.

The Cold War lasted almost half a century. The War On Terror was never going to be over in 10 years.

I still think beaming the internet from the skies and flooding the Muslim world with cheap Android phones is the number one and best tool. Elon Musk has a pan. Fund it. It is the cheapest and the least bloody.

Also, there is no avoiding the fact that the only way to tackle Climate Change is by creating a genuine 21st century world government. Climate Change and terrorism are twin challenges. They are similar. They only have global solutions.

ISIS claims deadly mosque attack in Kuwait Terrorist Attacks in France, Tunisia and Kuwait Kill Dozens

“The Kuwait operation is especially dangerous, as this is ISIS’ first operation in a gulf state,” Mr. Riedel said in an email. “The others will be deeply alarmed.” ..... “Muslims, embark and hasten toward jihad,” said the Islamic State’s spokesman, Abu Mohammed al-Adnani, in an audio message released this week. “O mujahedeen everywhere, rush and go to make Ramadan a month of disasters for the infidels.” ...... United States intelligence and counterterrorism officials were scrambling on Friday to assess the connections, if any, between the attacks in France, Kuwait and Tunisia. Officials said that if the assessment found that the attacks were linked, officials would seek to determine whether the Islamic State had actively directed, coordinated or inspired them...... the assault resembled others launched by ISIS recently on Shiite mosques in neighboring Saudi Arabia ..... “This is something that was planned,” she said. “It was not just one guy who decided to put on a suicide belt and go in there.”

Attacks hit three continents amid fears of escalating Islamist violence

Emergency security meetings were called across Europe, and French police were dispatched to protect “sensitive sites” ..... Tunisian authorities reeled with another blow to its vital tourism industry, three months after 22 people were gunned down at the world-famous Bardo museum in the capital, Tunis. In Kuwait, the prime minister, Sheik Jaber al-Sabah, denounced the blast at a Shiite mosque as a direct attack at “national unity.” ..... France’s interior minister, Bernard Cazeneuve, also said a suspect arrested — identified by French media as Yassin Sahli — was on a watch list between 2006 and 2008 of potential followers of a radical branch of Islam, but had been taken off surveillance. ...... In a communique circulated by Islamic State-linked social media accounts online, the group said one of its members, Abu Suleiman al-Mowahid, detonated a belt of explosives at a “gathering of apostates.” ...... The Kuwait attacks followed similar mosque blasts in neighboring Saudi Arabia targeting Shiite worshipers. The Saudi attacks also were claimed by the Islamic State, whose extremist Sunni followers view Shiites as heretics.

Islamic State said to kill scores in Syrian border city

Islamic State jihadists engaged in a bloody rampage in the Kurdish-majority Syrian city of Kobani and its environs on Friday, officials said, executing at least 142 civilians before withdrawing as vicious fighting continued in the town for a second day........ described the attack as "a crime against humanity ... it's a barbaric massacre" ....... "The executions were perpetrated against entire families, [they were] completely exterminated," he said, adding that the death total would make this the second largest massacre perpetrated by the group. At least 28 Islamic State militants were killed in the clashes.

Related articles

• Al-Qaeda: US Killed No. 2
• Al Qaeda Confirms US Drone Strike Killed its Yemen Leader; Announces New Chief
• al-Qaeda Operative Killed in US Airstrike in Libya
• Top al Qaeda leader killed
• Yemen Al Qaeda execute 2 Saudis accused of spying for US
• Would a Drone Strike on Congress Be a Bad Thing?
• Leader of al-Qaeda in Yemen 'Killed' in US Drone Attack
• Libya: High ranking Al-Qaeda member killed during US air raid
• US strike on 'Al-Qaeda-associated terrorist' in Libya: Pentagon
• US drone attack abolishes Al-Qaeda second boss

Terrorism

Terrorists Among Us: Jihad in America (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

ढाका में मोदी ने कहा, हमें traditional युद्ध करना आता है, सैनिक भेजो, टैंक भेजो, फाइटर प्लेन भेजो, लेकिन दुनिया को terrorism से कैसे सामना किया जाता है वो नहीं आता। True, it is a new strain of virus.

कुछ solutions हैं।

• State building ---- जिस तरह मच्छर पानी न बहने वाली तालाब ढूँढती, उसी तरह आतंकवादी ऐसे देश ढूँढ़ते हैं जहाँ failed state हो। 
• Cooperation between States ---- दुनिया के देशों को information sharing करनी होगी। Otherwise if each country is a silo of its own, you give the terrorists a lot of room to play. 
• Information Technology ------ The leaders like Bin Laden might choose to go "dark." But generally speaking terrorist cells rely a lot on electronic communication. There has been much contention on this. Even in countries like America there has been a lot of talk about how civil liberties are being curtailed and citizens are being spied upon. Perhaps there is a happy medium somewhere where you rely mostly on machine reading until you have something substantial and only then you get humans involved. Like with Gmail, the email service serves you ads. But it is machine reading, and you don't feel violated. 
• Social network mapping ------ All terrorist groups rely on social networks. Smaller and tighter the group, more reliant they are on their social networks. So when you nab a few, they lead you to others. 
• Political grievances have to be proactively addressed. Not because terrorism is and should work. But if there are legitimate concerns, they are legitimate. And they should be addressed. Not as a matter of negotiation with the terrorists or as a step in being blackmailed, but independent of all that. 
• The "frontline" is where you have small, agile, well trained operatives who engage in direct action. Mistakes have been made in drone attacks, but they are also one of the tools on the frontlines. 
• Ideological fights on social media. 
• Larger debates in society, at universities, in old media, on TV, in newspapers. Point by point rebuttals. 

Terrorists rely on the war of asymmetry because they know that is the only way they have any chance. आमने सामने आएंगे तो asymmetry गायब हो जाएगी। 

That is why you have to fear the ISIS more, because they are breaking many of the rules of the traditional terrorists. Terrorists prefer not to hold territory. 

Terrorists rely a lot on out of the box thinking. That goes along the lines of asymmetry. So you have to keep on your toes and constantly be trying to figure out what their next moves might be. It is a game of chess. 

Ultimately you just have to drown them out with plentiful information. Wireless broadband and cheap Android phones for the masses ----- I think that is the number one thing. Hundreds of millions of Muslims sharing cat videos makes ISIS irrelevant. You drown out the terrorists with everyday boring stuff. I happen to think that is the most potent weapon. 

I have said this many times. I think of the War On Terror as being on par with the Cold War. It will conclude after there is a total spread of democracy across the Arab/Muslim world.

India is the new Britain, because ultimately this is about the ideology of democracy. The oldest and the largest democracies belong together. America and India need each other.

Terrorism is "cutting edge" like Climate Change ---- they both require global coordination. No one country can tackle either. 

Related articles

• French 'anti-Islamophobia' group 'plotted terror'
• Ted Talk: How the FBI creates terrorists in America
• 3 terrorists arrested in twin cities
• Tony Abbott Wants To Take The Fight To 'Submit or Die' Islamic State Terrorists
• Two men involved in propaganda of terrorism arrested in E Kazakhstan rgn
• Suicide bombers, terrorists die as troops repel attack on Shetimari
• Terror group seeks youths with skills
• Egypt Reports Killing 13 Ansar Bait al-Maqdis Terrorists
• Successful Raid By FC In Quetta
• There Have Been Six Terrorist Plots Since April Alone. How Concerned Should We Be?

ISIS Territory Is The New Rwanda

Map of Rwanda from CIA World Factbook, with province boundaries and names added. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

In the worst case scenario, the ISIS territory, even if it does not expand -- I mean, it is not like anyone seriously thinks they will take over everything they want to take over -- is a Rwanda in the making. It is selfish to think the ISIS is a problem only if it blows up a cafe in some rich country. The killings inside ISIS territory have to be of concern. Once ISIS has reached its territorial limits and it becomes super hard for it to expand, it is going to turn inwards, and it is going to keep looking for enemies within. Already unacceptable levels of killings are going to go up several notches. What will the world do then? Sit and watch? What is the threshold? Is it half a million dead? At what point does the world intervene?

ISIS is not a religion, it is not a state, it is a cult. It is not even a terrorist organization like the Al Qaeda, it is a cult.

Related articles

• In support of the BBC documentary "Rwanda's Untold Story"
• Rwanda receives €7m from Germany for district development
• World Bank gives Rwanda $70m to help fight poverty
• UN pulls out of DR Congo assault
• Picture of the Day: Team Rwanda Sees Snow For First Time Ever

Boots On The Ground?

My blog post on February 2: Boots On The Ground?

News today, February 11: Obama opens door to 'limited' ground combat operations against ISIS.

"If left unchecked, ISIL will pose a threat beyond the Middle East, including to the United States homeland," Obama said. ........ Obama is offering to limit authorization to three years, extending to the next president the powers and the debate over renewal for what he envisions as a long-range battle.

These ISIS folks are not exactly people you have the option to invite to the debate table. The hard nosed truth is force is necessary. Terror attacks in Australia and Paris are all emanating from there. It is only a matter of time before something happens in the United States. They sure have the intention. These people would let go off a dirty bomb the first chance they got at any location of convenience.

The Al Qaeda never had territory. The Taliban had territory, and the Al Qaeda used it like a parasite. These guys are worse than the Al Qaeda, if that is possible, and they command a bigger territory than the Taliban, more strategic, and have robust revenue streams.

Waiting for them to strike when they have a clear intention to do so is like waiting for them to build up their capabilities. It does not take much to blow up one cafe, but the incident scares an entire nation.

The ISIS running a state is not something that can be tolerated.

The Middle East is not some problem that will simply go away if you will ignore it. And it is not an easy problem.

This is the right move by the president, a Nobel Peace Prize winner. Sometimes you need boots on the ground to keep the peace. It is in his job description.

As to the details, I am no military expert. But it makes political sense to build a large coalition of countries. Because every democracy is a target. It makes sense to have a limited, well defined ground operation where you try and work with local allies. The ISIS offends pretty much everybody in that neighborhood. Air power would play the decisive role. Intelligence would play a big role. But there is no avoiding firefights. That is the sad truth.

I still think beaming internet from the sky and flooding the land with cheap Android phones is the best way to make progress in that part of the world. You want hundreds of millions of Muslims sharing cat videos. That is cheaper, better, and it minimizes the violence.

Obama seeks sweeping Isis authority amid infighting over open-ended war
Obama Sends Letter to Congress Seeking Authorization of ISIS Fight

Related articles

• Obama officially kicks off first new Middle East war in 13 years against ISIS
• Former Defense Sec. Robert Gates: 'Unrealistic' To Say We Will 'Destroy' Al Qaeda, The Taliban
• Viewpoint: Can China bring peace to Afghanistan?