Misreading Musharraf

washingtonpost.com ^ | Thursday, May 23, 2002; Page A33 | Jim Hoagland

[AM2000]

India and Pakistan are three to four weeks from a foreseeable war that the United States has done too little to prevent. By misreading Gen. Pervez Musharraf, the Bush administration has contributed to a dangerous confrontation between South Asia's two nuclear-armed rivals.

Troops the two sides have deployed in and around the Kashmir theater total 1 million. They balance on a razor's edge. The winter snows that immobilized them for four months are gone. Extreme heat and then monsoon conditions will arrive in a month or so in the region, limiting India's logistical capabilities and campaign predictability. India's politically faltering government faces a choice of going to war before that moment -- or enduring the embarrassment of backing down from a costly and seemingly pointless mobilization.

[AM2000]

This is a good read.

[crystalk]

Why should we want to prevent it? Get it on and get it over, and get all the islamic bombs and missiles destroyed and/or used up.

[swarthyguy]

Musharraf's nightmare.

[jimtorr]

Yes, it is a good read, even though I think the Post has misread the situation. IMHO, I thing GW is willing to let Musharraf hang himself, and deflect anger away from the U.S. towards India in the process.

[RightWhale]

3 to 4 weeks from war, and a month from impenetrable heat and monsoon. It doesn't add up, does it. Other articles say September. But they are as ready now as they ever will be.

[swarthyguy]

Pakistan helped create and foster al Qaeda and the Taliban. It has long used terror as an instrument of state policy to try to break India's hold on two-thirds of Kashmir that New Delhi controls.

And Musharraf is the dictator of a state that exceled in its commitment to terror. Don't you think sending jihadi squads to kill kids(why target living quarters on an Army base otherwise) necessitates some kind of a response.

This fits Bush's definition of international terrorism; across internationally recognized albeit disputed sovereign borders(LoC).

But seems like India will hit Kashmir and no more. If at all!

[Nogbad]

Must Read.

[swarthyguy]

It's really hot in the plains and the desert, but Kashmir is a more alpine place and it's hot in the valley but not uncomfortable and cool higher.

[crypt2k]

We can live without him, India can't live with him. get rid of him.

Yes, but then who replaces him!

[Ronin]

...from a foreseeable war that the United States has done too little to prevent...

Who the heck elected US God???

India and Pakistan have never been very far from each other's throats and the current Pakistani-based terrorism in India has driven New Delhi's patience to the breaking point.

We can wheedle and noodle these guys towards the peace table as much as we can, but in the final analysis, if they decide they are going to fight, we are not going to be able to stop them.

[GOP_1900AD]

I'd be right in there along side India with my boot down on Pakistan's neck. We've been duped big time by these double crossers - they gave us what were really very minor concessions "to help the war on terror" but have continued licking Jiang Zemin's boots, continuing to build the joint Pak Navy - PLAN naval port at the entrance to the Strait of Hormuz, parterning with Pak and Myanmar on setting up PLA forward deployment bases (to make a surge for the Strait of Malacca) and continuing the rich ISI tradition of helping any and all enemies of the West while stealing US nuclear secrets. Nuke 'em....

What every God fearing Westerner needs to know about the Trans-Asian Axis, the ISI, 9/11, The PRC and Russia. Tip - Check out the Bodansky links in the paper titled "The Trans-Asian Axis Has Not Disappeared."

[Dog Gone]

This is a good read, but I don't know how much of Hoagland I believe. His premise is that Musharraf wants war in order to focus international attention on Kashmir.

I don't buy it. It essentially would be a bet that either the US or China would come to his aid in time to save his hide, before the nukes fly. That would be one hell of a reckless gamble.

It would be a foolish gamble if it's true that Musharraf knows about 50 - 60 terrorist camps in Kashmir that he won't shut down. If Hoagland is right about that number, the US should not only signal the go-ahead to India, but we should help bomb them ourselves.

In reality, a war between Indian and Pakistan today would almost certainly result in Musharraf being replaced somehow. I have trouble believing that he wants that to happen.

Maybe Musharraf has fooled me, and he's both evil and stupid. That certainly isn't my impression.

[swarthyguy]

Yes, but then who replaces him!

That's a recipe for inaction; Mullah Omar & Co., and WW2 enemies weren't thought about in terms of replacements.

[Dog Gone]

That's a recipe for inaction; Mullah Omar & Co., and WW2 enemies weren't thought about in terms of replacements.

Do a google search on Yalta and Potsdam sometime. You apparently skipped those chapters in your history book.

Having an endgame worked out in advance is critical. You may not have the details, but you have the long-term goal, and a way to achieve it. If not, you're so dumb you probably won't achieve the short-term goal anyway.

[keri]

Yep. We're likely to catch it.

You don't have any vacation plans within the next six months or so, do you?

[swarthyguy]

Not Stalin; Hitler and Tojo. Defeating Axis leaders was the primary function. Yalta and Potsdam were about organising Europe and some of the world.

[swarthyguy]

We don't know how the war on terror is going to end, either.