Musharraf calls on old comrades for support

PRESIDENT MUSHARRAF rallied former army commanders to his side yesterday in an attempt to shore up faltering support for him in the Pakistani Army. The meeting came after his hardline speech on Monday, which was seen by most analysts as an effort to rally the support of officers who do not want him to abandon support for the Kashmiri militants, whom they see as “freedom fighters”. So far he has managed to keep the military with him as he moved away first from Pakistan’s long-standing policy of supporting the Taleban in Afghanistan and then swung behind the US-led coalition against terrorism. Now they have become concerned that he should not yield to India under threat of war.

“President Musharraf is walking a tightrope,” Lieutenant-General (retired) Talat Masood said. “There is a strong feeling in the army that India is trying to humiliate them by dictating terms for peace.”

If the President made a radical shift away from support for Islamic fighters in Kashmir it would jeopardise his support in the army. Army support is a key element of the delicate balancing act that must be performed by the Pakistani leader, as he faces pressure from all sides. While being pressed by India and the international community to take firmer action to stop cross-border infiltration by Islamic militants, he is being accused by hardliners at home of compromising Pakistan’s interests.

His bold decision to crack down on Islamic militant groups, long backed by the military’s main spy agency, the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), has provoked a conservative backlash. Many observers believe that his decisions were not fully implemented and that the Islamic militants fighting against Indian forces continue to receive support.

“There is a limit to which the army can go with a policy of using force against those who are seen as fighting for Pakistan’s interests in Kashmir,” Lieutenant-General (retired) Hamid Gul, a former chief of the ISI, said.

A fiercely anti-American former commander, he accuses the President of “going too far in appeasing the West” and taking a “step back” on the Kashmir issue. “By calling those attacking the India forces terrorists, General Musharraf is only echoing the Indian position,” he said.

General Musharraf’s position has become more tenuous because of a growing feeling against the United States in the military. Many officers believe that Western countries, particularly the US, have not come to Pakistan’s support as it faces the threat of war from its nuclear rival.

The President has made changes to the army’s high command three times since October last year to sideline conservative generals opposed to his policy of joining the US led anti-terrorist coalition. The successive purges have helped the President to put liberal officers into key positions but many of those who have fallen from grace are still in the military headquarters and can capitalise on the emergency.

Most military observers agree that the President has put at risk his own survival by deciding to curb Islamic militancy. Security around him has already been tightened. His movements are kept secret because of growing fears of his meeting the fate of Anwar Sadat, the Egyptian President assassinated by Islamic militants after he made peace with Israel.<P

It's tough playing both ends against the middle. Now, despite the predominant media spin about the equivalent madness on both sides, Mush is faced with considering nuclear retaliation for a conventional indian Kashmir campaign.

What seems to be forgotten is that a precedent has been established for nuclear blackmail; not only of india but the entire world. Pakistan has explicitly threatened the FIRST USE of nukes.

The parties are kicking a lot of dirt on each other right now. Trying to provoke the other, or prove their manhood for their constituents back home. The Indians are inclined to go, the Pakis are doing their best to dare them to cross the line.

The leftist paradigm allows the weaker Pakis to attack India without penalty, while India must show "restraint". India appears well past restraint at this stage. Add to that the muslim 'humiliation' issue, so that the Pakis feel obligated to respond to the Indian build-up. India attacks conventionally due to some provocation, Pakistan respond conventionally, but is soon overwhelmed in the air and at sea. Some Paki field commander, about to be overrun, resorts to nukes (Paki C&C is notoriously bad - Musharraf claims he has no control, doesn't know where the nukes are. If they're in the field as reported, even if under "loyal" commanders, their security is significantly at risk). India responds in kind, heavily. Total elapsed time: 3-5 minutes. The World's Shortest and Deadliest War.

If the Pakis simply backed away from the border and put away their toys, world pressure on India to do likewise would be impossible to ignore. However, that would be 'humiliating' to the Pakis (Its a Muslim Thing, You Wouldn't Understand^©), so it doesn't seem likely. The US could put its troops in harms way. That would stop the Indis, but not the Paki terrorists. If India pulls back, the Paki fundamentalists would see that as a sign of victory and redouble their efforts. A "Mexican Standoff" of sorts.

Jihadis in Kashmir are the wildcard, no matter how many conversations occur between Washington, New Delhi and Islamabad, If the terrorists cannot be contained by Pakistan (very unlikely) or blocked by India (unlikely), further attacks in Indian-controlled Kashmir and elsewhere will occur. If sufficiently provocative, they could push New Delhi to act decisively.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.