|
Major pullout from Afghan border area
ISLAMABAD: While shifting tens of thousands of troops from the Pak-Afghan border to the Indo-Pak border, decision-makers in Islamabad have informed Washington that Pakistan was left with no other option after the failure of the Bush administration to defuse the tension with India which is escalating with each passing day.
| Remind me why we have the tension in the first place ... |
| Gosh. You mean they left their entire western border unprotected against incursions from Afghanistan? That was... ummm... brilliant. |
Sources said troops are being redeployed on a significant scale and the move is not meant only to send a message either to Americans or Indians. They said Pakistan could no longer risk its security by keeping its forces on the Pak-Afghan border when Americans are not in a position to prevail upon the Indian establishment to tone down its "hostile posture". Sources also said there is a growing anti-American sentiment across Pakistan, apart from resentment toward Indian efforts to build up pressure on Pakistan.
| I guess something that's full grown can be described as "growing." But I'd say Pak is making a major blunder here, unless B.O. lacks any testicles at all. |
When asked how many troops are being relocated from the Pak-Afghan border to the Indo-Pak border, military sources in Rawalpindi said almost 40 per cent of the 80,0000 troops are being shifted. They added that the remaining 60 per cent of the troops would continue to guard the Pak-Afghan border besides continuing military operations against Taliban-linked militants in the tribal region and would not be pulled back. The sources, however, added that if the Indian military build-up along the Indo-Pak border continues, 20 per cent more of the Pakistani troops could be shifted from the western borders in a span of one week.
 | Part of this build-up is the 14th Division as we noted yesterday, but the Paks continue to deploy forces near the Indian border. They really think the Indians are coming this time. |
Giving details of the Pakistani troops' redeployment, the military sources said two units of the Army had been withdrawn from Lower Dir district bordering the restive Bajaur Agency and Afghanistan's Kunar province while troops had also been pulled out of South Waziristan. The troops withdrawn from Lower Dir were not involved in any military operations and had been deployed there for back-up support.
| Translation: they were there for show, so as to fool gullible Western reporters, and sat in the garrisons while the Border troops and paramilitary police did the work .. or as much work as they were willing and tasked to do. |
The sources said some of the troops pulled out of the tribal areas were based in snow-bound areas where no fighting could take place at this time of the year. The sources added that the 10th Brigade of the Pakistan Army has been sent to Lahore, the 3rd Armoured Brigade of the Army had been ordered to march towards Jhelum, while the 10th and 11th divisions have been put on high alert and troops have been stationed in the Rajauri and Poonch sectors of Kashmir. To a question, the sources said shorter internal lines made full mobilisation faster and easier for Pakistan than for India. They pointed out that during 2001-2002 Pakistani troops had been deployed even before India had completed its own deployment, even though Pakistan began its deployment only in response to that of India. Approached for comments, Pakistani military spokesman Major General Athar Abbas said: "We do not want to create any war hysteria, but we have to take the minimum security measures to ward off any threat".
The sources added that the 10th Brigade of the Pakistan Army has been sent to Lahore, the 3rd Armoured Brigade of the Army had been ordered to march towards Jhelum, while the 10th and 11th divisions have been put on high alert and troops have been stationed in the Rajauri and Poonch sectors of Kashmir. To a question, the sources said shorter internal lines made full mobilisation faster and easier for Pakistan than for India. They pointed out that during 2001-2002 Pakistani troops had been deployed even before India had completed its own deployment, even though Pakistan began its deployment only in response to that of India.
Approached for comments, Pakistani military spokesman Major General Athar Abbas said: We do not want to create any war hysteria, but we have to take the minimum security measures to ward off any threat.
Pakistan is believed to have been producing more plutonium per year than India for several years and has between 20kg and 60kg of plutonium at present. But Pakistan, whose weapons program is generally uranium-based, has between 1,200kg and 1,250kg of highly enriched uranium, says the study.
Though a smaller arsenal does not matter much in the case of nuclear deterrence, if Pakistan overtakes India in atomic bombs, it will make it much more difficult for India to negotiate a fissile-materials cutoff treaty.
The ISIS study states that Pakistan has five functional ballistic missiles today, while India has a single Prithvi battlefield ballistic missile. Pakistan also has a defined nuclear command authority, while India is still groping to define its slogan of minimum nuclear deterrence. The question India must now answer is whether it should be satisfied with its conventional military superiority and allow Pakistan to maintain the parity it has achieved in the nuclear field or instead raise its nuclear and missile capacity citing a threat from China as the major justification.
But several strategic analysts, particularly those with a military background, say that India has not been building bombs since the 1998 tests and has been practising a moratorium not only on testing weapons, but also on building them, though they are not happy with the situation. Indeed, in their view, New Delhi allowed itself to be persuaded by the US to practice strategic restraint, though under another name, defence posture.
Posted by: john frum 2008-12-28 |
