You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Submit your comments on this article
India-Pakistan
Asia Times: "Musharraf cooks up an American banquet"
2003-06-18
Found via the Brothers Judd.
By Syed Saleem Shahzad
Pakistani President General Pervez Musharraf's visit to the United States and his meeting with President George W Bush on June 24 are likely to lay the foundations for landmark changes in Pakistan's policies, including those on Israel, Kashmir, its nuclear program and the army. Sources in the Foreign Office familiar with the agenda say that key decisions likely to be agreed on by Musharraf and Bush at Camp David include the following:
  • A clear road map for resolution of the Kashmir conflict in which the "Chanab" formula, which envisages the division of Kashmir along religious lines, is likely to be adopted. Thus, the Muslim-majority areas would be allowed to join Pakistan, while the areas where Hindus and Buddhists are in the majority would remain with India.
    That would be rather amazing.
  • A rollback in Pakistan's nuclear and missile program pursuant to the resolution of the Kashmir issue.
  • Deployment of Pakistani troops in Iraq, subject to a financial deal to be agreed on by the US and Pakistan.
    Which would free up some US divisions for . . . other things.
  • Renewed assistance in Afghanistan to contain the burgeoning revival of the Taliban movement. Before the elections scheduled in Afghanistan later in the year, Pakistan will help the US to eliminate the power vacuum in the country by mediating talks with the various Afghan groups, including the Hizb-i-Islami Afghanistan of Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, the Taliban and other Pashtun factions.
  • Cutbacks in the Pakistani armed forces. Pakistan has already laid off 300,000 personnel.
    And to really gild the lily . . .
  • Recognition for Israel. Initially, the two countries would establish "track II" diplomacy, and once the grounds were prepared, Pakistan would announce its recognition of the Israeli state. In return, the US would waiver US$1.8 billion in bilateral debt. The US has already written off $1 billion in return for Islamabad's support after the September 11 attacks and for its reversal of support for the Taliban.
. . . All of the issues on the table in Washington, if agreed on and fully implemented, would dovetail with US aspirations for the South Asian region, and would significantly marginalize China, Iran and Russia. On the domestic front, though, Musharraf's reputation in some hardline Islamic quarters as a stooge for the US would be further damaged, raising the prospects of more internal strife.
Don't know if this is for-real, or just someone trying to sell someone else a bridge in Brooklyn, but if it's a for-real, it would be a major diplomatic coup for us and a brave move for Musharaaf.
The same writer had a piece on the U.S. turning to the Talibs to settle Afghanistan last week. Either he knows something none of the rest of us know, or he's thinking wishfully. It's an idea that stinks out loud. If that part of it smells, the rest of it's probably from the same source. The Kashmir deal would be unacceptable to the jihadis because it would give part of Kashmir to India, unacceptable to India because it'd give most of it to Pakland — because the Paks and their front organizations have killed or chased out the Pandits. Given the level of sweet reason prevailing in Pakistan, I'd call chances of diplomatic relations with Israel a pipedream. Having Pak troops in Iraq would also be a crummy idea; the biggest trouble areas we have are the Sunni areas (read wahhabi), so adding Sunni troops to the mix isn't the way to go. In fact, adding Muslim troops into the mix is probably a crummy idea in general.
Posted by:Mike

#7  Um...180 degrees in what direction? From Jerusalem to Mecca, 180 degrees would probably be out in the Indian Sea...any mosques on Diego Garcia? No? Good!
Posted by: Frank G   2003-06-18 21:15:53  

#6  You know,I keep hearing about this"Farthest Mosque"thing it seems to me the farthest mosque would be the closest Mosque 180degrees opposite Mecca.Anybody know where that would be?
Posted by: raptor   2003-06-18 20:25:10  

#5  Raptor---Mecca is at Lat N21d29m Long E39d45m

The opposite side of the globe for the Farthest Mosque would be Lat S21d29m Long W140d15m, which is 180 deg from Mecca in longitude.

That puts you smack dab in the South Pacific between S America and Australia, roughly speaking. Put the mosque on a barge and park it out there. A good place for it, heh heh.
Posted by: Alaska Paul   2003-06-18 21:33:19  

#4  Pakistani "diplomacy":

"For $ 1.8 billion we'll recognize Israel. For 1.6 we'll establish an embassy but only send a charge d'affaires, no embassador. For 1 billion we'll establish a consulate, no embassy. For 800 million we'll establish an economic and cultural office only. For 500 million we'll establish only an official tourism office. For 100 million we'll have a foreign ministry official go on vacation there every once in a while. On the other hand, for 3 billion we'll recognize Israel and establish an embassy in Jerusalem. For 5 billion Perv will address the Knesset. For 7 billion Perv will offer to pray at the Western Wall. For 50 billion Pakistani archaeologists and Islamic scholars will attempt to prove that the "farthest mosque" mentioned in the Koran was not on Temple Mount in Jerusalem, but was actually located in Karachi, and that Muhammed ascended to heaven from Pakistan"
Posted by: liberalhawk   2003-06-18 11:50:41  

#3  This makes no sense. Large numbers of Hindus and Sikhs have fled Kashmir to escape Muslim terrorism. Chunks of what is now Pakistan were Hindu majority areas pre-partition. Will Pakistan now hand over those areas to India? Will India have to hand over to Pakistan areas that are majority Muslim?
Posted by: Zhang Fei   2003-06-18 11:16:28  

#2  A clear road map for resolution of the Kashmir conflict in which the "Chanab" formula, which envisages the division of Kashmir along religious lines, is likely to be adopted. Thus, the Muslim-majority areas would be allowed to join Pakistan, while the areas where Hindus and Buddhists are in the majority would remain with India.

This would involve India handing over a large chunk of its Kashmir over to Pakland. I can say with a lot of assurance that nobody in India will ever agree to that. If the Islamofascist want to live under Sharia they are welcome to piss off to NWFP.
Posted by: rg117   2003-06-18 06:56:13  

#1  Fred:

@#$%^& Netscape bunged up the formatting commands! Please fix the hilite.

First line should read "Found via the Brothers Judd." with an appropriate hyperlink to http://brothersjudd.blogspot.com
Posted by: Mike   2003-06-18 06:31:38  

00:00