Western governments are jubilant over the fall of Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovich, a Russian ally. They may be underestimating Vladimir Putin: Russia has the option to hasten Ukraine's slide into chaos and wait until the hapless European Union acquiesces to - if not begs for - Russian intervention.
That leaves the West with a limited number of choices. The first is to do nothing and watch the country spiral into chaos, with Russia as the eventual beneficiary. The second is to dig deep into its pockets and find US$20 billion or more to buy near-term popularity for a pro-Western government - an unlikely outcome. The third, and the most realistic, is to steer Ukraine towards a constitutional referendum including the option of partition.
#1
Very, very pleased at happened in the Ukraine. The young people who battled for freedom won. They fought hard and were determined. They are good Christian people. God Bless Ukraine. God Bless the European Union.
These are the college kids being cut down by Berkut (Special Police) using Kolesnikovs (AK 47s). And more unarmed young people moved up to protect the bodies against more fire, they themselves being cut down. These are a generation of people I support.
[DAWN] WITH an already fragile internal security situation, Pakistain does not need additional tension on the external front. That is why the positive vibes emerging from Quetta, where Pak and Iranian officials recently concluded a three-day meeting, need to be welcomed. The bilateral atmosphere has been vitiated of late by the kidnapping of five Iranian border guards, who were kidnapped inside their country and reportedly brought to Pakistain by Jaishul Adl, a Death Eater group. Things heated up when a senior Iranian official commented that Tehran could send troops inside Pakistain to recover the guards. Thankfully, cooler heads prevailed last week at the joint border commission meeting where officials from both countries announced that a joint panel would be formed to recover the Iranian soldiers. Joint border patrols were also proposed.
The fact is the Pakistain-Iran border is a long and porous one. Human traffickers use loopholes to surreptitiously slip migrants into Iran for onward journey to Europe, while drug smuggling in the area is also a problem. Yet the issue that has the ability to particularly damage bilateral relations is that of cross-border militancy. Jaishul Adl carried out a deadly attack in the Iranian province of Sistan-Baluchestan last year while the anti-Iranian Jundallah outfit, which has committed numerous terrorist attacks across the border, has been accused by some in Iran of finding sanctuary inside Pakistain. Both Pakistain and Iran face unrest in their border regions; hence close cooperation is required to prevent one country's soil from being used against the other by non-state actors. While Iran's talk of sending troops inside Pakistain in 'hot pursuit' is totally unacceptable, it is equally undesirable if faceless myrmidons are using safe havens inside Pakistain to foment trouble in Iran. Pakistain did well not to overreact to the recent rise in tensions. Instead of indulging in media diplomacy, both Islamabad and Tehran need to strengthen the lines of official communication in order to jointly address the problem of transnational militancy and other irritants that work to harm bilateral ties.
Posted by: Fred ||
02/25/2014 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[6 views]
Top|| File under: Govt of Pakistan
[DAWN] WITH parts of Hangu and Tirah valley pummelled by the military, the inevitable speculation has picked up again: is this a soft roll out of the much-talked-about military operation against the TTP in North Wazoo? Thus far, there is little indication that that may be the case -- though the intense speculation only adds to the pressure for one and also reinforces the notion of divisions between the PML-N government and the army high command on the best way ahead. For, as the weekend's strikes by the military indicate, the idea of limited retaliation by the military after TTP attacks against it has already progressed towards so-called pre-emptive action. But even as the military goes from strictly defensive actions to a mildly aggressive posture, the government continues to insist that talks are still very much the preferred option -- as long as the TTP wants to take up the government on its offer.
There are two elements here that merit comment: the army's preparedness and the government's negotiating strategy. On army preparedness, it is encouraging to note both the resolve to push back against the TTP militarily if necessary and a greater focus on targeted operations. However, facts are stubborn; statistics are more pliable... military resolve and better intelligence are necessary but not sufficient conditions for military success -- that would entail having a strategy that looks into both the medium- and long-term futures and ensuring that the civilian and military arms of the state can work together to deny bully boyz space in their remaining strongholds. Whether there is any thought being given to such concerns by the army high command is unknown. What is clear though is that the military will need to redefine its understanding of success if a decision is eventually taken to allow the military option to go ahead.
As for the government's negotiating strategy, at least this can be said for it: the craven and supine approach at the outset has gradually been replaced with a stronger and more convincing stance. Be it the insistence that talks must take place within the ambit of the Constitution or that any deal will be a localised affair to demand the TTP demonstrate its interest in a negotiated settlement by announcing a ceasefire first, the government -- whether by design or because of the pressure it has found itself under -- has finally put some genuine pressure on the TTP. If the government stands firm in the days ahead, it is the TTP that will have to provide answers first. Does the TTP have the ability to ensure bad boy violence ends across or the country? Is the TTP even genuinely interested in negotiations or is it just a time-buying tactic? If the government stands firm, the answers should be known shortly.
Posted by: Fred ||
02/25/2014 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[7 views]
Top|| File under: Govt of Pakistan
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
Wazoo
