Af Pak Events

The intensity of war in Af-Pak has picked up considerably in September beginning last week of August. The pattern indicates flexing of muscle by the Punjabi Taliban and TTP across Pakistan. The numbers in Pakistan include 108 civilians, mainly Shia minority, killed and 400 wounded. In Afghanistan the coalition forces were able to kill 64 “terrorists” of the Haqqani group in three separate incidents. It included the coalition forces repelling  Haqqani attacks at Salerno,Chapman and Margah Forward Operating Bases. The events unfolded as enumerated:

On 23 August,  the Taliban targeted mosques to take out pro-government leaders in coordinated attacks in South Waziristan, killing 25 people in three bombings and suicide attacks. The largest strike took place at a mosque in the town of Wana in South Waziristan. In the explosion, 18 people were killed.There have been 23 major attacks on mosques and other Islamic institutions in Pakistan since December 2007, according to information compiled by The Long War Journal.

On the same day Five terrorists and seven civilians were were killed when unmanned US strike aircraft fired three missiles at a compound in the village of Danda Darpa Khel, a village just outside of Miramshah in North Waziristan, according to Dawn.

On 26 August, the US  struck targets  with a predator attack in Kurram which killed four “terrorists”.

On 28 August coalition and Afghan troops beat back a complex Haqqani Networkassault on two bases in eastern Afghanistan, killing more than 20 fighters and a senior commander during and after the attack. The Haqqani Network “simultaneously launched” coordinated attacks on Forward Operating Bases at Salerno and Chapman. As per ISAF, 30 Haqqani Network fighters including 13 wearing suicide vests, were killed during the Aug. 28 assault on two US bases in Khost. On 02 September, as per ISAF press release, more than 20 members of the Haqqani Network were killedafter launching an early morning attack on Outpost at Margah in the Bermel district of Paktika province. On  the same day unmanned US strike aircraft attacked compounds in two separate strikes  in the Taliban-controlled tribal agency of North Waziristan killing at least 15 Taliban as per media reports.

In the meanwhile, despite the floods, Shia minorities were attacked in two separate incidents in Lahore on 01 September and Quetta on 03 September. 29 people were reported killed and more than 200 people were wounded in bombings by Lashkar-e-Jhangvi al Almi, another name for the so-called Punjabi Taliban, during religious processions. The Lashkar-e-Jhangvi in particular is well known for carrying out sectarian terror attacks against minority Shia, Ahmadis, Sufis, and Christians in Pakistan. In Quetta, a suicide car bomb was detonated in the midst of a Qods Day protest held by Shia Muslims who oppose Israel’s control of Jerusalem. 54 people( some reports claim 76) were killed and nearly 200 were wounded, according to reports from Geo News and Dawn. (Note: The figures have been compiled from the Long War Journal.)

On 01 September, the US government  designated the Movement of the Taliban in Pakistan as a terrorist entity, and  named Hakeemullah and Waliur Rehman Mehsudas specially designated global terrorists. Hakeemullah and Waliur now have $5 million bounties out for information leading to their capture and prosecution. On 03 September the Pakistani Taliban threatened to attack foreign aid workers delivering relief for the floods that have paralyzed much of the country.

Analysis – Pakistan’s Sectarian Violence

The patterns of these figures indicate the renewed vigour in conduct of suicide attacks and bombings by groups of all hues,backed by Al Qaeda, especiallythe attacks against religious minorities, to ignite a sectarian crisis in Pakistan. The Quetta attack immediately heightened tension between the Hazara ethnic minority – which is Shia – and the city’s Sunni majority Pushtun population. Immediately after the attack, armed Hazara men took over the streets in Quetta.

Lahore and what is happening there is important to Pakistan’s ethnic map. As per an analysis over Radio Australia by MJ Gohel, chief executive officer of the security research group, Asia Pacific Foundation,whoever wants to destabilise the country or the government has to go after Lahore. Militants in Pakistan believe that if they can turn Lahore into a battleground, then there is little to prevent the Taliban influence from spreading right across the entire country and turn it into a Taliban state.

The rise in violence levels indicates that Al-Qaeda-linked militants are exploiting the fact that the catastrophic monsoon floods that have engulfed Pakistan have put authorities under severe pressure. This gives them adequate levey to perpetuate sectarian clashes which when combined with the after affects of the floods would create the desired environment for further radicalisation of the society – an opportunity the Taliban are eagerly waiting  for.

The procession in Quetta was in observance of Al Quds Day on the last Friday of the fasting period. Al Quds is the name of the historic mosque in East Jerusalem, which is under Israeli control since 1967. Ever since Israel occupied East Jerusalem in 1967, Muslims all over the world observe the last Friday of the fasting period as Al Quds Day to remind each other that Al Quds is still under the control of Israel.This call was given by Ayatollah Khomeini in a message issued by him to all the Muslims of the world—-Shias as well as Sunnis—in August 1979. The Pakistan Taliban and the Sunnis in general believe that  Shia Iran collaborated with US for the invasion of Sunni Iraq. The attacks on Shias observing Al Quds Day in Quetta were meant to punish not only the Shias of Pakistan, but also Iran. This would fan fires amongst Iran establishment to vitiate the environment further.

The Pakistan Army has not been silent through all this. As per claims in the The News , the Pakistan Army is selectively eliminating Taliban commanders and killing Taliban prisoners. While Taliban claims should be taken  sceptically, there does appear to be some truth to this report. There have been several reports of Taliban commanders being killed months after being arrested. These could be the bad Taliban not colluding with the Pakistan Army. On ground this widens the rift between Taliban and the Pakistan Army against the theory of “Good – Bad Taliban”. The Taliban and their acolytes have the easier route of putting the establishment under greater strain by inciting the ethnic violence.

Apart from their role in Pakistan, the TTP under Hakimullah Mehsud, has become ambitious and has been engaging in executing missions in Afghanistan and overseas.This is evident from the US charge of Mehsud’s alleged involvement in killing of seven Americans at a CIA base in Afghanistan and the confessions of Shahzad the NY bomber.

Analysis Afghanistan

The attacks on ISAF posts and bases with suicidal intent  exhibit growing confidence of the Taliban. Despite suffering heavy casualties they have maintained reasonable control in Kandahar / Southern Afghanistan and have increased their influence North of Kabul in Mazar-e-Sharief, KonduZ and Herat. There are also reports that they have joined hands or reached an understanding with various factional militant group in the North bordering Iran and the Central Asian Republic including factions of the erstwhile Northern Alliance. This has ominous portents for ISAF which is far too stretched with the ANA and ANP not yet totally effective. Infiltration of Taliban in Afghan scurity forces is another thorny issue. The forthcoming elections will provide Taliban and al Qaeda with adequate opportunities to discredit the process through violence.

The primary targets of predator strikes seem to be Al Qaeda, the Haqqani Network, and the Movement of the Taliban in Pakistan, especially North Waziristan – a terrorist training and breeding ground where the Pakistan Army has not launched operations as yet.

Roundup

The floods have changed the landscape of Pakistan but not the mindset. There are ominous signs that the combined effects of the floods, inefficiency of the civil government, still hawkish India centric focus of Pakistan Army and the upper hand gained by the militant groups in fanning the sectarian fires will result in a fractured future for the Pakistani polity – at least for now. The current trend of violence may continue.

The Pakistan Taliban has threatened to carry out attacks in the US and Europe “very soon”, two days after US added the Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) to its list of “foreign terrorist organizations”. “We will launch attacks in America and Europe very soon,” said Qari Hussain Mehsud, who is the Taliban’s top trainer of suicide bombers and Hakeemullah Mehsud’s top deputy.

Afghanistan awaits the surge after the Iraqi pullout and it would be interesting to see General Patraeus’s strategies including the plan for the end game. 

Afterthought

Then there was the ISI claim of India being relegated by militant threat in Pakistan. No such luck. Amidst diverse  reports on the subject,  The Nation rubbished that the militant threat could ever overtake India as enemy number one. “There is no change in Pakistan’s stance vis a vis India”. The recent instance of Pakistan needlessly hesitant in accepting India’s flood relief very well exposes the typical Pakistani mindset. As per us, this claim is purely tactical; in their heart of hearts, their mortal enemy is still India.  The Pakistani establishment has brought upon its people a virulently anti-Indian and doctored version of history. The venom is too deep seated and only an internal collapse and balkanisation of the Pakistan state can bring some genuine drift in the mindset. Under these conditions, the scenario of a lasting peace with Pakistan appears extremely remote. In the meantime Indian eyes are temporarily on the Dragon.

Related Articles

• Haqqani network spreads its attacks against America across eastern Afghanistan(telegraph.co.uk)
• US Treasury sanctions Pakistani Taliban, top two leaders (longwarjournal.org)
• 20 Haqqani Network fighters killed in failed assault on US base in Paktika(longwarjournal.org)
• Pakistan Taliban Claim Suicide Bombing Killing 43 Shiite Muslims (huffingtonpost.com)
• US Predator strike kills 12 in North Waziristan (longwarjournal.org)

Analysts are an intriguing lot. They want to analyse, dissect and lay bare all aspects of an issue till the issue pleads for mercy. Indus Waters are one such issue which analysts are very fond of raking up as it attracts eyeballs being an Indo Pak affair. More so, the floods have focused attention of the world on the waters so why not bring it up?

The fact that there is a model for sharing resources of all the six rivers flowing into Pakistan through the Indus Water Treaty of 1960 is known. The fact is that the Indus water Treaty has so far stood the test of time. Few countries in the world have signed and honoured such treaties as the two nations have; a fact often forgotten. India has just accepted the Bagliar Award and Pakistan has accepted publicly India’s assurance of no diversion of Chenab waters. India also has the Ganges Agreement with Bangla Desh that has held in place regardless of ups and downs.

Some perspectives from an award winning essay are here.  What at times remains hidden behind the facade of politicking on the issue is the management of these resource. Whether India or Pakistan like it or not the glaciers are melting. Soon, I can’t predict how soon, the flooding will cease to be the problem in favour of droughts causing mayhem of gigantic proportions.What will we share when the source dries out. Steven Solomon, the author of “Water: The Epic Struggle for Wealth, Power, and Civilization ”has this to say on the issue in The NY Times :

In March, the State Department announced that water scarcity had been upgraded to “a central U.S. foreign policy concern.” Pakistan is at the center of it.

This is because a widespread water shortage in Pakistan would further destabilize the fractious country, hurting its efforts to root out its resident international terrorists. The struggle for water could also become a tipping point for renewed war with India. The jihadists know how important the issue is: in April 2009, Taliban forces launched an offensive that got within 35 miles of the giant Tarbela Dam, the linchpin of Pakistan’s hydroelectric and irrigation system.

and

The Pakistanis may never come to love us. But as the current spectacle of Islamic jihadists bringing emergency aid to flooded areas warns us, we can’t afford to ignore Pakistan’s looming freshwater crisis.

David Rothkopf writing in Foreign Policy(FP) argues  that Obama should use his visit in November as an opportunity to get India and Pakistan to talk water and resolve other vexed issues based on a “Nudge” model by America. Nothing wrong with the argument theoretically. Will it also apply to Kashmir, Gilgit Baltistan and terror? In this complex and most dangerous conflict of interests between the two neighbours, reason has seldom had a chance. Some in the West strategic circles argue that the US government is still not doing as much as it should in terms of contributing at a systemic level to helping the Pakistanis and Indians turn this nightmare (floods) into a strategically significant trust-building event. An Indian view is here.

The American media overdrive focusing on water is a clear effort to get India and Pakistan to talk – somehow, in the best American interests. Water is just one such excuse through which the self appointed interlocutors may spur even track two negotiations by highlighting the acute shortage of fresh water in Pakistan.

However the American interests are not as important as putting up a review of water sharing in the region including India, Pakistan, China and Bangladesh. This is a big bite to be taken one at a time but finally the relationship between Indus river system, the Ganges and Tsangpo has to be strengthened to mutually benefit the region.

Of interest to note is that China has signed no treaty and also does not recognise the UN Protocol on water sharing by upper and mid riparians.

 It thus has problems with Russia, Vietnam, Burma, Cambodia, Thailand, India, Bangla Desh, and Pak on water sharing as all its decisions with respect to water have been unilateral. In light of this discussion, America’s polite intervention may be to score over public opinion in Pakistan. China it may not. Obama knows that the real problem is with the upper riparian, China, which US will not be willing to buck.

“What we need is a trans-boundary water opportunity analysis”. Transcending from “dividing” to “sharing”  the resources, as articulated by A Rafay Alam, a respected Pakistani in the “News” in July this year. A bold piece considering the traditional rivalries between India and Pakistan where each side has an attitude focusing on a blame game. Then there is the mistrust that characterises Indo-Pakistani relations, gross mismanagement of water resources within Pakistan, outdated irrigation practices, poorly planned agricultural zoning, a rising population and resultant water scarcity that make “discussion” mandatory beyond Kashmir and terror. Whether the politicians on both sides will agree to such a discussion is a major stumling block towards creating a universally acceptable formula that creates a win-win situation for both the nations – even if it has to be brokered by Obama.

For Obama this may be  a necessity borne out of diffusing tensions between the two nuclear neighbours as his “big-ticket” outcome of the Indian visit but for the region it is more a matter of survival. The fact that the West originated debate is being picked up in South Asia is a factor of Western world’s attempt to facilitate some progress on Indo Pakistan relations that have a direct impact on the “India Centric Pakistan”. This according to the West will open the doors for other bilateral issues to be resolved. Some in America see this as a strategic opportunity towards perception management post the floods.

Finally, however, the solution has to be based on an economic resource sharing formula that benefits both sides, as per observations of Elinor Ostrom, the Nobel Memorial Prize winner for Economic Sciences this year for her study of shared resources. This may appear to be a motivated article from a Western world view but as is the case in all the water wars since biblical times, this is as good an opportunity as any other to get a move on the subject. However, the issue of upper and lower riparian meets a dead-end when it comes to China and whether Obama would want to push his luck here is a matter of debate.

Alam suggests a track II channel to discuss this issue till adequate political will is generated on both sides – I differ. The track II channel in an Indo Pakistani environment is prone to sabotage by the establishment as has been the experience in the past. This cat has to be belled despite her ferocity. It would also tilt  international opinion in favour of the region – especially Pakistan.

Utopian, but if followed it may end up as a formula with China(??) and Bangladesh too – water for peace!  An earlier discussion Water Wars had articulated a similar thought.

The foreign policy experts need to leverage this great resource to harbinger peace in the region.

The question nonetheless is, “Will Obama bite the bait and will hawks in India and Pakistan let him?”

Obama’s watered down version of “Mission Accomplished” statement originating from the Oval office, rather than a warship on high seas, is indicative of a lot that America has endured in Iraq and is likely to endure in Afghanistan. These wars were not Obama’s choices but inheritance. Inheritance that he was well seized of when he took the plunge for presidency. That Afghanistan today has turned into Obama’s Iraq is a well known fact. As the Time articulates:

In his 2007 Iraq address, Obama cited his own words from the famous October 2002 speech he gave opposing the then coming Iraq invasion: Obama warned that the war could lead to “a U.S. occupation of undetermined length, at undetermined cost, with undetermined consequences.” It was a prescient warning. But in a twist of fate, those words might also apply to Obama’s troubled war in Afghanistan. As if commemorating America’s inconclusive exit from Iraq wasn’t already hard enough.

The biggest criticism, though, is that President Obama fudged on his campaign promise to end the war and remove all troops from the country by May 2010. Perceptions of a ‘complete withdrawal” remain contested across the political landscape in US.

Then there is this major blot on the US interventionism in foreign countries from Vietnam to Afghanistan – America never went in either of these places with a clear end state in mind. Like in Vietnam,in Iraq, US fell into the trap of mission creep. Their initial rationale was to find and eliminate Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction.

In their absence the US stayed on to topple Saddam Hussein’s government and dismantle his political party, military and government services. Once they had destroyed a brutal but none-the-less functioning government, they set up a U.S.-led Provisional Authority to replace it.

And then they stuck around to help write them a constitution, hold democratic elections, form a government, and train new military and security forces.

Afghanistan appears headed the same way but will be a much harder nut to crack. US is repeating the same mistakes here too – End State!  But they have the advantage of Pakistan fighting with and against them in this war to complicate issues further. Interestingly, Iran remains the common factor in both these conflicts. The power vacuum that Obama leaves behind has been articulated well by Guardian in this post.

Answering  the basic question of conditions conducive to a pull out, – the American perspective is clear – America seems to have had enough of this war in blood and money and wants out. Perfectly understandable after seven long years in combat for oil. Iraq has also paid in blood and oil for Saddam’s fictional weapons of mass destruction. An estimated expenditure of $ 750 billions ( more than a trillion if you count add ons in terms of managing the war casualties) has done little more than established the image of America as a war monger in a “War on Islam”, producing more anti american Jihadis in the bargain. This has magnified the threats to American homeland security manifold.

Iraq is still in a turmoil and suffers more civilian casualties at the hands of other Iraqis than the Americans. The Republic of Iraq or the Iraqi al Qaeda is more powerfultoday than ever. As per an APestimate the number of civilians killed in July in Iraq exceed the number of casualties in Afghanistan.

The Shia – Sunni divide is wider now than ever with Iran ready to extract its pound of flesh. The Kurds would be awaiting their turn in the governance model which will generate more conflict. More than 4,400 US troops have died in Iraq since the invasion, a number dwarfed by the estimated 100,000 civilians killed, according to Iraq Body Count.

As per Iraqi diaspora Saddam’s days were better in all hues of civil life. The systems worked and there was general happiness barring a few dictatorial glitches. Iraqis seemed unconvinced that the official end of US combat operations would herald an improvement in security. As per Middle East observers, the U.S. cuts and runs, have paved the way for Iran to declare victory. Iran has emerged the only beneficiary of the U.S. occupation and its withdrawal. Iraqis now think of their security, of their livelihood, of their wealth, their country’s future and the future of their children.While many Iraqis have welcomed the withdrawal, others say they believe it is happening too soon and that the country is not ready to manage its own security. Al Zazeera ran a debate on Iraq after America recently. The deliberations argued that peace would be fragile and America may have to return.

The withdrawal of US combat troops from Iraq has begun and by the end of August there will be fewer than 50,000 left in the country. But although the so-called combat brigades may be gone, they are being replaced by equal numbers of contractors. And just this week, on one day alone, 13 separate attacks across the country provided a chilling reminder of the perilous conditions confronting the local forces.

With violence on the increase and politicians locked in a stalemate, can the Iraqiarmy ensure the country’s security or will US soldiers have to return?

Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki says that the conditions are conducive for a US draw down in an “Independent” Iraq,which as per Biden is not disengagement.

“If the politicians continue fighting on the chairs, the situation will get worse,” as per Salah Abu al-Qassim, 36, a trader in Shorja market in central Baghdad.

Much against Maliki’s claims the political situation in Iraq is still fragile. As per media reports,Iraq’s top army officer, Lieutenant General Babaker Zebari, warned on August 11 that a complete withdrawal of US troops at the end of 2011 was premature, and urged politicians that the American military should stay until 2020.

This, however, is a backgrounder on shape of things to come in Iraq post the withdrawal.

Then there is the question of post withdrawal funding and its ramifications.

Many believe that by 1973, the U.S. military had a formula in place that would end its involvement in Vietnam and ensure South Vietnam’s stability after the withdrawal of U.S. forces. Yet after the signing of the Paris peace agreement that year, Congress began cutting Nixon administration requests for military and economic assistance to South Vietnam. Two years later, Saigon fell to North Vietnam. Congress must not repeat the mistakes of the Vietnam era and cut off support to Iraq as our forces redeploy. Fortunately, the differences between post-combat Iraq and post-combat Vietnam are greater than their similarities. Only the most strident antiwar critics reject the success of the surge in Iraq. Even Obama, a onetime critic of the strategy, now recognizes its success.

Experts and think tanks in US would be busy finding similarities in lessons learnt in Iraq for application in Afghanistan.The main being the enormous difficulties of trying to force a country into a political system that the majority of its citizens neither want nor are prepared to sustain on their own.

Hopefully the 50,000 left behind don’t push their luck too far. We hope Obama’s prophecy of “a U.S. occupation of undetermined length, at undetermined cost, with undetermined consequences is proved wrong and this cycle of “invasion, surge and withdrawal” thought through as the biggest lesson of contemporary military history.

Related Articles

• Obama’s Iraq Address: Afghan War Looms Large over Speech (time.com)
• Interview: Iraq warns others away as U.S. ends combat (reuters.com)

Two Fronts

India today is passing through interesting and challenging times along its periphery. Pakistan, with its focus on Afghanistan despite the floods, has not lost its balance, and continues fomenting trouble in Kashmir and elsewhere in India. Kayani, with an extended term on American insistence, has redoubled his efforts at keeping India out of any progress in Indo Pak relations. This was evident in routing India’ s aid through UN and disallowing Indian aid workers visas.

The situation in Afghanistan is spiralling out of control for the US and Pakistan is trying its best to keep India out of any political settlement there. This blog has covered this aspect extensively.

China has opened up another front for India with pressure all along the LAC, as evident from a range of its actions in the region – from denying Visas to Kashmiris to asserting its claims on Arunachal Pradesh. The Chinese military developments in Tibet are a cause for concern at Delhi.

Further, the Chinese policy of “String of Pearl with Golden Beads” has put additional strain on relationship between the two countries. Pakistan is the prized golden bead and is always keen to provide collusive support to China. Then there are Nepal, Bangladesh, Burma and Sri Lanka, where the increasing Chinese influence is giving India sleepless nights. This complicates the two front theory. Thus pressure is being put on India from two and more fronts even without going to war. In addition, there are bound to be proxy pressures mounted on India from the string of pearls. The Indian response mechanism can not overlook this and  therefore has to keep all options open and work accordingly to manage its resources.

The discussions in the previous post amply highlight that India will have to maintain its trajectory despite China. Strategically China will continue to talk of peace but the tactical needling to keep India off balance will be its preferred option. Especially, with collusive Pakistani support. The larger aim would be to keep India engaged with Pakistan while maintaining pressure along a score of disputed issues. Ajay Das responding to the previous post has made an interesting but realistic observation:

Few pacifists amongst Indian strategic community often highlight asymmetries in Sino-Indian economic growth rates; military capabilities; infrastructure etc to make Indian leadership believe the futility of competing with China – ohh, we can’t catch up attitude. Let’s remember that POLITICAL WILL which represents NATIONAL WILL in a democracy, is a key component of NATIONAL POWER. China itself is nowhere near to achieving parity with US economic, technological or military might, yet it successfully applies its NATIONAL POWER against the US and other nations – it is more a manifestation of its POLITICAL WILL than the mere summation of its hard and soft elements of power. Let us face it squarely that there is no option for India to compete with China, deter and even overwhelm its anti-India moves. For that to happen, a time-bound capability enhancement program has to be in place and then pursued.This must be preceded by articulating and stating India’s strategic intent most unambiguously.

The text in bold is India’s gravest weakness as articulated in four previous posts. If only India had a strategic decision making structure which could articulate it’s short and long term strategic vision, it would have managed a better periphery – possibly a periphery of peace. This would need intelligent commitment of resources and application of policies in pursuance of National Interests. A strategic relationship with America could hold the key to emerging picture in the sub continent – a possibility which may fructify during Obama’s November visit – if all goes well.

Border management is one of the important aspects in India’s internal as well as external security. The country has 15106 km of land border running through 92 districts in 17 states and a coastline of 7516 km touching 13 states and union territories. India’s total number of islands is 1197 which accounts to a stretch of 2094 km additional border or coastline. This compounds the problems of internal security and border management manifold. Even in peace the commitment and demands on security forces ties down bulk of the security forces in border management.

The Beleaguered Backyard

The rise of fundamentalism and separatist activity in the valley, even though for material gains to Pakistan, is a headache Indian Security establishment would have wanted to wish away at  a time when democratic forces were making some headway in stabilising the situation there. The political turmoil as a result of the stone pelters undermines the efforts of the ruling NC / Congress government, exposes the chinks in the political processes and marginalises the masses. The post ” The Larger Game ” has covered this adequately.

The reader participation clearly suggests that concerted political efforts are required to steer the valley towards peace. Simultaneously the security forces have to graduate to the new paradigms of riot control while keeping the insurgency under check.

North East continues to burn and no political solutions appear to be in sight. The issue of Nagalim and resultant blockade of Manipur exposes our claims that situation has been brought under control.

Naxalism has gained potency, courtesy our political and bureaucratic mismanagement, and now stares at us as the biggest threat to National Security. The stories Dantewada Again and NaxalRage cover most of the aspects of management of this bleeding ulcer. The ultimate measure of success, though can only be a qualitative improvement in the quality of life of the people of the Red Corridor, through a composite approach. There is growing evidence that the Naxals are being funded and fueled by our adversaries who are fishing in the troubled waters here.

I dare not enter into the domain of right wing violence and economic wars being unleashed against the country lest it prompts the readers to ask “What is Right”?.

Prognosis

Considering the troubles along the periphery and our beleaguered backyard, we need to get our act together in putting suitable structures and mechanisms at the National and state levels to take stock of these multiple threats. Being strictly matters of National Security, they need to be manned and managed by experts in the field who have spent a life time managing security. Generalists won’t do, Generals will. These structured mechanisms need to articulate and develop suitable road maps to take us out of the mess we are in. Coherently and collectively.

To end this piece from an observation from a very respected analyst would be in order: 

Hambantotta was first offered to us by Sri Lanka. We demurred, because of appeasing the Tamils…It is again on offer for Phase 2 devp. Will we agree? I wonder.

Pak is something that obsesses us and methinks, quite unfairly at that. I do think we need to move on and not have a bleeding heart if they self destruct, because even when they do, there is precious little we can or would do about it. Kautilya’s realpolitik is indeed needed by us. Our real worry is China in the long term and in the shorter term, getting our smaller neighbours less Pak to bat for us.

The real problem is that we do not have cognisable Perspective Planning and we exclude the military from national decision making. Also, there is no follow up on military gains in Counter Insurgency operations (see Kashmir) because politicians distrust the military/do not comprehend national strategic needs and methods. Ends, Ways and Means are neither taught at Mussourie nor Parliament. Cleverness and obfuscation is, laced in endemic corruption and professional immorality. Shame.

It is time we focused on this vital aspect of governance. Knee jerk reactions will keep us mired in trouble from all fronts and burn the backyard – deeper.

The latest round of events of snapping Defence ties based on rejection of Visa to a General  has cast a shadow over the uneasy relations between the two Asian Tigers and has started a fresh debate on the Sino Indian relations.

The relations between the two neighbours have never been easy at the best of times, ever since the 1962 War. However despite booming trade between the two countries this recent bout of needling appears to be motivated. Of late China has increased the stakes in Arunachal Pradesh and issued “plain paper” visas to Indians born in Jammu and Kashmir. Then there was the uproar about Dalai Lama’s visit to Arunachal Pradesh. Increased border violations have been noticed in Ladakh and Arunachal Pradesh. Chinese activities in Indian neighbourhood – its plans to dam the Brahmaputra and extend the Tibet rail link into Nepal are other aspects of continuing Chinese assertiveness. The operationalisation of rail and additional air infrastructure in Tibet for the first time are again signals of an assertive China.

This post, though not related to the incident perse, throws some light on the dynamics of “and” or “versus” theories in the relationship between the two countries. Then there are colours of American and Pakistan relations painting this relationship.

What we hear least about is the tangled weave of national interests that means China courts Pakistan as a proxy for it’s own competition with India, to the point where Pakistani experts concede that, given a choice between alliance with the US or China, Pakistan’s military will choose China “every day of the week, and twice on Fridays”.

This relationship is at the back of a lot of Chinese man oeuvres in the region to keep America and India at bay.

As per Vikram Sood, the ex Chief of RAW,  US and China have their own geostrategic rivalries to settle, and the Chinese may have assessed that their moment has come.

“Yet China remains concerned with its intricate trade and financial links with the US, and also with the security of its trade and supply routes that transit the Malacca Straits. It has endeavoured to develop extensive land routes through Central Asia, but these are inadequate. It is a matter of time before China will make its presence more visible in the Indian Ocean. It has port facilities in Hambantota and Gwadar, and a presence in the Arabian Sea as it battles Somali pirates. China has expanded its contacts with Iran, more in competition with Russia than the US, it seeks mineral wealth in Afghanistan, its relations with Pakistan need no elucidation and it has developed strong ties with Burma.” This Burmese angle may resolve China’s Malacca Dilemma.

China’s enunciation of its strategic interests in South China Sea and the Yellow Sea through naval exercises as a caution on US – Korean enterprise in Jul 2010 is a reminder that China is now ready to assert itself.  Thus while we may agonise over challenges across our land frontiers, we would be ignoring the new challenge in the Indian Ocean unless we plan countermeasures now. He further articulates that:

China pretty much owns Pakistan and will own Afghanistan within a decade.  India would be better served, in my opinion, by turning its back upon both in their entirety, rather than shackle itself to a ball and chain designed by China. Although national pride demands that something, anything, be “done now” about terrorism, the truth is that such attacks are gnats stinging an elephant, doing more damage by distraction than by the pain they inflict.

The recent concessions by Pakistan to China over the Karakoram highway and now greater autonomy to PLA Army to operate in Gilgit and Baltistan underscores Pakistan’s need to play by Chinese rules in keeping India away. In the bargain connecting China to Iran for gas and trade.

As per this report in BBC, India can match China in next 20 years, if it retains its focus and manages its maritime interests unshackled from the tactical friction on its Western borders.China and India, accounting for roughly 40% of the 6.5bn plus people on PlanetEarth, are not merely the two fastest growing major economies in the world at present, but are among the few countries that have continued to expand at a time when the economies of most countries have contracted. The article also asks the pertinent economic question, “Can the lumbering elephant overtake the hyperactive dragon?” But that is an economic assessment of 2009 and even if were to happen, “Can the two march together – geopolitically?”

Check this out for the relationship matrix between India and China:

China has strategically allied itself with Pakistan in a geopolitical move against India which concentrates as much on economics as on military support – although in Pakistan’s military-heavy economy the two are inseparable. For instance, dredging the harbor at Gwadar has given both China and Pakistan an important economic asset as well as China an advance naval base. But the overall aim of Chinese sub-continent policy, and its alliance with Pakistan, is to cut off India’s overland access to Europe, the Middle East and Asia while enhancing China’s own.That’s why Afghanistan is the battleground for these geopolitical rivals. Between Pakistan and China, India is effectively blocked from land routes into the continent, effectively an island should its rivals wish it.

In deference to China and wooing Pakistan for an Afghan exit, America appears to have forgotten India almost entirely. Although Indians must pursue their own strategic independence, that’s no reason why America and India should not have closer ties which would help India see its national interests as more parallel to America’s. In that respect, George Bush got something right and Obama seems to be floundering.

However, the American people are howling at the gates of Congress to end these trillion dollar, decade-long wars of occupation and aggression, and there is simply no conceivable military solution to any of our problems – whether that’s Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq, or even Iran. Diplomacy has to be the way to go.  Huffington Post of 25 Aug explains this. A must read into the political and diplomatic muddle that the triumvirate has gotten Pakistan into.

This is where Obama finds himself in a logjam if he does not take India on board. In the present geopolitical environment America has to find a regional solution to the Afghan mess and think beyond Pakistan. The two names that come to mind immediately are India and China. How,  has been discussed in an earlier post “Afghanistan after America”. Economically though, China is edging past America to be the next super power which complicates this relationship.

Theoretically speaking, the two Asian giants need to come together to make this century a truly Asian one. But there are impediments of geopolitics, suspicion and of course Pakistan. Pragmatic realism demands a multiple track diplomacy with China and USA which fructifies “India and China” rather than “India Versus China”.

The irritants of the present must thus be tackled from a position of equality with clear Quid Pro Quo.

This (right) is a satellite picture of the devastating path of the Indus that has rendered 4 million homeless and affected 20 million. This NY Times imagery gives a bird’s eye view of the extent of the calamity. Putting the pieces of this devastation back would be a herculean task for any government. Especially a government that is seen to be ineffective and living at the mercy of Kayani and his cahoots in the Army. The Taliban have added to the woes of the people by proclaiming a war against foreign aid workers and ministers in the government.

This update is debilitating when the country is reeling under such a disaster. If ever a country were ready for a coup, it is Pakistan. Voices in Pakistan, which can still access internet, are euphoric about an imminent march of Kayani to the presidential palace. Altaf Hussein, the MQM leader is asking generals to fulfill their patriotic duty by taking over the reigns of the country and redistributing land, held by the feudal landlords, amongst the masses.However Con Coughlin in this discourse argues that the military appears reluctant to bite the bait for a variety of reason. This reluctance appears to be borne out of Kayani’s preoccupation with Afghanistan or Af Pak and his ability to rule without having to govern Pakistan. Musharraf, though, seems to have repeated his bid to govern the country, if Kayani permits.

In the meanwhile, Zardari and Gilani have hit the ground running and find the chinks in their governance model exposed. Statistically speaking, 20 million people seem to have been affected(some argue the figure is 6.5 million), more than 1600 killed and about 80,000 have been marooned with helicopters being the only connectivity. At a time when 40 more helicopters are needed for relief drops by the UN relief agencies, only 13 are available. The floods have laid bare the Pakistani establishment’s hands off governance model, exposed the feudal land lords and ruined the country’s infrastructure beyond immediate relief.

In a country where most of the agricultural wealth is concentrated in the hands of a few feudal landlords, the misery being experienced by millions of dispossessed and impoverished citizens is inevitably going to stoke the fires of dissent.

The marginalisation and alienation of the poor in Pakistan today is phenomenal. In the province of  Khyber-Pakhtunkhwala(KP), dominated by the Pashtuns, the alienation is complete as Pashtuns claim that Islamabad has favoured Punjab over KP for political reasons. Of the 1,600 confirmed dead, 1,086 people died in the northwestern KP province, 183 in northern Gilgit-Baltistan district, 109 in southern Sindh, 103 in central Punjab, 71 in Pakistan-administeredKashmir and 48 in southwestern Baluchistan. These disproportionate deaths have angered the provincial council of KP further.

Amidst all this chaos and suffering, the  Pakistani militant group Tehrik-e Taliban(TTP) plans to conduct attacks against foreigners participating in the ongoing flood relief operations in Pakistan. The US government also believes that the “federal and provincial ministers” may be at risk. TTPs threat may be in direct support to the militant cadres and Islamic charities spreading their sphere  of influence during this adversity. The UN has however stated that it would continue with the relief operations.

The U.S. interest in Pakistan goes beyond helping flood victims as Pakistan is a key strategic ally in the battle in Af Pak. Analysts contend that the United States can ill afford to let a lack of Western aid increase the influence of charities associated with militant groups. But whether the outpouring of donations from U.S. taxpayers can appease the Pakistani public, many of whom resent U.S. drone strikes in the country’s north, is uncertain. A recent Pew Survey found nearly six of 10 Pakistanis view the United States as an enemy. It is this sentiment which is being exploited by the terror groups to strengthen their hold on the average patriotic Pakistani.

Looking ahead, as the flood waters advance south towards the sea, they leave behind them a trail of death, disease and destruction never experienced in living memory.  

Out of these disease will claim many more lives as medical aid is scantily available, especially where people have been marooned. The worst has still to be experienced in Southern Sindh.The magnitude will only increase as the flood waters recede. The world may have pledged an aid of $ one billion but the problem is who will disburse it and  manage the disaster now.

This op-ed in Dawn is enlightening under the circumstances.

Indian hearts bleed for their Pakistani brethren but Pakistani rulers are willing to sacrifice their own people rather than accept relief operations by India.

It is suicide to block Indians Visas at a time like this. It could get ridiculous enough to accuse US and India, with Afghan connivance, to have engineered the floods by controlling monsoons and river waters. Such is the politics being played over the lives of people when the SAARC disaster management mechanism could have been put in place immediately.

We pray for our Pakistani brethren!

These faces of war in Afghanistan are a grim reminder that the Taliban are evolving their tactics better than the ISAF in this war on terror. The increased levels of sophistication and expertise in using IEDs and conduct of guerrilla warfare indicates the tenacity and vibrancy of the so called backward Taliban to contest all that is Western in this war. They have the most important attributes of a war on their side, “Time”.

This is the very commodity US is running out of. Defense Secretary Robert Gates says the July 2011 date is set in stone, while the US and NATO commander in Afghanistan, Petraeus, articulates he might recommend against a withdrawal depending on conditions on the ground. With coalition patience running thin and the support for war hitting an all time low, the ISAF is forced to speed up operations against the Taliban. It is exactly this desperation of coalition forces which is being targeted by the Taliban. Lay back and attack at will on ISAF facilities and troops with the new and improved version of Guerrilla Warfare. Amidst mounting casualties, Vice President Joe Biden argues that they have not lost the war yet.

He says, “We now are only beginning with the right general and the right number of forces to seek our objectives”.

What force and what objective is what Biden is confused about along with a majority of coalition nations.

Whether Coalition forces are in Afghanistan for a war on Terror or are they to construct Afghanistan. The debate about whether the U.S. armed forces should be involved in nation-building was big in the 1990s, but the nation-builders have won the argument hands down.

The terminology has shifted, to be sure, from “nation-building” to “stabilization and reconstruction” missions, but these include efforts to improve governance and the economy as well as security and stability. A tall order in a country that has never understood democracy as a nation and has thrived and lived under it’s own tribal dispensations. It would do well to remember that the Afghans, through history, have not been defeated in reckon-able memory. That is a major departure from America‘s war in Iraq. The belief that Afghans like Coalition presence and the Taliban don’t, is a myth. The Afghans know that the coalition will go away but the Taliban will stay.

The coalition took 9 long years of attrition  to surmise in the London Conference that “talking to” and not “fighting” the Taliban was the only way forward. This realisation has been forced upon the coalition by the resilience and convictions of the Taliban –  that they can and will repeat history. Ahmed Rashid had articulated this aspect in February 2010 after the London Conference. Six months and Kabul Conference later, the coalition does not seem to have made much headway in talking to the Taliban – an aspect laboured on in an earlier post.

The involvement of Pakistan army in the floods has further weakened the ISAF operations on the Eastern front along Khyber Pashtunwala and Balochistan. The Taliban have used this opportunity to spread their influence in the North weakening the Plan B. According to this analysis in Washington Post by Rangin Dadfar Spanta, national security adviser of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan, Pakistan is the Afghan War’s real aggressor.

Amongst all this America seems to have little time to dismantle the al Qaeda in Af Pak region – the very reason they are in Afghanistan in the first place. The American estimates may indicate a low al Qaeda foot print but they still hold sway over a large population in the muslim world and especially in this region. They have a huge impact on the Taliban. As per one report, “The Pakistani madrassahs are still the big recruiting and training place. The Afghans go to a madrassah in Pakistan, where an Arab is typically like the dean, or headmaster, and learn how to fight.

Then the Afghan goes back home and teaches others to build bombs or fight — and gets paid handsomely for it.”. More on this can be read here. The al Qaeda, suspicious of the Taliban, has started participating selectively in the insurgency to maintain the pressure. They are also getting innovative with their tactics and techniques of war fighting, as is apparent in this article.

Over time and especially after the faulty analysis of situation reports of WikiLeaks, an impression is gaining ground in the West that Al-Qaeda has become a “afterthought” as troops battle the Taliban in Afghanistan, according to a Washington Post analysis of classified documents. This may spell doom for the coalition. The al Qaeda doesn’t figure in the WikiLeaks as these are situation reports where every hostile casualty might be treated as Taliban. The analysis of the thousands of documents from 2004 to 2009 back US claims that al-Qaeda has become a “marginal player on the Afghan battlefield,” as per an analysis of the Washington Post. Nothing could be farther than the truth.

The Coalition is in a quandary fighting this war on multiple fronts where its ally Pakistan is manipulating all the pieces of the Zigsaw puzzle, often to its own peril. The Taliban and al Qaeda signatures indicate a paradigm shift in their capability to continue with their Jihad against the infidels. Pakistan is currently down but is not willing to let go of the pie in Afghanistan for its misplaced sense of Strategic Depth against an Indian threat.

Patraeus would do well to address the issue of Taliban and Pakistan under an overarching umbrella of al Qaeda. The “build” phase may be out of context in Afghanistan – “stabilization and reconstruction” well that will take time and that is a commodity coalition is running out of.

The floods in Pakistan have raised a variety of issues ranging from the aid to the rescue efforts and the politics being played over the biggest calamity Pakistan is facing.

It has something to do with the Jihadi participation in the Earthquake relief of 2005. The donors watched in despair as their aid was used by terror groups to win more sympathisers. It is largely this track record which has inhibited larger sums flowing in this time around. WhileBan Ki Moon has termed this as the “slow motion tsunami“, there is no spontaneity in the inflow of aid.

Holbrookes claims that it would take billions to stabilise the situation but he too is weary of the al Qaedamoles siphoning the largess. Compared to Haiti and its devastating earthquake earlier this year, the global community is being much tighter with its wallet. Only about half the 450 million dollars needed by the United Nations for immediate relief and recovery has been committed, but not necessarily yet delivered. And the billions of dollars in damages to the vital agricultural sector and other industries means economic woes are only beginning. Feeding the hungry will be a major challenge.

As Pakistan continues to battle  floods and struggles for relief funds from foreign donors, it is also in a fix over winning hearts and minds of its citizens. Never a place of rock-solid political stability, the recent uprooting of 20 million civilians by the rains and floods has added a new dimension to the nuclear-armed country. The success or failure of the relief mission can change the country.

Groups such as Jamat ud Dawa and other Jihadi groups have accelerated the pace of theirrelief work, however small they may be. Fears of al Qaeda and Taliban (TTP) using this opportunity to swell their cadres is battering the image of the “democratic” government. Charities with links to militants have taken advantage of the vacuum left in Pakistan and delivered aid to thousands stranded by the floods, possibly boosting their own standing among those communities. 

”A big problem is that while the Zardari government and the international community struggle to get their act together the Islamist militants are already on the ground providing relief,” says Pakistan expert Bruce Riedel of the Brookings Institution, a Washington think tank. The World Political Review makes an important observation when it articulates that the militant groups have used the calamity to garner popularity and public support as the government of the day dithered. As per a report by AP / Reuters, Pakistan government has promised to clamp down on “Charities” engaged in relief work. A clear ploy to convince the world that their aid would not be used to radicalise Pakistan further.

Then there is public resentment against getting aid from Zardari’s Western friends while the Muslim world has not loosened their purse strings as expected. The Pakistan Army has also accelerated pace of its work to convince the average Pakistani that they are their only saviors in Pakistan. This is evident from some of the observations in the mediawhere people argue that, “The army may not be able to fully govern but at the moment, without the further strengthening of democratic and civilian institutions, Pakistan cannot be governed effectively without the men in uniform”. The already weak democracy in Pakistan is thus paving the way for the military and their fundamentalist groups to gain ground in governing Pakistan. This CNN report outlines that Pakistan Army is capable of handling the floods and the militancy.

On the war front, the Americans are worried that the Pakistan Army has abandoned operations against the militant groups in favour of relief operations. This has affected their(US) efforts on the Af Pak borderlands. The floods have marginalised intensity of military operations while the militant groups are gaining in the battle for hearts and minds. Despite aid by America, the popular sentiment remains anti American. This is a double whammy where US is losing out on the “War” and the “hearts and minds”. While the immediate focus is on saving lives in Pakistan, the United States hopes one result of its rapid and generous response to the floods will be to help improve America’s dismal approval ratings in the country.

The environmental angle  forebodes more such calamities for the world at large. Scientists are divided in their opinion on the reasons for a spate of environmental catastrophes unleashed this year. There is however consensus that this may just be the beginning of erratic seasonal behaviours. This report is worth a read.

The scale of the disaster caused by the floods in Pakistan, is barely comprehensible. As Juan Cole has written, expressing near disbelief : “The submerged area of the country is as big as the United Kingdom, fourteen million Pakistanis are affected, two million are homeless.” Six million need immediate relief, according to the UN., and thirty six thousand are suffering from acute diarrhoeal symptoms, with cholera already diagnosed. 1,600 are reported dead, with the number certain to multiply. Famine is a real possibility.

That Pakistan government, still seeped in anti India rhetoric, has refused Indian assistance at a time like this is incomprehensible. It is time the Nuclear State did more with its F – 16 fleet and Chinese missiles and helped the destitute who may only be able to survive because their poverty and deprivation has made them rugged.

The announcement of November 7 as the date for elections has sparked off a race to boycott the elections by various ethnic groups.  An article highlights the troubled path where various ethnic and political groups including the NLD are following to stay away from the elections on the plea that the Junta will manipulate these elections and hence they need to be boycotted. Large areas of Burma are controlled by the Wa and other groups such as the Karen, Kachin and Mon. This article depicts the ethnic mood.

The stickers, bearing the message “It is our right to vote or not to vote in the 2010 election,” are part of a boycott campaign launched by the activist movement Generation Wave. They are appearing in public places ranging from bus shelters to shopping centers.

The election laws prohibit Suu Kyi and more than 2,000 other political prisoners from participating in the election. Suu Kyi has said the election is “absolutely unlikely” to be free and fair, and political parties will not have enough time to campaign.

Burma’s election will be insignificant without the participation of pro-democracy leaderAung San Suu Kyi, according to Htay Kywe, one of the imprisoned leaders of the 88 Generation Students group, who is currently serving a 65-year sentence in western Burma.

As the date for registering parties for the election draws closer(Aug 30), the political parties who want to participate are finding it difficult to field candidates in at least three constituencies. According to the junta’s Political Parties Registration Law, a  party must contest in at least three constituencies and meet the minimum number of party members within 90 days after its registration as a party was approved; failure could lead to its dissolution. Opposition parties complain that, due to the short period allowed for candidate registration and their lack of funding, they will be able to compete for only a limited number of the 498 seats in the national parliament. The regime’s election laws stipulate that if there is only a single candidate in a constituency, then he or she wins the seat—meaning that the junta’s proxy parties are guaranteed victory in many constituencies.

The gagging of media and ban on anti election or anti Junta articles is another major stumbling block towards conduct of free and fair elections.

“We don’t have any freedom of information now, and we won’t have it in the future,” said a journalist in Rangoon. “It is obvious that there will be no media freedom during the election. There is no way that this election will be fair without media freedom.”

In May 2008, the military regime did not allow domestic media to publish any reports critical of the proposed constitution, and it prevented publications from talking to voters and gathering news at polling stations.

Then there is another twist to manipulating the elections. The election commission is apparantly delaying registration of opposition parties mainly the Kachin State Progressive Party (KSPP) and other Kachin parties until shortly before the election in order to prevent them from carrying out campaign-related activities. In the meantime, the government-backed Union and Solidarity Development Party (USDP), which has many Kachin members, is free to conduct its activities and campaign in Kachin State. The USDP is also understood to be planning the establishment of an alternative, pro-government party led by Kachin who are members of the USDP.

Then there is the issue of Junta reserving seats for itself in both houses. As per latest regulations both houses of parliament will reserve a quarter of all seats for serving military officers [110 out of 440 in the national level parliament and 56 out of 224 in the upper house]. In April, Prime Minister Thein Sein and more than 20 other senior generals with ministerial portfolios resigned from the military and registered with the new pro-government Union Solidarity and Development Party to contest the elections. The Burmese junta is to undertake a huge military reshuffle next week, after which 10 officers at the rank of lieutenant general ranks are to retire to participate in the recently announced general elections on November 7, a source at the Ministry of Defence said late yesterday, as per Mizzima.

“No one should be fooled. The generals may be exchanging their khakis for civilian clothes, but these polls are still a carefully arranged plan to keep power in the hands of the military junta,” Elaine Pearson, acting chief of Human Rights Watch Asia Division, said.

The group said it also had concerns that intimidation of people and political parties would intensify.

Amongst such diverse machinations of the election process, it is indeed tough for the international community to participate in monitoring the election process. When viewed in perspective, the elections process must throw open more options for any meaningful solution. Mass manipulation will only marginalise Myanmar in the international arena with more sanctions, while internally there would be no change in the lives of its millions.

Yesterday, South Korean President Lee Myung-bak announced his proposal of a “reunification tax” for his nation. This unexpected announcement has set talks alblaze over the eventuality of the North Korean’s downfall. As part of his televised speech on the 65th anniversary of Korea’s liberation from Imperial Japan, Lee stated there was a “need” to push for a special tax in the ”possible” event the Korean peninsula undergoes reunification.

After months of high tension on the peninsula following the ’mysterious’ sinking of a South Korean warship, Cheonan, which killed 46 sailors, and the severing of numerous diplomatic and financial relationships between the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea and the Republic of Korea, a proposal of a reunification tax was the last thing anybody expected.

For South Koreans, Lee’s proposal for a unification tax, much less reunification, is spontaneous considering he had approved of various provacations and isolations including the installement of loud-speakers along the DMZ that played Cold War propaganda designed to lure North Korean soldiers across the border, U.S.-Korean military drills, and policies that have carefully bullied North Korea financially and, many claim, set back a solid reunification by decades.

The proposed tax would be reviewed by specialists to gather the appropriate funds for the expected cost of ‘proper reunification which is estimated, by also analyzing the costs of the West-East German reunification, to easily surpass hundreds of billions of dollars into the trillion.

Many have applauded the South Korean president for such a “timely suggestion” since North Korea’s leader Kim Jung-Il is quickly ailing (judging by released photos) added with the fact the communist government is destabilized due to policy failures and its poor economy which makes up a measly 2.89% of South Korea’s economy.

Indeed, President Lee hinted that “reunification will occur ‘soon’” in prediction of an inevitable and sudden collapse of the North Korean government.

Yet South Korean critics slapped their foreheads at the president’s proposal which would, again, provoke North Korea into threatning yet another military action against its southern neighbor for its president’s audacious comment. Other S. Koreans argue that the idea of a “reunification tax” at this time when North Korea is ‘vulnerable’  would give the false impression to both the North Korean government and South Korean citizens that the ROK would be absorbing the DPRK which would rocket the cost of reunification up to not just 1.7 trillion dollars, but to more than 2 trillion dollars considering the disparity between the two Korea’s economies.

Reunification is highly desirable and appealing to both Koreas, yet the jaw-dropping cost of reunifying the two countries has made the ROK and the majority of its citizens hesitate. A recent poll in 2009 showed that more than 80% of South Koreans wanted reunification, but less than 19% wanted a reunification within their generation in fear of economic consequences. Moreover, the culture of both side’s Koreans has drifted far apart since 1948 leading to fears that the North Koreans will not be able to integrate into a 21st century, Korean society which would create widespread social problems.

Disagreements between the two Koreas over the U.S military presence, North Korea’s nuclear program, and the 1953 armistice have largely halted reunification talks that was set in motion by former South Korean President Kim Dae Jung’s ”Sunshine Policy” which Lee Myung-bak’s party has virtually abolished.