Time was when India was the ‘enemy’, Kashmir was the issue. That time is long gone. Kashmir has been forced into the background; India is no longer an enemy; it is now simply a pawn in a much bigger game. The game itself is deadly; its players are deadly serious. Make no mistake about it; our situation is hugely alarming. We are the ‘single most dangerous’ nation, a ‘failed’ state with ‘rogue’ elements; we are a ‘direct threat to global security’ and the world is determined to remedy this situation. The entire world, ‘Friends of Pakistan’ included. Even as they court us, their minds are very clear. One way or the other, Pakistan and its nuclear arsenal has to be brought under rein. By hook or by crook, this has to happen. The hook has been tried more than once but has failed; the time has now come for the crook.

Yet we remain delusional. While we debate and discuss all that is wrong within our borders and outside them. We blindly ignore the big picture. We are so consumed by individual issues that we are unable to see the problem in its entirety. We fail to see the forest because of the trees. This we do despite the fact that the ‘forest’ is staring us in the face; it has been for well over a decade.

A third world country, especially a Muslim country, shall not be allowed to possess nuclear weapons. It is not germane whether it is right or wrong, whether it is ethical or otherwise; this is the plan. It has been decided by those who call the shots. Pakistan is a third world country. It is also a Muslim state. And it has nuclear weapons. It matters not that Pakistan acquired a nuclear weapon capability to safeguard itself against a threat from a nuclear armed neighbor. It matters not that our fear of Indian hegemony is real. No nuclear weapons for the third world; no nuclear weapons for the Muslims, no nuclear weapons for Pakistan.

Pakistan’s nuclear capability shall be neutralized. It will happen. This is the fact, plain and simple; this is the forest; verdant and dense. It has been decided; indeed it was decided on or by 28th May 1998. That was the memorable day we rejoiced. From ZAB’s promise to eat grass but acquire the ‘bomb’ to Nawaz Sharif’s final order, (the import of which he had no idea and most probably still does not) ‘dhamaka kar dein’; from a handicapped military unable to fight a meaningful conventional war to our scientific community harnessing the might of the atom, from a host of carpetbaggers and middlemen reaping immense financial benefit to the poor peasants laboring in the fields pursuing an unattainable dream, the entire nation of Pakistan rejoiced. Sweets were distributed, the air resounded with hoarse cries of ‘Allah ho Akbar’, tears of joy flowed; normally stern and composed individuals hugged and backslapped each other.

We then went home, back to our dreary lives. Nothing changed. The nation continued eating grass. Military pundits waxed lyrical about our deterrence and, in the same breath, justified and acquired additional funds for conventional weaponry and the nation continued laboring along its self destructive path.

Their options were many; they ranged from direct military attack as was done in the case of Iraq (remember Osirak) to dialog as was the option exercised with South Africa. In between lay a complete assortment including coercion, blackmail, bribery, sabotage, etc. All were tried with varying degrees of success but the desired end could not be achieved. The Pakistani nuclear arsenal continued to grow; indeed the situation actually worsened as we made sure that the direct military attack option was precluded. We did so under the erroneous belief that a second strike capability would make us safer; our deterrence would be bolstered. The actual outcome was unfortunately quite the reverse. We forced the West to switch to another, more permanent and achievable option; that of destroying the state of Pakistan. If the bomb could not be taken away from Pakistan, Pakistan would be taken away from the bomb. States have been destroyed earlier, more than once; each time with dramatic success. Remember Yugoslavia; a European industrial power and a vibrant economy? Or the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics? Fragmentation is easy once you set your mind to it. One needs only to find the fault lines and just tap the cracks gently. Fracture will happen. Provide a trigger, detonation will follow. Gullible, illiterate, ill informed and disenchanted masses led by self-serving, myopic leaders just need to be aroused. They will take it on from there.

This is where Pakistan is today. All the events taking place in and around our borders are sparks that are designed to ignite the fire that shall consume us. All aim to arouse the masses, destabilize the state, undermine it in the eyes of the world and endorse the sentiment that they must ‘tackle a rogue nation’. It is now being openly stated that Pakistan is a failed state and shall break apart within months and when that comes to pass, the required forces shall move in and take over our nuclear assets.

So what should Pakistan do? Shall we resign ourselves to this inevitability? Should we continue looking at the trees or should we recognize the forest and take action accordingly? Should the nation continue with its hackneyed fixes that don’t work or should it wake up and recover itself from this destructive process.

We can, even now, protect Pakistan and recover from the mess we are in. However, this can only be done if we think outside the box and come up with a boldly novel and imaginative solution.
There is such a solution. It is elegant; it is simple; it is extremely effective. Use the Bomb. Simple, elegant and effective. Let’s use our nuclear arsenal to put Pakistan back on track. After all, isn’t this why we developed these weapons? Isn’t it our plan that if the nation’s existence is at risk, we shall use the bomb? We acquired this technology to deter aggression and, if that deterrence failed, we would use these horrific weapons to teach the ‘enemy’ a lesson he would never forget even if it meant self destruction. We know that the region would turn into a nuclear wasteland. We recognize that the outcome would be mutually assured destruction. MAD. An appropriate acronym. A devastated Pakistan, a crippled enemy, a horrified world. And of course, no nuclear weapons remaining in Pakistan; indeed, no Pakistan either.

Deterrence has failed. The ‘enemy’ is at the gates; in certain areas it is actually inside the perimeter. The enemy is not the Taliban, it is not Al Qaida, it is not India, it is not the Baluch separatists, it is not the religious extremists, it is not those that foment trouble in our cities. The ‘enemy’ is the global desire that Pakistan not possess nuclear weapons. They want our bomb and they are coming to get it. Deterrence has failed and we therefore now need to go to the next step. We have to use the bomb otherwise soon, the bomb shall no longer be ours. Their plan is simple and worth repeating; if the bombs cannot be taken away from Pakistan, they shall take Pakistan away from the bombs. They have to ensure that these weapons of mass destruction are neutralized.

We can thwart this design. We can and must use our nuclear weapons to our national advantage but we must do so creatively, intelligently and responsibly. Done properly, Pakistan can come out of the present mess in a very positive manner. We can not only safeguard the Nation but also give it a major push towards economic well being and human development. Equally importantly, we can secure our rightful place in the comity of nations.

We must ‘expend’ our nuclear weapons but this has to be done creatively. Instead of lighting the fuse, we should do exactly the opposite. We voluntarily give up our ability to light the fuse. In this radically unconventional manner, we actually ‘use’ our nuclear assets. We consciously elect to terminate our nuclear weapons program in exchange for national security.

This is a horrible thought. It is pure anathema to each and every Pakistani. I know this and I understand it. I recognize that our nuclear weapons are our pride; they are our only consolation for the misery that confronts our unfortunate masses. We eat grass, we beg, we cringe, bow, scrape in front of the world community for handouts but we do so comfortable doing so because, at the back of our minds, we know that we are a nuclear power. Unfortunately the world does not see our nuclear assets through our prism. To them we are a third world nation, bankrupt in more ways than just financial. To the rest of the world, we are a ‘major headache’. And they are now going to fix the headache.

Many will violently object to this proposal. Those that croon delightedly about our nuclear assets and vehemently defend our right to possess them are a vocal lot. The sad truth is that they are also the ones that will be the first to depart for sunnier climes when the brown stuff hits the fan. Clutching their green cards, their permanent residence visas and dual nationality passports, these patriotic individuals that include politicians, bureaucrats, military men, businessmen and members of our ‘civil society’ shall promptly depart for their second homes leaving behind the millions who have lived their tedious lives in the belief that Pakistan is a proud, defiant, principled nuclear armed Muslim nation destined for greatness.

The masses that are left behind will suffer.

‘Dhamaka Kar Dein’. Not by blowing the bombs up but by trading them for a better future. Let us exchange our weapons of mass destruction for instruments of national development. Let us put together the best negotiating team we can and let us trade our nuclear weapons for maximum attainable benefits. Write off our national debt. Get electrical power generation plants. Dredge our canals; desilt our reservoirs, harness our monsoon deluges. Build dams, roads, schools, hospitals and other much needed infrastructure. Modernize our education system, our police, our laws, our jails and our inefficient courts. Upgrade our agriculture and our industry. Get us clean drinking water, wholesome food, adequate health care and speedy justice. Negotiate an equitable water treaty, establish trade corridors, obtain preferred nation status, gain access to global markets. The list is long. Topping it must of course be a demand for the implementation of numerous UN resolutions on issues that relate to Pakistan in particular and the Muslim world in general.

The West will jump at the chance. They are not fools; nor are they emotional juveniles. If the developed world can spend trillions of dollars to bring about economic safety it shall have absolutely no problem spending a fraction of that to ensure nuclear safety. More importantly, the West knows full well that this trade off shall not cost them anything in real terms. They know that loans do not get paid if the borrower state fractures. They know that all the development monies for providing power stations, dams, infrastructure, training; whatever; all those amounts shall all be spent largely in the West through western companies and would actually be a welcome fix for their sagging economies and rising unemployment. The West shall benefit, the common Pakistani will benefit, the world shall be a safer place.

The end game has already begun. Let us, for once, act sensibly. Let us think with our heads and not with our hearts. Remember ‘Strategic Defiance’? Let us not have another myopic policy of ‘Nuclear Defiance’. The time has come to use our nuclear weapons to our national advantage while we still have the chance. The window of opportunity for exercising this option is fast closing. Let us see the forest before darkness falls because recently the Western tune has changed alarmingly. Everyone is now saying that Pakistan’s nuclear assets are in safe hands. Hands that, until recently, were considered extremely unsafe. The hands haven’t changed. Or have they? If so, the window is already closed; darkness has already fallen.

Nuclear war to break out in South Asia

The danger of a nuclear war in the world will remain even if Russia and the United States agree to reduce their strategic offensive arms. Asia’s nuclear powers - India and Pakistan – do not intend to follow the example of the two superpowers. The ongoing standoff in South Asia may lead to catastrophic consequences for the whole world.

The conflict between India and Pakistan lasts for over 60 years already. Their confrontation became especially dangerous after 1998, when both India and Pakistan conducted a series of nuclear tests and showed the world their ability to build nuclear weapons.

On May 28, 1998 Pakistan announced that it had successfully conducted five nuclear tests.

The Pakistani Atomic Energy Commission reported that the five nuclear tests conducted on May 28 generated a seismic signal of 5.0 on the Richter scale, with a total yield of up to 40 KT (equivalent TNT). Dr. A.Q. Khan claimed that one device was a boosted fission device and that the other four were sub-kiloton nuclear devices.

On May 30, 1998 Pakistan tested one more nuclear warhead with a reported yield of 12 kilotons. The tests were conducted at Balochistan, bringing the total number of claimed tests to six. It has also been claimed by Pakistani sources that at least one additional device, initially planned for detonation on 30 May 1998, remained emplaced underground ready for detonation.

These tests came slightly more than two weeks after India carried out five nuclear tests of its own on May 11 and 13 and after many warnings by Pakistani officials that they would respond to India.

Pakistan's nuclear tests were followed by the February 1999 Lahore Agreements between Prime Ministers Vajpayee and Sharif. The agreements included confidence building measures such as advance notice of ballistic missile testing and a continuation of their unilateral moratoria on nuclear testing.

India has never concealed an intention to possess nuclear weapons. The nuclear doctrine was approved in the nation in 2001. It is worthy of note that India never signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. The Indian government believes that it has a full right to possess nuclear arms just like Russia, the USA, China, France and Great Britain.


In accordance with the nuclear doctrine, India ’s nuclear arsenal will have the air, the ground and the sea constituents. The country’s Air Force already has nuclear-capable Mirage-2000, MiG-27 and Jaguar aircraft. It also has ground-based ballistic missiles. India does not have nuclear submarines yet, but it may become a reality very soon.

Pakistan is India’s primary potential enemy. China can also be a threat to one of Asia’s largest nations. The Indian nuclear program of the 1960s was a response to its own defeat, which the nation suffered as a result of the border war with China in 1962.

Several dozens of nuclear warheads will be enough for India to contain Pakistan. Even if Pakistan launches a massive attack against India’s vast territory, it will be impossible to destroy most of the Indian strategic nuclear arms. Quite on the contrary: India’s nuclear retaliation with the use of 15-20 nukes will cause much bigger damage to Pakistan, which is a lot smaller in size.
India has 115 nukes at the moment. About 80 warheads will be enough to destroy Pakistan entirely. However, India will not be able to attack China afterwards. The latter has 410 nuclear warheads. Therefore, India will most likely try to enlarge its nuclear potential.

Unlike India, Pakistan does not have its nuclear doctrine officially documented. There is not enough information about the details and the structure of the nuclear forces of this country either. Official spokesmen for the Pakistani authorities say that the development of the nation’s nuclear forces will fully depend on the actions of the Indian government.

Pakistan possesses nuclear arms as a nuclear deterrent against a possible attack from India. In addition, Pakistan aims to reduce India’s predominance in other arms. Pakistan has all chances to build 40-45 nuclear warheads. The country has ballistic missiles too.
A nuclear blow in South Asia can result in a global catastrophe. The population of India and Pakistan totals over one billion people. The two countries do not have any means of protection against a nuclear attack. Even a minor nuclear explosion will kill millions of people and trigger a humanitarian catastrophe.

Pakistan sues cricket bodies

PAKISTAN is suing international cricketing bodies for moving the World Cup 2011 secretariat out of its country and into India, a lawyer said Wednesday.

The move is a further escalation of Pakistan's protest against an International Cricket Council (ICC) decision late last month to strip the country of its 14 matches in the contest over security fears in the troubled Muslim nation.

The ICC also moved the World Cup 2011 secretariat out of Pakistan's cultural capital Lahore to India's financial hub Mumbai and distributed Pakistan's matches to three other host countries - India, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh.

Pakistan's already dented reputation as a safe sporting venue was left in tatters after attacks by gunmen on the Sri Lankan cricket team bus in Lahore on March 3 left seven Sri Lankan players and their assistant coach wounded and eight policemen dead.

The signs are misleading. War between the US and Pakistan is not imminent. It's ongoing.

Thoughts On The War Between

The USA And Pakistan

Terrorism is not indigenous to Pakistan. It is the direct consequence of American invasion and occupation of Afghanistan and American Drone attacks in FATA

Thirty years ago the Soviet Union was the target, Afghanistan was an expendable battlefield, and Pakistan provided the logistical base. Now the situation is slightly different: China is the target, Afghanistan is the logistical base, and as for Pakistan ...

As you might expect if you've been paying attention for any of the previous six years, or six decades, all the reasons given for war by US politicians and media types are quite false, and transparently so -- yet no one in the national media can tackle any of them head-on. It's a remarkably dangerous situation, of course: the world's most heavily armed nation is still under a media blackout against certain aspects of reality, just as if Obama's election and inauguration had never happened. Fancy that!
The signs are misleading. War between the US and Pakistan is not imminent. It's ongoing. So far the US has made more than 60 airstrikes against Pakistan using unmanned aircraft, and one commando raid using ground troops and attack helicopters. These attacks have killed more than 700 people, and even the most "optimistic" government reports count only 14 al Qaeda leaders among the dead.

It goes without saying that if any foreign country flew just one bombing mission against the USA, or mounted a single commando raid, it would be regarded as an act of war and treated accordingly. Of course this sort of analysis, putting the shoe on the other foot as it were, is missing from our national political discourse, because in mainstream American political analysis, there is no other shoe; there is no other foot; and anyone who suggests otherwise is promptly banished.

In any case, "imminent" is the wrong word. The war is not imminent. What's imminent is a grave escalation. And the escalation, in my view, is not only imminent but inevitable.

A major, horrific war between the USA and Pakistan is, as I understand it, not only inevitable now; it has been inevitable for many years. I'm quite certain about this. The only question remaining in my mind is: How many is "many"?

You may be hearing that America must wage war against Pakistan in order to prevent the Taliban from conquering (or at least destabilizing) Pakistan and seizing the country's arsenal of nuclear weapons, and/or to ensure that terrorists can never attack the United States as they did on September 11, 2001, and/or to eliminate the "safe havens" from which "insurgents" are attacking American and NATO forces in Afghanistan, and/or because the Pakistani army hasn't been able to defeat the scourge of terrorism all by itself.

But none of this makes any sense. Pakistan's nuclear weapons are under American control, as they have been since Zardari government. The "loose nukes" scenario, which the war against Pakistan is supposedly designed to prevent, is not only a thoroughly fictional argument, but a thoroughly cynical one as well.

If Pakistan's nukes were not under American control, the Americans wouldn't dream of attacking Pakistan. (If you've been paying attention for any of the previous six years, or six decades, you may recall that the US only attacks countries which have no chance to defend themselves, or to retaliate.)

Furthermore, an all-out attack on Pakistan by the US is more likely to cause fragmentation and destabilization in Pakistan than to bring peace and democracy. (Think of Iraq; think of Afghanistan.) So the idea that an American intervention is necessary to prevent a horrific outcome is equally false, and equally cynical. In fact, a horrific outcome -- fragmentation and destabilization -- is much preferred by the American warmongers, and that's why they're so intent on waging this war. It's really quite simple, once you cut through all the propaganda.

Meanwhile, the only way to ensure that terrorists cannot attack us as they did on 9/11 would be to run a complete and open investigation of the attacks of that day, and who made them possible, and who benefited from them ... and to hold the guilty parties accountable. This has manifestly not been done, and clearly, had it been done, we would be in a much different position today. Significantly, president Obama has no intention of allowing an independent investigation into the so-called "terrorist" attacks, so the official fiction remains in place now and is poised to remain in place forever.

So it's not easy to answer questions such as: How long has this war been in the cards? Has it in fact been inevitable for "many years"? And what do we mean by "many"? But we do need to try.
It was all quite simple.

George Bush declared the attacks of 9/11, which he and his administration had done so much to enable, "an act of war". Then he blamed it on "terrorists of global reach" and he asked the world's leaders, "Are you with us, or are you with the terrorists?"

Pervez Musharraf, no dummy in situations of this type, said "We're with you!"

Choosing any other option, of course, would have ensured Pakistan's immediate destruction.

But by choosing as he did, Musharraf allied himself with a lie, and made Pakistan complicit in the war crimes and crimes against humanity that were about to unfold in Afghanistan.

The American and NATO invasion and occupation of Afghanistan has sparked the inevitable reaction, from people we know as "terrorists" and "insurgents". Our terminology implies, falsely, that the US and NATO troops and the puppet government they installed and support are there legitimately. But this is not true, or even close to the truth.

In fact, the resistance to American subjugation, no matter what we call it, correctly sees Pakistan both as America's number one ally in an effort to destroy Afghanistan, and as America's primary regional source of logistical and other support. So counter-attacking in Pakistan makes at least some strategic and tactical sense, from the Afghan point of view. Most Americans know little or nothing about any of this. So we guess about the things we really ought to know.

Suppose -- here's that other shoe again -- Russia bombed, invaded and occupied the US, in a campaign based in and supplied from Mexico. Would an American resistance spring up? Would the resistance attack Russian installations in Mexico? Would it also attack Mexican institutions that supported the Russians? One could only hope so.

If only the truth were that simple. The reality is much worse than the hypothetical. Since a semi-plausible rationale exists for Afghan attacks against Pakistan, the Americans in Afghanistan, always eager to foment a little terrorism which then requires a reaction, have been using Afghan proxies to attack Pakistan, according to reports from Asia which you will never read in any American newspaper.

It's no coincidence that spectacular bombings and gory suicide attacks keep happening in Pakistan whenever it seems the government is approaching a condition of peaceful co-existence with the so-called militants who live in the mountains near the border with Afghanistan. Or is it?

It's no coincidence that American forces were moving freely, un-hampered by the usual security precautions, in Islamabad's Marriott Hotel just before the hotel was the site of a spectacular bombing attack. Or is it?

It's no coincidence that Baithulla Mehsud, Pakistan's public enemy number one, who has recently been blamed for virtually everything, and who has made outrageous public threats against the American homeland, eludes the Pakistan security forces whenever they get close to him, while communicating using encryption they cannot crack. Or is it?

It doesn't take a genius to connect these dots. Or does it?

And I have met my destiny
In quite a similar way
The history book on the shelf
Is always repeating itself
-- ABBA: "Waterloo"

A longer-term view of Pakistan's current problem would show that its roots were planted almost exactly 30 years ago. In the mid-70s, Afghanistan had shaken off its long-standing feudal monarchy and was beginning to move in progressive directions. A democratic election had empowered a legitimate, representative government, for the first time in Afghanistan's history, and a new social and economic awakening seemed imminent.

Unfortunately for the people of Afghanistan, these developments provided an opportunity certain Americans had been waiting for. They called their plan "Operation Cyclone" and they implemented it in secret. It involved recruiting the baddest bad-guys they could find in the Muslim world, and bringing them to the US for training in terrorist techniques such as murder and sabotage. Once trained, they were sent to Pakistan, were infiltrated into Afghanistan, and began to wreak havoc.

The new government of Afghanistan -- still trying to figure out how to make social democracy work in an Islamic context -- was not at all prepared to deal with terrorists, and asked the Soviet Union for help with security. The Soviets wanted no part of Afghanistan's problem, but neither could they sit back and watch while terrorists destabilized a neighboring country. And the Afghans kept begging for help.

In December of 1979, six months after "Operation Cyclone" went into effect, the Soviets sent troops to assist the Afghan security services -- just what the Americans had hoped for. Immediately, propaganda organs around the world began to trumpet the "fact" that the Soviets had "invaded" Afghanistan. The terrorists who had been sent to attack Afghanistan now turned their attentions to the Soviet troops, and suddenly what had been an internal security problem became the trigger for a major war.

The war raged for almost a decade, killed more than a million people, and destroyed what little infrastructure there was to destroy in Afghanistan; it also did untold damage to the already-crumbling Soviet Union. This was all to the good, according to American policy-makers.

The USSR was at the time America's most powerful "competitor" in the "grand game" of global domination; its fall was a blessing to those American leaders who had been yearning to become the world's only superpower.

And as for Afghanistan, the experiment with social democracy there could not be allowed to stand, much less succeed, for the same reason that similar experiments cannot be allowed to stand anywhere else in the world that American military power can reach: to preserve the myth that capitalism -- unbridled dog-eat-dog militarized capitalism -- is the only path that can possibly lead to prosperity.

There were other factors involved, to be sure. We shouldn't say anything about Afghan poppies and CIA heroin trafficking. We shouldn't say anything about natural resources or pipeline routes either. To do so would put us off the map -- well beyond the limits imposed on "polite" political analysis and far too close to the reality behind the American occupation of Afghanistan today.

Thirty years ago the Soviet Union was the target, Afghanistan was an expendable battlefield, and Pakistan provided the logistical base. Now the situation is slightly different: China is the target, Afghanistan is the logistical base, and as for Pakistan ...

In terms of the "grand chessboard", one might be tempted to say that turnabout is fair play for Pakistan. Those who do the bully's dirty-work always end up as victims themselves. And what's been happening to Pakistan lately, and what's about to happen to Pakistan in the near-term Obama-driven future, could be seen as blowback: retribution for the crimes Pakistan has committed, in complicity with the Americans, against Afghanistan.

But the "grand game" is simply an abstraction, one that "justifies" mass murder on a horrific scale in defense of dimly perceived "national interests". In reality, we're talking about hundreds of millions of people whose lives are about to be destroyed, or in the process of being destroyed, as the "players" continue to see strategic advantage in the destruction and destabilization of foreign countries.

And -- for the most part, and as always -- the victims, and the soon-to-be victims, have done nothing wrong. They've been trying to live their lives and provide for their families under a repressive government which came to power with American support, and which, for most of the past several decades, has been doing America's bidding. Is it a coincidence that the people of Iraq can say the very same thing?

"Operation Cyclone", which filled Afghanistan with terrorists and planted the roots that grew into both the Taliban and al Qaeda, was started during the presidency of Jimmy Carter. The Carter administration's marketing slogan -- "Human Rights" -- gave it perfect cover for a clandestine program of fomenting terrorism in one country in order to destabilize another. And the chief architect behind the plan, Zbigniew Brzezinski, who was Carter's National Security Advisor, is now one of Barack Obama's inner circle. That's no coincidence, either.

And this, ultimately, is what makes a major escalation of the war between the US and Pakistan inevitable. The Obama administration embodies none of the change we were hoping for. We are still governed by Bush/Clinton retreads, neo-con chicken hawks, friends and agents of Israel, and Wall Street bankers. None of these people see anything wrong with the American imperial project.

The destruction of Pakistan is, and always has been, essential to that project. And the movers and shakers don't care how much pain and suffering they cause.

To prevent a disastrous war between the USA and Pakistan, it would be necessary to dismantle the American imperial system, and this -- as we keep seeing over and over and over -- is not about to happen.

The prospect of Islamist militants destabilizing nuclear-armed Pakistan is a global fear, but only 10 percent of Pakistanis saw terrorism as their biggest worry, according to an opinion poll released on Monday. For the vast majority economic issues such as inflation, unemployment and poverty were a greater problem, according to a survey by the International Republican Institute (IRI), a Washington-based organization chaired by Senator John McCain.

Carried out in March, some of the survey's results have been overtaken by the pace of events in Pakistan, where the army launched an offensive in recent weeks in and around the Swat valley after Taliban militants moved stealthily closer to Islamabad.

Having sought a deal with the militants by agreeing to impose sharia, Islamic law, across a large chunk of the northwest, the government unleashed the army after sensing a change in national mood as more people realized the Taliban would not be appeased.

Moreover, 56 percent of Pakistanis said they would back any future Taliban demand for sharia in cities outside the northwest, including Karachi, Quetta, Multan and Lahore.
There were, however, some signs of a sea change over whether Pakistan should cooperate with the United States in counter-terrorism, with 37 percent of people saying there should be cooperation, compared with 9 percent 15 months earlier.

A test Pakistan has failed before

On the second full day after declaring the state was at war, Pakistan's prime minster said today that Pakistan was "fighting for its survival" in its attempts to "eliminate" the Taliban from the Swat Valley, from where they have distributed brutal forms of justice and extended their reach to an area just a few mountain tops away from the capital, Islamabad.
As soldiers again square off against the Taliban in Swat, an influential US newspaper writes, Pakistan faces a test it has often failed before – fighting an insurgency while caring for those displaced by the conflict.

Military officials say they are determined to continue the current offensive until they control the 400-square-mile area. But it is far from clear that the army will do any better this time than last when it was ground to a halt by the Taliban.
“Everyone here believes they [the Taliban] are coming back,” a 21-year-old in Takht Bhai told the paper.Over the past four years the military has struggled through a series of campaigns against the Taliban in the mountains. Most, like the battle in Swat, ended in a standstill.

Curfew lift lets more flee Pakistani valley

Thousands of fearful civilians, many on foot, fled a war-torn Pakistani valley on Sunday to take advantage of a lifted curfew that could precede an even more intense round of fighting between the military and the Taliban.

Pakistan has urged residents of the Swat Valley to leave over the past week, while its warplanes have pounded the militant-held region in what the prime minister called a "war of the country's survival." Hundreds of thousands have already fled, adding a humanitarian crisis to the nuclear-armed nation's economic, political and other woes.
As soon as the curfew was lifted early Sunday, residents in major Swat towns began to leave in any way they could.

Pakistan may have superior military might, but to win the war against Taliban guerrillas they must avoid collateral damage and rebuild angry lives shattered by the offensive, analysts say.Militants are believed to have a strong presence in more than half North West Frontier Province, despite military operations over the past two years, on top of six years of battles in the surrounding semi-autonomous tribal belt.

The army has lost more than 2,000 soldiers since 2002 and has claimed to have killed thousands of rebels, yet the Taliban have continued to advance.

It has been a deadly fight -- difficult militarily to fight guerrillas on remote, rugged mountainous terrain and difficult politically to wage battle against fellow Muslims, particularly if civilian casualties soar.
Pakistan has a conventional standing army of around 700,000 troops and traditionally considers India its main threat. The military press wing says 100,000 are deployed on the western front in the border areas with Afghanistan.

It remained unclear whether large numbers of troops based in the provinces of Punjab and Sindh, on the Indian border, would be diverted to what President Asif Ali Zardari has called a fight until a return to "normalcy".

Army called in to eliminate the militants: Gilani

Prime Minister Gilani announced peace will be restored at all cost, as the government is set to officially announce the launch of a military offensive in Swat, today.

In a late evening address to the nation on Thursday, the Prime Minister said that the government had ‘Implemented the Swat peace accord because of the people… [and] implemented the Nizam-e-Adl despite both domestic and international pressure.’

However, ‘TNSM did not abide by the peace agreement and continued with violence. The militants have waged war against all segments of society.’

Gilani called on the nation to ‘understand the severity of the situation,’ saying that though the leadership’s first priority remains peace, the government has ‘decided not to bow … [their] … heads in front of terrorists… The army has been called in to eliminate the militants.’

The announcement comes as Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari gears up to meet Afghan President Hamid Karzai and US President Barack Obama in a series of tripartite talks in Washington.

Pakistan's leaders urge West not to panic

PAKISTAN'S leaders insist the world should not panic about the nuclear-armed nation losing its fight against Islamist militants.

When questioned on CNN about the chances of Islamabad's nuclear arsenal falling into the hands of extremists, Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari said the insurgents would have to defeat the world's seventh biggest army first. "My Government is not going to fall when one mountain is taken by one group or the other," he said.

Whether the world is reassured by the comments depends a lot on the effectiveness of the offensive against the Pakistani Taliban and their allies in the Swat Valley.

It is now up to Pakistan's military to show it has the will and the capacity to conduct a sustained and successful campaign against the Taliban. If it fails, Mr Zardari's soothing assurances will become more difficult to believe.

President Barack Obama is applauding Pakistan and Afghanistan for their commitment to helping the U.S. fight terrorists holed up in their territory, but he also is cautioning that the path to success is slow and unsure.“The road ahead will be difficult,” Obama said Wednesday after a series of meetings with Afghan President Hamid Karzai and Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari that yielded few announced new commitments. “There will be more violence, and there will be setbacks.”

There are no plans to deploy U.S. ground troops to Pakistan, U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates said Thursday, despite concerns over increasing violence between Pakistani troops and Taliban militants.

'We Face a Common Threat':

White House to Push Afghanistan and Pakistan to Fight Extremists

With growing concerns about security in Pakistan, President Obama will convene a trilateral meeting today with President Hamid Karzai of Afghanistan and President Asif Ali Zardari of Pakistan to discuss how the three nations can work together to stabilize the region.

White House officials say that Obama will push Karzai and Zardari to commit to work more intensely and cooperatively to fight al Qaeda and other extremists.

The two leaders are in Washington this week for a series of meetings where the focus will be on the shared security concerns among the three nations.

Today's meetings kick off at the State Department, where Secretary Hillary Clinton will meet first with Karzai, then with Zardari.

In the afternoon, Obama will hold separate meetings with both Karzai and Zardari, and then all three leaders will meet. In the evening, Vice President Joe Biden will host a dinner with Karzai and Zardari, their respective delegations and congressional leaders.