Vitamin_C
Chief Minister (5k+ posts)
Perception of the international community:
Perception is very important in international politics and it can be used to make a positive or negative image in the minds of people all over the world. It can also decide the outcome of wars and sanctions, for example low support for Vietnam war caused Americas defeat, even though America was winning militarily. Similarly the war in Iraq ended sooner than the war in Afghanistan possibly due to negative perception of the international community over the former.
Since 9/11 Pakistans perception has fallen and people associate the country with terrorism, this works in favour of India which wants to isolate Pakistan and build a negative perception about the country as a terrorist state. Since 2009 and Pakistans Armed Forces operations against terrorist groups the perception of Pakistan has been changing to more positive. The more attacks the terrorists do in Pakistan, the more sympathy the international community will have for the country. After the attacks in Sehwan by ISIS, Pakistans image and perception as an ally in war on terror is very high and Pakistan should capitalize on this.
ISIS has the worst perception in people's minds. It is no doubt the most hated organization of the 21st century. Any country that will fight against ISIS will become an instant hero in the international community and their image will be greatly boosted. An example is the Kurds, who have gained support of many countries because of its stand against ISIS.
The last step will be a very controversial one so here are the pros and cons:
Pros:
Cons:
For number 2, 5000-10000 soldiers may not be a big problem. Pakistan has the highest number of contribution to UN mission and we are used to sending thousands of soldiers to help in conflicts abroad. It was Pakistan army that rescued US soldiers when their black hawks were shot down in Somalia.
For number 3, 10,000 troops and a few dozen tanks will not make a huge impact. Also if India attacks a country which is a major non-Nato ally currently in a war with ISIS. This will damage Indias image so bad that it will take them decades to recover, not to mention that many allies will be more willing to help such as Turkey, Saudi and China.
Not to mention that India will no longer have the justification to launch cold start after the world sees Pakistans resolve to fight terrorism and Indias cries of terrorist and failed state as a blinding cloud to fool the world. This will help Pakistan in case of war against India because we will get invaluable hands on experience in coordinated desert warfare and the ability to test latest Chinese high tech weapon systems. May even test missiles that are used to carry tactical nukes.
For number 4 and 5. So what if they retaliate, does not mean we will make decisions from fear tie our own hands and sit quietly when they kill women and children just because we are afraid of their so called retaliation. We should act decisively and do it right the first time to cripple them so bad that they cannot even think of doing something like that again. The territories controlled by ISIS are sparsely populated and in the desert, except for the city of Ar-Raqqah. The reason why they seem so strong is that no one has challenged them yet except for the Kurds. Assad is forced to chose his battles and he ignored ISIS because they do not control many urban areas. The main fight was between Rebels and Assad while ISIS took over what they left behind or do not care to take control of. Most of it is waste desert lands, villages and one major city.
Let me know what you guys think. Discuss.
Perception is very important in international politics and it can be used to make a positive or negative image in the minds of people all over the world. It can also decide the outcome of wars and sanctions, for example low support for Vietnam war caused Americas defeat, even though America was winning militarily. Similarly the war in Iraq ended sooner than the war in Afghanistan possibly due to negative perception of the international community over the former.
Since 9/11 Pakistans perception has fallen and people associate the country with terrorism, this works in favour of India which wants to isolate Pakistan and build a negative perception about the country as a terrorist state. Since 2009 and Pakistans Armed Forces operations against terrorist groups the perception of Pakistan has been changing to more positive. The more attacks the terrorists do in Pakistan, the more sympathy the international community will have for the country. After the attacks in Sehwan by ISIS, Pakistans image and perception as an ally in war on terror is very high and Pakistan should capitalize on this.
ISIS has the worst perception in people's minds. It is no doubt the most hated organization of the 21st century. Any country that will fight against ISIS will become an instant hero in the international community and their image will be greatly boosted. An example is the Kurds, who have gained support of many countries because of its stand against ISIS.
- Pakistan should cooperate, coordinate and negotiate with the US to send troops into Afghanistan border areas where ISIS exists. SSG commandos can be sent into the mountains to eliminate those who are responsible for the senseless killing of women and children in Sehwan. There should be no negotiation with Afghan government. The Army should give a long stick to the Afghans just like Raheel Sharif did.
- The border fence between Afghanistan and Pakistan should be completed on a high priority basis. Army has been cleaning up the terrorist hideouts in the north since almost a decade now. The gutter from where all this filth is coming should be sealed so it does not spread more. This should be the highest priority.
- Pakistan should cooperate with Turkey/Nato/US to send troops in Syria to take the fight directly to ISIS. With tanks, special forces and airforce.
The last step will be a very controversial one so here are the pros and cons:
Pros:
- ISIS has the most negative perception, fighting ISIS directly in its heartland will boost Pakistans public image as a fighter against terrorism and will severely derail Indias plans of creating a terrorist perception of Pakistan and Modis plans of isolating Pakistan will collapse overnight.
- It will increase Pakistans power projection. It will make Pakistan engaged with major powers in the region like Turkey, Iran, Saudi, USA, Russia and Germany. Countries will start taking Pakistan more seriously, allies such as China will want more closer ties and other countries will ask to form alliances such as GCC countries.
- It will damage Indias image in the global community. India has being trying to blame Pakistan as a terrorist country. Actions speak louder than words and this action by Pakistan will expose Indias lies to the world.
- Pakistan gained great experience from the operations and battles against terrorists in Northern Pakistan. Most soldiers on Pakistani side of LOC are very high on morale and confidence despite having lower numbers because they have direct experience from a conflict whereas there adversaries have never seen a war.
- The deployment in Syria would include infantry, tanks, airforce and air defence in a desert environment. This will be a great experience for Pakistan armed forces cooperation to counter cold start in the deserts of Bahawalpur. Pakistan can also test latest Chinese weapons such as the Al-Haider tank, the new attack helicopter and 5th generation fighter jets.
- It will improve the global security, preventing future attacks not only in Belgium, France, Germany but also in Pakistan.
- Chance for the COAS to take decisive action and to prove his worth. Send a message to the enemies that we have a strong leadership and we are not to be messed with.
Cons:
- It can be costly and require deployment of up to 10,000 troops.
- Pakistan is already in its own conflict with a new war starting against terrorists soon in Pakistan. Army is already stretched between Afghanistan, Balochistan, LOC and Western border. With the new addition of defending CPEC routes.
- May make us short on troops back home to defend against an Indian Cold Start attack.
- Repercussion or increase in suicide attacks.
- May turn into a prolonged deployment for example the Afghan war.
For number 2, 5000-10000 soldiers may not be a big problem. Pakistan has the highest number of contribution to UN mission and we are used to sending thousands of soldiers to help in conflicts abroad. It was Pakistan army that rescued US soldiers when their black hawks were shot down in Somalia.
For number 3, 10,000 troops and a few dozen tanks will not make a huge impact. Also if India attacks a country which is a major non-Nato ally currently in a war with ISIS. This will damage Indias image so bad that it will take them decades to recover, not to mention that many allies will be more willing to help such as Turkey, Saudi and China.
Not to mention that India will no longer have the justification to launch cold start after the world sees Pakistans resolve to fight terrorism and Indias cries of terrorist and failed state as a blinding cloud to fool the world. This will help Pakistan in case of war against India because we will get invaluable hands on experience in coordinated desert warfare and the ability to test latest Chinese high tech weapon systems. May even test missiles that are used to carry tactical nukes.
For number 4 and 5. So what if they retaliate, does not mean we will make decisions from fear tie our own hands and sit quietly when they kill women and children just because we are afraid of their so called retaliation. We should act decisively and do it right the first time to cripple them so bad that they cannot even think of doing something like that again. The territories controlled by ISIS are sparsely populated and in the desert, except for the city of Ar-Raqqah. The reason why they seem so strong is that no one has challenged them yet except for the Kurds. Assad is forced to chose his battles and he ignored ISIS because they do not control many urban areas. The main fight was between Rebels and Assad while ISIS took over what they left behind or do not care to take control of. Most of it is waste desert lands, villages and one major city.
Let me know what you guys think. Discuss.
Last edited by a moderator:
