No Exit from Pakistan, Daniel Markey...

desan

desan

President (40k+ posts)

He is staunchly Pro-India and mostly look at things from Indian Lens...

"China-India tensions remain high. To reduce the threat of conflict, Daniel S. Markey recommends the U.S. boost aid to India and begin working with like-minded partners to develop a coordinated response strategy".

www.cfr.org

Preparing for Heightened Tensions Between China and India

China-India tensions remain high. To reduce the threat of conflict, Daniel S. Markey recommends the U.S. boost aid to India and begin working with like-minded partners to develop a coordinated response strategy.
www.cfr.org www.cfr.org
 
Last edited:
A

abdlsy

Prime Minister (20k+ posts)
bc intaa zore naa lugah pakistan is unpredictable hae,

zurra sumbhul kae,

ac kumrae mein bhaet kurr bc bs,

zero in geography baewakhoof, only allah knows

salae just like pakistani anchors write a fantasy book najoomi kee aulad million dollar bunna kae subh koe puraeshaan

we dont know about our region where even us born n raised pakistanis are confused,

mc baewakhoof no exit bc saaf baat kurr china koe spy kurna hae forever
 
miafridi

miafridi

Prime Minister (20k+ posts)
I agree with you on the fact that most of his info seems to show an Indian perspective and therefore his information is flawed(incomplete) at various things. Just for example:

1) He says that there is conflicting and confusing statements coming in from Pakistan where at one hand it is saying that US should stay in Afghanistan while at the other hand it is saying that US better leave Afghanistan.

Ans: Imran khan is asking the US is to prolong there stay until and unless a political settlement of Afghanistan is reached. Meaning that Pakistan do want the US to get the hell out of Afghanistan, but it also want the US to stay until at least all the Afghan Stake holders agree to some settlement(which will end the bloodshed).

2) He says that TTP turned against Pakistan because of Pakistan didn't go against these groups and were ignorant to US calls.

Ans: TTP or other Anti-Pakistan groups didn't turn against Pakistan because Pakistan was ignorant to them, but because these same groups(or the people in these groups) were once trained by Pakistan with US Aid(and full support) against the Soviets, calling it as Jihad(holly war), but now the Same US wanted Pakistan to go against these same groups telling them that they were now terrorist. This is what turned such groups against Pakistan.


3) He says that India was pushed towards Quad because of China's aggression towards India.

Ans: It is in fact the Quad which pushed China to be aggressive towards India, not the other way around. Otherwise China did accords with India not to be part of any group made against each other, but despite this accord in 2017 India made significant moves towards the Quad which is what made China to follow aggressive path against India.
 
Last edited:
Sohail Shuja

Sohail Shuja

Chief Minister (5k+ posts)
A wiseman once said that in international relations, there are no friendships, just interests -- and interests keep changing.

In the new cold war of US which it has started against China, it is clear that Pakistan will be of no use. However, India has a potential to work as an antidote to China. First reason is that it has a history with China, secondly, India has a massive size of economy as well.

Therefore, by looking through the lens of US, India is more valuable than Pakistan in this new cold war. The think tanks like this will start distorting the facts to forge a public opinion in favor of India.

But yes, while we have also changed our discourse from West to our North, therefore our relations from the eastern side are likely to have some change as well. But least they forget that we have our own strategic importance for US, therefore, it is highly unlikely that US will help India to subdue Pakistan. US only wants India to focus on China, which the India is not willing to do at the moment and this is why a clear strategy has not been devised by the Indo-US coords. India was already given strategic posts at Pentagon, but in the end, it proved to be of no benefit to either side.
 
Eyeaan

Eyeaan

Chief Minister (5k+ posts)
Typical US myopic mish-mash constructed out of Indians and some US-resident experts ' narratives. It is clueless as it always has been.
 
Last edited:
desan

desan

President (40k+ posts)
Eyeaan said:
Typical US myopic mish-mash constructed out of Indians and some US-resident experts ' narratives. It is clueless as it always has been.
Click to expand...

Don't think he is clueless...

He knows exactly what he is trying to do!!!
 
Eyeaan

Eyeaan

Chief Minister (5k+ posts)
desan said:
Don't think he is clueless...

He knows exactly what he is trying to do!!!
Click to expand...
What's he trying to convey, exactly?
Is Quad policy over-done or faulty?. As I understand Quad is not primarily about India- pak or politics but about weapon systems and future deployments/war in Indian/SChina oceans.

Or is he enticing Pakistani generals/politicians/media that manna might keep dropping in beaks if they modify their narratives about Afghan and china issue? It seems so.
However US policy is made by Pentagon.
I have read a couple of his old articles in fp and an old report for congress opposing afghan withdrawal - I intend not to read his this book - but perhaps ... . However I cannot get what substantial he might be saying and TO WHOM!!. Please you may help explaining it ' to whom'.

People like macKay or battalions of FP experts, academicians are parasites who live of conflicts and wars. (Once, US used to allocate $100+mil yearly budget for research/propaganda for Pakistan only ) So many intellectuals/scholars lived of WOT, their vast majority was in West. WOT their life-line.

A lesson of History: Once, there used to be a cold war with tens of thousands of experts, academicians, Russian study departments arounds the world with huge huge funds. Afterwards those universities and institutions instantly shifted being WOT experts . A crop of ME experts was raised and nurtured. (just like battalions of red intellectuals in third world countries became Human right experts while just a few years back 'human right was condemned as a bourgeoisie illusion). Scholarship of such academicians (religious cults, fluid groups etc) can be seen exclusively as competition in the market place of ideas for group's benefits - this a certain political theory I'm referring to.
 
Last edited:
pinionated

pinionated

Minister (2k+ posts)
His perspective is American, but he is right. America cannot ignore Pakistan because of its geographical location. They can either scare Pakistan, buy their politicians and Army, or invest like they r in India. If they won’t invest, China is and will.
 
desan

desan

President (40k+ posts)
Eyeaan said:
What's he trying to convey, exactly?
Is Quad policy over-done or faulty?. As I understand Quad is not primarily about India- pak or politics but about weapon systems and future deployments/war in Indian/SChina oceans.

Or is he enticing Pakistani generals/politicians/media that nanna might keep dropping in beaks if they modify their narratives about Afghan and china issue? It seems so.
However US policy is made by Pentagon.
I have read a couple of his old articles in fp and an old report for congress opposing afghan withdrawal - I intend not to read his this book - but perhaps ... . However I cannot get what substantial he might be saying and TO WHOM!!. Please you may help explaining it ' to whom'.

People like macKay or battalions of FP experts, academicians are parasites who live of conflicts and wars. (Once, US used to allocate $100+mil yearly budget for research/propaganda for Pakistan only ) So many intellectuals/scholars lived of WOT, their vast majority was in West. WOT their life-line.

A lesson of History: Once, there used to a cold war with tens of thousands of experts, academicians, Russian study departments arounds the world with huge huge funds. Afterwards those universities and institutions instantly shifted being WOT experts . A crop of ME experts was raised and nurtured. (just like battalions of red intellectuals in third world countries became Human right experts while just a few years back 'human right was condemned as a bourgeoisie illusion). Scholarship of such academicians (religious cults, fluid groups etc) can be seen exclusively as competition in the market place of ideas for group's benefits - this a certain political theory I'm referring to.
Click to expand...

These kinds of people should not be taken lightly, as they have the capacity to be quite influential in shaping public opinion through their lectures, books, and interviews - not unlike Christine Fair (beware of the double negative).

Most of these people also have significant ingress in power corridors and therefore play an important role in influencing the policies of powerful nations in the West.

A lot of them work as professors in prestigious universities who in turn help churn out future influencers and policy makers.

People like Hussain Haqqani in WA, Shahzeb Jilani of DW, Taha Siddiqui in Paris, etc are quite busy in propagating a similar narrative against this country.

 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Featured Discussion Latest Blogs خبریں

© Copyrights 2008 - 2022 Siasat.pk - All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy | Disclaimer|