PKPolitics Discuss » Current Issues

Obama's Alternative Universe...

(5 posts)
  1. A realistic analysis of event happenings in Afghanistan and Pakistan both current as well as from the past. Here one may find problems identified with solutions offered. As I found this article a bit lengthy but informative, thought I could still share some with our honorary members:

    OBAMAS ALTERNATIVE UNIVERSE
    By Scott Ritter
    January 13, 2010 "Truthdig"

    United States must stop factoring al-Qaida and a nebulous “war on terror” into the problem it faces in Afghanistan and Pakistan today. As is the case in the Middle East, the problems faced by America in Central Asia are manifested not so much by what is (improperly) acknowledged—i.e., al-Qaida, the Taliban and a “war on terror”—but rather by that which is not. As the instability of Afghanistan pushes the United States deeper and deeper into the quagmire of Pakistan, it becomes clearer by the day that the key to any future American exit from the region runs not through Kabul, but rather Islamabad. As such, the problem faced by the United States cannot be defined as it currently is, in terms of Swat, Waziristan, Baluchistan and other remote areas of Pakistan’s border with Afghanistan, but rather a region which American politicians are loath to utter publicly: Kashmir.

    The increasing radicalization of Pakistan is not derived from what has been transpiring in its Pashtun regions, or those of Afghanistan, but rather from the cancerous tumor that remains from the messy divorce of India and Pakistan in 1948. Kashmir is the source of Pakistani-Indian enmity, and is the primary reason that each of those two nations has developed a nuclear arsenal aimed at the other’s heartland.

    Kashmir serves as the principle motivating force for radical Islam in Pakistan today. Long before Pakistan facilitated American support for Afghan freedom fighters, it was providing training and support for Islamic fundamentalists who served the cause of a unified Kashmir under the flag of Pakistan.

    Reducing the influence of radical Islam in Pakistan will never come as a result of any manifestation of American “Af-Pak” policy, but rather through American leadership in recognizing the reality of the unresolved Kashmir situation, and the necessity of resolving this problem in a manner that recognizes Pakistan’s legitimate concerns. However, similar to what Israel does in handling the issue of Palestine, India has been able to leverage its economic and regional influence in a manner that prevents American policymakers from engaging on the issue of Kashmir. Without such an engagement there can never be a resolution of the problems faced by America in Pakistan today.

    As America enters 2010, one does not require a crystal ball to forecast that issues pertaining to Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan and the “war on terror” will dominate the headlines throughout the year. And here’s one thing that is less clear but every bit as certain: So long as President Obama fails to recognize that there is no “war on terror” for America to fight, and that the problems in the Middle East and Central Asia cannot be resolved without recognizing the paramount roles of Palestine and Kashmir, respectively, then not only will there be no solution to America’s problems but these problems will only get progressively worse, creating the conditions for the formulation of a series of new “solutions,” none of which will address the problems they are designed to resolve.

    Sadly, if this prediction comes true, 2010 will be a very bad year for the American people, and the world as a whole, simply because those who can make a difference are operating in an alternative policy universe governed by the self-serving interests of those who use politically induced fear as a mechanism of placating a public oblivious to the fact that they are sleepwalking ever closer to a demise of their own making. For this we have no one to blame but ourselves.

    Complete article:
    http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/obamas_alternative_universe_20100108/

    Scott Ritter was a U.N. weapons inspector in Iraq from 1991 to 1998. He is the author of “Target Iran” (Nation Books, 2007).

    Posted 2 years ago on 15 Jan 2010 18:08 #
  2. zia m
    Member

    Good analysis by scott Ritter.He is very outspoken but does not have much influence on policy makers in Washington.
    Obama has inherited two wars.I think he is smart enough to recognise the problem.
    He has the best possible man (George Mitchell) working on the Palestinian issue but it is not going to be easy.AIPAC has too much influence on US politics it can make Obama lose the next election.

    Posted 2 years ago on 15 Jan 2010 20:28 #
  3. toamin
    member

    Yea he inherited two wars but initiated two more.

    They are neither in control nor in manageable position.

    Posted 2 years ago on 16 Jan 2010 3:19 #
  4. shahzad1924
    member

    semirza, good share.

    Posted 2 years ago on 16 Jan 2010 8:29 #
  5. Assalam-o-Alaikum-Warahmat-ULLAH ALL,

    Let there be no confusion. US didn't step in the Middle East and EurAsia regions with its military to end conflicts. It entered there with its military to ensure safety of Israel, to establish their (US/Israel's) long term hegemony i.e., supremacy of NWO.

    It is here to create problems, spread injustice, militarize these regions in order to implement its own hegemony over these regions.

    For US can't make NWO 'effective' without achieving this objective. Their agenda i.e., the entire! world must accept slavery of 'Yahood'/Zionists.

    US is the only! nation in the world which is supporting Israel in every! sense, financially, with military hardware, fighting wars for Israel, etc etc.

    Yes, the business model that has evolved in US over decades which has now fully matured is its 'military industrial complex'. It is spread over 44 states, where it provides jobs. US and its representatives are not ready to move away from this, even though they will create more! jobs in the process according to interviews I'v seen in US mass media. They do not want to move towards peaceful ways of generating their economy. Yet they are ready to allow violent murder! of innocent millions! worldwide every year because of it.

    What is US's primary export ? WMDs (weapons of mass! destruction), right ? What is the primary use of these weapons ? -> Spread! injustice.

    Why does US always! support minorities over majorities when it subdues a nation ?

    Is it not common sense ?

    Posted 2 years ago on 16 Jan 2010 12:05 #

RSS feed for this topic

Reply

You must log in to post.