Thank you for your reply, and in case I wasn't clear, I thought the article was excellent.
I never meant the Pakistan army was aiding separatists, but I do think it odd that, if the US intends hiving off Baluchistan, the Pakistan army would be content to allow the US to create a colony of sorts there, and for the US to use it to arm separatists. If this is policy is clear to a determined civilian, how much more clear would it be for the ISI etc? That's why it seemed strange that the army is content to simply use Gwadar to run scams, and the US has been allowed to entrench itself so much in the province.
But on second thoughts, maybe they don't see much they can do to stop the Americans get entrenched. Maybe their land grab is a way to profit from the inevitable, and to surround the port and thereby constrict its growth and monitor US activities there.
And as for China and Russia arming the Taliban, I'd still be very keen to see what supports that claim.
Assuming most of it is true, interesting developments in Baluchistan are afoot. I have a little trouble understanding why the Pakistani military would be so keen to get on board with a project that has the dismemberment of Pakistan as a goal (even allowing for the staggering corruption in that body), and I would like to see some evidence that China and Russia arm the Taliban, since Russia has allies among the northern Alliance and China fears the growth of Islamic radicalism in Sinkiang, just up the road.
But now that the Americans have quietly acquired a deep water port and three airbases along a what is indeed an excellent pipeline route, and are using the area as a base for attacking Iran, Baluchistan has massive strategic value for the USA. It follows that the US is no longer (presuming it used to be) a passive observer in Pakistani separatist strife. Most of the geopolitical value of Pakistan for the US lies there; why wouldn't the government of Islamabad be dispensable to them if the US is secure in Baluchistan? The drone attacks on Quetta - 70 odd k into Baluchistan - demonstrate that the US sees little need for restraint in the way that it exerts its power there.
You miss a vital option that would achieve your outcome. If the USA accepts the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court and all the other international law bodies it hasn't recognised, America will find it much easier to obtain international cooperation to go after people like Awlaki, and it will gain additional mechanisms by which to prosecute them. The humiliation foreign governments experience for being seen as America's puppet when opposing terrorists will be diminished, so other nations will be more likely to exercise their universal jurisdiction over crimes against humanity to prosecute terrorists or hand them over to the tribunals.
The respect that the USA would get for this simply cannot be understated, although I doubt a majority of Americans would go for it once Fox goes berserk. Its true that many, many claims will be brought against America, but it will do as much to take America off the Imperial path as anything else, and think American democracy will be much better for it. I think it would make Obama worthy of his Nobel Peace Prize, and force a revolution in the way America conducts war, if it continues to conduct it at all.
Thank you for your reply, and in case I wasn't clear, I thought the article was excellent.
I never meant the Pakistan army was aiding separatists, but I do think it odd that, if the US intends hiving off Baluchistan, the Pakistan army would be content to allow the US to create a colony of sorts there, and for the US to use it to arm separatists. If this is policy is clear to a determined civilian, how much more clear would it be for the ISI etc? That's why it seemed strange that the army is content to simply use Gwadar to run scams, and the US has been allowed to entrench itself so much in the province.
But on second thoughts, maybe they don't see much they can do to stop the Americans get entrenched. Maybe their land grab is a way to profit from the inevitable, and to surround the port and thereby constrict its growth and monitor US activities there.
And as for China and Russia arming the Taliban, I'd still be very keen to see what supports that claim.
Assuming most of it is true, interesting developments in Baluchistan are afoot. I have a little trouble understanding why the Pakistani military would be so keen to get on board with a project that has the dismemberment of Pakistan as a goal (even allowing for the staggering corruption in that body), and I would like to see some evidence that China and Russia arm the Taliban, since Russia has allies among the northern Alliance and China fears the growth of Islamic radicalism in Sinkiang, just up the road.
But now that the Americans have quietly acquired a deep water port and three airbases along a what is indeed an excellent pipeline route, and are using the area as a base for attacking Iran, Baluchistan has massive strategic value for the USA. It follows that the US is no longer (presuming it used to be) a passive observer in Pakistani separatist strife. Most of the geopolitical value of Pakistan for the US lies there; why wouldn't the government of Islamabad be dispensable to them if the US is secure in Baluchistan? The drone attacks on Quetta - 70 odd k into Baluchistan - demonstrate that the US sees little need for restraint in the way that it exerts its power there.
You miss a vital option that would achieve your outcome. If the USA accepts the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court and all the other international law bodies it hasn't recognised, America will find it much easier to obtain international cooperation to go after people like Awlaki, and it will gain additional mechanisms by which to prosecute them. The humiliation foreign governments experience for being seen as America's puppet when opposing terrorists will be diminished, so other nations will be more likely to exercise their universal jurisdiction over crimes against humanity to prosecute terrorists or hand them over to the tribunals.
The respect that the USA would get for this simply cannot be understated, although I doubt a majority of Americans would go for it once Fox goes berserk. Its true that many, many claims will be brought against America, but it will do as much to take America off the Imperial path as anything else, and think American democracy will be much better for it. I think it would make Obama worthy of his Nobel Peace Prize, and force a revolution in the way America conducts war, if it continues to conduct it at all.