By Peter Chamberlin

Kurram Agency JirgaAfter amplifying distrust with the primary Taliban leadership (by grabbing-up most of the senior leadership), Gen. Kayani may be figuring-out that Sirajuddin Haqqani is the last ace up his sleeve.  If the generals cannot hide their primarymilitant assets in Kurram, then there will be no offensive in N. Waziristan.

The closing of the border access points is a dark omen of things to come.  Failure to force the Shia of Parachinar using fear alone, into accepting Taliban dominance will likely signal their imminent decimation by overwhelming military force.  The only thing really restraining the generals from choosing the ultra-violent solution is the possibility that the free press (blogger community) will not let them get away with it.  In order to pretend that Pakistan is a democracy and to deny that it is still a military dictatorship, the Army must continue to hide its protection of the Haqqani network and the Taliban itself.  If the people of the world were to see that the Army rules by using its secret militant assets to terrorize its own people, then there would be a cut-off of the international funds that keeps the country afloat.  Pakistan walks a tightrope in order to maintain the illusion of "democracy."

It is impossible to write about the Pakistani Army without arousing the passions of the Pakistani people.  The fact that Pakistani democracy is really only two years old, counting from the end of Musharraf, means that it really is a work in the making.

When speaking to the people of another country, especially one which is torn by American actions, it is necessary at first, to tailor your words to fit the prevailing opinions in that country.  In the two years in which I have been actively trying to really communicate with the Pakistani people, I have found support at various times from both ends of the Pakistani political spectrum, those who support the Army and those who believe that the Army is the problem.  Long-time readers may have noticed my writing reflected an apparent pro-Army position in the beginning and an anti-Army opinion these days.  In the beginning, before I really understood the Pakistani problem, I supported the Army's actions, believing them to be a defense against the "bomb you back to the Stone Age" mentality of Bush and Cheney.  Now that I know, I cannot contemplate supporting Army actions.

  Al-Qaeda's Suspect Humanitarianism

The hypocrisy of the Pak Army is unbelievable, nearly as great as that of their American mentors.  The truth of the terror war can easily be seen in Pakistan.  The whole thing is bullshit masquerading as "patriotism."  Pretending that they are defending us (US and Pakistan), patriotic young men in both armies have laid their bodies in the line of fire.  They were enlisted not to defend, but to create an artificial means of indirect control over us, the civilians.  The concept of "limited war" is a mechanism of indirect popular control, devised to enable the government to wage wars of aggression, without breaching the public's limits of acceptable morality.   Pakistan's Army, just like America's, wages war upon its enemies as a way to wage indirectly war upon its own people.  The war justifies the elimination of political rights.  This is the real mission of the war, not the manufactured war against synthetic enemies.

The war in Pakistan has come in waves.  Perhaps the final wave for Pakistan will be the one waiting to wash over Kurram, then Peshawar, then Islamabad.  By creating the synthetic (manufactured) war in S. Waziristan, Musharraf has managed to convince the Pakistani people to embrace waging total war upon the militants. In contrast to past government failure to force the war in FATA upon the people, guerrillas wearing black hoods have easily swayed public opinion in favor of the war, simply by bombing a few mosques and funeral processions.  In the past, the people have risen-up against America's war, now the militants cause the people to rise-up against them, just what the armies of Pakistan and America want.  How convenient.

  How the US Radicalized Conservatism

The war against the synthetic opponents in Pakistan's tribal regions is a war that Musharraf inherited from Zia.  Since the beginning, the Army's militants have always been Deobandi or Wahabbi Sunni radicals, who murdered mostly Shiites all over the country.  The Sunni militant war against the Shia has always focused on Kurram and the "Parrot's beak" staging area, where America's militants were gathered together before moving into Afghanistan.  The "mujahedeen" army organized for America around Peshawar, under the direction of Osama bin Laden, waged a bloody action against Parachinar's Shia defenders that cost hundreds of lives.  This was to send a warning signal to revolutionary Iran, who was providing support to Parachinar's Shia as well as to the Hazara Shia on the Afghan side of the border.  This geostrategic war, fought on a very personal local level, has been the very real daily life of thousands of people, simply because it happened out of our eyesight, beyond the great mountains of the Hindu Kush.

The Internet has changed all that.  The dreaded war called "globalism" has stretched all the way into the formerly inaccessible places like Parachinar.  The military takeover of Parachinar must be "televised," so to speak.  We cannot let the Army and the militants seal this zone off and carry-out a Pakistani version of Israel's "Cast Iron" there (SEE: Parachinar–Pakistan’s Gaza Strip ).

There are many articles on the past siege of Parachinar on this website.  As this latest planned action unfolds, it is certain that there will be many more, such as the one below, Kurram: the forsaken FATA.


Peter Chamberlin has been actively opposing all non-defensive war most of his life. Peter’s first petition (as a teenager) was a success in his local community, raising several hundred signatures protesting Nixon’s scapegoating of Lt. Calley for the My Lai incident. He has been very active since 1982 writing letters to newspapers and magazines, as well as recalcitrant national leaders, speaking-out against war, nuclear war, and the impending violent collapse of the Western empire (that is now at hand). Chamberlin has been writing for the Internet since 2005.  Started There Are No Sunglasses in 2008.

He is a regular contributor to Opinion Maker.