The Final Showdown Is On The Cards!

By Hamid Waheed

I have extensively written on threat to Balochistan, the largest province of Pakistan due to vested interest of regional and global powers. The dirty game, now seem to take a final turn after Osama’s operation inside Pakistan. The article on perception ‘Pakistan Fighting Perception’ on role of think tanks in the new global strategies published on Opinion Maker must be seen in line with the facts I am listing down from the net. The foreign agents were told to keep the fire on low burner and fight war on Kurd model i.e. through media and keeping issue live at international level till foreign support reaches.

The stage is now being set for this low intensity rebellion to get the “foreign support”. This would interrupt Pakistan’s use of this resource rich, strategically located province, prevent Iran from sending a pipeline to India, as well as eject the Chinese from the region. For those wondering why America is attempting to escalate tensions in Pakistan over the “Bin Laden” hoax instead of using it as an excuse to leave the region, the Balkanization of Pakistan and the permanent disruption of Pakistan’s, Iran’s, and China’s development may be the answer. Mulla Omer and Quetta Shura will be the buzz word of tomorrow. Iranian president stated that Osama was in US custody long before his assassination in Abbottabad. A British paper today indicates at action against Pakistan’s nuclear assets. Kerry the founder of KLB and KLL is saying aid to Pakistan may be stopped. For a person following the Think Tanks and US, UK study groups its not a news. Let me list history of few reports from net.  

  Boeing 797: Air Bus Crusher

In a 2006 report by the corporate-financier funded think tank titled, “Pakistan: The Resurgence of Baluch Nationalism,” violence starting as early as 2004-2005 is described. According to the report, 20% of Pakistan’s mineral and energy resources reside in the sparsely populated province. On page 4 of the report, the prospect of using the Baluchi rebels against both Islamabad and Tehran is proposed. In Seymour Hersh’s 2008 article, “Preparing the Battlefield,” US support of Baluchi groups operating against Tehran is reported as already a reality. In Brookings Institution’s “Which Path to Persia?” the subject of arming and sending Baluchi insurgents against Tehran is also discussed at great depth.

The 2006 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace report goes on to describe accusations by the Pakistani government that the rebels are armed with overly sophisticated weaponry. India, Iran, and the United States are accused as potential culprits. The report concludes that virtually none of Pakistan’s neighbors would benefit from the insurgency and that the insurgency itself has no possibility of succeeding without “foreign support.” The conflict is described as a potential weapon that could be used against Pakistan and that it is “ultimately Islamabad that must decide whether Baluchistan will become its Achilles’ heel.” This somewhat cryptic conclusion, in the light of recent reports and developments can be deciphered as a veiled threat now being openly played.

Quite clearly when Islamabad accused foreign governments of fueling and arming the unrest in Baluchistan, they were absolutely correct. Seymour Hersh’s report lays to rest any illusions over whether or not America is arming Baluchi rebels. Brookings’ “Which Path to Persia?” report also openly calls for arming and sending Baluchi rebels out against Tehran. More recently, longtime proponent of a Baluchi insurgency, Selig Harrison of the Soros funded Center for International Policy, has published two pieces regarding the “liberation” of Baluchistan itself.

  TTPs anti-Malala statements

Harrison’s February 2011 piece, “Free Baluchistan,” calls to “aid the 6 million Baluch insurgents fighting for independence from Pakistan in the face of growing ISI repression.” He continues by explaining the various merits of such meddling by stating, “Pakistan has given China a base at Gwadar in the heart of Baluch territory. So an independent Baluchistan would serve U.S. strategic interests in addition to the immediate goal of countering Islamist forces.”

Harrison would follow up his frank call to carve up Pakistan by addressing the issue of Chinese-Pakistani relations in a March 2011 piece titled, “The Chinese Cozy Up to the Pakistanis.” He begins by stating, “China’s expanding reach is a natural and acceptable accompaniment of its growing power—but only up to a point. ” He then reiterates his call for extraterritorial meddling in Pakistan by saying, “to counter what China is doing in Pakistan, the United States should play hardball by supporting the movement for an independent Baluchistan along the Arabian Sea and working with Baluch insurgents to oust the Chinese from their budding naval base at Gwadar. Beijing wants its inroads into Gilgit and Baltistan to be the first step on its way to an Arabian Sea outlet at Gwadar.”

Harrison has made calls for the carving up of Pakistan for years. In 2009 he insisted that Pakistan should grant Baluchistan autonomy, citing a laundry list of technicalities that justified such a devolution of power. Quite clearly, Mr. Harrison has become more blunt as of late. And while endless papers and covert support for the Baluchi insurgency have been going on for years, more overt calls, echoing with equal, self-serving hollowness as those for Libya’s foreign-funded rebellion, are being made. His statement in a seminar held in Apr 2011 is the latest effort.

  No To NATO Supplies

Selig Harrison is also a regular attendee at the “Balochistan International Conference” and frequently reiterates his calls for a “free Baluchistan.” With him is Washington lobbyistAndrew Eiva, a former special forces operator who took part in supporting the Mujaheddin in Afghanistan. He proposes a vision of a bright future where Baluchis will enjoy their gas and oil wealth one day in their own autonomous, free nation. Such encouragement from Harrison, whose Center for International Policy is funded by the Ford Foundation, George Soros’ Open Society Institute, and Rockefeller Family and Associates, or Eiva’s flights of petroleum-fueled fancy at a Carnegie Endowment function – funded by Exxon, Chevron, BP Corporations of North America, the GE Foundation, Shell International, as well as the globalist mainstays of Soros, Rockefeller, and the Smith Richardson Foundation – would be almost laughable if real people weren’t dying and Pakistan’s entire future being put at risk.

The above may just be a compilation from internet but Pakistani leader ship and its security and intelligence under General Kiyani and Pasha need to take stock of all such happenings while formulating future Pakistan policy. Pakistan has the capability to avert any such pressure but only with FAITH, DISCIPLINE and UNITY.