Operation Ghazab Lil Haq (Pakistan - Afghanistan War)

[Watandar]

For how long are we going to always blame foreign actors as for our military failures at home? I definitely do believe countries like UAE/Israel/India have a role to play but Pakistani Army has failed to develop an effective strategy to secure the province over decades.

It is reactive, tactical and complaining after every attack. This army needs to stop pretending to be competent and seek advice and training from the Turks and Chinese, put its ego aside.

Wow, that's the first thing you have said in months that makes sense. Pakistan army has spectacularly failed in its actual job.

 

[Vapnope]

Wow, that's the first thing you have said in months that makes sense. Pakistan army has spectacularly failed in its actual job.

Because state thinks that kinetic actions are the way to deal it, which is not really helping. Here is what Asad Durrani said back in 2014-15

He wrote about handling *asymmetrical/sub-conventional warfare* through *9 pillars of the state*. The idea got traction after it was discussed in connection with Pakistan’s National Action Plan and counter-insurgency doctrine around 2015-2018.

The 9 pillars he outlined are typically listed as:
1. *Political* - Credible political process, national consensus
2. *Economic* - Address deprivation, create opportunities
3. *Social* - Education, health, justice delivery
4. *Ideological* - Counter extremist narrative
5. *Media* - Strategic communication, counter propaganda
6. *Diplomatic* - Manage external linkages of militants
7. *Legal/Judicial* - Fast, fair justice system
8. *Administrative/Governance* - State presence and service delivery
9. *Military/Law Enforcement* - Kinetic response as last resort

The argument is: you can’t defeat asymmetrical warfare with military force alone. You need all 9 pillars working together, with the military pillar being only one part.

 

[Hopefully Pessimistic]

Because state thinks that kinetic actions are the way to deal it, which is not really helping. Here is what Asad Durrani said back in 2014-15

He wrote about handling *asymmetrical/sub-conventional warfare* through *9 pillars of the state*. The idea got traction after it was discussed in connection with Pakistan’s National Action Plan and counter-insurgency doctrine around 2015-2018.

The 9 pillars he outlined are typically listed as:
1. *Political* - Credible political process, national consensus
2. *Economic* - Address deprivation, create opportunities
3. *Social* - Education, health, justice delivery
4. *Ideological* - Counter extremist narrative
5. *Media* - Strategic communication, counter propaganda
6. *Diplomatic* - Manage external linkages of militants
7. *Legal/Judicial* - Fast, fair justice system
8. *Administrative/Governance* - State presence and service delivery
9. *Military/Law Enforcement* - Kinetic response as last resort

The argument is: you can’t defeat asymmetrical warfare with military force alone. You need all 9 pillars working together, with the military pillar being only one part.

Nonesense. Pick up a history book or look at your allies. Kinetic actions are indeed the only way to deal with an armed insurgency, the problem is that there is no larger over-arching strategy at play.

If you have all the right tools at your disposal, but have no idea in craftsmanship to build something, those tools are useless.

Overwhelming military force with a larger strategic plan comes first, after significant degradation, you employ reconciliatory and relief measures related to socioeconomic uplift and bringing them into the mainstream.

But it is a very dangeroua mindset to reward ethnically motivated violence, if someone is going around as an armed group carrying out ethnic-based executions, then you are mentally ill if you think they need to be rewarded before punished to set a precedent that this isn't okay.

If you plan to reward BLAs violence, be ready for everyone to demand a share, Pashtun Taliban, Sindhis, and then Punjabis.

 

[ACE OF HEARTS]

Why is it difficult to monitor the border through drones 24 / 7 ?

One drone every 50 km is manageable for 24 / 7 surveillance?

 

[Distant_Observer]

Nonesense. Pick up a history book or look at your allies. Kinetic actions are indeed the only way to deal with an armed insurgency, the problem is that there is no larger over-arching strategy at play.

If you have all the right tools at your disposal, but have no idea in craftsmanship to build something, those tools are useless.

Overwhelming military force with a larger strategic plan comes first, after significant degradation, you employ reconciliatory and relief measures related to socioeconomic uplift and bringing them into the mainstream.

But it is a very dangeroua mindset to reward ethnically motivated violence, if someone is going around as an armed group carrying out ethnic-based executions, then you are mentally ill if you think they need to be rewarded before punished to set a precedent that this isn't okay.

If you plan to reward BLAs violence, be ready for everyone to demand a share, Pashtun Taliban, Sindhis, and then Punjabis.

Europe and the US invaded and brutalized the afghans for their support of AQ and 9/11 attackers.

They then relentlessly purged bad actors from within.

This is how order and control is restored.

Pakistan is paying the price for not dominating its western flank.

 

[Hopefully Pessimistic]

In fact, I want to expand on this. People view insurgencies and terrorism all in the same brush but each one is unique to its own specific context and state goals. The outcome that some countries seek is extremely different to what others seek as well as the nature of the insurgency.

The problem is that Pakistanis are low IQ, often don't read much so they love taking copy-paste solutions done by X,Y,Z. It's the lazy village-idiot intellectual thing to do.

Mainly, the obsession is with the American strategy of hearts & minds, this is because the Pakistani Army lacking its own native ideological clarity or meaning in what Pakistan really is or its goal, has always seeked out-of-place solutions copied from outside, but especially from the US due to close ties and idolising it. They lack both originality, and a localised perspective because of the hollowness of Pakistani identity itself.

But there are major flaws in trying to just copy & paste US strategies because they were fundamentally expeditionary operations overseas to defeat specific groups like ISIS. In other words, the US needed their temporary support to defeat a group and then leave.

This is starkly different to national insurgencies within your border because not only do you defeat the insurgency, but it requires a strong degree of assimiliation and integration into the mainstream of the country. You are not going to up and leave, it's home territory.

This is why Turkish strategies, Sri Lankan or Chinese strategies had always been majorly different to US expeditionary forces overseas. Because there is also a larger demographic and cultural assimiliatiom program to stabilise a territory and integrate it. It's not a temporary thing.

@Panzerkiel opinions?

 

[R2D2]

The strategy of "Sanp bhi mar jae aur lathi bhi na toote" is radically out of the box. If the Field Marshal implements Islamic system in Pakistan, the TTP problem would be solved over night as half of them would become free soldiers for Pakistan and the other half would go back to what they were doing in civilian life. FM can then do an economic union with Afghanistan and double the area of Pakistan.

 

[krash]

How do you guys even sleep the day you don't blame Pashtoons and PTI for everything that is wrong with Pakistan ? Sleeping pills that day ?

If Punjab bordered Afghanistan. And had the same poorly managed border issue. And was used for same campaigns against USSR and USA, and was radicalized by ZIA. would it have been any different then today's KPK ? Why is Baluchistan even worst then KPK ? Is BLA pashton dominated or based in KPK ?


To be frank, I am not even a nationalist pashtoon neither am I pashtonistan supporter or favor afghani pashtoon a bit over Pakistan. But the way you all are fed up of us, why not just let us go ? Why not just change constitution and make us a separate country and stop all trade and relationship with KP ? We expel all the pashtoon from Sindh and Punjab as well. Leave no one behind. And then see how soon Pakistan become a switzerland. Just be done with it. This is a request from someone from KP. Either stop barking on us or just be done with it. Your famous and old "udhar tm idhar ham".

He said PTI, not Pashtoons. This emo pretense of martyrdom doesn't work anymore.

The negligence former FATA, and for that matter Balochistan, GB, Norther KPK, and internal Sindh have seen is criminal. Their different circumstances have produced differently defunct communities. The local, provincial, and federal politicians, tribal dynamics, locals, and the rest of Pakistan have all played their role in it to the fullest. Yet, every single one of you Pakistanis is desperate to pin it on the other, while unashamedly excusing your own failings and your favorite politicians' transparently divisive and anti-state rhetoric, even if it means destroying your children's inherently interwoven and interdependent futures.

 

[Distant_Observer]

He said PTI, not Pashtoons. This emo pretense of martyrdom doesn't work anymore.

The negligence former FATA, and for that matter Balochistan, GB, Norther KPK, and internal Sindh have seen is criminal. Their different circumstances have produced differently defunct communities. The local, provincial, and federal politicians, tribal dynamics, locals, and the rest of Pakistan have all played their role in it to the fullest. Yet, every single one of you Pakistanis is desperate to pin it on the other, while unashamedly excusing your own failings and your favorite politicians' transparently divisive and anti-state rhetoric, even if it means destroying your children's inherently interwoven and interdependent futures.

1.3 billion Indians eat cow shit for dinner every night and they don't do these antics.

Being a peaceful and productive member of your community is the cornerstone of all civilized people wherever they are in the world.

Unfortunately, this is an affliction with many in Pakistan and the middle east. There is an underlying guardrail that attempts to rationalize violent terroristic ideologies as a form of a noble struggle so the state is unable to adopt a clear stance.

Pakistan paid the price after the Afghan invasion when it was caught in no mans land. They didn't even move the troops to the border to close it. They let the locals give taliban fighters safe havens They knew these taliban are namak haram scum and yet they still yielded. Pathetic.

I am still waiting for the general that can properly invoke the hard state so we can start applying collective punishment that extends beyond borders. Looks like the current one has become too comfortable in his civilian clothing.

 

[Hopefully Pessimistic]

In fact, I want to expand on this. People view insurgencies and terrorism all in the same brush but each one is unique to its own specific context and state goals. The outcome that some countries seek is extremely different to what others seek as well as the nature of the insurgency.

The problem is that Pakistanis are low IQ, often don't read much so they love taking copy-paste solutions done by X,Y,Z. It's the lazy village-idiot intellectual thing to do.

Mainly, the obsession is with the American strategy of hearts & minds, this is because the Pakistani Army lacking its own native ideological clarity or meaning in what Pakistan really is or its goal, has always seeked out-of-place solutions copied from outside, but especially from the US due to close ties and idolising it. They lack both originality, and a localised perspective because of the hollowness of Pakistani identity itself.

But there are major flaws in trying to just copy & paste US strategies because they were fundamentally expeditionary operations overseas to defeat specific groups like ISIS. In other words, the US needed their temporary support to defeat a group and then leave.

This is starkly different to national insurgencies within your border because not only do you defeat the insurgency, but it requires a strong degree of assimiliation and integration into the mainstream of the country. You are not going to up and leave, it's home territory.

This is why Turkish strategies, Sri Lankan or Chinese strategies had always been majorly different to US expeditionary forces overseas. Because there is also a larger demographic and cultural assimiliatiom program to stabilise a territory and integrate it. It's not a temporary thing.

@Panzerkiel opinions?

Panzer bhai, as a respected member of the forum with intimiate knowledge internally, can you shed some light if you agree with some of this analysis and which part you wouldn't?

I believe following the increasing attacks like the Quetta blast, the lack of interaction by the security establishment with the public creates an atmosphere of low morale and hopelessness. Obviously, it's not possible for them to explicitly give every detail of what they plan, but completely not shedding light is a bad idea, informal channels should be used to give some assurances that we have taken notice of X, Y, Z, and will do things differently.

This keeps the nation's morale high even in difficult times because they know their army is not sitting their clueless but also on the offensive. Unfortunately there is a culture to not care much of public opinion (partially because public itself usually isnt interested or has stupid ones) but i think shedding a little light and showing your still in the fight through visible action goes a long way!

@Panzerkiel

 

[Oscar]

Nonesense. Pick up a history book or look at your allies. Kinetic actions are indeed the only way to deal with an armed insurgency, the problem is that there is no larger over-arching strategy at play.

If you have all the right tools at your disposal, but have no idea in craftsmanship to build something, those tools are useless.

Overwhelming military force with a larger strategic plan comes first, after significant degradation, you employ reconciliatory and relief measures related to socioeconomic uplift and bringing them into the mainstream.

But it is a very dangeroua mindset to reward ethnically motivated violence, if someone is going around as an armed group carrying out ethnic-based executions, then you are mentally ill if you think they need to be rewarded before punished to set a precedent that this isn't okay.

If you plan to reward BLAs violence, be ready for everyone to demand a share, Pashtun Taliban, Sindhis, and then Punjabis.

Well, the soviets tried overwhelming force and eventually hit real world limitations - America could have basically made Afghanistan devoid of any Afghan if it wanted to - but real world limitations will always hit home.
So the same applied to Pakistan - real world limitations will hit home every time regardless of wishful thinking.

These real world limitations are political, geographical, social and also translate into quality of resources for the military including human resource.

 

[Vapnope]

Nonesense. Pick up a history book or look at your allies. Kinetic actions are indeed the only way to deal with an armed insurgency, the problem is that there is no larger over-arching strategy at play.

If you have all the right tools at your disposal, but have no idea in craftsmanship to build something, those tools are useless.

Overwhelming military force with a larger strategic plan comes first, after significant degradation, you employ reconciliatory and relief measures related to socioeconomic uplift and bringing them into the mainstream.

But it is a very dangeroua mindset to reward ethnically motivated violence, if someone is going around as an armed group carrying out ethnic-based executions, then you are mentally ill if you think they need to be rewarded before punished to set a precedent that this isn't okay.

If you plan to reward BLAs violence, be ready for everyone to demand a share, Pashtun Taliban, Sindhis, and then Punjabis.

I am gonna refer to experts like Galula, Kitson & Kilcullen on assymetrical warfare who say exactly what Asad Durrani said (which actually became the charter of NAP). I am just curious, which expert or example you are pointing out which says that the only solution is kinetic operations?

 

[Hopefully Pessimistic]

I am gonna refer to experts like Galula, Kitson & Kilcullen on assymetrical warfare who say exactly what Asad Durrani said (which actually became the charter of NAP). I am just curious, which expert or example you are pointing out which says that the only solution is kinetic operations?

All of these were focused on a very specific counter insurgency context which were US & European powers on expeditionary foreign lands.

This is starkly different to the goals of a state dealing with territories at home which it wants to integrate and assimiliate into a mainstream identity.

Reach up on Turkish historical operations, strategy and planning and why it was employed to see the difference in goals. Socioeconomic stuff happens too but isn't the primary solution.

See this:

In fact, I want to expand on this. People view insurgencies and terrorism all in the same brush but each one is unique to its own specific context and state goals. The outcome that some countries seek is extremely different to what others seek as well as the nature of the insurgency.

The problem is that Pakistanis are low IQ, often don't read much so they love taking copy-paste solutions done by X,Y,Z. It's the lazy village-idiot intellectual thing to do.

Mainly, the obsession is with the American strategy of hearts & minds, this is because the Pakistani Army lacking its own native ideological clarity or meaning in what Pakistan really is or its goal, has always seeked out-of-place solutions copied from outside, but especially from the US due to close ties and idolising it. They lack both originality, and a localised perspective because of the hollowness of Pakistani identity itself.

But there are major flaws in trying to just copy & paste US strategies because they were fundamentally expeditionary operations overseas to defeat specific groups like ISIS. In other words, the US needed their temporary support to defeat a group and then leave.

This is starkly different to national insurgencies within your border because not only do you defeat the insurgency, but it requires a strong degree of assimiliation and integration into the mainstream of the country. You are not going to up and leave, it's home territory.

This is why Turkish strategies, Sri Lankan or Chinese strategies had always been majorly different to US expeditionary forces overseas. Because there is also a larger demographic and cultural assimiliatiom program to stabilise a territory and integrate it. It's not a temporary thing.

@Panzerkiel opinions?

 

[kambhakt]

Europe and the US invaded and brutalized the afghans for their support of AQ and 9/11 attackers.

They then relentlessly purged bad actors from within.

This is how order and control is restored.

The Americans failed to restore order and control in Afghanistan.

 

[Pakistan Space Agency]

Dafuq is this?

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Us versus them, and them versus us.

It's a 78-year old story.