U.S.Z threats backfire - Pakistani Establishment and General Kiyani take a firm stand

Read on Pakistan Cyber Force Facebook Page

•  Subscribe to our Daily Updates

Ever since Pakistan developed strategic relationship with U.S.Z in the sixties, it has been continuously and periodically receiving threats from the United States of Zionism. On the face of it, the reasons keep on changing but the real aim of these threats always remains the same. Till this time, Pakistan has become quite used to such threats. The Pakistani establishment can easily discern what is a threat and what is a bluff.

Have the threats achieved the results that the United States of Zionism wanted? Absolutely not! The U.S.Z base was closed down despite the threats. Islamabad still continues to pursue its aims in Afghanistan despite the assassination of a Prime Minister. The Globalist Puppet President Carter was forced to deal with President Zia Ul haq. Pakistan continued to pursue the Nuclear Program despite several sanctions and threats to the life of the Prime Minister in whose time the program was initiated. Pervez Musharraf agreed to the seven points in theory that were presented to him as a bypass route to avoid “being bombed to stone age”, but was never allowed to be totally compliant by the real controlling powers in Pakistan that never let the puppets cross a certain limit. General Kiyani sahb, according to Bob Woodward, totally rebuffed the U.S.Z delegation.

General Ashfaq Pervez Kiyani

Frustrated over Pakistan’s lackluster response to the war against terrorism, U.S.Z Puppet President Barack Obama sent his top dogs to threaten Pakistan that he would have no other option but to respond, if they do not take decisive action against “terrorist safe havens”.

Investigative journalist Bob Woodward, in his latest book “Obama’s Wars”, writes:

Adding to the frustration, the Pakistani establishment in particular the all powerful Army chief General Ashfaq Parvez Kiyani refused to adhere to any of the four demands that the U.S made through National Security Adviser Gen James Jones and CIA chief Leon Panetta during that trip in May this year.
Kiyani would not budge very much. He had other concerns. "I’ll be the first to admit, I’m India centric”, General Kiyani said.

General James Jones having concerned look on his face

CIA Chief Leon Panetta

“The President wants everyone in Pakistan to understand that if such an attack connected to a Pakistani group is successful, then there are some things even he would not be able to stop. Just like there are political realities in Pakistan, there are realities in the United States of Zionism.

The book further claims that:

“No one will be able to stop the response and consequences. There is not a threat, just a statement of political fact. Zardai was told during the meeting”.

Giving a series of specific instances how "terrorists’ leaders" are operating unhindered inside Pakistan, Jones told the Puppet Zardari that Zakiur Rehman Lakhvi, the Lashkar-e-Tayyaba commander of the 2008 Mumbai attacks, is not being adequately interrogated and

“he continues to direct Lashkar-e-Tayyaba operations from his detention center. Lashkar-e-Tayyaba is operating in Afghanistan and there, the group carried out a recent attack at a guesthouse. Intelligence also shows that Lashkar-e-Tayyaba is threatening attacks in the United States and the possibility is rising each day".
General James Jones said according to the book "Obama's Wars".

After meeting their Puppet Zardari, U.S.Z officials met Kiyani sahb, wherein Jones told Pakistan Army Chief that the clock had started ticking ever since all the four requests had been made by the Neocon Globalist Puppet Obama.

Kiyani sahb holding a press conference in the middle of mountains

"But Kiyani would not budge very much. He had other concerns. 'I’ll be the first to admit, I’m India centric ( Pakistan is not threatened by our brothers Afghan Mujahideen at all )' ", Kiyani sahb said, according to the book.

Enticing Fury

Pakistan Cyber Force

U.S.Z to bomb 150 Sites in Pakistan - Pakistan's Strategic Response

Read on Pakistan Cyber Force Facebook Page

•  Subscribe to our Daily Updates

Many years into the so called "War Against Terror", Pakistan has by now become quite used to threats. Pakistan has got the capability by now to differentiate between a THREAT and a bluff. These threats and bluffs started right from the independence of this state when Nehru threatened Pakistan on 14th August, 1947. Some people are of the opinion that Shaheed-e-Millat Liaqat Ali Khan was assassinated due to his working on a plan for a confederation with Afghanistan. Later on, Kruschev (Russia) threatened Islamabad of severe consequences if the United States of Zionism's headquarter near Peshawar was not removed immediately. It was threatened by President Johnson when General Ayyub Khan closed down the U.S.Z base. Richard Nixon and Henry Kissinger threatened Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto for pursuing a Nuclear Program. Pervez Musharraf was threatened with being “bombed to the stone age” if the Pakistan Government didn't accept the seven points. Hillary Clinton threatened Pakistan with deadly consequences without clarifying what that threat meant. Now there are revelations (from not very reliable Indian sources) that the United States of Zionism wants to bomb 150 sites in Pakistan. Still they wonder, why there is ANTI-AMERICANISM in Pakistan. They have been spending billions of dollars on their mindless gigantic media drones named GEO, EXPRESS, SAMAA, ARY, INDUS, HUM and more to "help reconstruct good image of the American Nation amongst Pakistanis" but to no avail.

Undoubtedly, the White House will never take responsibility of these threats however the latest "hot pursuit" strikes by NATO this week have given a new meaning to these threats.

“The Obama administration has always been clear that the path to winning the war in Afghanistan goes through Pakistan. But if Bob Woodward’s new book is accurate, the White House considers its war effort much more dependent on the success and survival of Pakistan’s civilian government than was previously known".
Josh Rogin, Foreign Policy Magazine discusses the Obama tilt towards Pakistan.

Bob Woodward’s market jittering book entitled “Obama’s Wars” sheds new light on the Zionist Puppet Obama's administration’s vast outreach to the Pakistani civilian government led by Puppet Asif Ali Zardari. It paints a picture of an administration working hard to court the Pakistanis while remaining somewhat confused about Pakistani thinking on a range of issues.

Obama Wars by Bob WoodWard

One of the more interesting details in the advanced reports of Bob Woodward’s “Obama’s Wars” is that Washington had prepared a “retribution plan” in the event of a major attack on the United States which is traced back to Pakistan.

• “Some locations might be outdated, but there would be no concern, under the plan, for who might be living there now. The retribution plan called for a brutal punishing attack on at least 150 or more associated camps”
• The United States has a secret “retribution” plan to bomb more than 150 terror camps in Pakistan in the event of another major terrorist attack originating from that country.

This shocking disclosure about the "All bets off" policy of the Globalist Cartel sitting in Washington, towards an ostensibly dubious ally in the war on terror is contained in Bob Woodward’s opus ”Obama’s Wars” which details an evolving U.S.Z approach in the region.
The plan pre-dates the new Puppet Obama's presidency, going back to the old Puppet Bush's White House, but elements of policy, aimed at wiping out terrorist sanctuaries in Pakistan, is evident in the current administration’s ruthless bombing by unmanned drones of the so called "terrorist targets" inside Pakistan, which far surpasses the Bush approach in terms of frequency and intensity.

The Bomber Drone on Kabul Airport

The U.S.Z threat also puts in great context, the secretary of state Hillary Clinton's dire warning to Islamabad earlier this year that there would be severe consequences for Pakistan if another 9/11-type attack were traced back to that country.

The Dragon Surveillance Drone is being used to intercept satellite communication phones used by Talibans

According to Woodward:

Then President Bush did not see much difference between 9/11 and 26/11; a foundation of his presidency was zero tolerance for terrorists and their enablers and he was extremely proud of the hard-line doctrine.
Although plans for punitive strikes against Pakistan was initially linked to another 9/11 type attack on U.S, it evidently evolved after the 26/11 Mumbai carnage, when Bush asked his aides for contingency plans for dealing with Pakistan.
He called his national security team into the Oval Office and told his advisers, “You guys get planning and do what you have to do to prevent a war between Pakistan and India.” The order suggests that the U.S would undertake the bombing to prevent India from retaliating against Pakistan leading possibly to an all-out war.
“This is like 9/11, he (Bush) said, The United States military did not have “war” plans for an invasion of Pakistan. Instead, it had and continues to have one of the most sensitive and secret of all military contingencies, what military officials call a “retribution plan” in the event of another 9/11-like attack.”
In fact, such is the anger within the United States administration about Pakistan’s cunning and double-faced approach that the plan calls for a no-holds-barred approach. “Some locations might be outdated, but there would be no concern, under the plan, for who might be living there now. The retribution plan called for a brutal punishing attack on at least 150 or more associated camps”.

So how did Pakistan escape the wrath of U.S.Z’s “zero tolerance” policy? According to Woodward:

CIA intelligence with 48 hours of the attack showed no direct ISI link. Bush himself called Prime Minister Manmohan Singh to tell him that the new Pakistani government was not involved in the attack.
But the CIA later received reliable intelligence that the ISI was directly involved in the training for Mumbai. ISI chief Ahmed Shuja Pasha flew to Washington later to admit that at least two retired Pakistani army officers who planned the Mumbai attack had ISI links “but this had not been an authorized ISI operation. It was rogue.”
“There may have been people associated with my organization who were associated with this,” Pasha argued. “That’s different from authority, direction and control.”
Obama Presidency’s evolving Af-Pak doctrine that is more Pak than Af.

In an ABC interview available on youtube, Woodward described how Obama was told of deep problems in the U.S.Z relationship with Pakistan at his very first intelligence briefing, likening it to a “cold shower” for the President coming just two days after his 2008 presidential victory.
Woodward writes further:

“Imagine the high of being elected on that Tuesday and they come in two days later and say, by the way, here are the secrets, and one of the secrets is Pakistan. We’re attacking with a top-secret, covert operation, the safe havens in Pakistan, but Pakistan is living a lie. And this is a theme throughout the whole Obama presidency: ‘How do you get control of Pakistan?’ “

Not very long after that, in an Oval Office meeting with Pakistan’s Puppet President Asif Ali Zardari, Obama bluntly tells him that his country has to get over its obsession with India. “We do not begrudge you being concerned about India”, Obama tells Zardari, "but we do not want to be part of arming you (Pakistan) against India, so let me be very clear about that.”

From all accounts, Puppet Zardari’s attempt to change Pakistan’s chronic pathology towards India has been thwarted by the country’s military. 
Times of India.

Undoubtedly everyone remembers former Puppet Pervez Musharraf’s comment that Washington had threatened to bomb Pakistan back into the stone age if he did not cooperate after 9/11. But bombing a nuclear-armed country into a state of chaos, or indeed attempting to invade it, are unlikely policy options for the Neocon Zionists as they try to extract themselves from two unpopular wars while also fretting about neighbouring Iran’s own nuclear ambitions. Yet bombing "suspected al Qaeda camps" in the tribal belt could simply increase instability with further increased militancy. So where does that leave the United States of Zionism and its “retribution plan”? Where are the red lines that would demand an immediate and powerful U.S.Z reaction? Would it depend on the size of the attack, the intensity of public reaction, or electoral imperatives at the time? Does anyone know? Does Pakistan?

Josh Rogin describes the U.S.Z policy very differently than what the TOI reports said.

“According to Woodward’s account, the centrality of Pakistan was championed early on by Bruce Riedel, the Brookings scholar who was brought on as a key figure in the Obama administration’s March 2009 Afghanistan strategy review.”
“Obama, however, opted to pursue a less confrontational path. He concluded the central task would be convincing the Pakistani leadership to throw its lot in with the United States He said at the time of the initial strategy review in March 2009, “that we had to have a serious heart-to-heart with Pakistani civilian, military and intelligence leaders.”

Later that year, when making the decision to send an additional 30,000 “surge” troops to Afghanistan, The globalists sitting in Neocon knew that their plans to also expand the U.S.Z military presence in Pakistan and widen drone strikes would be a hard sell to the Pakistan's real decision making powers, keeping aside the Puppet Zardari and the Thief Ministers. In an attempt to sweeten the deal, the Puppet Obama framed the policy as a new “strategic partnership” with Pakistan, even tying the success of the U.S.Z mission in Afghanistan to the survival of the Puppet Zardari and the legacy of his deceased wife Benazir Bhutto.

Obama wrote in a letter to Zardari delivered by National Security Advisor Jim Jones and counter terrorism adviser John Brennan:

“I know that I am speaking to you on a personal level when I say that my commitment to ending the ability of these groups to strike at our families is as much about my family’s security as it is about yours”

Not very long ago, the Puppet Zardari was forced to tell the former U.S.Z Ambassador to Afghanistan Zalmay Khalilzad that he believed the United States of Zionism was involved in orchestrating attacks by the Pakistani Taliban against the Pakistani civilian government.
When Woodward sat down for his interview with Obama earlier this year, he asked the Zionist puppet if the situation was still that Pakistan is the centerpiece of the U.S.Z strategy. “It continues to this day”, Obama replied.
Bombing 150 sites in Pakistan would face colossal retribution towards the U.S.Z. Here are some possible scenarios.

1. Pakistan would immediately terminate the NATO supply routes choking the war in Afghanistan.
2. All overflights of U.S.Z planes and drones would be stopped.
3. The U.S.Z would be evicted from the air bases on Pakistani territory.
4. The Civilian Puppet Government that resists a forceful response to the U.S.Z would not be able to stand.
5. Without a reasonable supply route, the U.S.Z would then have to end the war in Afghanistan.
6. Pakistan would possibly end cooperation in the “War on Terror”.
7. In the worst case scenario, the U.S.Z bases in the vicinity could be targeted (My personal favourite)

Pakistan Army - Enemy's worst nightmare

Enticing Fury

Pakistan Cyber Force

Navy officers arrested in nationwide recruitment scam:

Indian Military News

The CBI on Sunday claimed to have busted a nationwide Defence recruitment racket with the arrest of four persons, including two naval officers, who allegedly leaked exam questions to the candidates.
The accused were identified R C Naikh and D S Murthi – both administration officers in Western and Eastern Naval Commands respectively, Ranbir Singh Rawat owner of Manasa International defence recruitment agency in Andhra Pradesh’s Vishakapatnam and Haryana-based teacher Hoshiyar Singh.
The four would be produced before a court on Monday, Rishi Raj Singh, Joint Director, said adding they had leaked the question paper of Lower Division Clerk recruitment examination to 150 candidates, who appeared for the exam here today.
The exam was held to fill up 175 clerks posts at Western Naval Command Headquarters and over 35,000 candidates appeared to write the exam.
“This is a serious offence. These people put country’s security at stake and tried to ensure that unqualified candidates get the jobs,” Singh said.
“The accused took anything between Rs 15,000 and Rs 50,000 from the 150 candidates, who hail from various parts of the country,” Singh added.
All these 150 candidates will now be our witnesses in the case, Singh said adding, “we will write to senior officials concerned in the Navy to take appropriate action on these candidates.”
-via

 Times of India

India desperate for a Photo Op, Pakistan should beware:

New Delhi wants to use the meeting to demoralize Kashmiris. A desperate India is cooking up a ruse, again.

By AHMED QURAISHI
Sunday, 26 September 2010.
WWW.PAKNATIONALISTS.COM
ISLAMABAD, Pakistan—A joint photograph of Pakistan’s foreign minister with his Indian counterpart in New York could do wonders on the pro-freedom demonstrators in Indian-occupied Kashmir, Indian officials have concluded.
India is desperate in Kashmir and is hoping that a joint photograph of Indian and Pakistani foreign ministers in New York would prove a damper for the Kashmiri demonstrators, showing them Pakistan is ‘onboard’ with India’s handling of the killings in the disputed region.
This is why the Indian government is using every India-sympathizer in Washington and inside the Obama administration to convince Pakistan to send its foreign minister to shake hands with India’s S. M. Krishna for the cameras.

Would Pakistan do it?
The race is certainly on and it seems there are some key figures in Islamabad who wouldn’t mind obliging the Indians and the Americans.
Early morning today a frantic text message reached Dr. Shireen M. Mazari, the editor of Pakistan’s The Nation daily newspaper. The message was simple:

“[President] Zardari & [Pakistan envoy to Washington Husain] Haqqani are desperately arranging for [Pakistani foreign minister] Shah Mehmood Qureshi to meet Indian foreign minister without agenda & without concrete Indian commitment to talks. Shah Mehmood is reluctant but US is pressurizing to give Indians chance to show Kashmiris that Pakistan is on board.”

Strangely, the message didn’t mention the name of Abdullah Haroon, an India-enthusiast appointed by Mr. Zardari as Pakistan’s envoy to the UN.
Dr. Mazari came on television by midday to break the news on a television channel owned by her newspaper.
If the move succeeds, India will walk away with an important psychological achievement at a crucial time, while Pakistan won’t get much, as usual.
The Indian desperation for this photo-op can be judged from the diplomatic moves India has initiated in the last five days to lure Pakistan into a meeting.
To ensure Pakistan falls for the trap, Indian officials have been generously mentioning ‘Kashmir’ and ‘Pakistan’ in the same sentence, creating the right atmospherics for jubilation in some Pakistani circles [‘Wow, India is conceding its position on Kashmir …’].
But a careful look at these statements shows a desperate India cooking up a ruse

1. NIRUPAMA RAO: The India foreign secretary was apparently the first to be tasked with luring Pakistan into a photo-op in New York. She issued a misleading statement in Boston, US, saying India is ready to discuss ‘all outstanding issues’ with Pakistan ‘including Kashmir.’ Unfortunately, much of the Pakistani and world media ignored the remainder of her statement. Buried somewhere else in her media interaction was the line, “It is an internal affair because it (Kashmir) is an integral part of India.” So, is India discussing Kashmir or not? Ms. Rao’s next line explains it all: “The issue of Jammu & Kashmir comes up in our relationship with Pakistan and we’ve said very clearly, very confidently and very transparently that we are prepared to discuss all outstanding issues with Pakistan.”  What India’s second most senior diplomat is saying is that ‘Kashmir does come up in our bilateral relationship’ with Pakistan in the form of the so-called cross-border terrorism and Pakistani meddling in Kashmir. The choice of words is careful not to indicate any concession to Pakistan.
2. S. M. KRISHNA: Her boss, the foreign minister, has reiterated over the weekend that Pakistan can’t force India to discuss Kashmir in future talks because his country won’t accept ‘preconditions’, which means another round of endless talks where India will keep delaying Kashmir while insisting on discussing nonissues such as trade and cultural exchanges.
3. S. M. KRISHNA: In a classic sign of Indian desperation, Mr. Krishna couldn’t wait a day to throw coldwater on the feel-good effect of his number two’s statement when he childishly advised Pakistan to ‘stay out of Kashmir’ and vacate ‘its side of Kashmir’ before ‘lecturing’ Indian on what to do in Indian-occupied Kashmir.

These statements underline how desperate India is this time on Kashmir. If Pakistan goes full throttle now and demands international intervention to stop Indian state-sponsored Kashmir genocide, New Delhi can’t cry foul. It can’t say Pakistan is feeding the insurgency, not when thousands of Kashmiris have shown they want Indian occupiers out. Nor can India’s usual supporters in Washington and London cover up the clear signs of Indian genocide in Kashmir.
Pakistan and the Kashmiris have India by the tail this time. Whatever Islamabad does, it shouldn’t grant India a photo-opportunity so it could use it to demoralize Kashmiri demonstrators.

India harassed by Pakistan's heavy Nukes and Plutonium capability

Read on Pakistan Cyber Force Facebook Page

•  Subscribe to our Daily Updates

While Indian scientists and engineers who monitored and embellished the results of Indian Nuclear Tests a decade ago, are holding their fingers between their teeth, the Delhi press has been shocked to learn about the successful nuclear program of Pakistan.

“Based on the seismic measurements and also the opinion from experts there was a much lower yield in the thermonuclear device test” conducted at Pokhran in May 1998. In nuclear parlance, a test is described as a fizzle when it fails to meet the desired yield. Affirming that India would need more tests, Santhanam cautioned against India being pressurized into signing the CTBT.

Asia Times. August 26, India battles with nuclear fallout By Ninan Koshy

Shaheen II taking off from the launchpad

Almost a year ago, when MOSSAD and RAW agents were rampaging the lovely Swat Valley, the irredentist Indian media and the revanchist public fed on a steady diet of Pakistan-phobia had begun to imagine hegemony galore for India. A series of reverses in the defense field–namely the fact that the Indian Nuclear test were duds, the Indian Nuclear Submarine sailed without a nuclear power reactor or any other power source, the DRDO flagellating the Department of Defence for overpaying by 60% for an obsolete Air Carft Carrier and the general malaise in the missile production program–have trimmed down the swollen head of those who reside on the Ganges Valley.

Nuclear Fireball created as a nuclear warhead carrying Shaheen II precisely hits its target

"It is this claim of perfection that is under serious challenge and generally believed to be dubious, if not hollow. Prominent scientists such as A Gopalkrishnan, former chairman of the Atomic Energy Regulatory Board and P K Iyengar are in agreement with the criticism of Santhanam and point out that the single thermonuclear device India tested in 1998 did not function at all as per design and did not produce anything near the expected design yield."

Asia Times. August 26, India battles with nuclear fallout By Ninan Koshy

This Times of India (TOI) report is an eye opener for all the "Greater India" utopia residents. The TOI personally called Hans Kristensen and asked him poignant questions about Pakistan’s Nuclear program and its missiles.

Ghouri taking off

WASHINGTON: Pakistan’s rapidly ramped up nuclear arsenal is now 70-90% strong with increasingly sophisticated bomb designs and smart delivery systems aimed primarily at India, two US researchers have said, even as Islamabad is running from pillar to post seeking foreign aid to stem an economic collapse.  

In a paper written for the Bulletin for Atomic Scientists, Robert Norris of the Natural Resources Defense Council and Hans Kristensen of the Federation of American Scientists say Pakistan is “busily enhancing its capabilities across the board, with new nuclear-capable ballistic missiles being readied for deployment, and two nuclear capable cruise missiles under development."

Two new plutonium production reactors and a second chemical separation facility also are under construction.

The paper essentially upgrades Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal both quantitatively (from 60 weapons last year to 70-90 now) and qualitatively — from uranium-base to being plutonium-centric.

“The fact that they are preparing nuclear-capable cruise missiles suggests their scientists have been able to miniaturize nuclear warheads by using plutonium,” Kristensen told ToI. “They are shifting their nuclear base from uranium to plutonium…in a sense, they are turning a chapter.”

Plutonium-based warheads are lighter and easier to handle, a better fit for nimble cruise missiles. India’s nuclear arsenal is largely plutonium-based.

Kristensen said Pakistan’s weapons and deliver-systems can be assumed to be India-specific because Islamabad “has not declared any other adversary.” The United States has been expressing concern to Pakistan about its accelerated program and urging it hold back, but there does not appear to be any concerted effort from Washington to influence Pakistan’s decisions, he added.

… But that does not seem to have impacted the multi-billion dollar ramping up of its nuclear arsenal in the absence of any US effort to leverage the economic handle it has on Islamabad.

Times of India. Chidanand Rajghatta, TNN 2 September 2009, 12:01am IST

Ghouri Missile immediately after lift off

Pakistan has not only made huge strides in the political arena, working with the U.S and China, it has now befriended Russia which opens up huge new areas of cooperation between the former foes. In the defense arena, India has been wasting billions of Dollars without getting its money’s worth. The new 123 deal places huge restrictions on its testing capabilities. The Indian Nuclear program is untested. Therefore the bombs placed on its failed missiles are mere duds. This makes India highly vulnerable in the areas that Bharat Verma has identified in the Indian Defense Review. For Pakistan, a strident China and a confident Pakistan will therefore be harder to deal with. Bangladesh, Nepal and SriLanka smelling blood will exact their revenge on the Bharati bully and fight against its hegemony.

Islamabad, on its part, uses its role as a so-called ally in the war against extremists to keep expanding its nuclear program by implicitly threatening to cease helping the US – a nightmare scenario for Washington since most of the supplies to its forces in Afghanistan goes through Pakistan.

“Both countries have a trump card to play. We have not heard any any descriptions about how they play it out,” Kristensen said.

In their paper, Kristensen and Norris say Pakistan is improving its weapon designs, moving beyond its first-generation nuclear weapons that relied on Highly Enriched Uranium (HEU). After pursuing plutonium-based designs for more than a decade, Islamabad appears to have mastered the technology.

Central to that effort, the paper says, is the 40–50-megawatt heavy water Khushab plutonium production reactor, which was completed in 1998 and is located at Joharabad in the Khushab district of Punjab. Six surface-to-air missile batteries surround the site to protect against air strikes. Norris and Kristensen say as a sign of its confidence in its plutonium designs, Pakistan is building two additional heavy water reactors at the Khushab site, which will more than triple the country’s plutonium production.

Explaining the changing nature of the Pak arsenal, they say all of these efforts suggest that Pakistan is preparing to increase and enhance its nuclear forces. In particular, the new facilities provide the Pakistani military with several options: fabricating weapons that use plutonium cores; mixing plutonium with HEU to make composite cores; and/or using tritium to “boost” warheads’ yield.

Without referencing the recent controversy in India about the success or otherwise of its thermo-nuclear test in 1998 (now dubbed the sizzle vs fizzle debate), the paper says “absent a successful full-scale thermonuclear test (by Pakistan), it is premature to suggest that Pakistan is producing two-stage thermonuclear weapons” – in other words, it has yet to acquire a Hydrogen Bomb.

But, they say, the types of facilities under construction suggest that Pakistan has decided to supplement and perhaps replace its heavy uranium-based weapons with smaller, lighter plutonium-based designs that could be delivered further by ballistic missiles than its current warheads and that could be used in cruise missiles. Pakistan rapidly ramping up India-specific nuclear arsenal.

Times of India. Chidanand Rajghatta, TNN 2 September 2009, 12:01am IST

The bottom line is that the Pakistani program is larger, more potent and more lethal than India could have ever imagined. The Pakistan Nuclear program has moved light years beyond the Heavy Enriched Uranium and has now firmly gone beyond Plutonium and Tritium usage. Though Hans Kristensen didn’t quiet say it–but he did inform the TOI and other news sources that the Pakistani Nuclear program is beyond the Hydrogen Bomb stage–this makes it a very advanced program.

Shaheen II gaining altitude

NEW DELHI, Sept. 2 (Xinhua) — Indian Army Chief Gen. Deepak Kapoor said on Wednesday that Pakistan was going well beyond deterrence after reports Islamabad had increased its nuclear arsenal and was working to add cruise missiles.

“There were certain degrees of deterrence and the figure of 70 to 90 nuclear warheads directed against a country certainly goes beyond the concept of deterrence,” Kapoor said in the western Indian city of Pune.

“It is a matter of concern for us,” he added.

Gen. Kapoor was commenting on an article published in the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientist about the enhanced nuclear arsenal of neighboring Pakistan.

“A new nuclear-capable ballistic missile is being readied for deployment, and two nuclear-capable cruise missiles are under development. Two new plutonium production reactors and a second chemical separation facility also are under construction,” said the U.S. journal.

Pakistan has previously denied it is adding to its nuclear warheads. Information Minister Qamar Zaman Kaira said in May his country did not need to expand its nuclear arsenal but would maintain a minimum nuclear deterrence that was essential for its defense and stability. Editor: Mu Xuequan

The Pakistani program was originally based on a Uranium program which has smaller yields. Now the miniaturized nuclear program has been successfully placed on top of very lethal Shaheen II missiles which can reach every nook and corner of Asia and half of Europe. Actually the Pakistani Inter Continental Ballistic Missile Technology (ICBM) allows it to reach all corners of the globe.

Enticing Fury

Pakistan Cyber Force

{EOP}Drone Attacks and National Sovereignty

A lot has been said against American drone attacks as a violation of sovereignty of Pakistan but the issue is getting more intense by each passing day. When the US drones attack Pakistan’s tribal areas, it is not just the ten, twenty or fifty innocent civilians they kill but it creates the anti-US sentiments in masses and a global feeling of disgust against US. Few stay mum and numb but there is large number of victims who vent their hatred very violently against US and its ally Pakistan. US is insensitive to the fact that civilian killings in these drone attacks provides reason to the youngsters for joining terrorist groups waging war against US and of course Pakistan, for being its closest ally in war on terror.


The drone strikes have pushed militants deeper into Pakistan and gave them an excuse to strike the heart of the country, further destabilizing it. No doubt drone attacks did kill some militants but at what cost?
US killed several hundred innocent Pakistanis and few militants in the tribal region of Pakistan in drone attacks since 2004. Apart from ineffectiveness, legality of these attacks is another major issue. According to New America Foundation the drone war against Al Qaeda’s leaders and, increasingly, their Pakistani-based Taliban allies has been waged with little public discussion or congressional investigation of its legality or efficacy. Current US leadership has not only continued the drone program but expanded it up further. In 2007, there were three drone strikes in Pakistan, 34 in 2008, 53 in 2009 and more than 37 so far in 2010.
One of the cruel facts former intelligence officials have acknowledged is that in many cases, the CIA had little information about those killed in the strikes.  In January 2006, US attempted to kill Abu Khabab and Aiman Zawahiri through Drone attack when they were believed to be in Damadola, but instead killed 80 civilians, including half-dozen kids. Who is accountable for those killings?
It is claimed by some US officials that the attacks on Pakistani civilians have been carried out on the request of Pakistani authorities or with their consent but the Chief of Army Staff General Ashfaq Pervez Kiyani has categorically said that there is no question of any agreement or understanding with the coalition forces whereby they are allowed to conduct operations on our side of the border. Even President Asif Ali Zardari protested, “It’s undermining my sovereignty, and it’s not helping win the war on the hearts and minds of people.” And, in January, Prime Minister Syed Yousuf Raza Gilani told media that there was no agreement between his government and the Americans to allow the strikes. Now CIA has been granted approval by the US government to expand drone strikes in other areas of Pakistan.
Shuja Nawaz, the author of “Crossed Swords” says, “Any drone attack in provinces outside of the tribal regions would be disastrous, totally destroying the American relationship with the Pakistani army.”

Problems with drone attacks are not limited to civilian causalities but now this issue has started turning into a complete volcano for Pakistan’s internal stability. Ideology of revenge is gripping the victims and those who are not in favor of any direct conflict with US are looking towards armed forces for a proper reply. CIA claims that drone attacks have killed ten of al-Qaeda’s 20 top commanders. But what CIA doesn’t tell to the world is the fact that while killing those 10 militants, the US has murdered more than 1400 Pakistanis not involved in any terrorist or extremist activities. Could it not imply that it killed 10 militants and gave birth to another 1400?
Lots of terrorists, who CIA believed, would have been killed in these attacks are still alive in actuality and waging a ruthless propaganda war inside country against armed forces being complicit in these drone attacks.  A notable thing is that Pakistan’s Chief of Air Force announced that his force has capability to strike down the US drones and can do so if government directs him so. Public pressure on government is mounting through media and civil society in this regard and recent surge in drone attacks would increase in this pressure even more.
If Pakistan decides to strike down every US drone in the future, what would US do? Situation has already gone out of control for US in Afghanistan now and is forced to engage Taliban through negotiations. Any decision by US to attack Pakistan in retaliation would be disastrous not only for US interests. China and Iran would never like US presence in another neighboring country so they won’t sit quietly. Russians would have the best opportunity to avenge obviously. American public would definitely stand against its own government, this time more aggressively due to poor economy.

In above mention situation Pakistan can make life of Americans in Afghanistan a lot difficult to force US administration to reconsider their drone war in Pakistani tribal areas, only reason why it is not happening right now is presence of a weak, inept and pro-US government in Islamabad. Looking at internal politics and ever mounting public pressure against US drone attacks in Pakistan it would be prudent to assume that political situation would not remain the same in near future.
Current corrupt government has even failed to send a strong message that US must refrain itself from violating Pakistan’s Air space as tolerance level against drone attacks in Pakistani masses is reaching its critical thresh hold.
CIA is pursuing agenda assigned by US administration to protect its own interests and it would continue what it is doing right now with Pakistan’s sovereignty. Question is when Islamabad would realize that it is failing miserably in protecting its citizen and interests? Only workable solutions that grantees accurate drone strikes is to transfer the drone technology to the Pakistani forces so that Pakistani forces can enhance their operational capabilities without creating anti-American sentiments in the local masses otherwise US must get ready to face the consequences in Afghanistan by victims and their heirs and must forget about winning hearts and minds of Afghan or Pakistani people.

By: Shehla Zafar

{EOP}Nato changes stance after protest by Pakistan

ISLAMABAD: Nato reversed its position on aerial strikes by its helicopter gunships inside Pakistan on Monday after Islamabad warned the US-led forces in Afghanistan of counter-measures.
International Security Assistance Force (Isaf), which had earlier defended the aerial engagement as an action ‘under the right of self-defence’, later in the evening, according to military sources, informed Pakistani commanders that they were trying to establish that their helicopters during the operation did not cross into Pakistani territory.
Isaf spokesman Capt Ryan Donald had earlier said: “The Isaf helicopters did cross into Pakistan territory to engage the insurgents. Isaf maintains the right to self-defence, and that’s why they crossed the Pakistan border.”
The strongly-worded protest communicated by Pakistan to Nato headquarters in Brussels reminded the military alliance that its mandate for operations in Afghanistan ended at Afghan border and there were no hot pursuit rules agreed with Pakistan.
Describing the cross-border air raids as ‘violation of its sovereignty and the UN mandate for coalition operations in Afghanistan’, the protest statement issued by the Foreign Office said: “In the absence of immediate corrective measures, Pakistan will be constrained to consider response options.”
(According to AFP, Foreign Office spokesman Abdul Basit said in the statement: “These incidents are a clear violation and breach of the UN mandate under which Isaf operates.” The statement said Isaf had been asked not to participate in any military action that violated the UN mandate and infringed upon Pakistan’s sovereignty. It said Pakistan had always emphasised the need for “coordinated and joint action” against militants.)
Military sources said the message communicated to the Nato command was crystal clear that in view of declining public support for war on terror, the security of Nato supply routes through Pakistan could be threatened in the aftermath of the new air campaign.
Analysts say Pakistan could only stop US-led forces from such violations by tactfully using its leverages that largely relate to the support for war on terror and the supply routes.
Nato was asked to coordinate its actions with Pakistan military and avoid crossing the ‘red lines’ — a euphemism for Pakistani sensitivities.
More than 50 people, many of them believed to be fighters of the Haqqani network, were killed over the past couple of days in three Nato/Isaf air strikes in Pakistani tribal areas along the border with Afghanistan.
Nato’s Apache helicopters were said to be ‘in hot pursuit’ of the militants crossing back into Pakistani territory to get to their sanctuaries.
The Nato attacks came after an escalation in drone strikes by the US against militant hideouts and other targets in North Waziristan, an indication that the US-led forces were changing their tactics to dismantle the militant network in the tribal region long considered to be the springboard for violence in Afghanistan.
About 20 drone strikes by unmanned Predator aircraft have taken place in September so far — the highest for a month since the Americans started using drones inside Pakistan in 2004.
Click here: