Implications of Pakistan's potential collapse?

[Smokie]

Well a rather concerning set of developments that hasn't been covered too extensively in the media is the situation in Pakistan - today pro-Taliban forces stormed another mosque as a response to the violence at the Lal Masjid mosque earlier this month where dozens died.

 

 

 

Ayman Al-Zawahiri, known Al-Qaeda commander, released a message regarding the Lal Masjid incident and told his faithful that "jihad is the only salvation." While most of Pakistan opposes fundamental radicalism, a few bad apples, as they say, spoil the bunch.

 

 

 

So if things weren't bad enough, there's still the aftermath of the Lal Masjid situation - the Times of India reported today that the Pakistani government has issued a warning to its citizens saying that there are still 600 students who haven't returned back to their homes after the Lal Masjid was stormed (these students attended the madrassas attached to the Lal Masjid mosque), and are likely to be armed and waiting to launch suicide bomb attacks. :shock:

 

 

 

So, and God forbid this should happen, if Pakistan does in fact collapse (what with on top of this Musharaff losing grip on the whole nation, and the refusal of aid to control these violent outbreaks, and the lawless behavior of the border-area tribal groups) at some point in the future, what impact would it have on the region?

 

 

 

How much more de-stablization can the region take before all hell breaks loose?

 

 

 

EDIT: It's almost a question of how big a role Pakistan plays in preserving Middle East peace (although Pakistani fundamentalists are known supporters of the Taliban). Does anyone have any numbers or insight on how effective a partner Pakistan has been for the US?

[Lynyrd_Skynyrd]

If Pakistan ever collapsed I think that their would probably be open war with India. The U.N would probably help India if we are saying Islamist extremists took power. But I don't think it will happen as the Pakistan Government I think is quite pro military and is "handling" the situation with public support I am assuming.

[Agunimon979]

The U.N would probably help

 

 

 

 

 

I stopped there.

[1_man_army]

If Pakistan ever collapsed I think that their would probably be open war with India.

 

 

 

India also has nuclear weapons so it would be un-thinkable for either Pakistan or India to push the button as they'd be killing themselves in the process. It may cause tension if Pakistan falls, and there will be alot of diplomatic efforts behind the scenes but declaring war against a nuclear power wouldn't be a truly winnable war for either nation.

[Lord_Omar_Iv]

world war 3 is coming to a sky near u.... :ohnoes: OHNOES!!!

[Smokie]

If Pakistan ever collapsed I think that their would probably be open war with India. The U.N would probably help India if we are saying Islamist extremists took power. But I don't think it will happen as the Pakistan Government I think is quite pro military and is "handling" the situation with public support I am assuming.

 

 

 

Well the UN is doubtful to intervene in any full-scale war, as it implicates the rest of the world.

 

 

 

However, I'm curious as to why you think an internal collapse of the government would cause violence against India?

[lordkafei]

The Indian arsenal is estimated at 30 - 35 warheads. Pakistan's hoard is similar.

 

 

 

Nuclear Weapons - India

 

Nuclear Weapons - Pakistan

 

 

 

There is no "button" to push here, the Pakistanis keep their weapons disassembled and India has disassembled components also.

 

 

 

These two contries have a history of fighting, so disassembled arsenals is probably a good thing.

[Lynyrd_Skynyrd]

If Pakistan ever collapsed I think that their would probably be open war with India. The U.N would probably help India if we are saying Islamist extremists took power. But I don't think it will happen as the Pakistan Government I think is quite pro military and is "handling" the situation with public support I am assuming.

 

 

 

Well the UN is doubtful to intervene in any full-scale war, as it implicates the rest of the world.

 

 

 

However, I'm curious as to why you think an internal collapse of the government would cause violence against India?

 

 

 

Well the U.N backed the Korean War against China and North Korea, if they were willing to back that what makes you think they wouldn't back a war against Pakistan?

 

 

 

It would cause violence because Pakistan has always hated India, a more extreme Islamic country would probably have more chance of attacking India than the current government.

[Smokie]

Right but if Pakistan fell into instability I don't think it would be able, in the midst of all the internal violence there would be, to mount an effective attack on India.

 

 

 

The UN 'backs up' (usually nothing more than diplomatic and political support) nations in situations of blatant aggression. The Korean War was an example of one side leading an unprovoked attack on the other - those situations make it easy to see who the perpetrator is.

 

 

 

However, in the situation of internal collapse, you're not going to see a government that could order attacks on anyone (given that this government wouldn't exist). It would, at the worst, continue to be the sputters of terrorism into Kashmir (not to downplay that).

 

 

 

Also, as it is, with a military dictator in command, they would still get blown out of the water by India in the event of a full-scale war. The other wars India has had with Pakistan have been ground-war border skirmishes, but a full-scale attack would prompt the use of ICBMs and the quite formidable Indian Navy.

 

 

 

And as someone else said, both nations have nukes so attacking each other is not exactly an advisable option for either. Although, come to think of it, if the government collapsed, nuclear arsenals might fall into the hands rogue groups ... :-k :shock:

[warren211]

My grandma and one of my aunts lives in Pakistan. Most of my parents relatives and friends live in pakistan as well. Obviously, this possible collapse is really worrying my family, even though my mom is brave enough to hide all her feelings so as not to trouble my worrysome little brother.

[warren211]

My parents and their friends here in the US are all trying to bring their relatives over to this safe country. However, they are frequently denied coming. Governments look at the passports and country of birth. if it says "India", they'll immediatly let you go, we need Indians here and they're not a threat to uss. If it says Pakistan or any of the "-stan" countries, you'd have to be extremely lucky to gain access. After the Scotland car bombing, even advanced Middle Eastern Doctors are being denied travel simply because one of the terrorists happened to be a doctor and now everyon assumes all foreign doctors are a threat. What everyone seems to be oblivious to is that India's surrounding countries are being affected by this...Racism. You may not call it racism but i believe it is, stereotypes against many countries because a few middle easterners are terrorists. People think racism is too strong of a word for this, but it is exactly what is going on. and if it doesnt stop, if nobody steps in, pakistan and several countries may be history after a few years. Say goodbye to a lot of your oil, america. then blame your president even though its hardly his fault.

[Necromagus]

The Pakistani president is a puppet player, keeping the ghost of Islamist extremism alive in his country to justify his own stranglehold on the country to his western buddies. He could probably crush them all in a few weeks if he actually tried, but then he could no longer keep his precious uniform on. The only question is how long he can keep up the balancing act before either side grows too strong to control.

[splatmster24]

The U.N would probably help

 

 

 

 

 

I stopped there.

 

 

 

ss very true, the UN=bunch of lazy arseholes who like to hear themselves talk.

[jasignhagj]

ways WW III will start

 

 

 

I. a tite for tat nuclear battle between india and pakastan

 

 

 

II. a Magor terroist attack against a major country : ie us canada uk

 

 

 

III. radicals taking controll of a middle-eastern country

[Smokie]

My parents and their friends here in the US are all trying to bring their relatives over to this safe country. However, they are frequently denied coming. Governments look at the passports and country of birth. if it says "India", they'll immediatly let you go, we need Indians here and they're not a threat to uss. If it says Pakistan or any of the "-stan" countries, you'd have to be extremely lucky to gain access. After the Scotland car bombing, even advanced Middle Eastern Doctors are being denied travel simply because one of the terrorists happened to be a doctor and now everyon assumes all foreign doctors are a threat. What everyone seems to be oblivious to is that India's surrounding countries are being affected by this...Racism. You may not call it racism but i believe it is, stereotypes against many countries because a few middle easterners are terrorists. People think racism is too strong of a word for this, but it is exactly what is going on.

 

 

 

Yeah it's the trouble of the times, though. Many Indians are systematically discriminated (Sikhs who wear turbans have been killed and abused several times since 9/11) at airports especially but in their daily lives also. The thing is, if you're a young South Asian or Middle Eastern male (Pakistani, Afghani, Indian, whatever), people can't tell if you're NOT the next 9/11 lead man (not sure if you've seen the security videos - lead hijacker looked like a sharply dressed young businessman, who would've thought?).

 

 

 

It's not right and I can't justify it, but that's the way it is, and will be until people gain more exposure to the world and realize that our differences are superficial.

 

 

 

Actually the people who claim to be the most tolerant are often the most misguided about race... On a kind of tangential note: contemporary America seems to embrace the concept of 'separate but equal' more than ever - the vast majority of Americans will agree to racial equality (and this is certainly progress), yet at the same time, a staggering 70% are opposed to interracial marriage (some argue this is because of cultural factors but I see no difference between the black girl/boy and white boy/girl who went to the same church, grew up in the same neighborhood, went to the same schools, accept the same values... But in many cases it's not like that so whatever, interracial marriage is quite touchy).

 

 

 

An even more interesting representation of this is when you watch commercials - they're everywhere, we see thousands a year, just think about this a little next time you're watching some - with couples in them. Notice that the couples are always of the same race. The one notable exception I've seen since I started thinking about this is the Verizon commercial with the white guy and the Asian girl who don't want to switch back to their old service provider.

 

 

 

I'm sure there are a few other examples, but you get my drift; interracial couples are highly underrepresented in commercials (I understand that they're not a large portion of the population, but it's not proportional).

 

 

 

That tangential discussion aside, lol, does anyone have any other thoughts about regional impacts besides Indo-Pak war?

[lordkafei]

 

Well the U.N backed the Korean War against China and North Korea, if they were willing to back that what makes you think they wouldn't back a war against Pakistan? ...

 

 

 

 

 

 

There were special circumstances, though.

 

 

 

The Soviet delegate was boycotting to protest a different issue. The Chinese seat was controlled by the ROC (Taiwan). The US won the vote because the Soviets weren't there to veto it and no one else wanted to.

 

 

 

Thus, the UN went to war in Korea.

 

 

 

That would never happen again in a million years.