General Musharraf Signs "Peace Treaty" With Pro-Taliban Militants?!

Author: APOLLOPublished: Sep 08, 2006 at 5:34 pm 3 comments

Mushy, our "friendly" neighbourhood Pakistani dictator, never ceases to entertain. I have been laughing hard since I heard this bit of news. If only "peace treaties" were as entertaining as this one, history classes would have been more interesting.

And to add to the mirth, the dumb Americans and the "international community" seem to have fallen for this rope-a-dope trick hook, line, and sinker.

The White House defended the deal because the Musharraf government "has been very cooperative in helping track down members of al-Qaeda."  Said White House Spokesperson, Tony Snow, "There's been an implication that somehow this throws open the border area to al-Qaeda. That does not make sense for the government of Pakistan.  We don't believe it is the case." Snow accused reporters of trying to connect non-existent dots to reach their conclusions. 

Photobucket - Video and Image HostingRead this headline and roll:

Pakistan signs peace deal with pro-Taliban militants - Critics say treaty, which calls for end to terrorist actions, seems 'a total capitulation' by Islamabad.

The dhimwits don't seem to get it do they? Pakistan and Mushy are not capitulating to anything. The Paki Army is perfectly capable of hunting mountain rats. The murder of Nawab Akbar Khan Bugti is proof positive of that.

Let's see what the terms of this so called "peace treaty" are.

  1. The Utmanzai tribe of North Waziristan Agency have committed that personnel of army and law enforcing agencies and state properties will not be attacked.  (Meaning Pakistan rangers and border guards "guarding" the Pak-Afghan border to prevent the NATO forces from crossing over the border to attack Al-Qaeda in Waziristan. Hmm... I think A-Q & Co will "respect" this term.)
  2. No target killing shall be carried out.  (They're terrorists. They do mostly indiscriminate killing.)
  3. No parallel administration will be established in the area. (Then who are you signing a "peace treaty" with? Are you not recognising them as a "parallel" administration already?)
  4. No cross border movement to Afghanistan for militant activities will be carried out and no ingress in settled areas adjacent to North Waziristan Agency will take place. (Translation — NATO forces will not be allowed inside Waziristan.)
  5. Similarly they have resolved that all foreigners in North Waziristan will leave Pakistan (Al Qaeda get out!!) albeit those who are unable to do so for certain genuine reasons(Wait! Wait! on second thoughts please sit back and enjoy our "hospitality") shall respect law of the land and abide by all conditions of the agreement. They shall not disturb the peace and tranquility of the area.

An eminent American blogger called Marc Schulman has this to say about the treaty:  "One possibility - the most hopeful possibility - is that, with the withdrawal of Pakistani troops from the North Waziristan, it would be easier for our troops to cross the Pakistani border in search of bin Laden without raising the ire of Pakistanis living in government-controlled areas."

Continued on the next page Page 1 — Page 2

Article tags

Spread the word
Bookmark and Share
Profile image for apollo

Article Author: APOLLO

I live in Bangalore, the IT capital of India among some of the worst traffic offenders in the world. When i’am not caught in the middle of a traffic jam or writing some code for my company or trekking or partying, u can find me goofing off on the …

Visit APOLLO's author pageAPOLLO's Blog

Read comments on this article, and add some feedback of your own
  • No image found

Article comments

  • 1 - Aamir Ali

    Sep 08, 2006 at 7:11 pm

    Pakistan was killing militants and the militants were killing Pakistanis. So what was the point? Better to have a peace deal that removes the fighting and converts the militants back into tribesmen.

  • 2 - Aaman Lamba

    Sep 09, 2006 at 10:32 am

    Aamir, don't be naive - why would the militants revert to tribal ways after they've tasted blood - is Mushy that great a persuader?

    Perhaps he's redirecting their energies to South of his border, rather than North, hmmm?

    And the travesty of the man being feted and entertained in the US, going on the Daily Show, etc.

  • 3 - Aamir Ali

    Sep 09, 2006 at 9:02 pm

    If they were so thirsty for blood they would not have agreed to compromise and peace. The tribesmen became militants because of misunderstanding with the govt and tribal code of honor and revenge. The battles have been fought with casualties on both sides, which has now lead to peace.

Add your comment, speak your mind

Personal attacks are NOT allowed.
Please read our comment policy.
Please preview your comment.

blogcritics lists for May 19, 2013

fresh articles Most recent articles site-wide

fresh comments Most recent comments site-wide

most comments Most comments in 24hrs

top writers Most prolific Blogcritics for April

top commenters Most prolific Commenters in 24 hrs