Why Pakistan is keeping mum about India-China LAC conflict

[pothead]

Hey pothead you shouldnt smoke the ganja. Your IQ is already very low you smoke and forget that the Chinese spanked the Indians hard in 62. If war starts today China would be in Mumbai within a week

Promises, promises and more promises.

Have been waiting for 8 months for PLA to move an inch but looks like they have decided to run away again.
Reminds me of barking dogs.

 

[Areesh]

Dozens of Indian soldiers died at LOC after this idiot wrote this article

That tells us how much disconnected to reality liberal fascists of Pakistan are

 

[Khan vilatey]

So basically she said to india that Pakistan will do nothing india should just carry on.

Why write garbage when the point can be explained in one line? No strategic thought. The print published these writers just because they are anti Pakistan army.

Ms. Siddiqa is what chanakya refers to as a "Artists as spies to injure the enemy" in modern terms they are called fifth columnists.

If you read very carefully, the tone of the article is extremely respectable to india and she is actually calling China and Pakistan the irresponsible actors. Then she hints to india to break Pakistan's alliance with China as its not so strong.

question is simple, why Pakistan tolerates such openly pro enemy elements. It just amazes me.

But Pakistani media and its agencies will play dumb as always. Gentlemen! we are being bombarded with psychological ammo.

I respectfully disagree and would respectfully like to debate this further to improve my learning.

I read the article differently. My understanding is as follows:

1) Pakistan after Balakot is all but certain that it can comprehensively defeat india in a limited conflict but this by no means means we go looking for trouble and start a conflict on our borders

2) the wisdoms of the ages,Pakistan starting a battle has thought us that it would be our people who would have to pay the price in a conflict with India. China will support us but at an extreme cost to the brave people and soldiers of Pakistan. Why not let China start the war with India thin them out and us geting Kashmir back. We had a similar opportunity in 1962 but those times were different we were not as close to China. Things are different now

3) given the he choice between fighting and improving our economy by completing CPEC. The later option would be preferred. See if the CPEC project complete inshallah we would become the predominant Muslim trading power. My Lord and master Hazart Mohammad (PBUH) was a trader and he changed the rag tag pre Islamic society of Madena by making it a trading superpower in Arabia. He (PBUH) with his great wisdom defend and when it became strong enough took back the Muslims Lands of Makkah back. Why should we not do the same. Become economically strong so our 300-400 million Muslims can have the best life and spend our money in the benefit of Allah.

I would like to hear your wisdoms friends please provide your feedback

k

 

[fallstuff]

I think Pakistan is staying out of it. This is better as China is capable of handling it on its own.

 

[nahtanbob]

Why Pakistan is keeping mum about India-China LAC conflict
General Bajwa is being careful not to aggravate LoC. If Bajwa didn’t escalate after India’s revocation of Article 370, he won’t do so now.

AYESHA SIDDIQA
5 July, 2020

As India tries to sort out its tension with China, Pakistan’s relative silence is noticeable. Although intently watching the India-China conflict, Islamabad’s contribution has not extended beyond the ceasefire violations to some significant ratcheting up the temperature at the Line of Control. If anything, there is the concern that New Delhi may initiate some form of fighting to assuage any domestic concerns regarding the Narendra Modi government’s inability to strongly stand up to China. While responding to Beijing in Ladakh or other places where China has critical interests may take longer for India, the domestic embarrassment could be minimised by increasing temperature with Pakistan. The idea of India starting a limited conflict with Pakistan instead is presented in two articles published within a week of each other from sources that have the ears of the military establishment. This in itself indicates how the military either sees the situation or would like the people to understand it.

Many in the Indian article, the former Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) chief talked about a combined China-Pakistan effort against India with the hope to solve the Kashmir issue. However, the article expressed a wish that the two countries should have collaborated before the launch of the crisis in Ladakh. But the fact of the matter is that there is no indication of any extraordinary movement by Pakistan at the Line of Control (LoC) or the northern areas. Of course, there could be additional troops along the LoC and in Gilgit-Baltistan in anticipation of any possible tension and to organise elections next month in August, in which the army will play its role of ensuring its favourite candidate wins, but not the kind of numbers that intelligence reports published in the Indian media present. In fact, given the tension in the area, it would be odd for Pakistan not to ramp up its defenses on the LoC, but an aggressive intent is not visible.

What’s in it for Pakistan
From the late 1990s, when Beijing-New Delhi relations had picked up to a degree that it had become a matter of concern for Islamabad, bilateral relations between Pakistan’s two big neighbours have nose-dived in an unprecedented manner. I remember my conversations with some Pakistani diplomats in 1998-99, who were worried about China no longer wanting to play a zero-sum game in South Asia.

Beijing had remained neutral even during Kargil when it encouraged Islamabad to withdraw its troops. When I spoke with him a few years ago, then air force chief, Air Marshal Pervaiz Mehdi Qureshi, talked about his visit to Beijing with the official delegation headed by Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif with the expectation that the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) Air Force will lend material help as it did during the 1960s. However, he returned disappointed when the PLA Air Force chief told Qureshi that he was ready to help if the Chinese political leadership agreed to it.

Unless China and India find a way around their mutual anxieties about each other’s intent, a new strategic scene has been set after Ladakh from which it is difficult for both to get out while keeping semblance of their respective strength. For Pakistan, this conflict is a strategic balancer that has greater potential of keeping New Delhi engaged, especially if India and China are tempted away from finding a solution to their ongoing tension towards a ‘Siachinisation’ of the Line of Actual Control (LAC). Asserting power and indicating intent to protect territories where ‘even grass doesn’t grow’ by both China and India (or as in the case of Pakistan and India in Siachen) is likely to escalate operational military expenditure and human cost on both sides. This is a battle that Rawalpindi would let China fight itself, and in which it may keep adding to the temperature in relatively small proportions.

Bigger battles in Pakistan
Surprisingly, there seems to be a dearth of analysis on the ongoing India-China conflict. Barring some carefully expressed views, there is nothing much to go on. This is probably due to the shrinking of the strategic community. Despite the military’s interest in promoting and building a security studies community, a debate is missing because the general curbing of alternative voices has reduced the organic nature of the conversation. However, the relative silence can be equally attributed to analysts being overly engaged with Pakistan’s domestic political crisis.

Some of the sources I spoke with were of the view that even the military’s attention is diverted to the bigger question of how to deal with the economic and general political crisis generated by Prime Minister Imran Khan and his ministers. The damage that the government and its aviation minister single-handedly brought to the country’s aviation industry is a real crisis that has not only resulted in the European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) blocking Pakistan’s national carrier from flying to Europe but will also have long-term repercussions for the country. Clearly, the hybrid-military/democratic model is failing and Army Chief Qamar Javed Bajwa and his cabal are unable to find a quick and credible replacement for Imran Khan. Even if an internal change within the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) is brought, it will be short-term with little likelihood of eradicating issues of governance.

The military’s political engagement at a time when temperature in the region is boiling is also a reminder of the Siachen crisis in the mid-1980s. While both India and Pakistan were busy shopping for high-altitude warfare gear and equipment, New Delhi overtook Pakistan in occupying the glacier as Rawalpindi was too busy with domestic politics. A similar situation prevails now, especially if the concern regarding possible Indian aggression is real. Given the concentration of forces in Ladakh, Pakistan’s main concern is about the security of Skardu in Gilgit-Baltistan, an area that may be on India’s focus, especially after the revocation of Article 370.

It’s not that Pakistan can’t defend itself since, for Islamabad, the takeaway from Pulwama-Balakot is that it has a fair chance of surviving in a limited conflict. However, deploying the military is more of a defensive option. And the offensive option, in the form of a substantial increase in cross-border militancy, continues to have its limitations because of the Financial Action Task Force’s (FATF) growing pressure on Pakistan. Those restrictions have not gone away, which is one of the reasons for General Bajwa’s continued carefulness in not excessively aggravating the situation at the LoC. As a senior journalist that I spoke with argued, “If Bajwa didn’t escalate soon after India’s revocation of Article 370 when there was visible anxiety in the armed forces, then he may not do it now when he is in a more stable position”.

India must look cautiously at its neighbourhood where patronage from China will make things more difficult as is obvious from the case of Nepal. Notwithstanding Pakistan’s security relations with China, it is not becoming another Kathmandu and shouldn’t be treated as one. New Delhi may be anxious about the possibility of a two-front situation, but must also recognise that Islamabad has not entirely tilted towards Beijing for its own needs that are totally unrelated to India. In fact, if anything, Pakistan would like to keep a balance between the big powers and other states strategically important to it. While driven by the desire to demonstrate its strength against China, India must think more cautiously about the behaviour of its neighbourhood. Showing Beijing intent to defend may be important but its equally necessary to keep the regional temperature down.

https://theprint.in/opinion/why-pakistan-is-keeping-mum-about-india-china-lac-conflict/454034/

Pakistani army is more interested in colonising Afghanistan than getting Kashmir. It is more achievable and has more benefits in terms of access to Central Asia

 

[N.Siddiqui]

It's a strategic mum, silence must be heard, a deafening silence.

And it is 'Pakistan' written all over the China strategic offence.