This makes a lot of sense to me. The TBTF is certainly something we include in our analysis of a country with nukes. Add to it the «Better the devil you know» and you end up supporting anything to upkeep status quo. However I always think the worst service Barack Obama did the US was not to let the banks crash in 2008/2009. That created a situation where the banks could and did continue after some very minor adjustments. (Yes I know Bush was president part of the time, but Obama (and McCain) agreed. So here we are in 2025 and Goldman Sachs and the others are doing their stuff. A bankruptcy of the banking system would have opened for a cleansing and a possible better rebuild. So instead of burning the financial industry in 2009 we get Trump burning the society in 2025. Because there are so many problems. And I have no doubt what hurts the general population most. And what will cost more to rebuild. Ok, is it the same with Pakistan and similar for Russia? (Because it is the same idea that has made the West (Europe at least) refrain from intervening. Oh… the nukes… oh a collapse would lead to Islamist groups or whatever taking control…) I think I will risk the alternative. These various very nasty groups will definitely do a lot of harm. Especially locally. And they will spread it around. So there will be hurts. Serious bad hurts. But isn’t that the situation today? There is ruling class in Pakistan and Russia that earns money on the nuclear threats. We cannot risk their nation going up in flames. Because…. But I don’t think these groups will be able to maintain and use their nukes for long, if at all. Rather they will sit with expensive toys that degrades quicker than they can say Insallah. Also their main interest will be grabbing and maintaining the power locally. Not something nukes are suited for. So while some might be afraid of that I am not. (But as said they will do harm. And they can definitely do more harm as terrorists also without nukes.) This in my opinion is true also for Russia. If that country breaks down, which seems inevitable in a decade or two there will be lot of nastiness. But not nukes. And if they break down both the shadow they cast internationally and the system they use to terrorize their own population breaks down. Fuck the TBTF.
It is perhaps helpful to look at the fate of Pakistan as the final destination...for Russia.
The famous Islamic nuke country, degenerated into a country fighting dirty proxy wars against the enemies of the West. Without even noticing, except for the violent end to political careers of several different politicians trying to change the strategic course of Pakistan (Zulfikar Butho, Benazir Butho, Imran Khan). Getting support, being looked at with a mixture of disgust and pity.
Fate of Pakistan is the ultimate goal of war against Russia, that started with containment of Soviet Union, and was later continued as a NATO enlargement policy. Refusing to alter the strategy that was successful against communist Empire, had a reason, a final goal.
Turning a nuclear armed Russia into a failed state, dividing Russia into smaller parts that fight each other and threaten major neighbours, locked for eternity into wars it cannot win.
Well, for people who believe in that 'deep state' - as existent and dominating 'the West' - and then 'playing games with Pakistan' (and Russia), what you're writing is 'making lots of sense'.
Problem: except for our banks & insurances sector (which are best descrbed with 'most sophisticated form of organised crime, imaginable'), we ('the West') are simply not that well organised. Actually: we're not organised the least. The essence of our society are some 200-300 super-rich, and then about 1,5 billion NPCs. What's more: we're so 'leaky', the existence of a conspiracy at such a super level would've become well-known already long ago.
Thus, sorry: nope. Pakistan is not played by 'the West'. Pakistan is - highly successfully - playing with fire, and constantly adding oil to it. Entirely on its own.
Let me remind you: Pakistan was de-facto diplomatically isolated from the USA, and subjected to US arms embargoes, when Bhutto launched the development of nukes. With Saudi financial backing. The USA couldn't care less at the time.
If the Americans cared, then only once USSR invaded Afghanistan, and there was an 'opportunity for a payback for Vietnam'. Then Pakistan - meanwhile under Zia ul-Haq (a staunch Islamist) - was 'suddenly good again'. Though not for any kind of 'super-clever deep-state-strategy', but for 'payback for Vietnam', only.
That's how (actually) short-sighted the US politics is. They never came to the idea (at least not back then: it's only more recently a few people in 'the West' came to the idea to 'connec tthe dots') to put together 'backgrounds and context' and start understanding the scope of Islamist revival: even the 'loss' of Iran as ally, in 1979, didn't wake up the USA. Until today, the Americans (actually: the entire 'the West') do not even know about the occuppation and siege of the Grand Mosque in Mecca, and the simultaneous assault on the US embassy in Islamabad, just a few months later. At most, they recall the times because they were ah-so-deeply-ashamed when the (future) IRGC seized the US embassy in Tehran, and the US rescue operation then miserably failed.
(The Europeans were shrugging shoulders already back then. 'Too busy with other things'...)
Meanwhile, the Pakistani establishment successfully made Bhutto a head shorter, and then did the same with Zia. I.e. the two 'creators of Pakistan as a nuclear power' were removed by their own. Not by Americans: by Pakistanis. And then the same establishment went buying itself PR-points in 'the West' by appointing Bhutto's daughter as PM. And that at the same time the ISI was first running a Mujahidden take-over of Afghanistan, and, when that failed, then creating the Taliban.
The West had absolutely nothing to do with anything of that. That was all Pakistan on its own.
Thus, please, don't cry me crocodille tears about 'Pakistan being played into self-destruction'. That's as 'valid' as when Indians complain they've been played by 'the West', because (quote), 'USA are about to invade India'.
Pakistan's own establishment is breeding jihadism because that's keeping the country destabilised to its own advantage. Because otherwise, 'average' Pakistanis might end less indoctrinated, stop fearing oppression, and even find the time to figure out just how much money are the jerks in power pocketing, how much are they misusing the religion, and how effective are they in ruining the economy and the entire nation.
«Pakistan's own establishment is breeding jihadism because that's keeping the country destabilised to its own advantage. Because otherwise, 'average' Pakistanis might end less indoctrinated, stop fearing oppression, and even find the time to figure out just how much money are the jerks in power pocketing, how much are they misusing the religion, and how effective are they in ruining the economy and the entire nation» – This is very similar to what the Kremlin's Chekist mafia ruling elite is doing in their various conflicts around the world. They are getting rid of their zombified, aggressive and impoverished population who want to fight, rob and kill. They dispose of them in Syria, Libya, African countries, or Ukraine so that they do not pose a threat to the regime. As Alexander Borodai, a deputy from Putin's United Russia party, said: "These are unnecessary people, we don't feel sorry for them."
«Russia is a democratic country, in a provoked proxy war against NATO, fighting in a land where everybody speaks Russian» – Russia is a stinking criminal pit, essentially run by the mafia.
Excellent comment. I have been saying for years, Pakistan is a failed state, a non-country. It is pathetic that the rest of the world has propped it up and allowed it to keep terrorising India for so long.
PS I have no affiliation to India and I have no illusions about Modi and his cynical pupulist nationalism, but India is still a successful state and has almost no track record of causing trouble around the world.
Besides nukes, a very important factor of financial assistance from the Gulf monarchies are Pakistani nationals that serve in the armies of GCC. If my memory serves me right, 20 thousand Pakistanies serve in Saudi army.
It's often overlooked, but these are effectively Praetorians that defend monarchies from local inner revolts.
Yesno. If you are talking about Pakistani army troops (which stay in kingdom under 1982 year agreement), yes, the number decreased from 20k back in 80s to 2-3 k now. But if we speak about Saudi military, still a lot of Pakistanis go there. There are no official statistics though. I came across different figures: from 20k to 70k. The latter figure is likely inflated but still we are talking about many thousands.
Not that sure. I do know the situation in the RSAF, and there are simply no Pakistanis there - and that for nearly 15 years. Even the number of British advisors was drastically reduced: already back as of 2015, this was down to '2-4 per wing'.
Just for comparison: as of 2010, it was still '2-4 per squadron', while different of 'princess' of the Saud family were crashing Tornados and F-15s for fun...
US advisors are present only at much higher command nodes.
Sure, I do not have as good/detailed insights into the ground forces. But, I do know these were completely reformed, and significantly beefed up, already after the Sixth Sa'ada War (2009-2010). And I mean: really, reformed and beefed up (so much so, the reform began with a mass wave of purges, with some 5,000 different ranks landing in a prison). Thus, any significant PA presence... I have my doubts. The Royal Saudi Armed Forces of nowadays are, really, a fundamentally different force than they used to be only 15 years ago, not to talk about back in the 1980s (when there was an entire mechanised brigade staffed by Pakistani personnel).
I think this a very important point you have raised. I do think there is an ongoing effort in the west to shift its support from Pakistan to India. Or should I say more accurately the US is shifting. France and the UK have supplied India with weapons since independence and will continue to do so. Personally it is heartening to see the US supplying weapons such as the P-8 and Apache to India. My view is that the strategic shift in the US to India is correct and on firm ground both in terms of soft power such as the Indian diaspora and hard strategic interests in countering the PRC. I would be interested in your take on this?
It's already since the times of the (I) Cold War that I'm finding it funny - and ironic, even absurd - how the West was (and still is) complaining about the Soviets 'buying influence through delivering arms'.
Arguably, the Soviets were playing that game too - but: they've learned it from the West. Because it's 'the West' that's always trying to buy influence through delivering arms. Alternativelly, nowadays it's such like Qatar - which is sort of 'officially' recognised as the greatest financier of extremist Islam, world-wide, but especially in the EU - that are buying Western arms to buy themselves influence in 'the West'.
...this is going so far that when Saudi Arabia and UAE grew fed up of Qatar, and put it under blockade (while, actually, preparing to invade and topple the Emir), in 2017 - they've been stopped by 'the West', because Qatar rushed to buy (between others), F-15s from the USA, EF-2000s in the UK, and Rafales in France... plus 10,000 best milk-cows from Germany.
That's how easy and cheap are 'we' - 'the West' - to have, nowadays.
Precisely this is the reason why I doubt there is really anything like serious 'shift' in the West's politics vis-a-vis Pakistan. If nothing else, Qatar has it easy to 'oil' positive PR for Pakistan. So much so, even the Taliban take-over in Afghanistan of 2021, was rather 'dramatic' because of the chaotic Western withdrawal, than for 'Taliban take-over' - which was widely celebrated, both in Pakistan and in Qatar.
And India is still 'well, not so interesting as a market' in comparison to the PRC. Because the PRC is a dictatorship, and thus if one arranges with few top communists in Beijing, one has it easy there. In comparison to that, nothing is 'easy' in India.
...and, once one is 'in bed with the PRC'... well, then sorry: it's hard not to be in bed with Pakistan, too: that's, simply, 'too much fun & profit'....
Thank you- that was really interesting. I had forgotten about the 2017 “Al Jazeera” crisis. I didn’t know it even included 10k milk cows. I had an Iranian friend at work at the time whose friends and relatives were making a fortune smuggling food stuff and among other things milk to Qatar. Gives a whole new meaning to smuggling white powder!
This mention of the IMF reminds me of the IMF's recent loan to Egypt which seems to have "coincided" with total acquiescence in the genocide across the border. Not sure what if any strings there are here, but Pakistan seems like a state that is not only too big to fail, but plays many games of geopolitical chicken at once. With the Chinese, with the US, with the IMF, with Iran. And each of those states have strings they would like to attach.
It is the same with Russia and all nuclear powers. It is too terrifying to imagine what could happen if they fall apart. So better leave them some room to breathe and even reluctantly support them despite the damage they cause.
France has a bitter experience with Pakistan due to the 2002 Karachi bus bombing. The background was France selling to Pakistan some submarines. As usual and allowed by French law, the deal included commission money to Pakistanis intermediaries. Aka the French state paid Pakistanis officials to sweeten the deal. Of course since we are civilized, this is totally not corruption.
Then the bombing happened. A bus carrying French engineer working on the deal was targeted by a suicide bombing : 14 dead (11 French, 2 Pakistanis + the attacker) and over 40 wounded. It was initially blamed on al-Qaeda but latter that thesis was eventually formally dismissed in 2009.
Instead, investigation by French authorities discovered not only the commission scheme but also a kickback system : some of the money given by the French state to Pakistanis officials via Pakistanis intermediaries was funnelled back to French politicians and among others things, served to fund UPR party dissident candidat Edouard Balladur run for the 1995 presidential election.
It appeared that President Jacque Chirac (the official UPR candidate who the election, also involved in multiple corruption and illegal funding scandal), decided to stop the commission/corruption scheme. Causing the anger of some Pakistanis intermediaries unhappy to not get all the money they expected. Thus motivating the bombing as retaliation.
The French justice all but openley blamed the Pakistanis intel service for the bombing.
Fun fact #1 : the sub-marine deal was part of a greater weapon deal involving KSA since Pakistan obvious did not have the money. KSA brought some French Frigate. The corruption scheme had a Saudi side as well.
Fun fact #2 : the corruption scheme involved Nicolas Sarkozy, the future French president. It also involved people latter blame in ... Sarkozy illegal presidential run funding by Gaddafi. You know the guy Sarkozy eagerly sought to kill as soon as he became president ...
Fun fact #3 : the French joint public-private venture company involved in the deal still exist and is now called "Naval Group". The French states holds 62% of its share and Thales 35%, with the rest to minor holders. It still hold total monopoly over French naval weaponry production and export. And it still consistently involved in corruption scandal :
Fun fact #4 : Since Thales' Naval group hold monopoly over all naval military production in France, it was the company involved in the Mistral affair : As part of the ceasefire deal clossing the 2008 Russian invasion of Georgia, a French president named ... Sarkozy ... offered to Putin to sell him 2 Mistral class helicopter carrier with transfert of technology to Russia. The deal was stalled by Sarkozy successor, François Hollande in 2015 following public outcry and Western allies pressure caused by Putin's invasion of Ukraine.
Fun fact #5 : France had to payback Russia while the Mistral were sold to Sisi's Egypt. Who has had much money as Pakistan ... So it was actually brought by ... KSA and then given to Egypt. Side note but under Hollande, there were multiple *suspicious deals involving Egypt. For exemple one of them involved the French military intel monitoring the Egypt-Libyan border. To do so, the service subcontracted a newly French created PMC led by ... the previous military intel directors. It also graciously offered for free the planes and the Equipements to the said company. Said company who was latter joined by ... the very military intel directors who oversaw the deal. This was back when both France and Egypt started to support the would be Gaddafi 2.0 : Haftar.
Fun fact #6 : Soon after, KSA became tired of constantly paying French weaponry for others states while having all the trouble in the world to get it for itself + maybe to getting back their part of the kickbacks. So much that it decided to momentarily cut all discussions with France for French weaponry export as long is it was forced to deal with massive companies such as Naval Group rather the actual producer of the weapons the Saudi sought to buy. Obviously they were getting tired to pay lots of money to French people who had nothing to do with the actual production but were in position to stall the deals until they get money. The Saudis pressure eventually partially succeeded. In 2018 they forced France's Naval Group to create a joint venture with a Saudi counterpart SAMI (Saudi Arabian Military Industries Company).
Sorry I did not meant to go on such a long rant. But when you start to pay attention to all the dubious deals in the defence sector, it immediately becomes a rabbit-hole.
Part of the story was an Iraqi negotiator of the French sale of (Dassault) Mirage F.1s to Iraq. That poor chap was promised a percentage in the case of successful negotiations. Alas, because Saddam wanted to make sure the French are delivering their best, latest high-tech, he also negotiated Dassault to pay him US$ 50 million for every Mirage lost in the war with Iran.
When the top brass of the Iraqi Air Force found out about that (that was in early 1983), they threatened to launch a coup against Saddam. Their impression was: Saddam was enriching himself on account of losing the war with Iran... 'Unsurprisingly', the negotiator in question disappeared without a trace (literally), as soon as he returned to Iraq.
Decades later, when his family then demanded Dassault to pay what was due for his services, Dassault... i.a. a court/judge in Paris, demanded from them to provide evidence for delivery of Mirage F.1s to Iraq...
...which they, as literal amateurs in that regards, couldn't do...
...and so, Dassault never paid the negotiator, plus the poor guy was made a head shorter by Saddam..
BTW, another such affair was also related to France and Dassault. Essentially, by 1981, Iraq was bankrupt (because of excessive spending for the war with Iran). Thus, it was on Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, and UAE to keep it afloat. Between others, these arranged a number of extremely complex arms deals - most of these in Western Europe. To keep a long story short, and for example: Dassault/France was delivering yet more Mirages to Iraq (plus Super Etendards), and these were paid in crude. Because of OPEC's production quotas, though, they often couldn't deliver own crude. Thus, the Saudis, Kuwaitis etc. started buying Iranian crude and delivering it to France as payments for Mirages that were flown by Iraqis into the war with Iran.....
What a surprise then: one of first targets of an Iraqi Mirage equipped with the French-made Aérospatiale AM.39 Exocet anti-ship missile - was a Saudi tanker hauling Iranian crude to France...
I never see any mention of the fact that Pakistan was responsible for nuclear weapons proliferation. To wit, supplying North Korea with the necessary technology and know-how by way of the "A.Q. Khan network", a thinly disguised arm of the ISI. It's my recollection that the Norks, in return, upgraded Pakistan's missile capability. Was there ever any sanction for that? I don't recall any.
Thanks for the recent writeups, Tom. I read this report just now and it seemed reasonable and quite contrary to most coverage in the best way. Would love to hear your opinion on it.
Great post, which gave me additional background information. So basically the situation with Pakistan is the same as it was with the RF in the past.
And to what did that TBTF fear lead?
A RF that wants a rebirth of the USSR under a different name, which thinks blackmailing with nukes will give it a complete freedom of acting without any consequences.
The same fear that allowed them without any damage to evacute it's troops from the right side of the Kherson oblast, where they normally should have been cut into pieces.
This allowed them also to continue the war with less problems.
Biden as a modern version of Æthelred the Unready with the difference that he hadn't to pay for it, but Ukraine had to.
This makes a lot of sense to me. The TBTF is certainly something we include in our analysis of a country with nukes. Add to it the «Better the devil you know» and you end up supporting anything to upkeep status quo. However I always think the worst service Barack Obama did the US was not to let the banks crash in 2008/2009. That created a situation where the banks could and did continue after some very minor adjustments. (Yes I know Bush was president part of the time, but Obama (and McCain) agreed. So here we are in 2025 and Goldman Sachs and the others are doing their stuff. A bankruptcy of the banking system would have opened for a cleansing and a possible better rebuild. So instead of burning the financial industry in 2009 we get Trump burning the society in 2025. Because there are so many problems. And I have no doubt what hurts the general population most. And what will cost more to rebuild. Ok, is it the same with Pakistan and similar for Russia? (Because it is the same idea that has made the West (Europe at least) refrain from intervening. Oh… the nukes… oh a collapse would lead to Islamist groups or whatever taking control…) I think I will risk the alternative. These various very nasty groups will definitely do a lot of harm. Especially locally. And they will spread it around. So there will be hurts. Serious bad hurts. But isn’t that the situation today? There is ruling class in Pakistan and Russia that earns money on the nuclear threats. We cannot risk their nation going up in flames. Because…. But I don’t think these groups will be able to maintain and use their nukes for long, if at all. Rather they will sit with expensive toys that degrades quicker than they can say Insallah. Also their main interest will be grabbing and maintaining the power locally. Not something nukes are suited for. So while some might be afraid of that I am not. (But as said they will do harm. And they can definitely do more harm as terrorists also without nukes.) This in my opinion is true also for Russia. If that country breaks down, which seems inevitable in a decade or two there will be lot of nastiness. But not nukes. And if they break down both the shadow they cast internationally and the system they use to terrorize their own population breaks down. Fuck the TBTF.
"Fuck the TBTF". If you're not a boomer you just became an honorary one ;)
i probably am, does 1963 count?
I think it does. That's good news and that's bad news cry-sob.
It is what it is.
It is perhaps helpful to look at the fate of Pakistan as the final destination...for Russia.
The famous Islamic nuke country, degenerated into a country fighting dirty proxy wars against the enemies of the West. Without even noticing, except for the violent end to political careers of several different politicians trying to change the strategic course of Pakistan (Zulfikar Butho, Benazir Butho, Imran Khan). Getting support, being looked at with a mixture of disgust and pity.
Fate of Pakistan is the ultimate goal of war against Russia, that started with containment of Soviet Union, and was later continued as a NATO enlargement policy. Refusing to alter the strategy that was successful against communist Empire, had a reason, a final goal.
Turning a nuclear armed Russia into a failed state, dividing Russia into smaller parts that fight each other and threaten major neighbours, locked for eternity into wars it cannot win.
But ...
Imbecile.
I see you do not agree with my opinion.
Any arguments, ideas, facts that might support your opposition ?
Well, for people who believe in that 'deep state' - as existent and dominating 'the West' - and then 'playing games with Pakistan' (and Russia), what you're writing is 'making lots of sense'.
Problem: except for our banks & insurances sector (which are best descrbed with 'most sophisticated form of organised crime, imaginable'), we ('the West') are simply not that well organised. Actually: we're not organised the least. The essence of our society are some 200-300 super-rich, and then about 1,5 billion NPCs. What's more: we're so 'leaky', the existence of a conspiracy at such a super level would've become well-known already long ago.
Thus, sorry: nope. Pakistan is not played by 'the West'. Pakistan is - highly successfully - playing with fire, and constantly adding oil to it. Entirely on its own.
Let me remind you: Pakistan was de-facto diplomatically isolated from the USA, and subjected to US arms embargoes, when Bhutto launched the development of nukes. With Saudi financial backing. The USA couldn't care less at the time.
If the Americans cared, then only once USSR invaded Afghanistan, and there was an 'opportunity for a payback for Vietnam'. Then Pakistan - meanwhile under Zia ul-Haq (a staunch Islamist) - was 'suddenly good again'. Though not for any kind of 'super-clever deep-state-strategy', but for 'payback for Vietnam', only.
That's how (actually) short-sighted the US politics is. They never came to the idea (at least not back then: it's only more recently a few people in 'the West' came to the idea to 'connec tthe dots') to put together 'backgrounds and context' and start understanding the scope of Islamist revival: even the 'loss' of Iran as ally, in 1979, didn't wake up the USA. Until today, the Americans (actually: the entire 'the West') do not even know about the occuppation and siege of the Grand Mosque in Mecca, and the simultaneous assault on the US embassy in Islamabad, just a few months later. At most, they recall the times because they were ah-so-deeply-ashamed when the (future) IRGC seized the US embassy in Tehran, and the US rescue operation then miserably failed.
(The Europeans were shrugging shoulders already back then. 'Too busy with other things'...)
Meanwhile, the Pakistani establishment successfully made Bhutto a head shorter, and then did the same with Zia. I.e. the two 'creators of Pakistan as a nuclear power' were removed by their own. Not by Americans: by Pakistanis. And then the same establishment went buying itself PR-points in 'the West' by appointing Bhutto's daughter as PM. And that at the same time the ISI was first running a Mujahidden take-over of Afghanistan, and, when that failed, then creating the Taliban.
The West had absolutely nothing to do with anything of that. That was all Pakistan on its own.
Thus, please, don't cry me crocodille tears about 'Pakistan being played into self-destruction'. That's as 'valid' as when Indians complain they've been played by 'the West', because (quote), 'USA are about to invade India'.
Pakistan's own establishment is breeding jihadism because that's keeping the country destabilised to its own advantage. Because otherwise, 'average' Pakistanis might end less indoctrinated, stop fearing oppression, and even find the time to figure out just how much money are the jerks in power pocketing, how much are they misusing the religion, and how effective are they in ruining the economy and the entire nation.
«Pakistan's own establishment is breeding jihadism because that's keeping the country destabilised to its own advantage. Because otherwise, 'average' Pakistanis might end less indoctrinated, stop fearing oppression, and even find the time to figure out just how much money are the jerks in power pocketing, how much are they misusing the religion, and how effective are they in ruining the economy and the entire nation» – This is very similar to what the Kremlin's Chekist mafia ruling elite is doing in their various conflicts around the world. They are getting rid of their zombified, aggressive and impoverished population who want to fight, rob and kill. They dispose of them in Syria, Libya, African countries, or Ukraine so that they do not pose a threat to the regime. As Alexander Borodai, a deputy from Putin's United Russia party, said: "These are unnecessary people, we don't feel sorry for them."
«Russia is a democratic country, in a provoked proxy war against NATO, fighting in a land where everybody speaks Russian» – Russia is a stinking criminal pit, essentially run by the mafia.
Excellent comment. I have been saying for years, Pakistan is a failed state, a non-country. It is pathetic that the rest of the world has propped it up and allowed it to keep terrorising India for so long.
PS I have no affiliation to India and I have no illusions about Modi and his cynical pupulist nationalism, but India is still a successful state and has almost no track record of causing trouble around the world.
Totally correct. 👍
Except for the assassinations it carries out around the world. No one has clean hands here.
Besides nukes, a very important factor of financial assistance from the Gulf monarchies are Pakistani nationals that serve in the armies of GCC. If my memory serves me right, 20 thousand Pakistanies serve in Saudi army.
It's often overlooked, but these are effectively Praetorians that defend monarchies from local inner revolts.
Not sure there are as many in the Saudi Army any more (1980s are long since over), but: definitely in Bahrain and, even more so: in Qatar.
Yesno. If you are talking about Pakistani army troops (which stay in kingdom under 1982 year agreement), yes, the number decreased from 20k back in 80s to 2-3 k now. But if we speak about Saudi military, still a lot of Pakistanis go there. There are no official statistics though. I came across different figures: from 20k to 70k. The latter figure is likely inflated but still we are talking about many thousands.
Not that sure. I do know the situation in the RSAF, and there are simply no Pakistanis there - and that for nearly 15 years. Even the number of British advisors was drastically reduced: already back as of 2015, this was down to '2-4 per wing'.
Just for comparison: as of 2010, it was still '2-4 per squadron', while different of 'princess' of the Saud family were crashing Tornados and F-15s for fun...
US advisors are present only at much higher command nodes.
Sure, I do not have as good/detailed insights into the ground forces. But, I do know these were completely reformed, and significantly beefed up, already after the Sixth Sa'ada War (2009-2010). And I mean: really, reformed and beefed up (so much so, the reform began with a mass wave of purges, with some 5,000 different ranks landing in a prison). Thus, any significant PA presence... I have my doubts. The Royal Saudi Armed Forces of nowadays are, really, a fundamentally different force than they used to be only 15 years ago, not to talk about back in the 1980s (when there was an entire mechanised brigade staffed by Pakistani personnel).
I think this a very important point you have raised. I do think there is an ongoing effort in the west to shift its support from Pakistan to India. Or should I say more accurately the US is shifting. France and the UK have supplied India with weapons since independence and will continue to do so. Personally it is heartening to see the US supplying weapons such as the P-8 and Apache to India. My view is that the strategic shift in the US to India is correct and on firm ground both in terms of soft power such as the Indian diaspora and hard strategic interests in countering the PRC. I would be interested in your take on this?
It's already since the times of the (I) Cold War that I'm finding it funny - and ironic, even absurd - how the West was (and still is) complaining about the Soviets 'buying influence through delivering arms'.
Arguably, the Soviets were playing that game too - but: they've learned it from the West. Because it's 'the West' that's always trying to buy influence through delivering arms. Alternativelly, nowadays it's such like Qatar - which is sort of 'officially' recognised as the greatest financier of extremist Islam, world-wide, but especially in the EU - that are buying Western arms to buy themselves influence in 'the West'.
...this is going so far that when Saudi Arabia and UAE grew fed up of Qatar, and put it under blockade (while, actually, preparing to invade and topple the Emir), in 2017 - they've been stopped by 'the West', because Qatar rushed to buy (between others), F-15s from the USA, EF-2000s in the UK, and Rafales in France... plus 10,000 best milk-cows from Germany.
That's how easy and cheap are 'we' - 'the West' - to have, nowadays.
Precisely this is the reason why I doubt there is really anything like serious 'shift' in the West's politics vis-a-vis Pakistan. If nothing else, Qatar has it easy to 'oil' positive PR for Pakistan. So much so, even the Taliban take-over in Afghanistan of 2021, was rather 'dramatic' because of the chaotic Western withdrawal, than for 'Taliban take-over' - which was widely celebrated, both in Pakistan and in Qatar.
And India is still 'well, not so interesting as a market' in comparison to the PRC. Because the PRC is a dictatorship, and thus if one arranges with few top communists in Beijing, one has it easy there. In comparison to that, nothing is 'easy' in India.
...and, once one is 'in bed with the PRC'... well, then sorry: it's hard not to be in bed with Pakistan, too: that's, simply, 'too much fun & profit'....
Thank you- that was really interesting. I had forgotten about the 2017 “Al Jazeera” crisis. I didn’t know it even included 10k milk cows. I had an Iranian friend at work at the time whose friends and relatives were making a fortune smuggling food stuff and among other things milk to Qatar. Gives a whole new meaning to smuggling white powder!
TBTF gilt umso mehr für russia. Leider.
This mention of the IMF reminds me of the IMF's recent loan to Egypt which seems to have "coincided" with total acquiescence in the genocide across the border. Not sure what if any strings there are here, but Pakistan seems like a state that is not only too big to fail, but plays many games of geopolitical chicken at once. With the Chinese, with the US, with the IMF, with Iran. And each of those states have strings they would like to attach.
It is the same with Russia and all nuclear powers. It is too terrifying to imagine what could happen if they fall apart. So better leave them some room to breathe and even reluctantly support them despite the damage they cause.
France has a bitter experience with Pakistan due to the 2002 Karachi bus bombing. The background was France selling to Pakistan some submarines. As usual and allowed by French law, the deal included commission money to Pakistanis intermediaries. Aka the French state paid Pakistanis officials to sweeten the deal. Of course since we are civilized, this is totally not corruption.
Then the bombing happened. A bus carrying French engineer working on the deal was targeted by a suicide bombing : 14 dead (11 French, 2 Pakistanis + the attacker) and over 40 wounded. It was initially blamed on al-Qaeda but latter that thesis was eventually formally dismissed in 2009.
Instead, investigation by French authorities discovered not only the commission scheme but also a kickback system : some of the money given by the French state to Pakistanis officials via Pakistanis intermediaries was funnelled back to French politicians and among others things, served to fund UPR party dissident candidat Edouard Balladur run for the 1995 presidential election.
It appeared that President Jacque Chirac (the official UPR candidate who the election, also involved in multiple corruption and illegal funding scandal), decided to stop the commission/corruption scheme. Causing the anger of some Pakistanis intermediaries unhappy to not get all the money they expected. Thus motivating the bombing as retaliation.
The French justice all but openley blamed the Pakistanis intel service for the bombing.
Fun fact #1 : the sub-marine deal was part of a greater weapon deal involving KSA since Pakistan obvious did not have the money. KSA brought some French Frigate. The corruption scheme had a Saudi side as well.
Fun fact #2 : the corruption scheme involved Nicolas Sarkozy, the future French president. It also involved people latter blame in ... Sarkozy illegal presidential run funding by Gaddafi. You know the guy Sarkozy eagerly sought to kill as soon as he became president ...
Fun fact #3 : the French joint public-private venture company involved in the deal still exist and is now called "Naval Group". The French states holds 62% of its share and Thales 35%, with the rest to minor holders. It still hold total monopoly over French naval weaponry production and export. And it still consistently involved in corruption scandal :
https://www.letemps.ch/monde/europe/soupconne-de-corruption-le-groupe-d-armement-thales-a-ete-perquisitionne-en-france-aux-pays-bas-et-en-espagne
Fun fact #4 : Since Thales' Naval group hold monopoly over all naval military production in France, it was the company involved in the Mistral affair : As part of the ceasefire deal clossing the 2008 Russian invasion of Georgia, a French president named ... Sarkozy ... offered to Putin to sell him 2 Mistral class helicopter carrier with transfert of technology to Russia. The deal was stalled by Sarkozy successor, François Hollande in 2015 following public outcry and Western allies pressure caused by Putin's invasion of Ukraine.
Fun fact #5 : France had to payback Russia while the Mistral were sold to Sisi's Egypt. Who has had much money as Pakistan ... So it was actually brought by ... KSA and then given to Egypt. Side note but under Hollande, there were multiple *suspicious deals involving Egypt. For exemple one of them involved the French military intel monitoring the Egypt-Libyan border. To do so, the service subcontracted a newly French created PMC led by ... the previous military intel directors. It also graciously offered for free the planes and the Equipements to the said company. Said company who was latter joined by ... the very military intel directors who oversaw the deal. This was back when both France and Egypt started to support the would be Gaddafi 2.0 : Haftar.
Fun fact #6 : Soon after, KSA became tired of constantly paying French weaponry for others states while having all the trouble in the world to get it for itself + maybe to getting back their part of the kickbacks. So much that it decided to momentarily cut all discussions with France for French weaponry export as long is it was forced to deal with massive companies such as Naval Group rather the actual producer of the weapons the Saudi sought to buy. Obviously they were getting tired to pay lots of money to French people who had nothing to do with the actual production but were in position to stall the deals until they get money. The Saudis pressure eventually partially succeeded. In 2018 they forced France's Naval Group to create a joint venture with a Saudi counterpart SAMI (Saudi Arabian Military Industries Company).
Sorry I did not meant to go on such a long rant. But when you start to pay attention to all the dubious deals in the defence sector, it immediately becomes a rabbit-hole.
I do not mind 'longer posts'. On the contrary: I love reading stuff that's interesting - exactly like this one.
BTW, it reminded me of the 'coming-into-being' of the book Iraqi MIrages (https://www.helion.co.uk/military-history-books/iraqi-mirages-dassault-mirage-family-in-service-with-iraqi-air-force-1981-1988.php).
Part of the story was an Iraqi negotiator of the French sale of (Dassault) Mirage F.1s to Iraq. That poor chap was promised a percentage in the case of successful negotiations. Alas, because Saddam wanted to make sure the French are delivering their best, latest high-tech, he also negotiated Dassault to pay him US$ 50 million for every Mirage lost in the war with Iran.
When the top brass of the Iraqi Air Force found out about that (that was in early 1983), they threatened to launch a coup against Saddam. Their impression was: Saddam was enriching himself on account of losing the war with Iran... 'Unsurprisingly', the negotiator in question disappeared without a trace (literally), as soon as he returned to Iraq.
Decades later, when his family then demanded Dassault to pay what was due for his services, Dassault... i.a. a court/judge in Paris, demanded from them to provide evidence for delivery of Mirage F.1s to Iraq...
...which they, as literal amateurs in that regards, couldn't do...
...and so, Dassault never paid the negotiator, plus the poor guy was made a head shorter by Saddam..
BTW, another such affair was also related to France and Dassault. Essentially, by 1981, Iraq was bankrupt (because of excessive spending for the war with Iran). Thus, it was on Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, and UAE to keep it afloat. Between others, these arranged a number of extremely complex arms deals - most of these in Western Europe. To keep a long story short, and for example: Dassault/France was delivering yet more Mirages to Iraq (plus Super Etendards), and these were paid in crude. Because of OPEC's production quotas, though, they often couldn't deliver own crude. Thus, the Saudis, Kuwaitis etc. started buying Iranian crude and delivering it to France as payments for Mirages that were flown by Iraqis into the war with Iran.....
What a surprise then: one of first targets of an Iraqi Mirage equipped with the French-made Aérospatiale AM.39 Exocet anti-ship missile - was a Saudi tanker hauling Iranian crude to France...
I never see any mention of the fact that Pakistan was responsible for nuclear weapons proliferation. To wit, supplying North Korea with the necessary technology and know-how by way of the "A.Q. Khan network", a thinly disguised arm of the ISI. It's my recollection that the Norks, in return, upgraded Pakistan's missile capability. Was there ever any sanction for that? I don't recall any.
This answered my question too, and THEN SOME! Thanks!
Another interesting post 👍👍
Thank you Tom !
Thanks for the recent writeups, Tom. I read this report just now and it seemed reasonable and quite contrary to most coverage in the best way. Would love to hear your opinion on it.
https://www.rusi.org/explore-our-research/publications/commentary/why-israel-escalating-its-strikes-against-syria
"It requested a US$1.4 loan" - 1.4 what? Billions? Surely not 1 dollar 40 cents? :D
Great post, which gave me additional background information. So basically the situation with Pakistan is the same as it was with the RF in the past.
And to what did that TBTF fear lead?
A RF that wants a rebirth of the USSR under a different name, which thinks blackmailing with nukes will give it a complete freedom of acting without any consequences.
The same fear that allowed them without any damage to evacute it's troops from the right side of the Kherson oblast, where they normally should have been cut into pieces.
This allowed them also to continue the war with less problems.
Biden as a modern version of Æthelred the Unready with the difference that he hadn't to pay for it, but Ukraine had to.
IMF loan is may be the reason of the recent Pakistan - India ceasefire.
If so, it's the only good thing about that loan.