<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Enough with the Coup Talk, Already</title>
	<atom:link href="http://registan.net/index.php/2009/05/04/enough-with-the-coup-talk-already/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://registan.net/index.php/2009/05/04/enough-with-the-coup-talk-already/</link>
	<description>All Central Asia, All The Time</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 25 May 2012 20:24:26 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Joshua Foust</title>
		<link>http://registan.net/index.php/2009/05/04/enough-with-the-coup-talk-already/comment-page-1/#comment-380140</link>
		<dc:creator>Joshua Foust</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 04 May 2009 23:34:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.registan.net/index.php/2009/05/04/enough-with-the-coup-talk-already/#comment-380140</guid>
		<description>Myra, I really didn&#039;t mean to. That&#039;s kind of a slippery slope, anyway, and I don&#039;t think we have to do either/or. What I am suggesting—indeed, asserting—is that the Army and the ISI maintain an enormous influence on Pakistani policies, and dealing only with leaders who do not hold sway with those institutions limits our approach.

Your points are certainly valid, and I don&#039;t have easy answers to them. The only point I was saying is that dealing with one half of the government—this time civilian &lt;i&gt;instead of&lt;/i&gt; military—strikes me as just as dangerous as before. And, the main point, is that we should stop speculating about toppling governments we find difficult to work with and instead start looking at the problems at hand.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Myra, I really didn&#8217;t mean to. That&#8217;s kind of a slippery slope, anyway, and I don&#8217;t think we have to do either/or. What I am suggesting—indeed, asserting—is that the Army and the ISI maintain an enormous influence on Pakistani policies, and dealing only with leaders who do not hold sway with those institutions limits our approach.</p>
<p>Your points are certainly valid, and I don&#8217;t have easy answers to them. The only point I was saying is that dealing with one half of the government—this time civilian <i>instead of</i> military—strikes me as just as dangerous as before. And, the main point, is that we should stop speculating about toppling governments we find difficult to work with and instead start looking at the problems at hand.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: myra macdonald</title>
		<link>http://registan.net/index.php/2009/05/04/enough-with-the-coup-talk-already/comment-page-1/#comment-380139</link>
		<dc:creator>myra macdonald</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 04 May 2009 23:28:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.registan.net/index.php/2009/05/04/enough-with-the-coup-talk-already/#comment-380139</guid>
		<description>Are you suggesting the United States should fall back on old habits of dealing primarily with the Pakistan Army and the ISI?

I have tried to address this in two posts:

http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/2009/04/28/the-pakistan-army-and-civilian-democracy/

http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/2009/05/01/will-obama-chart-his-own-course-on-pakistan/

You will find many Pakistanis who say that the power of the Pakistan Army has been inflated by U.S. support and as a result crowded out the development of civilian democracy.You might, or might not, subscribe to that view, but are you thinking through what you are saying when you insist that the military is the only organisation worth dealing with?

Also not sure I agree with your assessment of Kargil. Many Indians saw it as a failure for India. The situation was retrieved only by American pressure on Sharif to pull the troops back. That&#039;s slightly off-topic, but a subject I&#039;m happy to discuss with you in more detail.

Myra</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Are you suggesting the United States should fall back on old habits of dealing primarily with the Pakistan Army and the ISI?</p>
<p>I have tried to address this in two posts:</p>
<p><a href="http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/2009/04/28/the-pakistan-army-and-civilian-democracy/" rel="nofollow">http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/2009/04/28/the-pakistan-army-and-civilian-democracy/</a></p>
<p><a href="http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/2009/05/01/will-obama-chart-his-own-course-on-pakistan/" rel="nofollow">http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/2009/05/01/will-obama-chart-his-own-course-on-pakistan/</a></p>
<p>You will find many Pakistanis who say that the power of the Pakistan Army has been inflated by U.S. support and as a result crowded out the development of civilian democracy.You might, or might not, subscribe to that view, but are you thinking through what you are saying when you insist that the military is the only organisation worth dealing with?</p>
<p>Also not sure I agree with your assessment of Kargil. Many Indians saw it as a failure for India. The situation was retrieved only by American pressure on Sharif to pull the troops back. That&#8217;s slightly off-topic, but a subject I&#8217;m happy to discuss with you in more detail.</p>
<p>Myra</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

