Is America undermining Pakistan’s importance as an ally?

Published: August 24, 2014
SHARES
Email

US is currently trying to nurture a bi-polar Middle East, reshaping it in a way as to create a balance of power between Iran and Saudi Arabia. PHOTO: REUTERS

United States strategic shift to the Asia Pacific from the Middle East thanks to President Barack Obama’s Asia Pivot has certainly changed the entire Middle Eastern geopolitical calculus.

We are now witnessing a time period when, for the first time in history, the United States is on the verge of becoming energy sufficient as it surpassed Saudi Arabia in oil production in October, 2013. This happened while the wrapping up of military campaigns in the greater Middle East is translating into reduced military spending ergo, reduced military might in the said region.

These two events are significant as they are a contributing factor in the reshaping of the US strategic policy in the Middle East, about which we can make a calculated guess gauging from the current ripples that it has already created.

The US is currently trying to nurture a bipolar Middle East, reshaping it in a way as to create a balance of power between Iran and Saudi Arabia. This was hinted by the signing of the Iran deal that eased sanctions on Iran, thereby, integrating it back into the international economy (though marginally yet it is just a start to a long rearrangement of the jigsaw). In addition, Iran is indirectly being utilised to police Iraq at this point in time to limit Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIS) while the US Air Force (USAF) is acting as an air support unit to the Iranian revolutionary guards already on the ground.

This unique US-Iranian collaboration is worrisome for the Petro-Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, and interestingly for Israel as well. This mutual concern has given birth to yet another unique and indeed historic regional alliance between the House of Saud and Israel; albeit, being strictly limited to their mutual interests in the region (animosity to the Muslim brotherhood is one of them).

The Middle East is now looking more like a tug of war between the reluctant albeit important Saudi-Israeli alliance and the more traditional Shia crescent, led by Iran with Iraq, Syria, Hezbollah led Lebanon (and surprisingly Qatar due to its differences with Saudi Arabia and support for Hamas). The picture which emerges then is a bipolar Middle East policed by two power centres, balancing out each other yet both channelling their rivalry for a self-sustainable Middle East, seeking American approval at every stage lest they fall weaker compared to their rivals.

For Pakistan, this rearrangement of the geopolitical chess board of the Middle East is significant since it puts Iran in the lime light with partial American approval. It undermines Pakistan’s importance as the only policing state within the region, which it has to rely upon, on policing Afghanistan. A strong Iran will certainly be used as a policing state in Afghanistan (due to Iran’s animosity with the Taliban), and allow a safe passage route to Central Asia and Afghanistan via the rich Iranian sea ports contrary to Pakistan’s troubled land route, that is often compromised with supplies being torched regularly due to political instability in the country.

The current political turmoil in the country and the uncertainty surrounding the entire region is frightening for many. But amidst all this one has to question, would Pakistan still be a vital ally in the US war on terror? If not, it is indeed a worrying sign for a country with a cache of nuclear weapons.

Syed Wajahat Ali

Syed Wajahat Ali

A Machiavellian living in an Orwellian society. He tweets as @SWajAli (twitter.com/SWajAli)

The views expressed by the writer and the reader comments do not necessarily reflect the views and policies of The Express Tribune.

  • Feroz

    Groups like ISIS are a threat to all Islamic countries, those that are complacent will suffer the most. They share similar goals with most of the terror groups in the Afpak region and if they link up, those countries could be reduced to rubble. Pakistan will prove a very hospitable country if any such link up happens so it should destroy all terror groups on its soil before any such link up happens. America really does not have a proper policy towards terror groups like ISIS, so relying on them could prove fatal.Recommend

  • ahmad00711

    Isnt it a good sign that Usa has shifted its attention towards other countries in the region so that Pakistan can now operate independently without any interference in the war fought in Afghanistan ?Recommend

  • unbelievable

    Author is correct about USA reducing dependence on Saudi oil and change in Middle East strategy. However, despite the public rhetoric it’s obvious to most that the USA doesn’t consider Pakistan a real ally nor does it depend on Pakistan or Iran to police anything. I would argue that the USA would be very pleased if Pakistan could police itself.Recommend

  • Dakshin

    As geopolitics evolves, apparently so does the Pakistani propensity to churn out ever new and wondrous conspiracy theories complete with phrases such as “partial American approval” and “bipolar Middle East”. Previously, the US was derided for its machinations in the Middle East in order to quench its thirst for oil. Now that it is getting to self sufficiency, it is derided for losing interest in the Middle East. Can’t win, can it?

    I am also a little perplexed at the author’s conclusion though that if Pakistan is no longer a useful US ally, its cache of nuclear arms will become a risk. Sounds to me like a lover threatening suicidal destruction if jilted? That’s the same lover that constantly blames the US for meddling into its affairs. Seems like wants to thrust itself as a forever US ally regardless of the cost it has paid in the past and regardless of whether it is even desired as one any more.Recommend

  • Parvez

    The problem with us Pakistanis is that we tend to arrogate too much importance unto ourselves…….the sooner we get out of this habit, the better.
    Your view of the region and unfolding events made for interesting reading, although I thought that you failed to establish a historical link to the reasons behind these events.Recommend

  • Critical

    USA doesnt look Pakistan as an ally but rather as a pawn to maintain control in Asia….
    USA wanted India as an ally in 1950s but when socialist Nehru refused,they turned to Pakistan to infuriate them….
    Then when they wanted to drive out Soviet from Afghanistan,they used Pakistan…
    For war on terror,they threatened Pakistan with nuclear strikes if they dont cooperate….
    Similarly,China too looks at them as a pawn…..

    The worst thing being a pawn is that you are always expendableRecommend

  • American

    has overplayed its hand…and double crossed everyone. As you sow, so ye shall reap.Recommend

  • Gp65

    So if US stops relying on Pakistan to police Afghanistan ‘It is indeed a worrying sign for a country with a cache of nuclear weapons’?

    Not sure I follow. Is it a worrying sign for Pakistan? If so, how is its own cache of nuclear weapons a source of worry for Pakistan? Unless you were trying to blackmail US with a gun on your own head i.e. unless you keep funding us in the name of war on terror, we will be bankrupt and forced to sell our nuclear weapons to support ourselves.Recommend

  • Got it

    Did you mean, pakistan ?Recommend

  • Syed Wajahat Ali

    Yes indeed it is a worrying sign for Pakistan if it loses its utility. The US till now has overlooked Pakistan precisely due to its utility in the region. A state with no utility is no good for the west specially if it is equipped with nuclear weapons. If Pakistan does indeed try to blackmail the US by pointing their nuclear sticks at them, I think that will serve as a pretext for US to push for nuclear disarmament of Pakistan.

    Remember, there is no such thing as a “neutral” or self sufficient state. Every state in particular in the Greater Middle East has to rely on regional or transnational alliances.Recommend

  • Syed Wajahat Ali

    Let me help you shed off your “preplexity”. Every state has to rely on a regional or transnational alliance, and every state has its own utility. Pakistan since its inception had its utility for the US. When a state loses its utility, and when it has a tool to blackmail its masters, usually they are either disintegrated/balkanize, or they are kept under check. Pakistan is no exception. I think the prime problem with most people is that they give too much importance to Pakistan based on its nuclear weapons. Soviet Union is a classic example that nukes do not guarantee good prospect.

    As for churning out “new and wondrous conspiracy theories complete with phrases such as partial American approval and bipolar Middle East”, I think these are just phrases used to sum up lenghty conclusions which I could not have unfortunately presented given the limited word limit.

    If you are still “preplex”, please do write to me in person and I shall try to further explain my rationale.Recommend

  • Syed Wajahat Ali

    I did not fail to do that. I had a word limit to honor and a region spanning from Turkey to Pakistan to cover. I will be highlighting the historicity of these events in my upcoming blog hopefully.Recommend

  • KlingOn2K

    In another decade, the US will be the largest exporter of oil – thanks to shale gas. EU nations are also embracing shale gas in a big way. All this point to trouble for the Gulf nations. The time to clean up their act is between now and the time when their oil will become less relevant.Recommend

  • KlingOn2K

    Nukes are way overestimated. Israel’s Iron-Dome system and similar systems will ensure that. India and Israel have signed a development agreement for a similar system. Ultimately wars will still be decided the old fashioned way.Recommend

  • Pol Priy

    The US is the largest importer of oil at this moment in time. The shale gas story has been hyped up so much that ordinary Americans seem to believe that they’ve stopped depending on middle eastern oil.

    Fracking technology will be adopted, and adapted, by countries outside the West. The US is not the only one whose output of fossil fuels will increase. China and Venezuela have some of the largest reserves in the world. Imagine that! Two nations you hate so much!Recommend

  • Pol Priy

    Look children! It is a Christian fundamentalist!Recommend

  • Pol Priy

    Our scientists have been working on MIRVs for a long time now. Iron dome was only affective against home made rockets. It won’t work against our missiles.Recommend

  • Pol Priy

    Pakistan needs US aid to finance its current account deficit. Without dollars our rupee will depreciate a lot and we will be forced to reign in imports. Our biggest imports are petroleum products so imagine rationing of those. Long lines for petrol to match those for CNG! Other “luxury goods” imports like mobile phones will also have to be curtailed. Inflation will also increase.Recommend

  • Pol Priy

    America funded ISIS in order to overthrow the Syrian government. Now they are using ISIS as an excuse to bomb Iraq again.Recommend

  • Pol Priy

    Giving up nukes would be the biggest mistake ever. It would open the doors to an invasion. The only countries who have ever escaped invasion are the ones with nukes. Libya was fooled into giving up its nuclear program and then look what happened to it. It was attacked by the west and its proxies, regime change was effected and now it’s a battle ground for various warlords.Recommend

  • unbelievable

    Just because your dependent on the World for trade doesn’t mean you can’t be neutral. Further – your concept of Pakistan acting as policeman is uniquely Pakistani — NOBODY outside of Pakistan believes your a policeman and The outside World has a dim view of Pakistan Recommend

  • Parvez

    I did realise ….but thought I’d point it out, anyway. Views on the 1916 Sykes-Picot agreement on the Middle East would make for interesting reading…..especially with what is happening in the region now.Recommend

  • Gp65

    Thank you for taking the time to respond. Appreciate it. Ok so, you are saying it is a worrying sign because Pakistan would lose its utility and associated payments from US. I at least understand the logic there. Two questions for you:

    1) why did you bring up nuclear arms then?

    2) why do you want your country to be always used by US ( or some other country for that matter). Would you not rather have your leaders make decisions in national interest rather than how a decision wokd be perceived by those whom we are supposed to serve as a utility?Recommend

  • Gp65

    India does not rely on regional or transnational alliance and does not see its worth coming from being of utility to a powerful master. So when you say every natuon is like that, I do nit believe that is true.Recommend

  • Sid

    Balanced and composed reply…!! Respect Sir :)
    And I really love author’s who do care about comments on his blogs. And I further love the way you handle it without taking it personal. Which is very admirable. Looking fwd to your future write ups, and lengthy discussions.Recommend

  • http://peddarowdy.wordpress.com/ Anoop

    Smart comment.Recommend

  • http://peddarowdy.wordpress.com/ Anoop

    Sadly no. Like it or not, when Pakistan needed hard cash, it was Uncle Sam which gave Pakistan money one way or the other.

    NATO countries, their combined GDP is more than 70% of World’s GDP. BRICS contribute the rest.

    So, Pakistan will be ignored and isolated by 70% of the World’s GDP. Not a good thing, trust me. After Osama was found in Pakistan living in a mansion, well, you have no idea how that has forever tainted Pakistan’s image.Recommend

  • Jayman

    The “geo-strategic” importance of Pakistan was first highlighted by the Quaid himself in his first ever speech to the international community. Since then leaders in Pakistan have been trying to monetise it with little success. In hindsight, he could have done with not touching on this subject.Recommend

  • Indian

    Please ,print a follow up blog. I too would like to read your analysis.Recommend

  • numbersnumbers

    Just how important is an “ally” like Pakistan that has openly supported their Good Taliban assets in launching terrorist strikes into Afghanistan com their FATA Safe Havens, killing US/ISAF/Afghan soldiers???Recommend

  • Syed Wajahat Ali

    India is an authority onto itself economically, in terms of population and in terms of military buildup. India smartly maneuvers between the US and the Russian camp. Remember the Nuclear deal it fetched from the US? and remember that the Indian air force is almost primarily based on Russian equipment.

    I think I would have to do a write up explaining Clausewitz, Kautilya, Sun Tzu and Machavelli soon as well to better elaborate the role of regional and transnational alliances :)Recommend

  • Syed Wajahat Ali

    Well certainly. And thank you for pointing that out Parvez Sahab. I really appreciate your feedback :)Recommend

  • Syed Wajahat Ali

    Thank you for your feedback :) Yes, I am currently on a project compiling the role of ISIS in the Balkans. Once I am done with that, surely I will write a follow blog to this one :)Recommend

  • Syed Wajahat Ali

    Thank you so much Sid! I really appreciate your comments :)Recommend

  • Syed Wajahat Ali

    Well at least we agree on some part so that is progress indeed :)
    As for our disagreement over the regional policing is concerned, the US always seek regional allies (though totally based on their utility) to help them understand the region and assert their diplomatic muscle and influence over the said region. One would say, what was the need of the ISI by the CIA to armed the Mujaheddins in Afghanistan as well if we consider your example dear sir. However, I will again say, that regional policing is a concept that is quite old and infact, one of the core items on agenda at the Yalta conference after the 2nd World War was to decide the regional policemen on all war torn continents.

    Pakistan’s influence and regional know how of the Pashtun speaking regions of Afghanistan has always been indispensable and have been used as a policing tool by the US and the west for intelligence and diplomatic purposes. Remember, policing does not merely imply “physical” presence in terms of troop deployments. It also means “intelligence sharing”, “diplomatic influencing”, usage of “proxies” and political maneuverings etc.Recommend

  • Parvez

    ….and ZAB said ‘ realities change ‘……and he too was right.Recommend

  • Jayman

    Wrong. China is the largest net importer of oil. What is there to “hype up” in shale gas production? Is an increase in oil production of 43% since 2008, (yep 43!) something to sneeze at? Nations would give their eyetooth to have a quarter of that. Why should I begrudge China? Let every nation drill for shale gas. The more the merrier. I would love to see the fat Gulf nations go broke. We’ll then see the stuff they are made of.Recommend

  • JayMankind

    Your scientists are working on the MIRV? Good luck with that. We’ll discuss that when it happens. Until then, you might just have to not use those nukes.Recommend

  • Syed Asim Hassan Rizvi

    Wow, well let me tell you that Pakistan’s Geo- political importance may fluctuate but the Geo-Strategic importance can never be undermined. Please elaborate the chain of effects that will encompass the region if Pakistan is left behind.
    America is not fool enough and I think will not repeat the same mistake again as it did in the handling of China, for today India is emerging as China was 30 years earlier.
    There has to be some one bold enough to tackle the bull(India) by the horns.
    NUKES can not only be used for pointing purpose only, e.g. North-Korea and Pakistan, and please read b/w the lines. We can bargain a whole lot more.
    Don’t worry we have the counter plannings and counter-counter-counter plannings available to be executed if and when the time comes.
    We are Pakistanis, don’t underestimate us, we have been through 4 wars and a decade and a half long insurgency, flood, earthquakes, politicians, dictators and most of all ENEMIES. We will grow, for today our children are better than us hence we will excelRecommend

  • Prashant

    With all due respect, I must say there is no country in the world which can claim that they have a full proof security against an incoming ballistic missile leave alone a cruise missile capable of carrying a nuclear warhead.Recommend

  • Bahaduruddin Marri

    One undeniable fact,,will always be, that paid hindu trolls
    will infest this website. With false facts. manufactured statistics
    and a special; posting privilege granted by ET.Recommend

  • Banana

    And that is exactly what Pakistan should aspire to become, shouldn’t it? Instead of having to rely upon one transnational alliance. Agreed, that the dire straits that Pakistan now is in, does not allow you to waddle towards such long-term aspirations of being non-aligned. But then again every nation that stands in the international arena today as an authority to itself had to go through such crises. When the cold war ended, most European nations that were part of the NATO alliance and the Soviet bloc found themselves losing their utility. And look where Poland or Hungary or Belgium or Austria stand today. However, immediately post the cold war their only concern was the economy and not border conflicts with neighbours. If Pakistan ends its hostilities with India and concentrate on the economic front, there will be certainly no reason to long for any sugar daddy, IMHO.Recommend

  • realist

    I find your answers to readers comments very informative and very polite. As some other readers pointed out, do follow up blogs on this topic.Recommend

  • gp65

    Please point out which facts are wrong.Recommend

  • gp65

    IT is a fact that US has stopped being dependent on middle east for oil. It depends on UK and Canada for its net imports. You are also incorrect that US is the largest net importer of oil in the world.
    There is nothing to hype about shale gas. Gas prices in US have plummeted (As have my heating costs in the last 4 years).
    The fact that China and Venezuela too may use shale gas simply will add further to woes of middle east as dependence on them will reduce. Unsure why US would find that problematic.Recommend

  • gp65

    That is a fair comment. You would agree then that those who have constantly been blaming participation in US ‘war on terror’ for the problems Pakistan finds itself were being less than honest?Recommend

  • gp65

    “Wow, well let me tell you that Pakistan’s Geo- political importance may fluctuate but the Geo-Strategic importance can never be undermined.”

    Now that cold war has ended and Pakistan is no longer needed to keep an eye on USSR, please explain what is the source of your geostrategic importance if US starts to collaborate with IRan instead of Pakistan as the author hhas suggested.

    ” Please elaborate the chain of effects that will encompass the region if Pakistan is left behind”.

    Why don’t you elaborate since you obviously seem to be in the know.

    “America is not fool enough and I think will not repeat the same mistake again as it did in the handling of China, for today India is emerging as China was 30 years earlier”.

    Sorry what exactly was the erroneous handling of China 30 years back? Why do you think US which has openly welcomed the emergenc of India as a potential counterweight to China, thinks that emerging India is problematic for US?

    “There has to be some one bold enough to tackle the bull(India) by the horns.”
    Which country besides Pakistan do you think shares your opinion?Recommend

  • Jayman

    Do you know what the budget outlay is to maintain a nuclear arsenal? Do you know what Pakistan’s annual expenditure is on this count? Don’t you think it is coincidental that Pakistan’s financial state turned precarious after they started building nukes? Even the Soviet Union buckled under the weight of these expenses. Pakistan’s economy at its best was barely above subsistence level.
    You’re right in saying that no power will invade you while you have nukes. My point is, no power needs to. The cost of the nukes is enough to bring you down. Recommend

  • Syed Wajahat Ali

    As far as aspirations are concerned, I think I never got on to what Pakistan “should” become.Over here, I was talking about what Pakistan “could” become.

    So yes, there are a number of paths that Pakistan can take indeed :)Recommend

  • Syed Wajahat Ali

    Well, thank you so much. I will certainly do that now :)Recommend

  • Guest

    @ author
    The current political turmoil in the country and the uncertainty
    surrounding the entire region is frightening for many. But amidst all
    this one has to question, would Pakistan still
    be a vital ally in the US war on terror? If not, it is indeed a
    worrying sign for a country with a cache of nuclear weapons.Recommend

  • Sudhindra

    @ author
    The current political turmoil in the country and the uncertainty
    surrounding the entire region is frightening for many. But amidst all
    this one has to question, would Pakistan still
    be a vital ally in the US war on terror? If not, it is indeed a
    worrying sign for a country with a cache of nuclear weapons.

    OK, when u r ill and go to a doctor, u want him to treat u after he tells u what ails u …
    So, ur article about what ails Pakistan due to its geo-strategic location is one half of the story … Where do u go from here ? how do u come out of it ? Could u please share some thoughts about it !Recommend

  • Syed Wajahat Ali

    I will have to do an entire blog piece just to elaborate that Sudhindra. And I am currently working on it. Will post it soon :)Recommend

  • Syed Wajahat Ali

    Surely I will elaborate. The only thing is that I have to write an entire blog post for that. And judging by the number of response, i think i need to do a series of blog posts since people are surprisingly very interested in the topic :)Recommend

  • unbelievable

    Why is Pakistan Geo-Strategic? In the scheme of things almost no trade transits Pakistan and technology advances means that the USA doesn’t need Pakistani military bases. This is just another Pakistani myth pandered on a regular basis by many authors who never/ever take the time to justify the label/assumption.Recommend

  • JayMankind

    @syedwajahatali:disqus , you seem to have a good handle on the geopolitics of the region and Pakistan’s role in it. How does Pakistan perceive itself? Does it see its role as a ‘facilitator’ in the region?
    What is Pakistan’s niche? It has played the Defender of Ummah card but the Gulf states are not buying into it. While Pakistan produces a reasonable number of highly educated people, it is simply not enough to move the needle to any great degree. Kashmir alone cannot be the national goal for Pakistan. Any light on this issue would be greatly appreciated.Recommend

  • Pol Priy

    It’s not as if we are chomping at the bits to use our nukes. Your colleague brought it up so I pointed out that offensive systems develop right alongside defensive ones. Progress is not a one sided affair.Recommend

  • Pol Priy

    Opinion of the outside world is shaped by a hostile western media. They don’t know anything.Recommend

  • Pol Priy

    I should also like to point out that technology is no panacea. A machine is designed to do a specific thing and it cannot counter other types of threats. Nukes are designed to blow up at altitude. Rockets are designed to blow up on impact. A system designed to stop rockets will not be able to counter nuclear missiles without significant development.Recommend

  • Pol Priy

    Not really. We would still need to finance our current account deficit. Just we wouldn’t have the added burden of a horrible security situation.Recommend

  • Pol Priy

    It is hype when people start to believe they’ve become independent of middle eastern oil.

    The fact that the middle eastern nations export their oil for US dollars only is what underwrites that currency. If large importers like China start importing less then they will have less reason to maintain large reserves of the US dollar. The dollar will fall in value and Americans won’t be able to afford their lavish life styles.

    America is fundamentally opposed to China’s development. That is why they are stirring up trouble with their pivot to asia.Recommend

  • Pol Priy

    I said largest importer and I stand by that. What do you mean by net importer? You do realize that there are different types of crude oil and if the US is exporting certain types its because it is unable to use them locally. It still depends on imports for the type of oil it needs.Recommend

  • Jayman

    Good luck with that theory. But don’t hold your breath.
    Do some research on how China started to develop. It was US investments that paved the way for their advancement. You will find that but for the US it would be still ploughing in the middle of Shanghai. Your hatred for the US blinds you of all facts. Your simple economic arguments may win over but few else.Recommend

  • Banana

    Agreed..”Should” is what the people in power decide. “Could” is what us lesser mortals be apprehensive about.Recommend

  • Jayman

    The way “atami taaqat” is prefixed in every single argument in Pakistani media I presumed you’d use an ‘atami bumb’ to sort out every minor difference.
    Also, you might also want to see Iron Dome handle 15 rockets simultaneously. Its on Youtube. Did you know that Israel has a defense against ballistic missiles too? Imagine where that technology would be by the time you get your hands on the MIRV.Recommend

  • US CENTCOM

    We must remember that the U.S. and Pakistan joined hands due to our shared stance against terrorism. Anyone who thinks that the U.S. is supporting any terrorist organizations in Pakistan is simply mistaken. The truth is that terrorist
    organizations like the TTP have repeatedly issued warnings against the
    government of Pakistan for working with the U.S. They simply do not wish to see
    any alliance between our nations. They are working against our shared peace
    objectives in the region, and wish to see the path cleared for their terrorist
    activities. At the same time, we have always emphasized Pakistan’s importance
    in the region. Our nations have made a lot of sacrifices in our fight against
    insurgency and it only makes sense to build on our common sacrifices for the
    sake of achieving our common objectives. Our officials from the highest level
    have been meeting regularly to address our shared concerns, and we remain fully
    optimistic in regard to the future of our relationship. Conspiracy theorists
    have always tried to cast doubts over our relationship, but it is in our best
    interest to maintain a healthy working relationship, and we certainly hope to
    work together for the safety of our nations.

    Ali Khan
    Digital Engagement Team, USCENTCOMRecommend

  • KlingOn2K

    These ABMs target the nukes well before their detonation altitude. Besides, they don’t detonate on impact. They use proximity detonation. Anyway, you should see a video of one General Clark of the US army and he talks about why Pakistani nukes are not a worry.
    There is no way that the West would be making such a song and dance over Iran’s potential nuclear capability and not worry about Pakistan’s unless they have contingency plans to counter them.Recommend

  • Sudhindra

    Awaiting it …Recommend

  • Babu Ba

    Pakistan’s only asset is that it can be a gateway for trade between India and Central Asia. The only way to exploit it is peace/friendly relations with India & AfghanistanRecommend

  • Ram

    If delusion cannot cured with education then nothing will, Pakistan was never an ally it was just pawn in the game and will be used when the game needs it, this reminds of cartoon but I choose not to mention since it will ignite fellow pakistani sentimentsRecommend

  • KlingOn2K

    Oh boy, do you need to really study the system !! Actually it is quite the opposite. Home-made rockets fired from close range is trickier than ballistic missiles. They have a much smaller footprint and their trajectory can be wobbly.Recommend