My choice today: Saturday 31 May 2008

Khawahish aur khabar

The AQ Khan issue: Resurrecting a ghost?

Resurrecting a ghost

DR A.Q. Khan is back in the news, retracting by implication the confessionary statement he made in 2004 and asserting that he was forced to make it. Given the political situation today, it is obvious who he was referring to when he said he was made to come on TV and read out the statement. Besides making happy those now going after President Pervez Musharraf’s skin, Dr Khan would be hard put to ascribe any other motive to his decision to break his silence and restart the debate on an awkward aspect of Pakistan’s nuclear programme. That he was the man who put Pakistan on the world’s nuclear map and many in the nation regard him as a hero goes without saying. However, for a scientist he had an unusual trait — he spoke too much. Scientists, scholars and researchers, especially those who work on sensitive projects, the world over keep a low profile. A scientist seeking publicity is like a judge turning himself into a political activist. This was, however, less of the grotesque in the metallurgist; the greater part of the anomaly lay in his alleged role as a disseminator of nuclear technology.

He has now told DawnNews TV he did not do anything that was ‘illegal or unauthorised’. Evidence that was described as incontrovertible was collected to show that Dr Khan indeed ran a clandestine network that tried to make technology for making nuclear weapons available to ambitious governments ranging from North Korea to Iran and Libya. It is true that Pakistan is not a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. The legality or otherwise of his actions notwithstanding, now that he has chosen to break his silence Dr Khan needs to clarify what he means when he says he didn’t enter into any ‘unauthorised’ deals.

It is not a secret that all aspects of the country’s nuclear programme have remained in the hands of the military. Therefore, the implication that his actions were not just his own assumes added significance at a time when some in the West are questioning Pakistan’s ability to keep its nuclear weapons secure. We won’t get into the debate here whether Pakistan is safer and stronger for having nuclear weapons. We would, however, say that most damage to the country in recent years, and more so in recent months, has not been done by any external enemy but by loose talk within. And it is time political leaders in and out of government, ex-generals, scientists and others just paused and thought through the consequences of their words before they so generously share them with everyone.

Jamhooriat kay julaab

End of the road for president?

Baitullah Mehsud’s funds

The Governor of the NWFP, Mr Owais Ahmed Ghani, says the “caliph” of the “emirate” of South Waziristan, Mr Baitullah Mehsud, is spending between two to three billion rupees annually “on procuring weapons, equipment, vehicles, treating wounded militants and keeping families of killed militants fed”. He refuses to believe that this kind of money can be raised by him through “through taxation, zakat or donations”, but doesn’t say who could be funding him. The last caretaker interior minister had gone on record as hinting that the US could be involved, but it is likely that the country he has in mind is India.

This will not do. The truth could be that Mr Ghani isn’t really sure who is funding terrorism in Pakistan. But one thing we know for certain: America is funding the state of Pakistan to fight against Baitullah Mehsud who has big money. Once he reportedly took money from a predecessor of Mr Ghani’s in Peshawar to “pay back the dollars he had received from Al Qaeda”. Al Qaeda has drug dollars and proceeds from such smuggled goods as the foreign cigarettes that we smoke in Pakistan, plus the “cut” Mehsud may be getting from the second hand cars brought into Pakistan. The truth is that it costs us much more to mobilise against him and for that we need international help, whether we like it or not. (Editorial, Daily Times)
Read more...

My choice today: Friday 30 May 2008 - Bhutto, Abdul Qadeer Khan, Nawaz Sharif and the Nculear Pakistan - Sharia, Swat and Taliban

Why a resolution is not a solution?

ANP, Shariat and Swat





Nuclear technology and our 'heroes'



The ‘Bomb Day’ didn’t look so good

Here’s a bit of democratic irony. Mian Nawaz Sharif who stands tall as the champion of unfettered democracy also chose to celebrate the 10th anniversary of Pakistan’s nuclear tests. In Peshawar, the PMLN workers were photographed in front of a model of the Chaghai Mountain which shook when the bombs went off inside it on May 28 that year. But Balochistan, where the tests had been conducted, remained unimpressed. Baloch nationalist parties and student organisations observed Wednesday as a Black Day. Rallies against the nuclear tests were held in Quetta, Khuzdar, Mastung, Dalbandin, Chaghai, Kalat and Gwadar, condemning the use of Balochistan’s land for nuclear tests and describing it as “rubbing salt in the wounds of the Baloch people”.

Mian Sahib will probably have to decide whether he wants to extend his credentials to that province or juggle the tests with democracy. Just as Punjab has woken up to the fact that there is no national consensus on the Kalabagh Dam; it must also wake up to the fact that there is no consensus on the nuclear tests too. All over the world, nuclear powers are apologetic about their bombs. Why should we celebrate them? (Editorial, Daily Times)

Read more...

My choice today: Thursday 29 May 2008 - Rehmat Shah Afridi Case and Nawaz Sharif - Salman Taseer and conspiracy theorists - Nuclear Bomb and Pakistan

Salman Taseer and the conspiracy theory - by Hamid Akhtar



Nawaz Sharif, Saifur-Rehman and Rehmat Shah Afridi


Musharraf ka anjaam? 

The reality of everyday life in Pakistan

Should we celebrate the bomb?

Should we celebrate the bomb?

Ten years from the day Pakistan tested six nuclear devices in response to India’s earlier tests in the same month, we continue to waver between two extreme positions: get rid of the bomb; celebrate the bomb. Both positions are untenable and both fail to place the country’s nuclear weapons capability in the proper perspective. Consider.

Those that ask for a rollback argue on the basis of humanistic and peace concerns. While there is absolutely nothing wrong with taking that position in theory, it becomes problematic when it refuses to wed those concerns to the geopolitical realities on the ground. Salvador de Madriaga, the inter-War Chairman of the League of Nations Disarmament Commission, was spot-on when he commented on the normative passion for disarmament in 1973 thus: “The trouble with disarmament was (it still is) that the problem of war is tackled upside down and at the wrong end...Nations don’t distrust each other because they are armed; they are armed because they distrust each other. And therefore to want disarmament before a minimum of common agreement on fundamentals is as absurd as to want people to go undressed in winter. Let the weather be warm, and people will discard their clothes readily and without committees to tell them how they are to undress.”

Simultaneously, however, the world has been making efforts, feeble though they may be, to try and control the spread of nuclear weapons and related technologies. It is visible to all that those who are in the lead — the first Five nuclear weapons states — have not made any serious effort to respect article VI of the NPT which stipulated that “Each of the Parties to the Treaty undertakes to pursue negotiations in good faith on effective measures relating to cessation of the nuclear arms race at an early date and to nuclear disarmament, and on a treaty on general and complete disarmament under strict and effective international control (emphasis added).”

The NPT was perched over three pillars: non-proliferation, disarmament and right to fuel cycle. When in 1995 it was extended indefinitely at the quinquennial RevCon (review conference) and the United States had begun pushing the rolling draft of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT), the stage was set for India to test the bomb. It just needed a rightwing government to do that. That also meant Pakistan would test. The reason we mention this is to put the capability in a perspective — as a necessity, not as something that needs to “celebrated” or flaunted. Indeed, May 1998 created a balance of terror in the region whose nuances the two sides are still in the process of learning. Pakistan had to face reverses at Kargil and India had to demobilise after much heat and din of the biggest mobilisation since 1971 to understand that war-fighting is not a feasible option under the nuclear overhang. What does need mentioning is that this deterrence, in combination with other factors, has now created an environment where India and Pakistan can talk peace, as they are doing since January 2004.

But we still get the bomb wrong. Symbolically, in Lahore, the ceremony to celebrate Yaum-e-Takbeer — the day recalling the 1998 testing of the nuclear device — by the female workers of Pakistan Muslim League Nawaz (PMLN) was marred by “internal wrangling”. The bomb is not to be used for domestic political reasons. For it to be good for us, we need to accept the regional status quo, sign peace and trade treaties and clearly forswear any future cross-border adventures. Nuclear bombs are not for fighting; they provide security by freezing the status quo. The various theories of war-fighting the strategists in the West advanced in the fifties and the sixties have mercifully been laid to rest. What we now have is the realisation that when two sides possess such destruction neither can afford to act irrationally.

Moreover, the bomb itself cannot provide overall security and the broader canvass of security involves economic, political, social and other multifarious types of securities. Countries can still go under if they do not accept the fact that survival is a function of multiple capabilities. Within the region we now have the opportunity, in the absence of a hot war, to advance trade and economic cooperation. Inside the country we are in need of a robust economy, political stability and constitutional guarantees. The moment we understand that, our nuclear weapons will become our guarantors of peace. Indeed, an unstable state, under attack from Al Qaeda, which has its own WMD plans, Pakistan today is at risk from the very device it thought would give it security.
Read more...

My choice today: Wednesday 28 May 2008 - Kalabagh Dam; Nawaz Sharif, Bhutto and Nuclear Technology; PPP and PML-N coalition;

PPP and PML-N governments: Time for action

28 May- Nawaz Sharif and Bhutto

Goodbye, Kalabagh Dam!

The Federal Water and Power Minister, Raja Pervez Ashraf, has finally said what most governments in the past were unwilling to utter. On Monday he told the press that the government had dropped the Kalabagh Dam project “forever”, as it is “a controversial issue among the provinces”. The old line was: we will build it when all the provinces agree. It was actually “three versus one” because only Punjab wants it. The other three provinces have provincial assembly resolutions against its construction.

Given the political situation in 2008, the fate of Kalabagh Dam was sealed anyway. The ruling PPP has its base in Sindh where opposition to the dam is a part of Sindhi nationalism. It is in coalition with ANP in Islamabad and Peshawar, and ANP says it will, if necessary, physically oppose the construction of the dam. The PPP is also determined to smoke the peace pipe in Balochistan which supports the NWFP and Sindh on the issue. Presumably, it would have been impolitic to assert the old line — we will build it when the provinces agree — as it would have raised the level of bad faith all around.

No one in the past with the best of opportunities and convenient political allies in the recalcitrant provinces could make anyone agree to the dam. President Pervez Musharraf was the best man to try because of his support within the MQM and a very pliant Sindh chief minister in the person of Arab Ghulam Raheem, but both shied away from the topic as they thought they could not survive politically after agreeing to it. Similarly, the MMA clerical government in Peshawar was secretly willing to have the dam but was most reluctant to risk offending the Pakhtun majority in the province.

Punjab is still interested in the Kalabagh Dam, and experts inside Pakistan and at the World Bank support it when it says that the fears of the other provinces are not founded in fact. But the opponents don’t want to hear any expert view. The Sindhi leader Rasul Baksh Paleejo brings his cartload of “research material” to prove that the dam is harmful whenever he is invited to a TV programme to discuss the subject. Also, the world outside is increasingly wary of large dams because of the ecological damage they do to the environment and the suffering they impose on communities they displace. In India, for example, where big dams are planned, civil society movements are afoot to oppose them.

The verdict is that dams, while they produce cheap electricity and store water for irrigation, tend to silt up and become useless with the passage of time. Today all the big dams in Pakistan including Tarbela and Mangla are silted up by 30 percent, and the Mangla wall is to be raised to make it useful for a few more years. The Kalabagh Dam was proposed to be built on the Indus 15 miles north of Kalabagh in Punjab with a height of 260 feet and a length of 11,000 feet with a storage capacity of 6.1 MAF. It was to generate 11,750 kilowatt-hours of cheap electricity and irrigate 2.4 million additional acres. Its cost in 2000 was $10 billion. It was to take 10 to 15 years in construction.

Pakistan is externally under embargo for building nuclear power plants because it didn’t sign the NPT; now it is under a worse internal embargo on the building of dams. Last week, the nationalist Jiay Sindh party demonstrated in Sindh saying it would oppose even the Basha Dam which is not rejected by ANP so far. Basha is a long way off and will take much longer than the gas coming through in the Iran-Pakistan-India pipeline. But one can’t blame people who support the Kalabagh Dam because Pakistan really has no way out of its energy crunch.

The political well-being of the federation stands in the way of any agreement on distribution of our waters. The Indus Basin Treaty between India and Pakistan of 1960 was possible only after Pakistan recognised that an absence of treaty would favour the upper riparian India. As separate states, Sindh and Punjab — like India and Pakistan — would have to have a waters treaty, inclusive of upriver dams, or Sindh would go dry. The NWFP would be forced to go into a treaty with Punjab because of the sheer inequality of power, like India and upper riparian Nepal. But as a federation, Pakistan must pay heed to the increasingly hostile anti-dam sentiment among the federating units.

Pakistan can build the Basha Dam, but in view of the energy emergency it can “devolve” its policy and focus on smaller local dams. There is no doubt that after the abandonment of the Kalabagh Dam, the Iranian gas pipeline project has assumed a crucial make-or-break significance for Pakistan. But this requires a smoother equation with India and more strenuous diplomacy in Tehran and Washington. The needs are all urgent in the short term today; the feasibilities for big dams can be go on but there is a need to go for dams that can be completed in five years. *

(Editorial, Daily Times)
Read more...

My choice today: Tuesday 27 May 2008

Go Musharraf Go

Judges and Awaam 

A question for CJP Ifitkhar M Chaudhary

Balochistan - ignored, exploited

Zardari Afridi?

Judiciary crisis in Pakistan: Radicalism versus realism 
Read more...

My choice today: Monday 26 May 2008

What should Zardari do to Musharraf?

Benazir Bhutto's last book

Does the US want to get rid of Musharrraf?

Musharraf's third coup?

Baitullah’s bait?
Read more...

My choice today: Sunday 25 May 2008

"The flour crisis"

http://jang.com.pk/jang/may2008-daily/25-05-2008/col6.htm

Tourism of Malaysia

http://jang.com.pk/jang/may2008-daily/25-05-2008/col11.htm

http://www.dawn.com/weekly/cowas/20080525.htm

Despair on the line
By Ardeshir Cowasjee

LEST we forget, let me reiterate. Those now at the helm of the affairs of the republic that is Pakistan, this God-given man-made nation, guiding us along the path to destiny, whether they sport glittering Colgate smiles, implanted pricey hair, dyed locks, wigs, perukes, toupees or whatever, thanks to that marvellously wicked NRO forced upon a willing President General Pervez Musharraf by his well-wishers, the Yanks, have been made to appear as white as driven snow.

This unconstitutional and undemocratic piece of legislation, which should have been rubbished by our courts, has imbued them all — the happy returnees and those who have been with us over the past eight years — with implicit faith in themselves, their allies and their sycophantic inept confidants.

But, lest they forget, let them remember that this amnesty forced upon the people has not proven to them, the people, or even gone halfway to convincing them, that the crimes with which these mercenary ‘high-ups’ were charged have not been committed. That they have been let off the hook is merely the worst form of expediency, under the hypocritical garb of ‘reconciliation’ (reconciliation? — it is a perfect con job).

That man of great perception (there were no others to follow him) our founder and maker, Mohammad Ali Jinnah, once prophesied shortly after the making of his country, realising the calibre of men and women around and about him, that each successive government of Pakistan would be worse than its preceding one. This prediction, made 60 years ago, has been eerily correct, and continues to be so.

Pakistan’s newspaper of record, this publication, founded by none other than Jinnah, yesterday editorialised on the present political mess — a masterly understatement. The heading cannot be disputed: ‘Depressing scenario’.

To summarise and to add a few comments: Asif Zardari, unelected representative of the people and himself a relic of the 1990s, has flexed his unrepresentative democratic muscle and referred to his and the republic’s president as a “relic of the past”.

Flying into uncharted realms of fantasy, he has maintained that the people (that flailing horse forever being flogged) are not interested in their stomachs or their erratic electricity supply but only in the departure of Musharraf. Dawn, without elaborating, states that Zardari’s outburst has “sent shockwaves through political circles” and “exacerbated the sense of uncertainty and anxiety in the country”.

Why did Zardari utter? Well, says Dawn, it could mark a change in his policy of reconciliation, or it could be brinkmanship. On the one hand, one member of the famous coalition (we are not sure whether it is on or off) has it that the people want nothing other than the ousting of Musharraf whilst on the other hand, the other member tells us that the beloved awam wants nothing but the restoration of the judiciary.

Since our politicos are convinced that they are not worried about their creature comforts, let them come to an understanding at least about the premier importance of either Musharraf or the judiciary. As says the editorial, Zardari has been castigated for his retreat from the Murree Declaration vis-à-vis the judiciary, so in sticking to his reluctance to agree on the restoration he perhaps found it expedient to have a go at Musharraf hoping to ease tensions, in view of the “pressure from his allies and even elements in his own party” who were unhappy with his ostensible game of footsie with the president.

Musharraf is naturally not too pleased about this public display from the man he has done so much for. But then, what is the old saying about the dog biting the hand that feeds it? And, Zardari opened fire only after his last and final case (so he thinks) had been dismissed by one of the many courts forced to come to his rescue.

Yes, right is the editorial when it opines that the optimism that came with the dawning of Feb 19 “appears a distant memory”. But why does it not wish to point a finger of blame? They, the men running the national show, are all to blame. They are neither politicians of stature nor statesmen — they are minnows when it comes to political responsibility and statesmanship. If Musharraf has let us down, and if things progress as they seem to be progressing, these men he has brought in to play democratic politics are well on the way to letting us down with a bigger bang.

Dawn says that the “will of the people as manifest in the election results has not been entirely respected”. Putting it factually and bluntly, the will as manifested — relief from the inflated prices and shortages of the basic needs of the masses — has been trampled underfoot.

But yes, the “key players” have indeed chosen to “sacrifice the larger national interest at the altar of personal gain and ego”.

Now, why should we pretend to be so naïve as to be surprised by this? Did these key players, the two main democrats plus their sidekicks, not do exactly the same during the decade of the 1990s as they yo-yoed with the fate of Pakistan? Those of us who kept our heads firmly out of the clouds during this past year expected nothing more. In fact, what is surprising is that so far their shenanigans have not been more outrageous. However, time will tell.

And yes, there are “few reasons for optimism”, and that “we will find leadership at all tiers and in all areas of state” is indeed “a forlorn hope”. It is nowhere on the horizon. The danger lies in further deterioration, both political and economical. It also lies in the presidency. Musharraf tends to be reckless and if he is cornered, this recklessness may provoke him into doing something both he and his country may later bitterly regret. It is imperative that he keeps his cool, that he thinks long and hard before he acts.

One headline yesterday proclaimed ‘A foreign hand is involved in violence’ — the perennial excuse now offered by the Senate Standing Committee for the Interior on the prevalent absence of law and order.

Is it a foreign hand that has brought about the dog-eat-dog manifestation and vigilantism? Is it a foreign hand that captured and burnt to death alleged robbers in Karachi and Lahore? Is it a foreign hand that caused the slaughter (literal throat-cutting) in the precincts of Islamabad’s NDC of the wife and children of a serving military officer posted overseas? No, it is native desperation.

Nil desperandum no longer applies.

arfc@cyber.net.pk
Read more...

My choice today: Saturday 24 May 2008

A meeting with Sarabjit Singh

http://jang.com.pk/jang/may2008-daily/24-05-2008/col3.htm

Musharraf really going?

http://www.express.com.pk/epaper/Article.aspx?newsID=1100412350&Date=20080524&Issue=NP_LHE

Pakistan May Turn Over U.S. 'Spies' to Iran
Iran Claims Jundullah Militants, Led by Abdel Malik Regi, Are 'Spies' for the CIA
By RICHARD ESPOSITO and BRIAN ROSS

http://abcnews.go.com/print?id=4913927

May 23, 2008—

In another sign of growing tensions with the United States, Pakistan is threatening to turn over to Iran six members of a tribal militant group Iran claims are "spies" for the CIA.

The group, Jundullah, operates in Baluchistan on both sides of the border between Iran and Pakistan and has carried out a number of violent attacks on Iranian army facilities and officers inside the country.

The CIA has denied any direct ties with the group, but U.S. officials tell ABC News U.S. intelligence officers frequently meet and advise Jundullah leaders, and current and former intelligence officers are working to prevent the men from being sent to Iran.

The six Jundullah members were taken into custody by Pakistani authorities last week, and the Iranian Mehr News Agency reported Pakistan would soon extradite the men to Iran, where they would likely be put on trial as spies and face execution.

Officials said the group's leader, Abdel Malik Regi, was not among those arrested by Pakistan.

U.S. intelligence officials say they are aware of the developments with the Jundullah members and are said to be trying to block the extradition. In addition to causing turmoil in Iran, the officials say the group has been helpful in tracking al Qaeda figures trying to move through the Baluchistan region to Iran.

"The new Pakistan leaders have said they are going to do it, but they are saying a lot of things and trying to make a lot of deals," said one U.S. official. "If they are seeking stability inside the country, why would they want to inflame people in this region?" the official asked.

Iranian officials claimed this week that the U.S. had "a hand" in an April 12 bomb attack at a mosque in Shiraz that killed 14 people, according to Mehr News Agency, quoting Iranian Intelligence Minister Gholam-Hossein Mohseni Ejei.

"The U.S. is behind many events in Iran and the region with the aim of bringing insecurity," the intelligence minister reportedly said. "We have proper documentations in this regard," the minister told the news agency's reporters.

A senior U.S. official said Iran's claims "are nonsense, ludicrous."

The capture of the Jundullah members is seen by intelligence sources in the region as another indication that Pakistan's new government is distancing itself from the U.S. and U.S. intelligence operations in the country.

Other such steps by Pakistan in recent days include an accord between Pakistan's government and militant tribal leaders in the country's Swat Valley region where Taliban figures are believed to be hiding. Increasingly, U.S. sources say, Pakistan is effectively handcuffing U.S. ground efforts against al Qaeda in the border region and emboldening the Taliban.



Editorial of Daily Times:

Musharraf: fly in the ointment?

Unless conspiracy experts want to read all sorts of deceit and make-believe in it, the latest opinion expressed by the PPP leader Asif Ali Zardari about President Pervez Musharraf marks a significant turn in national politics. From the stance that “we can live with President Musharraf” to his being “a relic of the past” is a journey that is not without its ups and downs. And somewhere in the foundation of any possible equation, there is President Musharraf’s unremitting ambivalence that has come back to haunt us.

The conflict was simmering under the surface because of the lawyers’ movement, but it burst forth when the PPP got its “constitutional package” ready to address the twin problems of restoration of judges and the curtailment of presidential powers to dismiss the assemblies. The president reacted to his spokesman’s remark that he would “go at an appropriate time” by making him say that the PPP-PMLN coalition doesn’t have the two-thirds majority in parliament either to impeach him or clip his powers.

Thus the PPP, through Mr Zardari’s latest remark, has moved closer to the more radical position of the PMLN. It has also edged closer to the position of the lawyers’ movement that wants to get rid of the president through the restored Supreme Court. Will this remove pressure from the PPP to adopt the universally favoured radical change in Pakistan while Pakistan’s allies in the war on terrorism want a gradual transition? The latest remark by Mr Zardari may not assuage the misgivings of the lawyers’ movement but it will certainly have a salutary effect on the PMLN.

When the PMLN took out Article 58(2)b from the Constitution after the 1997 elections, the PPP in the opposition voted for it. Both parries had been alternately hurt by the power of the president to dismiss governments. After taking over in 1999, Mr Musharraf decided in his wisdom to keep the leaders of both the mainstream parties out of the country, after which he preferred to take on board the very religious parties that were opposed to his liberalisation of Pakistan, in order get the power-to-dismiss back in the 17th Amendment.

It is now known that President Musharraf was forced to take the leaders of the mainstream parties back because of the pressure of external powers. Those who think that he issued the National Reconciliation Ordinance (NRO), to make possible the return of Ms Benazir Bhutto and Mr Zardari, from the depths of his heart should take a look at his interview to Jemima Khan in which he accused the US and the UK of having forced the NRO on him. Clearly, he is a cold-blooded strategist who knows how to use ambivalence as his weapon.

There should be no hesitation in saying that in the coming phase of politics in Pakistan he cannot play any major role and might consider making a graceful exit himself at some stage. If the PPP coalition doesn’t have the two-thirds majority — the law minister Farooq Naek says it hasn’t so far — the president will stick around, but it will be in the midst of a rising graph of popular anger against him. His own party, the PMLQ, will not be able to bear the pressure of supporting him for long and could be on the way to splintering after developing “forward blocs”. The 2008 elections were a verdict of sorts and the people are interpreting the results against him.

It would, of course, be to the advantage of the president if the PMLN and the PPP continue to drift apart, and the former is unable to properly digest the latter’s move simply because it is attracted to the radicalism of the lawyers. In the event, far from being a fly in the ointment, the president would then survive nicely through a policy of divide and rule. After all, the PMLN’s motive behind supporting the lawyers is the removal of President Musharraf. The PPP-PMLN wrangling is now impinging on governance as the people increasingly want the coalition to devote time and energy to the economic crises being faced by the country. The sooner Mr Sharif and Mr Zardari make their historic compromise, the better.
Read more...

My choice today: Friday, 23 May 2008

MQM - a different (unpopular) perspective:

http://www.jang.com.pk/jang/may2008-daily/23-05-2008/col3.htm

Two chief justices? a seed for provincial disharmony?

http://www.jang.com.pk/jang/may2008-daily/23-05-2008/col3.htm

Despite our possible differences with military dictators, let us respect those who defend our country, i.e. shaheeds and ghazis of Pakistan's armed forces:

http://www.jang.com.pk/jang/may2008-daily/23-05-2008/col10.htm

Why must Nawaz Sharif avoid confrontation with Zardari:

http://nawaiwaqt.com.pk/urdu/daily/may-2008/23/columns3.php

Also see Abbas Athar's column in today's exprsss on this topic:

http://www.express.com.pk

Daily Times: Second Editorial: Deobandi-Barelvi war in Khyber

The Lashkar-e-Islam of outlaw Mangal Bagh has attacked four relatives of an MNA and done them all to death in the Khyber Agency. Earlier, one cleric was executed on the charge that he was “spying for America”. The MNA, significantly named Maulana Nurul Haq Qadiri, and his Tanzim Ahle Sunnat wal Jamaat, dominate the Landi Kotal side of the agency while Lashkar-e-Islam of Mangal Bagh dominates the Bara area of the agency. Mangal Bagh has been pretending to be on his own but the fact is that he is expanding his dominance out of Bara and inside the settled Peshawar area in order to become the cutting edge of the Al Qaeda and Taliban rebellion in the Tribal Areas.

The ex-chief secretary of the NWFP, Mr Khalid Aziz, heading a study of the Taliban phenomenon, said on a TV channel last week that he perceived a siege of the city of Peshawar in the rise of Mangal Bagh in Khyber. In the war that is coming to Peshawar the Barelvi-Sunni elements among the Pakhtuns are in the cross-hairs of the Taliban. The Barelvis are being constantly defeated in Khyber just because the Pakhtuns in the NWFP are overwhelmingly Deobandi. If Pakistan allows this to go on, the consequences would be devastating.
Read more...

My choice today: Thursday 22 May 2008

Why should we ignore General Hamid Gul's advice on Pakistan's role in the war on terror:

http://www.jang.com.pk/jang/may2008-daily/22-05-2008/col2.htm 

Tussle between PPP and PML-N? Whose loss?

http://www.jang.com.pk/jang/may2008-daily/22-05-2008/col3.htm

Why must we insist on a durable approach to the 'independence' of judiciary?

http://www.jang.com.pk/jang/may2008-daily/22-05-2008/col4.htm

.......

Editorial of Daily Times:

Second Editorial: Hangu jirga prefers jail to peace

As explosions wounded people in Kohat, bombs went off in Bajaur, and a cleric was murdered in Khyber agency for “spying for the Americans”, the 50-man jirga from Hangu was put in jail in Peshawar for not reaching a peace deal to end the sectarian war in Kurram Agency. The jirga was put in the jug under Frontier Crimes Regulations (FCR) while its leaders accused the “elders” comprising the jirga of deliberately avoiding solution. Hundreds of innocent people have been done to dearth in the nearly two-year old war between the Shia and the Sunni.

This is no surprise at all. Solutions were reached under FCR because of the system that prevailed under it. Above all, the authority of the state represented by the political agent could not be challenged. The jirga which contains members of the parties in conflict could not reach a decision because of the countervailing power of the Taliban. It is not the political agent but the Taliban and their central leader Baitullah Mehsud who call the shots. The Sunni-Shia conflict is hundreds of years old in the region, but Kurram became controversial — with its Shia majority in the headquarters, Parachinar — because it is located directly in front of the caves of Tora Bora in Afghanistan. The Shia are surrounded by Sunni tribes and run the risk of being ethnically cleansed.
Read more...

My choice today: Wednesday 21 May 2008 - Salman Taseer - By Asadullah Ghalib; Also dirty propaganda against Saman Taseer's family

PPP and PML-N Confrontation in Punjab

Also, Asadullah Ghailb's column on Salman Taseer in Daily Express, 21 May 2008.

http://www.express.com.pk


Dirty Propaganda against Salman Taseer and his family by the pro-Taliban right-wing agents of Nawaz Sharif, Jamaat-e-Islami and Imran Khan's Tehreek-e-Insaf and their paid yellow journalists

Comments by ordinary Pakistanis

dara Says:
November 19th, 2008

We are as nation spine less , brainless and powerless. We have been looted and murdered four or may be five times bu military generals and we couldn’t do anything (generals had worse life styles compare to Salman taseer).

We have lost four wars and half of the country and still celebrate 6th September. We have been fooled in the name of Islam by one Munafiq e azam four 11 years.
To people who are calling Indian “Kunjars”, recently “Kunjars ” had a debate in there cabinet to give Pakistan some Aid (5 billion reported in media) so that we mustn’t be selling our nuclear assets.

Those “Kunjars” landed on moon one week back and what a achievement for us to steel and up load Pictures of some one daughters on internet, congratulations perfect Muslims Pakistanies, you must be proud of yourselves, really Salman Taseer’s Family life is the biggest issue of this melting country….

Ghost Of TK Says:
November 14th, 2008

Since when these Amreeka’s piThoo, right winger reactionaries, the destroyers of Pakistan, the hitmen of kissinger, unwitting accomplices of the zionists, ie; the MULLAH’S … have become the “keepers” of the lawyer’s movement?

I would request to publish the names of the featured article writers because it would certainly be interesting to see who actually wrote this thing … thanks.

P.S. Good on the Sargodha University students. I think we can do without right wing religious nutbag (loaded) rants. The lawyer’s movement doesn’t need bearded rats who have betrayed Pakistan and the Islamic ideals to now rape the LMFJ.

makhalil Says:
November 14th, 2008

can some one point out what is Salman taseer’s anti-Pakistan campaign?

and regarding the word used “whiskey Ridden” i specially protest that how can this report be independent when their are attacking on someones personal attributes.

Just beacuse he is liberal, secular not a religious, muslim league, Rai wind going Governor of Punjab.

I think he has been victimised by the right wing {zia Ul Haqqeee} ruminants in media and politics for being a upright, leftist, secular and PPP governor of Punjab.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/urdu/pakistan/story/2008/05/080516_salman_taseer_profile_zs.shtml


some quoted the reference from Jassarat newspaper which is run by Jammat-e-Islami.

and i dnt need to say anything about the character of Jammat

they said the same things about ZA Bhutto and history has prove them wrong.
They said the same things about Benazir Bhutto and history has proven them wrong.

when we have no argument to back ourselves then we start attacking some ones personal life , their family life, their family members.

did salman taseers daughter killed any innocent or has been involved indirectly.

do they propagate hatred against people.

do they ‘force’ others to do things. what they think is right.


gditpp Says:
November 14th, 2008

In all fairness can the author of this post share with us the “anti-Pakistan statements and activities of, Salman Taseer”, and by the way who is in fact the author. Most propoganda in newspapers is done by baynamay yellow journalists.


that's what the right wing people did with
Jinnah sahab
Bhutto
Benazir
Zardari
Bilawal

grow up man.
grow up


and in their eyes the most pious women in Pakistan are

1-umm-e-Hasaan
2-Dr Afia Siddiue
3-Amina Jajua

they are all Maulvi Sarwer {who killed Zil Huma saying that he killed her because she doesn’t observe purdah}

http://www.bbc.co.uk/urdu/pakistan/story/2007/02/070221_zille_human_murder_fz.shtml


makhalil Says:
November 14th, 2008

If Joyala means not to agree with the following
1-yourself
2-PML
3-Ghazi Rashid
4-Hamed Gul
5-Jammat Islami
6-Al Qaeda
7-Tablighi Jammat
9-taliban
10-Neo-Islam

Then i don't have problem what ever you Label me.
Read more...