Indeed, it is not just ISI (or 'was not' just ISI) that has (had) connections with organizations which are (were?) involved in terrorist/sectarian activities in and outside Pakistan. Indian Army too does not seem to be not much different.
BJP = Jamaat-e-Islami, MMA, (and other right wing parties in Pakistan)
Vishwa Hindu Preshad = All sectarian and jihadi organizations in Pakistan particularly those sponsored by ISI (e.g. Sipah-e-Sahaba, Jaish-e-Muhammad etc)
RAW = ISI
There are however three key differences.
1. Unlike Mullah-Military Alliance in Pakistan, there is no VHP military alliance in India.
2. Their police is authorized to arrest a serving colonel.
3. India is far behind Pakistan in terms of the operation and effectiveness of disinformation cells which spring into action against every democratic government in Pakistan notwithstanding party affiliations, convincing many people that Musharraf and Zia were much better than Sharifs and Bhuttos.
Suspected involvement in Malegaon blasts: Indian Army says police can quiz its officials
By Iftikhar Gilani (Daily Times)
NEW DELHI: The Indian Army said on Thursday it was extending full co-operation to police to question its serving officials found in league with recently arrested Hindu terrorists involved in the bomb blasts in Muslim localities and mosques. “‘In the course of investigations by the Maharashtra police in the Malegaon bombing, some inputs of possible linkages of a serving army officer with other suspects have come to light. Accordingly, the police have, at this stage, sought to interact with the officer concerned and seek clarifications from him so as to proceed with further investigations,” said a statement issued by the Army Headquarters.
Sources said the army had already “moved” the suspected serving officer, Lt Colonel Prasad Purohit, to Mumbai so that he could be questioned by the police in connection with the blasts on September 29. The Anti-Terror Squad (ATS) of the Mumbai police suspects Purohit was associated with Major (r) Ramesh Upadhye, who is also under arrest in connection with the blasts. The ATS claims it has evidence of Purohit and Upadhye’s telephone conversations. It suspects Purohit was also in contact with Sadhvi Pragya Singh Thakur, a Hindu woman ascetic, who is under arrest in connection with the blasts.
Purohit and Thakur allegedly met at the Bhonsle Military School in Nashik on September 16. The army, in a press statement, said it would provide all assistance to the investigating agencies to probe suspects as and when required. “While no formal application has been received from the police authorities, the army headquarters have decided to extend full co-operation and facilitate interaction of the officer with the concerned investigating officials of the police. The officer has been moved to Mumbai to facilitate interaction at a mutually convenient date,”’ said the statement. Sources, however, said the army gave permission to quiz the officer with the stipulation that he would be interrogated in the presence of another army officer. It is learnt that the officer could be discharged from the army if his involvement in the crime is preliminarily proved and may be tried by a civilian court.
....
Also, read BBC Urdu dot com article:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/urdu/india/story/2008/10/081031_malegaon_blast_arrest_sz.shtml
Read more...
Editor's Choice
Friday, 31 October 2008
Suspected Indian Army Personnel's involvement in Malegaon blasts - ISI versus RAW and sectarianism in India and Pakistan
How rich are our parliamentarians, across the boad? A 2007 assessment of the richest Senators....
Senate excels NA with two richest parliamentarians
Saturday, March 03, 2007
ISLAMABAD: The wealthiest of all members of the parliament, including those sitting in the Lower House, belong to the Senate. Senator Muhammad A. Swati and Senator Ishaq Dar have emerged as the two richest MPs in the country's parliament today.
While many known billionaires sitting in the two houses of the parliament are giving us to believe they are penniless, Swati has acknowledged having assets worth more than a billion rupees. He is the only declared billionaire in the parliament. PML-N's chartered accountant Ishaq Dar is second in the run with over Rs820 million declared assets.
The leader of the house in the Senate -- Senator Wasim Sajjad -- has tripled his assets as compared to his previous return. Sajjad is now a 100-million-rupee man. However, the leader of the opposition in the Senate did not show much of a difference in his assets as compared to 2005.
The two houses belonging to the spouse of Information Minister Muhammad Ali Durrani that were valued in 2005 at just Rs6.4 million are assessed by him at Rs50 million in his 2006 return.
Amongst the Sardars, Khosas, Chaudhrys and Khans, Senator Sardar Muhammad Latif Khan Khosa is amongst the declared richest ones as he showed more than Rs160 million worth of assets. Humayun Akhtar's younger brother Haroon Khan has shown over Rs475 million worth assets, which are 15 times more than what the big brother has declared as an MNA.
Amongst women senators, Mrs Rehana Yahya Baloch tops the list with declared assets worth Rs312 million. Mrs Semeen Siddiqui follows Baloch with her declared assets worth around Rs190 million.
The newcomer in the Senate, Shujaul Mulk declared assets worth Rs200 million, whereas the rising star of Saifullahs -- Salim Saifullah -- declared assets valued around Rs104 million, including Rs15,000 worth mobile sets. Saifullahs are partners in the Mobilink.
Details of the assets as declared by the aforementioned senators are given below:
-- Muhammad Azam Khan Swati: Declared Rs25m Abbottabad house; Rs0.45m another Abbottabad house; 10 plots worth Rs12m in Bahria Town; Rs13 million of worth 8 plots in Top City; Rs11m four plots; total current assets US$4.8m including personal banks accounts, note receivable etc; US$15m worth fixed assets including real estate, 46% equity in Swati Enterprises and 100% equity in Swati Investment co.; other assets worth US$0.59m include household furniture, jewellery etc. His liabilities are US$5.2m. Worth of Swati's total assets comes to US$20.5m (about Rs1.2 billion).
-- Muhammad Ishaq Dar: Declared assets include house in Gulberg Lahore having present value around Rs25 m; two Islamabad plots Rs1.2m; two apartments in UAE worth UAE Dirham4.7m; Sterling Pounds5.6 m and $2500 invested abroad; Rs4m and Rs0.8m shares; Rs7m deposits; Rs5m worth Land Cruiser, Rs1.1m Corolla and UAE Dirham0.58m worth vehicle called Bentley Arnage; jewellery worth Rs225,000 and Dirham26,455; cash and bank balance include Dirham0.6m and Rs4m; FFA worth Rs250,000; and arms worth Rs23,825. Wife's assets included.
-- Wasim Sajjad: Total assets declared include Rs5m plot in Jhika Gali, Murree; share in Rs20m Lahore house; share in another Lahore house Rs1.6m; Rs30m share in the construction cost of farm house in Chak Shahzad, Islamabad; 1.4 kanal plot Abbottabad Rs1m, share in 2.3 kanal plot in Nathiagali Rs3m; House in F-7/4 Islamabad Rs15 m; another plot in Islamabad Rs1m; Rs3m paid as advance for 2 kanal plot in Lahore; Rs1.1m paid as advance for two plots; Rs3.4m investment in shares; almost Rs12m in banks/cash; Rs1m library, furniture, fixtures (FFA) etc; Rs2.7m prize bonds; and Rs1.3m worth car. Sajjad assets grew from 2004's Rs20.9m, 2005's Rs35.3m to the present Rs100m.
-- Mian Raza Rabbani: Present value of his assets include Karachi property worth Rs5.5m; and Lahore property worth Rs5m; two cars worth Rs1m and Rs0.87m; jewellery Rs1.4m; cash Rs0.96m and bank cash Rs1.2m; and FFA worth Rs0.5m.
-- Muhammad Ali Durrani: Two houses (in wife's name) in Lahore worth Rs40m; agriculture land at Ahmadpur Rs2.8m; agriculture land at Lahore Rs4m; three plots worth Rs4m; Rs432,760 capital investment; Rs25,000 paper mills and Rs505000 investment in Infinity Engineering; Rs1m defence saving certificates; three cars worth Rs2m; jewellery worth Rs0.56m; Rs1m prize bonds; and FFA Rs85,000. Unsecured loan Rs2.9m.
-- Sardar Muhammad Latif Khan Khosa: Present value of Lahore house Rs20m; Khosa Chamber Lahore Rs5m; house Lahore II Rs6m; commercial building Lahore Rs6m; 3 kanal Lahore plot Rs6m; Lahore house III worth Rs20m; Multan house/residence Rs3m; Flour mill Multan Rs50m; Multan plot Rs20m; share of DG Khan house Rs1m; DG Khan agriculture land Rs1m; DG Khan plots worth Rs3m; Rawalpindi flat Rs1.2m; agriculture land in Kasur Rs3m; share of house in DG Khan Rs0.5m; Rs0.35m advance for Islamabad society plot; three vehicles, one worth Rs1.3m, one valuing Rs1m and another Rs0.7m; Rs5m jewellery; Rs1m cash; Rs1m in banks. FFA 5m. Wife and scions assets included but explained that all of them have independent source of income.
-- Haroon Khan: Decaled assets include plots worth Rs33.8m; 1/4 share in house Rs25.5m; agricultural equipments Rs2.5m; stocks and shares Rs177m; unsecured loans Rs231.8m; jewellery worth Rs0.2m; Rs4.8m cash and Rs0.8m in bank; and Rs0.7m worth FFA.
-- Shujaul Mulk: Declared 34 shops in Mingora worth Rs34m; Mingora Cinema Rs2m; share in Mingora market Rs3.5m; 40% share in flour mill Rs0.6m; plot in Kalam Rs0.6m; 1/4 share in six residential houses at Mingora Rs1.8m; Saidu Sharif house Rs9.5m; share in agri-land Rs68m; business capital Rs17m; bank deposits worth Rs51m; remitted amount Sterling Pounds50,000; shares Rs3.2m; saving certificates Rs0.6m; two cars worth Rs2m; jewellery Rs1.7m; Rs95,000 cash and Rs0.5m FFA.
-- Salim Saifullah Khan: Declared Rs69.8m of family's property; Rs20m shares etc; Rs0.5m saving certificates; Rs8m unsecured loans; Rs0.9m jeep; 30 tola gold; Rs1.9m cash in hand; Rs0.5m in banks; Rs1.7m FFA and Rs15,000 worth mobile sets. Saifullah's debts stand at Rs211,290.
-- Mrs Rehana Yahya Baloch: Declared assets include Rs150m Quetta house; Rs150m Karachi flat; Rs8m Kalat farm house and Rs4m Kalat agriculture land. The ECP notification does not show the richest lady Senator having declared a car, jewellery, cash or bank balance.
-- Mrs Sameen Siddiqui: Declared Rs27.5m Karachi house; Rs40m another Karachi house; Rs80m agriculture land in Karachi; Rs40m Karachi plot; 162 acres of leased land in Karachi and Thatta; Rs0.25m shares; three old model Mercedes cars worth Rs0.7m; jewellery worth Rs0.9m; Rs150,000 cash and Rs1m in banks; and Rs250,000 worth FFA.
http://www.thenews.com.pk/print3.asp?id=6260 (The News)
Read more...
Saturday, March 03, 2007
ISLAMABAD: The wealthiest of all members of the parliament, including those sitting in the Lower House, belong to the Senate. Senator Muhammad A. Swati and Senator Ishaq Dar have emerged as the two richest MPs in the country's parliament today.
While many known billionaires sitting in the two houses of the parliament are giving us to believe they are penniless, Swati has acknowledged having assets worth more than a billion rupees. He is the only declared billionaire in the parliament. PML-N's chartered accountant Ishaq Dar is second in the run with over Rs820 million declared assets.
The leader of the house in the Senate -- Senator Wasim Sajjad -- has tripled his assets as compared to his previous return. Sajjad is now a 100-million-rupee man. However, the leader of the opposition in the Senate did not show much of a difference in his assets as compared to 2005.
The two houses belonging to the spouse of Information Minister Muhammad Ali Durrani that were valued in 2005 at just Rs6.4 million are assessed by him at Rs50 million in his 2006 return.
Amongst the Sardars, Khosas, Chaudhrys and Khans, Senator Sardar Muhammad Latif Khan Khosa is amongst the declared richest ones as he showed more than Rs160 million worth of assets. Humayun Akhtar's younger brother Haroon Khan has shown over Rs475 million worth assets, which are 15 times more than what the big brother has declared as an MNA.
Amongst women senators, Mrs Rehana Yahya Baloch tops the list with declared assets worth Rs312 million. Mrs Semeen Siddiqui follows Baloch with her declared assets worth around Rs190 million.
The newcomer in the Senate, Shujaul Mulk declared assets worth Rs200 million, whereas the rising star of Saifullahs -- Salim Saifullah -- declared assets valued around Rs104 million, including Rs15,000 worth mobile sets. Saifullahs are partners in the Mobilink.
Details of the assets as declared by the aforementioned senators are given below:
-- Muhammad Azam Khan Swati: Declared Rs25m Abbottabad house; Rs0.45m another Abbottabad house; 10 plots worth Rs12m in Bahria Town; Rs13 million of worth 8 plots in Top City; Rs11m four plots; total current assets US$4.8m including personal banks accounts, note receivable etc; US$15m worth fixed assets including real estate, 46% equity in Swati Enterprises and 100% equity in Swati Investment co.; other assets worth US$0.59m include household furniture, jewellery etc. His liabilities are US$5.2m. Worth of Swati's total assets comes to US$20.5m (about Rs1.2 billion).
-- Muhammad Ishaq Dar: Declared assets include house in Gulberg Lahore having present value around Rs25 m; two Islamabad plots Rs1.2m; two apartments in UAE worth UAE Dirham4.7m; Sterling Pounds5.6 m and $2500 invested abroad; Rs4m and Rs0.8m shares; Rs7m deposits; Rs5m worth Land Cruiser, Rs1.1m Corolla and UAE Dirham0.58m worth vehicle called Bentley Arnage; jewellery worth Rs225,000 and Dirham26,455; cash and bank balance include Dirham0.6m and Rs4m; FFA worth Rs250,000; and arms worth Rs23,825. Wife's assets included.
-- Wasim Sajjad: Total assets declared include Rs5m plot in Jhika Gali, Murree; share in Rs20m Lahore house; share in another Lahore house Rs1.6m; Rs30m share in the construction cost of farm house in Chak Shahzad, Islamabad; 1.4 kanal plot Abbottabad Rs1m, share in 2.3 kanal plot in Nathiagali Rs3m; House in F-7/4 Islamabad Rs15 m; another plot in Islamabad Rs1m; Rs3m paid as advance for 2 kanal plot in Lahore; Rs1.1m paid as advance for two plots; Rs3.4m investment in shares; almost Rs12m in banks/cash; Rs1m library, furniture, fixtures (FFA) etc; Rs2.7m prize bonds; and Rs1.3m worth car. Sajjad assets grew from 2004's Rs20.9m, 2005's Rs35.3m to the present Rs100m.
-- Mian Raza Rabbani: Present value of his assets include Karachi property worth Rs5.5m; and Lahore property worth Rs5m; two cars worth Rs1m and Rs0.87m; jewellery Rs1.4m; cash Rs0.96m and bank cash Rs1.2m; and FFA worth Rs0.5m.
-- Muhammad Ali Durrani: Two houses (in wife's name) in Lahore worth Rs40m; agriculture land at Ahmadpur Rs2.8m; agriculture land at Lahore Rs4m; three plots worth Rs4m; Rs432,760 capital investment; Rs25,000 paper mills and Rs505000 investment in Infinity Engineering; Rs1m defence saving certificates; three cars worth Rs2m; jewellery worth Rs0.56m; Rs1m prize bonds; and FFA Rs85,000. Unsecured loan Rs2.9m.
-- Sardar Muhammad Latif Khan Khosa: Present value of Lahore house Rs20m; Khosa Chamber Lahore Rs5m; house Lahore II Rs6m; commercial building Lahore Rs6m; 3 kanal Lahore plot Rs6m; Lahore house III worth Rs20m; Multan house/residence Rs3m; Flour mill Multan Rs50m; Multan plot Rs20m; share of DG Khan house Rs1m; DG Khan agriculture land Rs1m; DG Khan plots worth Rs3m; Rawalpindi flat Rs1.2m; agriculture land in Kasur Rs3m; share of house in DG Khan Rs0.5m; Rs0.35m advance for Islamabad society plot; three vehicles, one worth Rs1.3m, one valuing Rs1m and another Rs0.7m; Rs5m jewellery; Rs1m cash; Rs1m in banks. FFA 5m. Wife and scions assets included but explained that all of them have independent source of income.
-- Haroon Khan: Decaled assets include plots worth Rs33.8m; 1/4 share in house Rs25.5m; agricultural equipments Rs2.5m; stocks and shares Rs177m; unsecured loans Rs231.8m; jewellery worth Rs0.2m; Rs4.8m cash and Rs0.8m in bank; and Rs0.7m worth FFA.
-- Shujaul Mulk: Declared 34 shops in Mingora worth Rs34m; Mingora Cinema Rs2m; share in Mingora market Rs3.5m; 40% share in flour mill Rs0.6m; plot in Kalam Rs0.6m; 1/4 share in six residential houses at Mingora Rs1.8m; Saidu Sharif house Rs9.5m; share in agri-land Rs68m; business capital Rs17m; bank deposits worth Rs51m; remitted amount Sterling Pounds50,000; shares Rs3.2m; saving certificates Rs0.6m; two cars worth Rs2m; jewellery Rs1.7m; Rs95,000 cash and Rs0.5m FFA.
-- Salim Saifullah Khan: Declared Rs69.8m of family's property; Rs20m shares etc; Rs0.5m saving certificates; Rs8m unsecured loans; Rs0.9m jeep; 30 tola gold; Rs1.9m cash in hand; Rs0.5m in banks; Rs1.7m FFA and Rs15,000 worth mobile sets. Saifullah's debts stand at Rs211,290.
-- Mrs Rehana Yahya Baloch: Declared assets include Rs150m Quetta house; Rs150m Karachi flat; Rs8m Kalat farm house and Rs4m Kalat agriculture land. The ECP notification does not show the richest lady Senator having declared a car, jewellery, cash or bank balance.
-- Mrs Sameen Siddiqui: Declared Rs27.5m Karachi house; Rs40m another Karachi house; Rs80m agriculture land in Karachi; Rs40m Karachi plot; 162 acres of leased land in Karachi and Thatta; Rs0.25m shares; three old model Mercedes cars worth Rs0.7m; jewellery worth Rs0.9m; Rs150,000 cash and Rs1m in banks; and Rs250,000 worth FFA.
http://www.thenews.com.pk/print3.asp?id=6260 (The News)
Read more...
Fighting terror in South Asia - By Kuldip Nayar
“THERE is no terror, Cassius, in your threats,” Julius Caesar tells him. Pakistan could have told India the same thing at the meeting of the joint anti-terror mechanism: recent bomb blasts at Malegaon and Modasa were not the doing of ‘Muslims from across the border’.
Nor did the Pakistani delegation point out that India had its own Hindu terrorists, led by a woman and trained by some ex-army men belonging to an old Sainik school. The meeting, fourth in the series, was ‘positive’, although quiet.
The earlier ones generally ended up with New Delhi demanding the custody of criminals who had taken shelter in Pakistan and Islamabad asking for more evidence. New Delhi has given ‘more evidence’ of the ‘involvement of the ISI’ in the attack on India’s embassy in Kabul. Yet, the purpose was not to put Pakistan on the mat because it was conceded at that very meeting that there could have been ‘some other elements’ involved in the incident. The matter was left at that pleasant note. It was a new beginning of sorts.
On the day the representatives of India and Pakistan met in Delhi the prime ministers of the two countries discussed terrorism in Beijing. Both reiterated that they were committed to work together to clamp down on terrorist forces. “Terror is a common enemy of both India and Pakistan,” said Manmohan Singh and Yusuf Raza Gilani concurred with him. The equation between the two holds promise for the future.
What creates doubts is that a similar exercise was done more than a year ago. But that wasn’t translated into a joint anti-terror mechanism. The Musharraf-led army dragged its feet. However, Gen Ashfaq Parvez Kayani has put terrorism at the top of his agenda. This may mean the end of infiltrators into India. But if the policy has changed the reasons are not difficult to comprehend.
One, the terrorists have become a menace to Pakistan itself. But the most important development is the change in the attitude of the rulers. President Asif Ali Zardari is at the helm of affairs. His approach to Pakistan’s problems with India is different from that of the earlier regimes. He wants to befriend India.
I saw this happening from close quarters when I heard the national security advisers of the two countries. At a small dinner given by the Pakistan high commissioner in Delhi, they said certain things which were unbelievable. India’s National Security Adviser M.K. Nayaranan admitted that he was a hawk but had come around to believe what Manmohan Singh told him: “India and Pakistan were destined to be together.” I do not know what transpired between the two during official meetings but Pakistan’s National Security Adviser Mahmud Ali Durrani told me that the talks were more successful than he ever expected.
It looks as if the clouds of hostility that loomed over India and Pakistan are thinning. Both Manmohan Singh and Zardari reached some understanding on how to fight terrorism in the two countries when they met at New York. Both Narayanan and Durrani were asked to prepare the ground which they did at Delhi. The joint mechanism will be built on it in the days to come. It is obvious that the different agencies operating in the two countries will have to fall in line, stopping what they are doing within and without. In the next few days, the Pakistani training camps which are a sore point with India may be dismantled.
All these measures are laudable. But they are only the means, not the end by themselves. The end is to normalise relations between the two countries. This is not possible until both curb radicals, Hindus and Muslims, in their own territory and stop efforts at mixing religion with politics.
India, a secular polity, is under pressure. Hindutva is gaining ground. Despite their anti-national activities, New Delhi is reluctant to take action against the Sangh Parivar which has spread all over, opening Hindu Jagran Manch offices in every state. The members recruited are getting training and weapons. With its eyes on the forthcoming assembly elections and later to the Lok Sabha, the Congress is found too timid, too faltering.
It is already a bit too late because the politics of hate is spreading as has been seen in Bihar and Maharashtra where the lumpen are fighting on the streets. Hindu terrorists want an ethnic purity in the areas where they live. A new avatar of the Shiv Sena, Raj Thackeray, has created his counterparts in Bihar. One of their leaders came to Mumbai this week and killed four persons while looking for Raj Thackeray to wreak vengeance.
This trend is reminiscent of MQM’s violence in Karachi and it is tearing apart the society in both countries and creating fear in the minds of ordinary people. How will the joint mechanism check those who have communalised terrorism in India and politicised it in Pakistan? Both are contaminating the liberal and democratic atmosphere as the Tamil extremists (the LTTE) are doing in Sri Lanka and the Harkatul Jihad-i-Islami (HJI) in Bangladesh.
The entire South Asia requires a common mechanism to fight against the growth of disruptive tendencies. India had kept them in check with some courage and determination. But lately it looks as if politics has taken over because of the impending elections. India cannot fail South Asia when liberal, democratic values are beginning to matter in the region.
For that reason, Islamabad cannot afford to talk to the Taliban in the NWFP and Fata. This would look like buying peace. It makes no sense to New Delhi if the Taliban are won over for the time being. They will resume pushing their archaic thinking after having consolidated themselves.
It is a pity that Nawaz Sharif, who is all for a strong viable Pakistan, favours a settlement with the Taliban. He should have drawn a lesson from what has happened to Asfandyar Wali Khan. Wali, along with his family, has taken refuge in London because the Taliban tried to kill him and threatened to eliminate the entire family. They are against any liberal thought. Nawaz Sharif’s Muslim League should stand by the Pakistan People’s Party to eliminate the Taliban who have a dream to rule both Pakistan and Afghanistan. The region’s dream is different.
The writer is a leading journalist based in Delhi
Read more...
Nor did the Pakistani delegation point out that India had its own Hindu terrorists, led by a woman and trained by some ex-army men belonging to an old Sainik school. The meeting, fourth in the series, was ‘positive’, although quiet.
The earlier ones generally ended up with New Delhi demanding the custody of criminals who had taken shelter in Pakistan and Islamabad asking for more evidence. New Delhi has given ‘more evidence’ of the ‘involvement of the ISI’ in the attack on India’s embassy in Kabul. Yet, the purpose was not to put Pakistan on the mat because it was conceded at that very meeting that there could have been ‘some other elements’ involved in the incident. The matter was left at that pleasant note. It was a new beginning of sorts.
On the day the representatives of India and Pakistan met in Delhi the prime ministers of the two countries discussed terrorism in Beijing. Both reiterated that they were committed to work together to clamp down on terrorist forces. “Terror is a common enemy of both India and Pakistan,” said Manmohan Singh and Yusuf Raza Gilani concurred with him. The equation between the two holds promise for the future.
What creates doubts is that a similar exercise was done more than a year ago. But that wasn’t translated into a joint anti-terror mechanism. The Musharraf-led army dragged its feet. However, Gen Ashfaq Parvez Kayani has put terrorism at the top of his agenda. This may mean the end of infiltrators into India. But if the policy has changed the reasons are not difficult to comprehend.
One, the terrorists have become a menace to Pakistan itself. But the most important development is the change in the attitude of the rulers. President Asif Ali Zardari is at the helm of affairs. His approach to Pakistan’s problems with India is different from that of the earlier regimes. He wants to befriend India.
I saw this happening from close quarters when I heard the national security advisers of the two countries. At a small dinner given by the Pakistan high commissioner in Delhi, they said certain things which were unbelievable. India’s National Security Adviser M.K. Nayaranan admitted that he was a hawk but had come around to believe what Manmohan Singh told him: “India and Pakistan were destined to be together.” I do not know what transpired between the two during official meetings but Pakistan’s National Security Adviser Mahmud Ali Durrani told me that the talks were more successful than he ever expected.
It looks as if the clouds of hostility that loomed over India and Pakistan are thinning. Both Manmohan Singh and Zardari reached some understanding on how to fight terrorism in the two countries when they met at New York. Both Narayanan and Durrani were asked to prepare the ground which they did at Delhi. The joint mechanism will be built on it in the days to come. It is obvious that the different agencies operating in the two countries will have to fall in line, stopping what they are doing within and without. In the next few days, the Pakistani training camps which are a sore point with India may be dismantled.
All these measures are laudable. But they are only the means, not the end by themselves. The end is to normalise relations between the two countries. This is not possible until both curb radicals, Hindus and Muslims, in their own territory and stop efforts at mixing religion with politics.
India, a secular polity, is under pressure. Hindutva is gaining ground. Despite their anti-national activities, New Delhi is reluctant to take action against the Sangh Parivar which has spread all over, opening Hindu Jagran Manch offices in every state. The members recruited are getting training and weapons. With its eyes on the forthcoming assembly elections and later to the Lok Sabha, the Congress is found too timid, too faltering.
It is already a bit too late because the politics of hate is spreading as has been seen in Bihar and Maharashtra where the lumpen are fighting on the streets. Hindu terrorists want an ethnic purity in the areas where they live. A new avatar of the Shiv Sena, Raj Thackeray, has created his counterparts in Bihar. One of their leaders came to Mumbai this week and killed four persons while looking for Raj Thackeray to wreak vengeance.
This trend is reminiscent of MQM’s violence in Karachi and it is tearing apart the society in both countries and creating fear in the minds of ordinary people. How will the joint mechanism check those who have communalised terrorism in India and politicised it in Pakistan? Both are contaminating the liberal and democratic atmosphere as the Tamil extremists (the LTTE) are doing in Sri Lanka and the Harkatul Jihad-i-Islami (HJI) in Bangladesh.
The entire South Asia requires a common mechanism to fight against the growth of disruptive tendencies. India had kept them in check with some courage and determination. But lately it looks as if politics has taken over because of the impending elections. India cannot fail South Asia when liberal, democratic values are beginning to matter in the region.
For that reason, Islamabad cannot afford to talk to the Taliban in the NWFP and Fata. This would look like buying peace. It makes no sense to New Delhi if the Taliban are won over for the time being. They will resume pushing their archaic thinking after having consolidated themselves.
It is a pity that Nawaz Sharif, who is all for a strong viable Pakistan, favours a settlement with the Taliban. He should have drawn a lesson from what has happened to Asfandyar Wali Khan. Wali, along with his family, has taken refuge in London because the Taliban tried to kill him and threatened to eliminate the entire family. They are against any liberal thought. Nawaz Sharif’s Muslim League should stand by the Pakistan People’s Party to eliminate the Taliban who have a dream to rule both Pakistan and Afghanistan. The region’s dream is different.
The writer is a leading journalist based in Delhi
Read more...
Shame on you Zardari, Shame on you Shahbaz Sharif, Time to say "NO" to opportunists i.e., "Lotas"
Fatiana, Hiraj, Kashmala lining up for ministries
ISLAMABAD: Riaz Fatiyana, Ahmed Yar Hiraj and Kashmala Tariq – members of the opposition Pakistan Muslim League-Quaid (PML-Q) – are likely to be inducted in the federal cabinet as ministers, a source privy to the developments told Daily Times. President Asif Zardari invited members of a PML-Q dissident group to dinner on Thursday. An Aaj TV report said he told them he believed in political consensus and would respond to whoever contacted him in national interest. But Zardari denied he had created a ‘forward bloc’ in any party. Zardari did not announce the decision, but Aaj TV quoted him as saying that the federal cabinet ‘will be finalised soon’. “Members of the PML-Q forward bloc may get cabinet slots and the names of Riaz Fatiana and Ahmed Yar Hiraj are on top of the list,” the source said. He said the participants of the meeting discussed the political and economic situation in Pakistan and Zardari asked them for support. Fatiana, Kashmala, Sumaira Malik, Zubaida Jalal, Hamdan Bugti and Aslam Bodla were among the participants, according to various reports. The PML-Q forward bloc needs the support of 27 members to bring an in-house change. Dissidents have made unsubstantiated claims of support from 30 members. staff report (Daily Times)
Read more...
ISLAMABAD: Riaz Fatiyana, Ahmed Yar Hiraj and Kashmala Tariq – members of the opposition Pakistan Muslim League-Quaid (PML-Q) – are likely to be inducted in the federal cabinet as ministers, a source privy to the developments told Daily Times. President Asif Zardari invited members of a PML-Q dissident group to dinner on Thursday. An Aaj TV report said he told them he believed in political consensus and would respond to whoever contacted him in national interest. But Zardari denied he had created a ‘forward bloc’ in any party. Zardari did not announce the decision, but Aaj TV quoted him as saying that the federal cabinet ‘will be finalised soon’. “Members of the PML-Q forward bloc may get cabinet slots and the names of Riaz Fatiana and Ahmed Yar Hiraj are on top of the list,” the source said. He said the participants of the meeting discussed the political and economic situation in Pakistan and Zardari asked them for support. Fatiana, Kashmala, Sumaira Malik, Zubaida Jalal, Hamdan Bugti and Aslam Bodla were among the participants, according to various reports. The PML-Q forward bloc needs the support of 27 members to bring an in-house change. Dissidents have made unsubstantiated claims of support from 30 members. staff report (Daily Times)
Read more...
![[1100511441-2.gif]](http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_Vbc4oO2rGiw/SQrYogt_N4I/AAAAAAAAAdE/3uOqP7c37iQ/s1600/1100511441-2.gif)
Pakistan-Iran relations: It is time to reconcile and develop a new strategic relationship.... By Nazir Naji
![[col8.gif]](http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_Vbc4oO2rGiw/SQrQgvKc6OI/AAAAAAAAAc0/rP4Q0Ze-kzs/s1600/col8.gif)
![[col8a.gif]](http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_Vbc4oO2rGiw/SQrQZnLB20I/AAAAAAAAAcs/JUN2D8rmb6w/s1600/col8a.gif)
Thursday, 30 October 2008
Imran Khan's favorite friends Taliban cum Sipah-e-Sahaba kill three Shia Muslims in D.I.Khan
Unknown motorcyclists kill 3 in DI Khan
DERA ISMAIL KHAN: Three persons were killed due to firing by unknown motorcyclists in front of Mufti Mehmood Hospital, Dera Ismail Khan.
According to details two motorcyclists killed three persons named Qalab Hussain, Munir Hussain and Rizwan Haider and managed to escape while police has started searching of them in the city and its suburbs. Till the last information police has found no clue about the killers.
It is pertinent to mention that all three persons who were killed belonged to Shia sect.
Read detailed news on BBC Urdu dot com:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/urdu/pakistan/story/2008/10/081029_dik_killing_sen.shtml
http://www.onlinenews.com.pk/details.php?id=135386
Read more...
DERA ISMAIL KHAN: Three persons were killed due to firing by unknown motorcyclists in front of Mufti Mehmood Hospital, Dera Ismail Khan.
According to details two motorcyclists killed three persons named Qalab Hussain, Munir Hussain and Rizwan Haider and managed to escape while police has started searching of them in the city and its suburbs. Till the last information police has found no clue about the killers.
It is pertinent to mention that all three persons who were killed belonged to Shia sect.
Read detailed news on BBC Urdu dot com:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/urdu/pakistan/story/2008/10/081029_dik_killing_sen.shtml
http://www.onlinenews.com.pk/details.php?id=135386
Read more...
Being secular and a Muslim - By Aneela Babar
By Aneela Babar
IF Pakistan had an annual Eid address to the nation, much like the Queen’s Christmas address, the president would not have been amiss in quoting her in referring to the past year as Pakistan’s annus horribilis.
As Pakistanis at home and overseas witnessed the bloodshed that has engulfed their country, they wondered how long will be the wait for dawn to break? In this era of globalisation some have attempted to articulate the tragedy befalling our nation this Ramazan in the very New York-words of ‘Pakistan’s 9/11’, however it is very clear that the crisis that faces our country is one unlike any other.
So, at such a difficult time in Pakistan’s history as we are battling numerous domestic and international crises, would it be a case of misplaced priorities on my part if I revisit the long-debated argument on whether it is possible to be secular, Muslim and Pakistani today?
I am confronted with the same barrage of queries every time there is an act of violence in our part of the world, “do many Pakistanis want to be fundamentalist?” Every time I fumble to explain that it is just not religion but a smorgasbord of ethnicity, history, deprivation and location that drives some to violence, so yes it still remains pertinent to return to some debates that we have long abandoned.
It is not that our leadership has abandoned these questions, in fact it is the first exercise that any Pakistani head of state undergoes to exhibit the ‘urbane face’ of Pakistan to the rest of the world. It is the sign of the times and the deterioration of the quality of our leadership that these attempts have corroded from Jinnah’s astute observation of the difference between a country for Muslims that maintained a secular spirit and an Islamic nation that was a theocracy per se. This as elaborated in his much quoted address to the Constituent Assembly when he asked of us to embrace our freedom to frequent our places of worship in the new state of Pakistan and told us how our caste, religious or ethnic affiliation was outside the purview of the state.
It is our misfortune that in more recent times our leaders have shown less imagination. So for President (then Chief Executive) Pervez Musharraf a ‘secular Muslim’ meant posing with his pet dogs. This to assure the world that unlike other military men who took to wooing the clergy to bolster their popular support, this general could afford to be a bit daring.
President Zardari might have thought he could accomplish it by conducting his charm offensive in New York. That his attempts towards being the sophisticated man about town became the stuff that enrages women everywhere and that makes late-night talk show hosts rub their hands in glee is another story.We have suffered the lack of a coherent debate on this issue because for one we have absorbed an authoritarian and one-dimensional narrow definition of Islam. For another there has been state control of any kind of dissent towards the ‘official definition’ of Pakistani Islam, whether it has been the particularly Wahhabi shades of the ’80s or the post-9/11 diktat that today we are all Sufis.
This has coincided with the religious extremists controlling any available platform to conduct such a debate. For instance, what would one mean by a secular Pakistani? This is crucial, for religious elements in Pakistan read secularism as ladeeni (having no belief system at all).
In today’s times we have to lower our expectations of the Pakistani public’s perception of secular Islam, suffice to say it would be enough if they interpret it as not approving acts of violence in the name of defending their Muslim brethren.
There are many voices, especially amongst young Muslim men that I encounter in my classroom lately, with their own common-sense perception of what being Muslim means. They are of the thought that being violent or militant comes naturally to Muslims. Hence the urgency to bring to their attention alternative spaces and definitions where one can be both a good Muslim and non-violent and identify an ethic of self- reform that makes legitimate other readings of Islam.
Amartya Sen’s work on inter-communal dialogues in the recent past has shown that “tolerance towards diversity of opinion was not alien to the South Asian region” (this is Sen, 2005 in The Argumentative Indian). Episodes where our leaders have sponsored and supported dialogues to address difficult problems of religious upheaval should be dusted off the cobwebbed library shelves and be shared with the larger public.
Even if they are the ubiquitous tales of Akbar’s “pursuit of reason” rather than “reliance on tradition” and his “visionary insistence on the need to have conversations and interchanges among holders of different convictions”. (All this as Sen impresses on us in a time when “Giordano Bruno was being burnt at the stake in Rome for heresy, in the public space of Campo dei Fiori.”)
However it was the father of our nation who impressed upon us in his much-censored and diluted address of 1947 how he believed that: “History shows that in England conditions some time ago were much worse than those prevailing in India today. The Roman Catholics and the Protestants persecuted each other. Even now there are some [s]tates in existence where there are discriminations made and bars imposed against a particular class.
“Thank God we are not starting in those days. We are starting in the days when there is no discrimination, no distinction between one community and another, no discrimination between one caste or creed and another. We are starting with this fundamental principle that we are all citizens of one state.”
Words to remember and stand by in the long, difficult months ahead as we turn upon particular ethnicities within our nation accusing them of sponsoring violence, accuse a particular class and ‘liberal ideology’ for being the bane of all our woes, and emulate an ostrich head in the sand in our declaration that abandoning a particular alliance will resolve our current woes. Yes, an absence of the background noise of drones might simplify our conflict but it is not the only solution. May we be blessed with wisdom and prudence today and tomorrow. (Dawn)
Read more...
IF Pakistan had an annual Eid address to the nation, much like the Queen’s Christmas address, the president would not have been amiss in quoting her in referring to the past year as Pakistan’s annus horribilis.
As Pakistanis at home and overseas witnessed the bloodshed that has engulfed their country, they wondered how long will be the wait for dawn to break? In this era of globalisation some have attempted to articulate the tragedy befalling our nation this Ramazan in the very New York-words of ‘Pakistan’s 9/11’, however it is very clear that the crisis that faces our country is one unlike any other.
So, at such a difficult time in Pakistan’s history as we are battling numerous domestic and international crises, would it be a case of misplaced priorities on my part if I revisit the long-debated argument on whether it is possible to be secular, Muslim and Pakistani today?
I am confronted with the same barrage of queries every time there is an act of violence in our part of the world, “do many Pakistanis want to be fundamentalist?” Every time I fumble to explain that it is just not religion but a smorgasbord of ethnicity, history, deprivation and location that drives some to violence, so yes it still remains pertinent to return to some debates that we have long abandoned.
It is not that our leadership has abandoned these questions, in fact it is the first exercise that any Pakistani head of state undergoes to exhibit the ‘urbane face’ of Pakistan to the rest of the world. It is the sign of the times and the deterioration of the quality of our leadership that these attempts have corroded from Jinnah’s astute observation of the difference between a country for Muslims that maintained a secular spirit and an Islamic nation that was a theocracy per se. This as elaborated in his much quoted address to the Constituent Assembly when he asked of us to embrace our freedom to frequent our places of worship in the new state of Pakistan and told us how our caste, religious or ethnic affiliation was outside the purview of the state.
It is our misfortune that in more recent times our leaders have shown less imagination. So for President (then Chief Executive) Pervez Musharraf a ‘secular Muslim’ meant posing with his pet dogs. This to assure the world that unlike other military men who took to wooing the clergy to bolster their popular support, this general could afford to be a bit daring.
President Zardari might have thought he could accomplish it by conducting his charm offensive in New York. That his attempts towards being the sophisticated man about town became the stuff that enrages women everywhere and that makes late-night talk show hosts rub their hands in glee is another story.We have suffered the lack of a coherent debate on this issue because for one we have absorbed an authoritarian and one-dimensional narrow definition of Islam. For another there has been state control of any kind of dissent towards the ‘official definition’ of Pakistani Islam, whether it has been the particularly Wahhabi shades of the ’80s or the post-9/11 diktat that today we are all Sufis.
This has coincided with the religious extremists controlling any available platform to conduct such a debate. For instance, what would one mean by a secular Pakistani? This is crucial, for religious elements in Pakistan read secularism as ladeeni (having no belief system at all).
In today’s times we have to lower our expectations of the Pakistani public’s perception of secular Islam, suffice to say it would be enough if they interpret it as not approving acts of violence in the name of defending their Muslim brethren.
There are many voices, especially amongst young Muslim men that I encounter in my classroom lately, with their own common-sense perception of what being Muslim means. They are of the thought that being violent or militant comes naturally to Muslims. Hence the urgency to bring to their attention alternative spaces and definitions where one can be both a good Muslim and non-violent and identify an ethic of self- reform that makes legitimate other readings of Islam.
Amartya Sen’s work on inter-communal dialogues in the recent past has shown that “tolerance towards diversity of opinion was not alien to the South Asian region” (this is Sen, 2005 in The Argumentative Indian). Episodes where our leaders have sponsored and supported dialogues to address difficult problems of religious upheaval should be dusted off the cobwebbed library shelves and be shared with the larger public.
Even if they are the ubiquitous tales of Akbar’s “pursuit of reason” rather than “reliance on tradition” and his “visionary insistence on the need to have conversations and interchanges among holders of different convictions”. (All this as Sen impresses on us in a time when “Giordano Bruno was being burnt at the stake in Rome for heresy, in the public space of Campo dei Fiori.”)
However it was the father of our nation who impressed upon us in his much-censored and diluted address of 1947 how he believed that: “History shows that in England conditions some time ago were much worse than those prevailing in India today. The Roman Catholics and the Protestants persecuted each other. Even now there are some [s]tates in existence where there are discriminations made and bars imposed against a particular class.
“Thank God we are not starting in those days. We are starting in the days when there is no discrimination, no distinction between one community and another, no discrimination between one caste or creed and another. We are starting with this fundamental principle that we are all citizens of one state.”
Words to remember and stand by in the long, difficult months ahead as we turn upon particular ethnicities within our nation accusing them of sponsoring violence, accuse a particular class and ‘liberal ideology’ for being the bane of all our woes, and emulate an ostrich head in the sand in our declaration that abandoning a particular alliance will resolve our current woes. Yes, an absence of the background noise of drones might simplify our conflict but it is not the only solution. May we be blessed with wisdom and prudence today and tomorrow. (Dawn)
Read more...
Ali Ahmed Kurd, the SCBA elections, some perspectives... by Abbas Ather and other analysts
The Vote Count
In the 2007 SCBA elections, the candidate opposing Aitzaz Ashan secured only 175 votes. In the 2008 SCBA elections, the candidate opposing Ali Ahmad Kurd secured 506 votes.
ISLAMABAD/LAHORE/ KARACHI:
Kurd secured 144 votes in Islamabad, while his rival M Zafar got 70 votes.
Overall, Kurd secured 1397 votes (66.43 percent) while Zafar got 706 votes (33.57 percent).
In Lahore, Kurd won 1,009 votes while Zafar got 506 votes.
In Peshawar, Kurd polled 62 votes while Zafar bagged 37.
Kurd got 44 votes in Quetta against 18 polled in his rival’s favour.
In Karachi, Kurd secured 138 votes, while Zafar got 75 votes according to the unofficial vote count. staff report (Daily Times)
Analysis by Abbas Ather
![[1100511217-2.gif]](http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_Vbc4oO2rGiw/SQrU65mPItI/AAAAAAAAAc8/fFMKRZ1ZmPU/s1600/1100511217-2.gif)
Also must read, what kind of reservations PPP has about Iftikhar Chaudhry?
http://letusbuildpakistan.blogspot.com/2008/10/what-kind-of-reservations-asif-zardari.html
‘Fiery’ Kurd and lawyers’ movement
The fiery lawyer from Quetta, Mr Ali Ahmad Kurd, has won the election to the office of president of the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA), the forum that has proved the credentials of the country’s apex lawyers’ organisation. His victory was convincing and reflective of the lawyers’ resolve to reject the overtures of the government and hold fast to the decision to get the deposed chief justice of the Supreme Court, Mr Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, back into his office by removing the incumbent chief justice who they think is in illegal occupation of the post.
The newspapers have described Mr Kurd as a “fiery” person. This he indeed is, among the group of top lawyers and retired judges who led the movement beginning 2007 when President Pervez Musharraf fired Chief Justice Mr Chaudhry. Mr Kurd’s speeches were highly emotional and flecked with the political rhetoric worthy of a movement that promised to go beyond being just a professional trade union agitation. As the movement shows signs of languishing a little, he is just the man to make the blood in its veins run more briskly. Whereas Barrister Aitzaz Ahsan, the outgoing president of SCBA, ended up moderating the high intensity of the movement, Mr Kurd will have the difficult task of intensifying its flagging resolve. (Daily Times)
COMMENTS:
MalangBaba:
Congratulations. Kurd is a man of honor and courage. He is a true democrat and a Human Rights believer. Nation needs people like him.
I also consider other leaders of lawyers movement to have the same qualities. People like Aitezaz, Munir Malik and Tariq Mahmood are great Pakistanies.
I honestly believe that this group of lawyers should form a new political party under the leadership of Iftikhar Ch., organize it around the country and start home work for next elections 5 years down the road. That will be a gr8 service to the nation instead of indulging useless confrontation and agitation.
Unfortunately the lawyers movement died the day they came in trap of Imran Khan and Qazi and decided to boycott the elections. Nation rejected their call. Both major parties were ready to support Kurd and Aitezaz and many other lawyer movement leaders. They decided to rock the boat of constitutional change. Now they have nothing. Iftikhat Ch. don’t get more than few hundred ppl in his rallies now. Calling the movement alive is just a wishful thinking.
Remember, Kurd won the same position that Aitezaz and Malik Qayum won before him. Not a big deal.
Judiaciary is not the name of an individual. An overwhelming majority of judges have accepted restoration. Less than 1/2 dozen left out should accept the verdict of majority. They have become over-political. Now the only place for them is politics. They should try to come back to parliament thru elections and change the laws the way they want. How can a group rejected in elections and with no voice in parliament can challenge the elected President and parliament?
.....
Bahadar Khan:
You guys, most of you, want Imran Khan, who doesn’t have even district level party organization. Talking and speaking sober is easy unless you don’t have any responsibility. I wanted to vote for Imran Khan, but he didn’t even go for elections. Now how should I expect him in power or is he going to use 111 brigade?
Others are, PML(N) supporters. Do you seriously think, if Nawaz Sharif would have been PM or president, he would have done otherwise what Zardari group is doing now?
And then there are those who are digrunted because of betrayel to lawyers movement. Guys, 90% of ‘Good” judges have already taken oath. This is what politics is all about. PML(N) wanted to take credit for judges restoration so that they could call early elections and clinch more votes. At the same time PPP also wanted to manipulate that issue, which they have partly resolved without taking or giving anybody any political mileage.
Indeed “Missing Persons Cases” are a human tragedy. If they have done something wrong they should be presented in the court of the law.
However, do you seriously think, Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, is the reason for all the good? Certainly he is a courageous person but shouldn’t we build courageous and independent institutions? My well wishes are with Justice Chaudhry, but please do admit that he is an individual, a human being. And humans can be decapicitated because of many reasons. I think when institutions get stronger, we’ll not even have the cases like ‘Missing Persons Cases’ in the first place.
http://bkhan.wordpress.com/2008/10/17/enough-talk-pakistan-needs-help/
As I said earlier IMC is a courageous judge.
When system is rickety you cannot fix it by hard blow. You start a slow process. CJ, went far ahead and created enemies on the both sides of the establishment.
And we should certainly agree that judiciary and executive are two different branches of government and certainly has their own mendate. When one branch tresspasses the other, the friction gets started. Although CJ done commendable job against Musharraf but when his restoration campaign became pliticize then this was bound to happen. One party PML (N) got votes and other PPP sloganized their campaign. But this is how politics is, you don’t want somebody to become hero, so that he might get after you.
PPP is certainly scared of his (CJ ) popularity and popularity is the Achile’s heel for CJ.
But CJ has done his job, he will always be a legend. But I am sorry to say, this is all he would be able to get.
The last thing I can do is to talk against Imran Khan. He is the only rose in the desert. But what I mentioned about him is true as well. I beleive in democracy and I, as a voter, cannot help Khan Sahib, until he doesn’t contest election and organise his party.
I am not an advocate for Zardari or PPP. But I am afraid all of us are hapnatized by the propeganda launched against PPP. We like it or not PPP is a fact.
The character assassination campaign against politicians is never good. This helps undemocratic forces. Zaradari always takes comemrcial flights for his foreign trips but nobody would mention that. I have never ever seen in the Pakistani history that I know of, where somebody has actually circulated a photocopy of the guest book at Quaid-e-Azam’s masoleum for anyone else except Zardari.
Pakistan’s annual budget is something like this:
50% Debt Services
32% Defence
18% for poor public.
I have never seen anybody gave any example of people squandering 32% of the federal budget, do you know how many 10 percents would be there? Nobody talks about them.
Zardari, of his wedded life of 20 years, spent 12 years in prison. Even if he did some corruption that almost amounts to life imprisonment senetence and I think he has been brought to justice already.
I only like one thing about Zardari, he came to president house through pariament votes and not on the army tanks.
Rehamn Malik is not elected but Sherry Rahman is an MNA from Karachi, for the sake of record.
http://bkhan.wordpress.com/2008/10/17/enough-talk-pakistan-needs-help/
Read more...
In the 2007 SCBA elections, the candidate opposing Aitzaz Ashan secured only 175 votes. In the 2008 SCBA elections, the candidate opposing Ali Ahmad Kurd secured 506 votes.
ISLAMABAD/LAHORE/ KARACHI:
Kurd secured 144 votes in Islamabad, while his rival M Zafar got 70 votes.
Overall, Kurd secured 1397 votes (66.43 percent) while Zafar got 706 votes (33.57 percent).
In Lahore, Kurd won 1,009 votes while Zafar got 506 votes.
In Peshawar, Kurd polled 62 votes while Zafar bagged 37.
Kurd got 44 votes in Quetta against 18 polled in his rival’s favour.
In Karachi, Kurd secured 138 votes, while Zafar got 75 votes according to the unofficial vote count. staff report (Daily Times)
Analysis by Abbas Ather
Also must read, what kind of reservations PPP has about Iftikhar Chaudhry?
http://letusbuildpakistan.blogspot.com/2008/10/what-kind-of-reservations-asif-zardari.html
‘Fiery’ Kurd and lawyers’ movement
The fiery lawyer from Quetta, Mr Ali Ahmad Kurd, has won the election to the office of president of the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA), the forum that has proved the credentials of the country’s apex lawyers’ organisation. His victory was convincing and reflective of the lawyers’ resolve to reject the overtures of the government and hold fast to the decision to get the deposed chief justice of the Supreme Court, Mr Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, back into his office by removing the incumbent chief justice who they think is in illegal occupation of the post.
The newspapers have described Mr Kurd as a “fiery” person. This he indeed is, among the group of top lawyers and retired judges who led the movement beginning 2007 when President Pervez Musharraf fired Chief Justice Mr Chaudhry. Mr Kurd’s speeches were highly emotional and flecked with the political rhetoric worthy of a movement that promised to go beyond being just a professional trade union agitation. As the movement shows signs of languishing a little, he is just the man to make the blood in its veins run more briskly. Whereas Barrister Aitzaz Ahsan, the outgoing president of SCBA, ended up moderating the high intensity of the movement, Mr Kurd will have the difficult task of intensifying its flagging resolve. (Daily Times)
COMMENTS:
MalangBaba:
Congratulations. Kurd is a man of honor and courage. He is a true democrat and a Human Rights believer. Nation needs people like him.
I also consider other leaders of lawyers movement to have the same qualities. People like Aitezaz, Munir Malik and Tariq Mahmood are great Pakistanies.
I honestly believe that this group of lawyers should form a new political party under the leadership of Iftikhar Ch., organize it around the country and start home work for next elections 5 years down the road. That will be a gr8 service to the nation instead of indulging useless confrontation and agitation.
Unfortunately the lawyers movement died the day they came in trap of Imran Khan and Qazi and decided to boycott the elections. Nation rejected their call. Both major parties were ready to support Kurd and Aitezaz and many other lawyer movement leaders. They decided to rock the boat of constitutional change. Now they have nothing. Iftikhat Ch. don’t get more than few hundred ppl in his rallies now. Calling the movement alive is just a wishful thinking.
Remember, Kurd won the same position that Aitezaz and Malik Qayum won before him. Not a big deal.
Judiaciary is not the name of an individual. An overwhelming majority of judges have accepted restoration. Less than 1/2 dozen left out should accept the verdict of majority. They have become over-political. Now the only place for them is politics. They should try to come back to parliament thru elections and change the laws the way they want. How can a group rejected in elections and with no voice in parliament can challenge the elected President and parliament?
.....
Bahadar Khan:
You guys, most of you, want Imran Khan, who doesn’t have even district level party organization. Talking and speaking sober is easy unless you don’t have any responsibility. I wanted to vote for Imran Khan, but he didn’t even go for elections. Now how should I expect him in power or is he going to use 111 brigade?
Others are, PML(N) supporters. Do you seriously think, if Nawaz Sharif would have been PM or president, he would have done otherwise what Zardari group is doing now?
And then there are those who are digrunted because of betrayel to lawyers movement. Guys, 90% of ‘Good” judges have already taken oath. This is what politics is all about. PML(N) wanted to take credit for judges restoration so that they could call early elections and clinch more votes. At the same time PPP also wanted to manipulate that issue, which they have partly resolved without taking or giving anybody any political mileage.
Indeed “Missing Persons Cases” are a human tragedy. If they have done something wrong they should be presented in the court of the law.
However, do you seriously think, Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, is the reason for all the good? Certainly he is a courageous person but shouldn’t we build courageous and independent institutions? My well wishes are with Justice Chaudhry, but please do admit that he is an individual, a human being. And humans can be decapicitated because of many reasons. I think when institutions get stronger, we’ll not even have the cases like ‘Missing Persons Cases’ in the first place.
http://bkhan.wordpress.com/2008/10/17/enough-talk-pakistan-needs-help/
As I said earlier IMC is a courageous judge.
When system is rickety you cannot fix it by hard blow. You start a slow process. CJ, went far ahead and created enemies on the both sides of the establishment.
And we should certainly agree that judiciary and executive are two different branches of government and certainly has their own mendate. When one branch tresspasses the other, the friction gets started. Although CJ done commendable job against Musharraf but when his restoration campaign became pliticize then this was bound to happen. One party PML (N) got votes and other PPP sloganized their campaign. But this is how politics is, you don’t want somebody to become hero, so that he might get after you.
PPP is certainly scared of his (CJ ) popularity and popularity is the Achile’s heel for CJ.
But CJ has done his job, he will always be a legend. But I am sorry to say, this is all he would be able to get.
The last thing I can do is to talk against Imran Khan. He is the only rose in the desert. But what I mentioned about him is true as well. I beleive in democracy and I, as a voter, cannot help Khan Sahib, until he doesn’t contest election and organise his party.
I am not an advocate for Zardari or PPP. But I am afraid all of us are hapnatized by the propeganda launched against PPP. We like it or not PPP is a fact.
The character assassination campaign against politicians is never good. This helps undemocratic forces. Zaradari always takes comemrcial flights for his foreign trips but nobody would mention that. I have never ever seen in the Pakistani history that I know of, where somebody has actually circulated a photocopy of the guest book at Quaid-e-Azam’s masoleum for anyone else except Zardari.
Pakistan’s annual budget is something like this:
50% Debt Services
32% Defence
18% for poor public.
I have never seen anybody gave any example of people squandering 32% of the federal budget, do you know how many 10 percents would be there? Nobody talks about them.
Zardari, of his wedded life of 20 years, spent 12 years in prison. Even if he did some corruption that almost amounts to life imprisonment senetence and I think he has been brought to justice already.
I only like one thing about Zardari, he came to president house through pariament votes and not on the army tanks.
Rehamn Malik is not elected but Sherry Rahman is an MNA from Karachi, for the sake of record.
http://bkhan.wordpress.com/2008/10/17/enough-talk-pakistan-needs-help/
Read more...
Well done General Kayani, Shame on you RAW Totay (anti-Army and pro-Taliban parrots of media and politics)
![[1100510920-2.gif]](http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_Vbc4oO2rGiw/SQlfjUx4_-I/AAAAAAAAAcc/DR2Mx3Vs7uU/s1600/1100510920-2.gif)
Balochistan quake death toll rises to 236
Updated at: 1100 PST, Thursday, October 30, 2008
QUETTA: The death toll in an earthquake hit Ziarat division of Balochistan has risen to 236 whereas 391 people were injured. The toll is expected to climb further
Balochistan police sources said that Ziarat, Khawas, Varshoom are the worst affected areas where more than 300 houses have been destroyed completely and recovery of bodies and injured from the rubble is still underway.
Meanwhile, series of aftershocks continue in Ziarat. Metrological office predicted cloudy weather in quake-hit areas of Balochistan.
DG Met office Qamaruzzaman Chaudhry said rains are not expected in these areas, however, cold will be increased.
He told Geo News that last night temperature was ranged between –1 to –4 C. About aftershocks, DG said so far 44 aftershocks have been recorded and it still continues. (The News)
Read more...
QUETTA: The death toll in an earthquake hit Ziarat division of Balochistan has risen to 236 whereas 391 people were injured. The toll is expected to climb further
Balochistan police sources said that Ziarat, Khawas, Varshoom are the worst affected areas where more than 300 houses have been destroyed completely and recovery of bodies and injured from the rubble is still underway.
Meanwhile, series of aftershocks continue in Ziarat. Metrological office predicted cloudy weather in quake-hit areas of Balochistan.
DG Met office Qamaruzzaman Chaudhry said rains are not expected in these areas, however, cold will be increased.
He told Geo News that last night temperature was ranged between –1 to –4 C. About aftershocks, DG said so far 44 aftershocks have been recorded and it still continues. (The News)
Read more...
Wednesday, 29 October 2008
The Jewish school where half the pupils are Muslim: A great example of inter-faith harmony
King David, in Birmingham, is a state primary where the children learn Hebrew, recite Jewish prayers, eat kosher food and wave Israeli flags. So how come the majority of pupils are followers of Islam? Jonathan Margolis investigates
Thursday, 1 February 2007
It's infant prize day at King David School, a state primary in Moseley, Birmingham. The children sit cross-legged on the floor, their parents fiddling with their video cameras. The head, Steve Langford, is wearing a Sesame Street tie.
A typical end-of-term school event, then. But at King David there's a twist that gives it a claim to be one of the most extraordinary schools in the country: King David is a strictly Jewish school. Judaism is the only religion taught. There's a synagogue on site. The children learn modern Hebrew - Ivrit - the language of Israel. And they celebrate Israeli independence day.
But half the 247 pupils at the 40-year-old local authority-supported school are Muslim, and apparently the Muslim parents go through all sorts of hoops, including moving into the school's catchment area, to get their children into King David to learn Hebrew, wave Israeli flags on independence day and hang out with the people some would have us believe that they hate more than anyone in the world.
The Muslim parents, mostly devout and many of the women wearing the hijab, say they love the ethos of the school, and even the kosher school lunches, which are suitable because halal and kosher dietary rules are virtually identical. The school is also respectful to Islam, setting aside a prayer room for the children and supplying Muslim teachers during Ramadan. At Eid, the Muslim children are wished Eid Mubarak in assembly, and all year round, if they wish, can wear a kufi (hat). Amazingly, dozens of the Muslim children choose instead to wear the Jewish kipah.
At the prize morning Carol Cooper, the RE teacher, says: "Boker tov," (Ivrit for "Good morning").
"Good morning Mrs Cooper," the children chant in reply. The entire school, Muslims, Jews, plus the handful of Christians and Sikhs then say the Shema, the holiest Jewish prayer, all together.
The Year Four violin club (five Muslims, two Jews) play "Little Bird, I Have Heard". Just as many prizes are being distributed to Hussains and Hassans and Shabinas as there are to Sauls and Rebeccas and Ruths. In fact, if anything, the Muslim children have beaten the Jewish ones. Thus does the Elsie Davis Prize for Progress go to a beaming little lad called Walid, the religious studies prize to a boy called Imran wearing a kipah and the progress prizes for Hebrew, to a boy called Habib and a girl called Alia.
Times being as they are, King David doesn't advertise its presence in a city where its pioneering multiculturalism could raise all kinds of unwelcome attention. There's a discreet signboard outside that reveals little about the school's unique nature. There are watchful video cameras high up on the walls, plus two electronic gates to pass through. Sadly, it is, to a significant extent, says Laurence Sharman, the (Christian) chairman of the PTA, "an undercover school".
The Muslim parents, however, are only too keen to talk in the playground about what might be seen by some in their communities as a controversial schooling decision.
"We actually bought a flat in the catchment area for the children to come here," says Nahid Shafiq, the mother of Zainah, four, and Hamza, nine, and wife of Mohammed, a taxi driver. "We were attracted by the high moral values of the school, and that's what we wanted our kids to have. None of us has any problem with it being a Jewish school. Why on earth should we? Our similarities as religions and cultures are far greater and more important than our differences. It's not even an issue.
"At the mosque, occasionally, people ask why we send the children here, but there is no antagonism whatsoever, and neither is there from anyone in our family. In fact, it was a big family decision to try and get them into King David. This is the real world. This is the way real people do things in the real world. All the violence and prejudice and problems - that's not real, that's just what you see on the news."
Fawzia Ismail (the mother of Aly-Raza, nine, and Aliah, six) is equally positive. "My nephew came here and my brother showed me the school, so it's a bit of a family tradition now. We're very, very pleased with the school. It's so friendly. All the kids mix and go to one another's parties and are in and out of each other's houses. They teach a bit about Israel, but we don't have any problem with that. There are such similarities between our people and our societies."
Irum Rashid (mother of Hanan, nine, and Maryam, four) says that a lot of people in Small Heath are considering moving to Moseley because of King David. "It's a very happy school, the behaviour is fantastic, the food is great - because it's kosher - and so are the SATs results."
But what about learning Hebrew and the Jewish prayers? "I think it's great. The more knowledge, the more understanding," says one of the mothers. "They learn all they need about Islam at mosque school. Actually, the kids often sing Hebrew songs in the bath, which is a bit confusing because we speak Gujarati at home, but I think it's great."
The Jewish parents and teachers I speak to are just as enthusiastic. "You know, in these difficult times in the world, I think we show how things should be done. It's really a bit of a beacon," says one teacher, whose three children all went to King David and ended up at Oxford University.
Parent Trevor Aremband is from South Africa. "In Johannesburg, we have Jewish schools, but they're 100 per cent Jewish, so we were a bit shocked when we first came here. But the integration works so well. It's clearly the way to go in today's world. My son is eight and has loads of Muslim friends."
The most important thing, I am told repeatedly, is that the cross-cultural friendships forged at King David last a lifetime. I hear a conversation about how a Rebecca is going to fly over from the States for a Fatima's wedding. I am told about a pair of lads, one Jewish, one Muslim, who became friends the day they started in the nursery, went to senior school together as well as to university and are now living close to one another with their wives and families and are currently on holiday together.
King David was not designed to be such a beacon of inter-faith cooperation and friendship. Founded in 1865 as The Hebrew School, it was 100 per cent Jewish until the late 1950s.
Then two things began to happen: there was a growth in the Muslim population in middle-income areas such as Moseley, and a shrinking of Britain's Jewish community, especially outside the main centres of London and Manchester. Muslim children started coming to the school in the early 1960s, but the current position, in which they are in the majority (Jewish children comprise 35 per cent, Muslims 50 per cent, Christians, Sikhs and other, 15 per cent) is very new.
"One of the things that surprises people about this school," says Langford, "is that it's not an especially privileged intake. Half of our kids have English as an additional language. But the amazing thing is how well it all works. We have a new little boy here from China, whose only English a few weeks ago was to ask for the toilet. He now speaks English - and can say the Shema perfectly.
"If you gauge success, for instance, by racial incidents, which schools always have to report to the LEA, we have at the most one a term. And that can just mean some harsh words with a racial slant used in the playground. At multicultural inner city schools where I've taught, there will be far, far more than that, possibly one or more a week."
In terms of SATs and Ofsted inspections, King David has also shone. It is rated as good - the second highest possible ranking - in all areas, and Ofsted made a special mention at the last inspection of the integration between children of different faiths and races. In the recent SATs results, the school also came in well above the national average in all subjects.
Steve Langford, a Warwick University economics graduate, is himself a bit of a paradox. He is Church of England on both parental sides and only became interested in Judaism when he worked in a Jewish summer camp in Massachusetts in his gap year. His interest paid off when he got a teaching job a King David. Now he is learning Ivrit at evening classes and goes to Israel for holidays.
The Rabbi of Birmingham's Singers Hill Synagogue, one of the financial backers of King David, is proud of Steve Langford and of the school's extraordinary interfaith record.
"King David School is amazing," says Rabbi Tann. "The reason I think it works well is that racism is engendered entirely by adults. Children don't have it within themselves. Their natural mode is to play happily with everyone. It's only when adults say, 'Don't play with him, he's black, or don't have anything to do with him, he's Muslim, that troubles begin.'
"We never have any racial or inter-faith problems at all. Not ever. In 20 years here, it's simply never happened in any significant way. We teach that if you don't like someone, you avoid them. Don't play with them. Go to the other side of the playground. I believe that if more people followed the lead of King David School, we'd have a much more peaceful world." (The Independent)
Read more...
Thursday, 1 February 2007
It's infant prize day at King David School, a state primary in Moseley, Birmingham. The children sit cross-legged on the floor, their parents fiddling with their video cameras. The head, Steve Langford, is wearing a Sesame Street tie.
A typical end-of-term school event, then. But at King David there's a twist that gives it a claim to be one of the most extraordinary schools in the country: King David is a strictly Jewish school. Judaism is the only religion taught. There's a synagogue on site. The children learn modern Hebrew - Ivrit - the language of Israel. And they celebrate Israeli independence day.
But half the 247 pupils at the 40-year-old local authority-supported school are Muslim, and apparently the Muslim parents go through all sorts of hoops, including moving into the school's catchment area, to get their children into King David to learn Hebrew, wave Israeli flags on independence day and hang out with the people some would have us believe that they hate more than anyone in the world.
The Muslim parents, mostly devout and many of the women wearing the hijab, say they love the ethos of the school, and even the kosher school lunches, which are suitable because halal and kosher dietary rules are virtually identical. The school is also respectful to Islam, setting aside a prayer room for the children and supplying Muslim teachers during Ramadan. At Eid, the Muslim children are wished Eid Mubarak in assembly, and all year round, if they wish, can wear a kufi (hat). Amazingly, dozens of the Muslim children choose instead to wear the Jewish kipah.
At the prize morning Carol Cooper, the RE teacher, says: "Boker tov," (Ivrit for "Good morning").
"Good morning Mrs Cooper," the children chant in reply. The entire school, Muslims, Jews, plus the handful of Christians and Sikhs then say the Shema, the holiest Jewish prayer, all together.
The Year Four violin club (five Muslims, two Jews) play "Little Bird, I Have Heard". Just as many prizes are being distributed to Hussains and Hassans and Shabinas as there are to Sauls and Rebeccas and Ruths. In fact, if anything, the Muslim children have beaten the Jewish ones. Thus does the Elsie Davis Prize for Progress go to a beaming little lad called Walid, the religious studies prize to a boy called Imran wearing a kipah and the progress prizes for Hebrew, to a boy called Habib and a girl called Alia.
Times being as they are, King David doesn't advertise its presence in a city where its pioneering multiculturalism could raise all kinds of unwelcome attention. There's a discreet signboard outside that reveals little about the school's unique nature. There are watchful video cameras high up on the walls, plus two electronic gates to pass through. Sadly, it is, to a significant extent, says Laurence Sharman, the (Christian) chairman of the PTA, "an undercover school".
The Muslim parents, however, are only too keen to talk in the playground about what might be seen by some in their communities as a controversial schooling decision.
"We actually bought a flat in the catchment area for the children to come here," says Nahid Shafiq, the mother of Zainah, four, and Hamza, nine, and wife of Mohammed, a taxi driver. "We were attracted by the high moral values of the school, and that's what we wanted our kids to have. None of us has any problem with it being a Jewish school. Why on earth should we? Our similarities as religions and cultures are far greater and more important than our differences. It's not even an issue.
"At the mosque, occasionally, people ask why we send the children here, but there is no antagonism whatsoever, and neither is there from anyone in our family. In fact, it was a big family decision to try and get them into King David. This is the real world. This is the way real people do things in the real world. All the violence and prejudice and problems - that's not real, that's just what you see on the news."
Fawzia Ismail (the mother of Aly-Raza, nine, and Aliah, six) is equally positive. "My nephew came here and my brother showed me the school, so it's a bit of a family tradition now. We're very, very pleased with the school. It's so friendly. All the kids mix and go to one another's parties and are in and out of each other's houses. They teach a bit about Israel, but we don't have any problem with that. There are such similarities between our people and our societies."
Irum Rashid (mother of Hanan, nine, and Maryam, four) says that a lot of people in Small Heath are considering moving to Moseley because of King David. "It's a very happy school, the behaviour is fantastic, the food is great - because it's kosher - and so are the SATs results."
But what about learning Hebrew and the Jewish prayers? "I think it's great. The more knowledge, the more understanding," says one of the mothers. "They learn all they need about Islam at mosque school. Actually, the kids often sing Hebrew songs in the bath, which is a bit confusing because we speak Gujarati at home, but I think it's great."
The Jewish parents and teachers I speak to are just as enthusiastic. "You know, in these difficult times in the world, I think we show how things should be done. It's really a bit of a beacon," says one teacher, whose three children all went to King David and ended up at Oxford University.
Parent Trevor Aremband is from South Africa. "In Johannesburg, we have Jewish schools, but they're 100 per cent Jewish, so we were a bit shocked when we first came here. But the integration works so well. It's clearly the way to go in today's world. My son is eight and has loads of Muslim friends."
The most important thing, I am told repeatedly, is that the cross-cultural friendships forged at King David last a lifetime. I hear a conversation about how a Rebecca is going to fly over from the States for a Fatima's wedding. I am told about a pair of lads, one Jewish, one Muslim, who became friends the day they started in the nursery, went to senior school together as well as to university and are now living close to one another with their wives and families and are currently on holiday together.
King David was not designed to be such a beacon of inter-faith cooperation and friendship. Founded in 1865 as The Hebrew School, it was 100 per cent Jewish until the late 1950s.
Then two things began to happen: there was a growth in the Muslim population in middle-income areas such as Moseley, and a shrinking of Britain's Jewish community, especially outside the main centres of London and Manchester. Muslim children started coming to the school in the early 1960s, but the current position, in which they are in the majority (Jewish children comprise 35 per cent, Muslims 50 per cent, Christians, Sikhs and other, 15 per cent) is very new.
"One of the things that surprises people about this school," says Langford, "is that it's not an especially privileged intake. Half of our kids have English as an additional language. But the amazing thing is how well it all works. We have a new little boy here from China, whose only English a few weeks ago was to ask for the toilet. He now speaks English - and can say the Shema perfectly.
"If you gauge success, for instance, by racial incidents, which schools always have to report to the LEA, we have at the most one a term. And that can just mean some harsh words with a racial slant used in the playground. At multicultural inner city schools where I've taught, there will be far, far more than that, possibly one or more a week."
In terms of SATs and Ofsted inspections, King David has also shone. It is rated as good - the second highest possible ranking - in all areas, and Ofsted made a special mention at the last inspection of the integration between children of different faiths and races. In the recent SATs results, the school also came in well above the national average in all subjects.
Steve Langford, a Warwick University economics graduate, is himself a bit of a paradox. He is Church of England on both parental sides and only became interested in Judaism when he worked in a Jewish summer camp in Massachusetts in his gap year. His interest paid off when he got a teaching job a King David. Now he is learning Ivrit at evening classes and goes to Israel for holidays.
The Rabbi of Birmingham's Singers Hill Synagogue, one of the financial backers of King David, is proud of Steve Langford and of the school's extraordinary interfaith record.
"King David School is amazing," says Rabbi Tann. "The reason I think it works well is that racism is engendered entirely by adults. Children don't have it within themselves. Their natural mode is to play happily with everyone. It's only when adults say, 'Don't play with him, he's black, or don't have anything to do with him, he's Muslim, that troubles begin.'
"We never have any racial or inter-faith problems at all. Not ever. In 20 years here, it's simply never happened in any significant way. We teach that if you don't like someone, you avoid them. Don't play with them. Go to the other side of the playground. I believe that if more people followed the lead of King David School, we'd have a much more peaceful world." (The Independent)
Read more...
FCR in Pakistan's Tribal Areas
What to do with FCR?
Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani had declared last April that he would like to abolish the Frontier Crimes Regulation (FCR) in the Tribal Areas because it was “a barbaric colonial-era law that had ruled the tribal areas through the threat of collective punishment”. But Maulana Fazlur Rehman, whose party (JUIF) had joined Mr Gilani’s coalition, didn’t want the FCR abolished. In fact, there was such a variety of views on the subject that one did not hear of the planned ‘reform’ again after it was given over to a committee.
Surveys didn’t help either. A poll found that 39 percent of tribesmen wanted the FCR to be amended and 31 percent wanted it abolished. And old civil servants, who had served in the Tribal Areas, have been recommending a return to the system of the Political Agent, the linchpin of the FCR which doled out collective punishments that violate the fundamental principle of precise designation of the criminal. This view is gaining strength after the perceived failure of the military operations in the Tribal Areas against the terrorists.
A former ambassador and former consul at Afghanistan’s northern province of Mazar-e-Sharif has recommended a return to the old system in an article published recently. He says: “The deployment of the army in FATA has already weakened the established system of governance (the Political Agents). Despite the fact that many of us have strong reservations about the system, such as the powers of the Political Agent, it was in use for a long time and people are somehow used to it. It should be restored and given full support to ensure implementation of the new policy”.
We disagree. We believe that circumstances no longer allow for the revival of a system whose weaknesses were apparent for a long time. Territories administered with weak institutions are vulnerable to trespass and occupation. And the “non-success” of the military operations does not recommend a roll-back and a worsening of the disorder that had brought the army into the areas in the first place. Reading the political signs in Islamabad, one comes to the conclusion that parties which want to retain the FCR want to “Islamise” it, weaken the powers of the Political Agent and make punishments subject to appeal at a higher court.
Will that work? We suppose that the “rough justice” of the Political Agent is what is causing nostalgia about the old system. But the pro-FCR lobbies want this justice under sharia, presided over by ulema as a tandem authority. And if appeal is to lie over and above the authority of the Political Agent and his tribal jirga, where is that court to be located? And if it has to be established in Peshawar, then why should not the state of Pakistan amalgamate the Tribal Areas in the normally administered judiciary under the Federal Shariat Court?
The Tribal Areas have stopped being amenable to the system of the FCR established by British Raj in 1901. This started happening over 30 years ago when Pakistan’s national security establishment began using the Tribal Areas as the frontline territory for jihad and allowed the borders abutting on them to be punctured again and again till there was radical change in the indigenous economic and political forces there. The elements with the help of whom the Political Agent used to administer were superseded by new power centres. This state of affairs was quickly overtaken by “loss of territory” and those who controlled it used beheadings to get rid of the remnants of the old system.
Even the British had thought of changing the FCR. In 1919, 1920 and 1935, committees were formed for the purpose of reviewing it but consensus was not achieved. The condition of semi-lawlessness suited the Raj. But does it suit Pakistan? Today, one can hardly talk of law. The crisis is that of retrieving a territory being controlled by elements which’ve declared their own law there and are calling the area their “emirate”. The law can only come after the state of Pakistan has retrieved what belongs to it in the first place. No “interim” peace agreement that allows outsiders to rule the Tribal Areas in the name of sharia or anything else that stands outside the Pakistan system should be acceptable.
The erstwhile religious alliance of the MMA wanted to exit from the judicial system of Pakistan and enforce its inquisition-like “Hasba” laws but failed because the Supreme Court found them unconstitutional. A hot-house of sharia in the Tribal Areas with hand-cutting and “rijm” as its instruments of correction will destabilise the judicial system in the rest of Pakistan. Today we have 12 representatives of the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) sitting in the parliament while the parliament doesn’t have the power to legislate for FATA. Why not move towards consolidation instead of a split system? (Daily Times)
Read more...
Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani had declared last April that he would like to abolish the Frontier Crimes Regulation (FCR) in the Tribal Areas because it was “a barbaric colonial-era law that had ruled the tribal areas through the threat of collective punishment”. But Maulana Fazlur Rehman, whose party (JUIF) had joined Mr Gilani’s coalition, didn’t want the FCR abolished. In fact, there was such a variety of views on the subject that one did not hear of the planned ‘reform’ again after it was given over to a committee.
Surveys didn’t help either. A poll found that 39 percent of tribesmen wanted the FCR to be amended and 31 percent wanted it abolished. And old civil servants, who had served in the Tribal Areas, have been recommending a return to the system of the Political Agent, the linchpin of the FCR which doled out collective punishments that violate the fundamental principle of precise designation of the criminal. This view is gaining strength after the perceived failure of the military operations in the Tribal Areas against the terrorists.
A former ambassador and former consul at Afghanistan’s northern province of Mazar-e-Sharif has recommended a return to the old system in an article published recently. He says: “The deployment of the army in FATA has already weakened the established system of governance (the Political Agents). Despite the fact that many of us have strong reservations about the system, such as the powers of the Political Agent, it was in use for a long time and people are somehow used to it. It should be restored and given full support to ensure implementation of the new policy”.
We disagree. We believe that circumstances no longer allow for the revival of a system whose weaknesses were apparent for a long time. Territories administered with weak institutions are vulnerable to trespass and occupation. And the “non-success” of the military operations does not recommend a roll-back and a worsening of the disorder that had brought the army into the areas in the first place. Reading the political signs in Islamabad, one comes to the conclusion that parties which want to retain the FCR want to “Islamise” it, weaken the powers of the Political Agent and make punishments subject to appeal at a higher court.
Will that work? We suppose that the “rough justice” of the Political Agent is what is causing nostalgia about the old system. But the pro-FCR lobbies want this justice under sharia, presided over by ulema as a tandem authority. And if appeal is to lie over and above the authority of the Political Agent and his tribal jirga, where is that court to be located? And if it has to be established in Peshawar, then why should not the state of Pakistan amalgamate the Tribal Areas in the normally administered judiciary under the Federal Shariat Court?
The Tribal Areas have stopped being amenable to the system of the FCR established by British Raj in 1901. This started happening over 30 years ago when Pakistan’s national security establishment began using the Tribal Areas as the frontline territory for jihad and allowed the borders abutting on them to be punctured again and again till there was radical change in the indigenous economic and political forces there. The elements with the help of whom the Political Agent used to administer were superseded by new power centres. This state of affairs was quickly overtaken by “loss of territory” and those who controlled it used beheadings to get rid of the remnants of the old system.
Even the British had thought of changing the FCR. In 1919, 1920 and 1935, committees were formed for the purpose of reviewing it but consensus was not achieved. The condition of semi-lawlessness suited the Raj. But does it suit Pakistan? Today, one can hardly talk of law. The crisis is that of retrieving a territory being controlled by elements which’ve declared their own law there and are calling the area their “emirate”. The law can only come after the state of Pakistan has retrieved what belongs to it in the first place. No “interim” peace agreement that allows outsiders to rule the Tribal Areas in the name of sharia or anything else that stands outside the Pakistan system should be acceptable.
The erstwhile religious alliance of the MMA wanted to exit from the judicial system of Pakistan and enforce its inquisition-like “Hasba” laws but failed because the Supreme Court found them unconstitutional. A hot-house of sharia in the Tribal Areas with hand-cutting and “rijm” as its instruments of correction will destabilise the judicial system in the rest of Pakistan. Today we have 12 representatives of the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) sitting in the parliament while the parliament doesn’t have the power to legislate for FATA. Why not move towards consolidation instead of a split system? (Daily Times)
Read more...
American Muslims and Obama
According to an American survey, about 90 percent of American Muslims are expected to vote for Barack Obama on November 4. But strangely the Muslim organisation that carried out this survey doesn’t want the fact publicised widely because “it might hurt rather than help Mr Obama’s bid for the White House”. This is because a part of America thinks that Mr Obama is a Muslim — which he is not — and may favour policies that might make America vulnerable to Muslim terrorism. But a majority of the population clearly wants a changeover from the “neo-con” model of governance that has hurt the national economy. Even the Republicans want to make this change. But fear of terrorism reigns in the American mind and that might hurt Mr Obama.
The American Muslims have adopted the right stance. According to Mr Agha Saeed of the American Muslim Taskforce on Universal Rights and Elections, “Our goal is to maximise Muslim voter turnout, support candidates who support civil liberties, world peace, universal healthcare, better education, a fair immigration policy and social justice”. That is how most Americans think and that is not specific to Muslims. There are old policies to revamp and new ones to adopt and Mr Obama promises to do that for the American nation. Those who think that he would sacrifice any American interests at the global level are completely mistaken. (Daily Times)
Read more...
The American Muslims have adopted the right stance. According to Mr Agha Saeed of the American Muslim Taskforce on Universal Rights and Elections, “Our goal is to maximise Muslim voter turnout, support candidates who support civil liberties, world peace, universal healthcare, better education, a fair immigration policy and social justice”. That is how most Americans think and that is not specific to Muslims. There are old policies to revamp and new ones to adopt and Mr Obama promises to do that for the American nation. Those who think that he would sacrifice any American interests at the global level are completely mistaken. (Daily Times)
Read more...
Haroon-ur-Rashid, the undeclared propaganda secretary of Imran Khan.... Shame on you and your leader....
In his love with Imran Khan, Haroon-ur-Rashid has become blind. He is counting the number of flags of JUI and PPP. What does he think about the number of Imran Khan's PTI flags in the so called movement for the restoration of judiciary.
He compares this 'storm-in-a-tea-cup' movement by only two parties, Imran Khan' PTI and Qazi Hussain Ahmed's Jamaat-e-Islami, with the Pakistan movement led by Jinnah and Iqbal. He thinks that Qazi is Iqbal and Imran is Jinnah? These two shameless leaders have been continuously and persistently rejected by the people of Pakistan in various elections. Shame on you Haroon-ur-Rashid for distorting the facts.
![[col4.gif]](http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_Vbc4oO2rGiw/SQga7fLrWwI/AAAAAAAAAcU/T3zEBSMA2MI/s1600/col4.gif)
tharapolitics said:
Also read:
Haroon-ur-Rashid, the undeclared propaganda secretary of Imran Khan.... Shame on you and your leader....
Can Imran Khan be Pakistan's Obama? Haroon-ur-Rashid, the ex-lover of General Zia, Akhtar Abdul Rehman & Hamid Gul found his lost love in Imran Khan
Read more...
He compares this 'storm-in-a-tea-cup' movement by only two parties, Imran Khan' PTI and Qazi Hussain Ahmed's Jamaat-e-Islami, with the Pakistan movement led by Jinnah and Iqbal. He thinks that Qazi is Iqbal and Imran is Jinnah? These two shameless leaders have been continuously and persistently rejected by the people of Pakistan in various elections. Shame on you Haroon-ur-Rashid for distorting the facts.
tharapolitics said:
Haroon ur Rashid, wrote “excellent” regarding bringing democracy in parties.
Surprisingly, his today column is without any praising statement for Imran Khan. 
Harron Rasheed’s changing stance on heroic personalities:
-Start writing columns praising JI
-Switch to support to Zia and Akhtar Abdul Rehman in 80’s
-Wrote for IJI
-Then next hero was Mian Nawaz in 90’s
-Sudden change and shift stance to Abdul Sattar Eidhi and Hamid Gul in late 90’s
-Next his hero was “Maulana Akram Awan” (Shahnoor Studio fame)
-Then MMA
-Since two years Imran Khan
and TODAY Khawja Asif
Nice to see “a person” who is famous for “Qabza Group” in Rawalpindi is preaching us for “revolution” bla bla bla…..
Also read:
Haroon-ur-Rashid, a brilliant columnist, a follower of General Zia-ul-Haq and Zia's son Imran Khan...
Haroon-ur-Rashid, the undeclared propaganda secretary of Imran Khan.... Shame on you and your leader....
Can Imran Khan be Pakistan's Obama? Haroon-ur-Rashid, the ex-lover of General Zia, Akhtar Abdul Rehman & Hamid Gul found his lost love in Imran Khan
Read more...
Congratulations Imran Khan. Your friends Taliban kill Gayle Williams, a British-South African aid worker, who believed in doctrine of love...
In the name of love
SOME would see it as a profession of faith. Others may call it a religion of humanity. Either way, such intrepid devotion to the cause of basic humanism can only merit pure homage — as chaste as the aspiration itself, free of doubt and dismay. Gayle Williams, a 34-year-old British-South African aid worker, was one of many who believed in the doctrine of love. Last week, she lost her life to a bullet in Afghanistan and was laid to rest amid tight security in a Kabul cemetery where, reportedly, 50 family, friends and colleagues were in attendance — and in tears. Williams’ end may have been both unfortunate and dramatic but her last wish was nothing short of memorable — she had asked to be buried in Afghanistan where she worked with disabled children. Her murder has been claimed by the Taliban and fellow aid workers assert that the deceased had been targeted because Serve Afghanistan, the organisation she worked for, was spreading Christianity. Perhaps her desire to be put in the ground in a beleaguered Muslim country — instead of her own, amid her kin — will put such callous cynicism to rest.
Regrettably, Gayle Williams is not the first whose desire to serve humankind in the name of love has been denigrated in the name of either religion or suspicious intentions. Take the case of arguably the greatest ‘seraph’ of our times, Mother Teresa, hailed as the Saint Of The Gutters; she was also subjected to barbs such as the infamous book The Missionary Position and undying accusations of accepting aid regardless of its source. Then there is our indigenous and legendary humanitarian Abdul Sattar Edhi who, despite working miracles in areas such as rescue, refuge and rehabilitation, has been hounded by accusations as vile as child trafficking. Perhaps societies such as ours deserve fallen heroes. We either destroy our own idols or ensure that they are not free of clay feet. (Dawn)
Read more...
SOME would see it as a profession of faith. Others may call it a religion of humanity. Either way, such intrepid devotion to the cause of basic humanism can only merit pure homage — as chaste as the aspiration itself, free of doubt and dismay. Gayle Williams, a 34-year-old British-South African aid worker, was one of many who believed in the doctrine of love. Last week, she lost her life to a bullet in Afghanistan and was laid to rest amid tight security in a Kabul cemetery where, reportedly, 50 family, friends and colleagues were in attendance — and in tears. Williams’ end may have been both unfortunate and dramatic but her last wish was nothing short of memorable — she had asked to be buried in Afghanistan where she worked with disabled children. Her murder has been claimed by the Taliban and fellow aid workers assert that the deceased had been targeted because Serve Afghanistan, the organisation she worked for, was spreading Christianity. Perhaps her desire to be put in the ground in a beleaguered Muslim country — instead of her own, amid her kin — will put such callous cynicism to rest.
Regrettably, Gayle Williams is not the first whose desire to serve humankind in the name of love has been denigrated in the name of either religion or suspicious intentions. Take the case of arguably the greatest ‘seraph’ of our times, Mother Teresa, hailed as the Saint Of The Gutters; she was also subjected to barbs such as the infamous book The Missionary Position and undying accusations of accepting aid regardless of its source. Then there is our indigenous and legendary humanitarian Abdul Sattar Edhi who, despite working miracles in areas such as rescue, refuge and rehabilitation, has been hounded by accusations as vile as child trafficking. Perhaps societies such as ours deserve fallen heroes. We either destroy our own idols or ensure that they are not free of clay feet. (Dawn)
Read more...
At least 135 dead in Balochistan quake
QUETTA: The death toll from the earthquake in Balochistan has risen to 135, Dilawar Kakar, a mayor in the area said.
The 6.4 magnitude quake hit a rural area of the province before dawn on Wednesday.
Kakar said 135 deaths have been confirmed and that the figure will likely rise as rescuers reach remote villages.
He said hundreds more have been injured and some 15,000 people left homeless and appealed for help.
Minister for Revenue and Rehabilitation Zamaruk Khan said the government was preparing to provide food, shelter and medical care to survivors of the quake.
'Eight villages in Ziarat have been badly affected and there are still many areas which have not yet been reached,' Khan told Reuters.
Separately, a district offiial said at least 80 people were killed when the quake struck the region bringing down hundreds of mud-walled houses.
The US Geological Survey said a 6.4 magnitude quake hit 60 km northeast of the city of Quetta before dawn.
The Pakistan Meteorological Department put the magnitude at 6.5 and said the quake struck at 05:10 a.m.
'I'm telling you that 80 people are dead in this area where I am standing right now,' Sohail-ur-Rehman, a top district administration official in Balochistan province told Dawn Television by telephone from Wam district.
Officials in Ziarat district, 70 km northeast of Quetta, the capital of Balochistan province, said many houses collapsed in the quake and some were destroyed in landslides trigged by the quake.
'Hundreds of mud houses have collapsed. We are using whatever resources we have to help the people and have asked for help from the provincial government,' said Ziarat district chief Dilawar Khan.
'There is a large number of injured people but we don't have an exact figure,' he said.
Khan said people in the worst-hit areas had been rescued but teams had yet to reach some remote places in mountains above the Ziarat valley.
Ziarat district has a population of about 50,000. Its scenic valley is a picnic spot.
Five people had been killed in neighbouring Pishin district, to the north of Quetta, district government officials said.
'We were fast asleep when the tremor struck. We grabbed the children and ran outside. The earth continued shaking for more than a minute,' said Habibullah, a resident of Pishin. He said no one had been hurt in his neighbourhood.
PANIC
District government officials and hospital staff in the provincial capital, Quetta, said scores of people had been injured, most when mud walls collapsed or in the panic when people rushed from their homes.
The Meteorological Department said two tremors had struck before dawn, the second one bigger than the first.
Quetta resident Amjad Hussain said there had been panic in the city. 'There were two tremors, the second one was serious and people rushed out of their houses,' Hussain said.
Quetta was largely destroyed and about 30,000 people were killed in a severe earthquake in 1935.
The region's worst earthquake was in October 2005 when about 75,000 people were killed, most of them in mountainous northern Pakistan, in a 7.6 magnitude quake.
Large parts of south Asia are seismically active because a plate known as the Indian plate is pushing north into the Eurasian plate.
Balochistan is Pakistan's largest province but its most thinly populated. It has the country's biggest reserves of natural gas but there were no reports of damage to gas facilities. (Dawn)
.......
Updated at: 1120 PST, Wednesday, October 29, 2008
QUETTA: More than 100 people have been killed in an earthquake struck parts of Balochistan whereas scores of people still trapped under the rubbles.
Dozend of injured are under treatment as government has imposed emergency in all the hospitals of the province.
Pishin, Ziarat, Qila Abdullah, Chaman, Loralai, Sibbi, Mastung are hit badly areas. Several houses and buildings have been collapsed.
According to geological survey of Pakistan, the epicenter of the quake was in Chiltan mountains. Ziarat is the worst hit area where 10 people were killed after land sliding whereas four people were killed in Khanozai. Death toll in different parts of Balchistan has reached to 33. Ten bodies had recovered from the rubbles and shifted to hospital in Ziarat.
According to ISPR, contingents of FC have been dispatched in affected areas for rescue operations along with medical team. Two army helicopters have also been sent in Wachun and Kowas villages for rescue operations.
Deputy director of geological survey of Pakistan Asif Rana told Geo News that more aftershocks are expected in these areas within next 48 hours. (The News)
......
BBC Urdu link:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/urdu/pakistan/story/2008/10/081029_quetta_quake.shtml
Read more...
The 6.4 magnitude quake hit a rural area of the province before dawn on Wednesday.
Kakar said 135 deaths have been confirmed and that the figure will likely rise as rescuers reach remote villages.
He said hundreds more have been injured and some 15,000 people left homeless and appealed for help.
Minister for Revenue and Rehabilitation Zamaruk Khan said the government was preparing to provide food, shelter and medical care to survivors of the quake.
'Eight villages in Ziarat have been badly affected and there are still many areas which have not yet been reached,' Khan told Reuters.
Separately, a district offiial said at least 80 people were killed when the quake struck the region bringing down hundreds of mud-walled houses.
The US Geological Survey said a 6.4 magnitude quake hit 60 km northeast of the city of Quetta before dawn.
The Pakistan Meteorological Department put the magnitude at 6.5 and said the quake struck at 05:10 a.m.
'I'm telling you that 80 people are dead in this area where I am standing right now,' Sohail-ur-Rehman, a top district administration official in Balochistan province told Dawn Television by telephone from Wam district.
Officials in Ziarat district, 70 km northeast of Quetta, the capital of Balochistan province, said many houses collapsed in the quake and some were destroyed in landslides trigged by the quake.
'Hundreds of mud houses have collapsed. We are using whatever resources we have to help the people and have asked for help from the provincial government,' said Ziarat district chief Dilawar Khan.
'There is a large number of injured people but we don't have an exact figure,' he said.
Khan said people in the worst-hit areas had been rescued but teams had yet to reach some remote places in mountains above the Ziarat valley.
Ziarat district has a population of about 50,000. Its scenic valley is a picnic spot.
Five people had been killed in neighbouring Pishin district, to the north of Quetta, district government officials said.
'We were fast asleep when the tremor struck. We grabbed the children and ran outside. The earth continued shaking for more than a minute,' said Habibullah, a resident of Pishin. He said no one had been hurt in his neighbourhood.
PANIC
District government officials and hospital staff in the provincial capital, Quetta, said scores of people had been injured, most when mud walls collapsed or in the panic when people rushed from their homes.
The Meteorological Department said two tremors had struck before dawn, the second one bigger than the first.
Quetta resident Amjad Hussain said there had been panic in the city. 'There were two tremors, the second one was serious and people rushed out of their houses,' Hussain said.
Quetta was largely destroyed and about 30,000 people were killed in a severe earthquake in 1935.
The region's worst earthquake was in October 2005 when about 75,000 people were killed, most of them in mountainous northern Pakistan, in a 7.6 magnitude quake.
Large parts of south Asia are seismically active because a plate known as the Indian plate is pushing north into the Eurasian plate.
Balochistan is Pakistan's largest province but its most thinly populated. It has the country's biggest reserves of natural gas but there were no reports of damage to gas facilities. (Dawn)
.......
Updated at: 1120 PST, Wednesday, October 29, 2008
QUETTA: More than 100 people have been killed in an earthquake struck parts of Balochistan whereas scores of people still trapped under the rubbles.
Dozend of injured are under treatment as government has imposed emergency in all the hospitals of the province.
Pishin, Ziarat, Qila Abdullah, Chaman, Loralai, Sibbi, Mastung are hit badly areas. Several houses and buildings have been collapsed.
According to geological survey of Pakistan, the epicenter of the quake was in Chiltan mountains. Ziarat is the worst hit area where 10 people were killed after land sliding whereas four people were killed in Khanozai. Death toll in different parts of Balchistan has reached to 33. Ten bodies had recovered from the rubbles and shifted to hospital in Ziarat.
According to ISPR, contingents of FC have been dispatched in affected areas for rescue operations along with medical team. Two army helicopters have also been sent in Wachun and Kowas villages for rescue operations.
Deputy director of geological survey of Pakistan Asif Rana told Geo News that more aftershocks are expected in these areas within next 48 hours. (The News)
......
BBC Urdu link:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/urdu/pakistan/story/2008/10/081029_quetta_quake.shtml
Read more...
Tuesday, 28 October 2008
Well done, Imran Khan, Hamid Gul, Kashif Abbasi and Hamid Mir. Your friends Taliban have destroyed another girls school in Swat.
Well done, Imran Khan, Hamid Gul, Kashif Abbasi and Hamid Mir. Your friends Taliban have destroyed another girls school in Swat. Imran Khan? Why don't you admit your children to a Taliban jihadi madrassah? Is that your insaaf?
Read full story at the following link:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/urdu/pakistan/story/2008/10/081028_swat_school_as.shtml
Read more...
FROM Karachi to Swat, the Taliban are active. Shame on you Imran Khan, Hamid Gul, Kashif Abbasi, Mushtaq Minhas. Are you still in a state of denial?
From Karachi to Swat
FROM Karachi to Swat, the Taliban are active. The ‘executions’ in what once was a tourist paradise and a police informer’s abduction in the port city show both, their tentacles in society and the ruthlessness of their philosophy and action. Pakhtun tribal traditions include respect for mediators. But on Sunday militants belonging to Maulana Fazlullah’s camp ambushed tribesmen on the way to a peace jirga and took 12 of them hostage, and when other tribesmen attacked the Taliban the hostages were shot. Later they were hanged to ‘teach a lesson’ to the non-Taliban. The police informer in Karachi was murdered because he tipped off the authorities about an Al Qaeda-Jundullah cell. How they kidnapped him is immaterial. It is doubtful he was trussed up and taken to Swat all along in that condition. Most probably he was lured into visiting his home district and then trapped. But what is shocking is the Taliban did not confine their wrath to the informer; they beheaded his wife, children and parents — a deed that testifies to their moral depravity.
The murder of the peace jirga members is not the first of its kind. The Taliban have been murdering non-combatants as a matter of policy now for years. In the past they have bombed mosques, Eid congregations, and civilian targets, including girls’ schools and UN relief offices, without any qualms of conscience. What is shocking, however, is that sections of society friendly to the Taliban keep mum about these barbaric acts and, thus, indirectly encourage terrorism. The government’s own handling of this menace has been anything but scientifically planned. The crackdown launched on the Swat rebels in November last has no doubt made some headway, but as Sunday’s crime shows Fazlullah’s men are far from vanquished and are still quite capable of making mischief. In Bajaur the military for the moment seems to have the upper hand, and the militants have shown a desire to negotiate. However, a well-coordinated strategy to crush the rebellion appears to be missing. Notice, for instance, the prime minister’s unhappiness with the FC commander’s remarks — later clarified — that it will take a full year for the authorities to restore peace to Fata. The unanimous parliamentary resolution demonstrated the nation’s will to combat terrorism, but regrettably some religious parties still have a soft corner for the terrorists and condemn suicide bombing and others acts of terrorism only for record’s sake. (Dawn)
Read more...
FROM Karachi to Swat, the Taliban are active. The ‘executions’ in what once was a tourist paradise and a police informer’s abduction in the port city show both, their tentacles in society and the ruthlessness of their philosophy and action. Pakhtun tribal traditions include respect for mediators. But on Sunday militants belonging to Maulana Fazlullah’s camp ambushed tribesmen on the way to a peace jirga and took 12 of them hostage, and when other tribesmen attacked the Taliban the hostages were shot. Later they were hanged to ‘teach a lesson’ to the non-Taliban. The police informer in Karachi was murdered because he tipped off the authorities about an Al Qaeda-Jundullah cell. How they kidnapped him is immaterial. It is doubtful he was trussed up and taken to Swat all along in that condition. Most probably he was lured into visiting his home district and then trapped. But what is shocking is the Taliban did not confine their wrath to the informer; they beheaded his wife, children and parents — a deed that testifies to their moral depravity.
The murder of the peace jirga members is not the first of its kind. The Taliban have been murdering non-combatants as a matter of policy now for years. In the past they have bombed mosques, Eid congregations, and civilian targets, including girls’ schools and UN relief offices, without any qualms of conscience. What is shocking, however, is that sections of society friendly to the Taliban keep mum about these barbaric acts and, thus, indirectly encourage terrorism. The government’s own handling of this menace has been anything but scientifically planned. The crackdown launched on the Swat rebels in November last has no doubt made some headway, but as Sunday’s crime shows Fazlullah’s men are far from vanquished and are still quite capable of making mischief. In Bajaur the military for the moment seems to have the upper hand, and the militants have shown a desire to negotiate. However, a well-coordinated strategy to crush the rebellion appears to be missing. Notice, for instance, the prime minister’s unhappiness with the FC commander’s remarks — later clarified — that it will take a full year for the authorities to restore peace to Fata. The unanimous parliamentary resolution demonstrated the nation’s will to combat terrorism, but regrettably some religious parties still have a soft corner for the terrorists and condemn suicide bombing and others acts of terrorism only for record’s sake. (Dawn)
Read more...
PPP's strategy for Balochistan
A strategy for Balochistan (Daily Times)
The secretary of the Shaheed Benazir Bhutto Reconciliatory Committee on Balochistan, Senator Babar Awan, says he has a strategy for a solution to the problems of Balochistan. He has it narrowed down to “three Rs”: reconciliation with all political forces, rebuilding national institutions and reallocating resources. The roadmap will have “five steps” and it will kick off with a jirga of intellectuals and other stakeholders from Balochistan on October 31 in Islamabad. After that another jirga comprising all the political parties of the province would be held.
Let us admit one thing straightaway. Islamabad today is in a good position to address the Balochistan problem. The PPP government has been able to tone down the insurgency that showed no signs of abating during the tenure of the previous government. Credit must also go to the PPP chief minister of the province, Nawab Aslam Raisani, who has established his credibility among the major players in the politics of Balochistan by rising above partisan politics and taking a pro-Balochistan stance. Now this development places on Islamabad the onus of going much farther ahead of the advances made in the past to bring Balochistan back on board the federation.
This point of time in the history of Pakistan is least suitable for a radical devolution to the provinces. The state is hardly in control of its territory elsewhere, its institutions are weak to the point of non-delivery, and there are foreign elements freely challenging the writ of the state. Yet the pledge to devolve has been made time and again and is now inevitable when the jirgas convene to examine the demands of those who represent Balochistan. But any effort to meet the demands of Balochistan will have to be done under the Constitution. And if the Constitution no longer helps in its present shape — and this is what the Baloch point out — the government should be prepared to muster the kind of parliamentary consensus needed to carry out amendments in the Constitution.
If the situation in Balochistan is unique to it, the solutions proposed for the resolution of its problems will have to apply to all the provinces. The quantity of devolution acceptable to the people of Balochistan should be applicable to all the provinces although under this devolution a certain degree of preferential treatment can be apportioned to Balochistan because of its special conditions.
We hope that the jirga will highlight as well as compress the long tally of demands that appear in the media; and that the Balochistan Assembly is able to formulate a final list that is acceptable to all, including elements that have fled into the mountains and are engaged in what they see as some kind of “liberation struggle”. Most demands related to administration are aimed at reducing the interference of the federal government in the province. This applies not only to the bureaucracy but also to such forces as the frontier constabulary and the police. The biggest “nationalist” demand grows out of what modern-day textbooks call “resource-based” nationalism.
The “feelings” of the Baloch must be understood with sympathy. Their focus on the resources of the province has become sharp over the years because of lack of development in the province. Had Balochistan been developed into a modern self-sufficient province, no one would have become conscious of what Pakistan extracts from its soil and how it is disposed of. But now the law that guides the control of the natural resources and their royalties and ownership will have to be revisited. A survey of what the Baloch leaders have highlighted in the past will give us a measure of the scale of the task lying ahead of the federation.
Economic backwardness hounds areas in Ormara, where Pakistan’s modern naval base is constructed; Chaghai and Kharan, where the nuclear test was conducted and where copper and gold are being mined; Lasbela, where an industrial town and strategic facilities are located; Dera Bugti, known for its gas wells; Quetta and Bolan, where coal is being mined. And so on. Balochistan is 78 percent without electricity; and 79 percent of its population is without the facility of gas. Balochistan has just 3.4 percent of all gas consumers, as compared to 64 percent of Punjab.
If peace is arranged in Balochistan, much can be given to Balochistan in return for a lot of new land that can be opened for exploration to enhance Pakistan’s national capacity to produce energy. But the final solution must attract the people of Balochistan. Because its population is relatively small, constitutional provisions can be made to create this attraction so that the rest of the provinces can collectively benefit from Balochistan’s natural endowments without making the people there feel cheated. In return Balochistan must make itself governable by strengthening the writ of the state in its territory. (Daily Times)
Balochistan matters (Dawn)
THE Shaheed Benazir Bhutto Reconciliatory Committee on Balochistan that was formed last April is finally showing signs of stirring. On Sunday, it revealed a roadmap incorporating among other things a plan to work on reconciliation, reconstruction of national institutions in the province and the reallocation of resources. A jirga is scheduled for later this week to discuss the strategy that has President’s Zardari’s approval. It is to be hoped that there are no delays and its composition will be inclusive of all opinion. The government, in all sincerity, should attempt to implement the proposals aimed at dispelling Baloch grievances and bringing back the alienated people of the province into the national mainstream. True, there is some doubt on this score considering that some very concrete proposals made by a parliamentary committee in 2005 to address Balochistan’s woes fell by the wayside. But unlike the previous political dispensation, this government is the outcome of a popular mandate and there is greater pressure on it to turn in a better performance.
This is the right time to strive — and to be seen as doing so — for Balochistan’s uplift. The ceasefire declared by Baloch militants last month has largely held while the army has scaled back its operations. It may be difficult to effect a reconciliation among the various aggrieved segments of society at the moment, especially in view of the thousands of ordinary civilians who were made to feel the military’s wrath during an intense operation against the militants. But it is imperative that the path leading to reconciliation is paved with positive actions involving major development in the province, greater provincial autonomy, more equitable resource-sharing and job opportunities for the Baloch many of whom feel that outsiders are being given preference in employment.
Promises have to be translated into reality to make the Baloch have a real sense of ownership in their province. These include making the necessary constitutional amendments envisaged by the roadmap and promised earlier by the prime minister who said after the February polls that the Concurrent List would be abolished within a year to allow the provinces more autonomy in their affairs. It is equally important to give a fair hearing to Balochistan’s demand for more equitable resource distribution. It is incumbent on the new National Finance Commission to ensure that the next award guarantees satisfactory gains for the province which has long wanted factors such as poverty and under-development to be among the main criteria for distribution. Balochistan, along with the other smaller provinces, has strongly felt the injustice of a population-based formula that has favoured Punjab, and it is about time its voice was heard in this regard. Failing to do so would mean a return to militancy in the province and the consequent weakening of the state. (Dawn)
Read more...
The secretary of the Shaheed Benazir Bhutto Reconciliatory Committee on Balochistan, Senator Babar Awan, says he has a strategy for a solution to the problems of Balochistan. He has it narrowed down to “three Rs”: reconciliation with all political forces, rebuilding national institutions and reallocating resources. The roadmap will have “five steps” and it will kick off with a jirga of intellectuals and other stakeholders from Balochistan on October 31 in Islamabad. After that another jirga comprising all the political parties of the province would be held.
Let us admit one thing straightaway. Islamabad today is in a good position to address the Balochistan problem. The PPP government has been able to tone down the insurgency that showed no signs of abating during the tenure of the previous government. Credit must also go to the PPP chief minister of the province, Nawab Aslam Raisani, who has established his credibility among the major players in the politics of Balochistan by rising above partisan politics and taking a pro-Balochistan stance. Now this development places on Islamabad the onus of going much farther ahead of the advances made in the past to bring Balochistan back on board the federation.
This point of time in the history of Pakistan is least suitable for a radical devolution to the provinces. The state is hardly in control of its territory elsewhere, its institutions are weak to the point of non-delivery, and there are foreign elements freely challenging the writ of the state. Yet the pledge to devolve has been made time and again and is now inevitable when the jirgas convene to examine the demands of those who represent Balochistan. But any effort to meet the demands of Balochistan will have to be done under the Constitution. And if the Constitution no longer helps in its present shape — and this is what the Baloch point out — the government should be prepared to muster the kind of parliamentary consensus needed to carry out amendments in the Constitution.
If the situation in Balochistan is unique to it, the solutions proposed for the resolution of its problems will have to apply to all the provinces. The quantity of devolution acceptable to the people of Balochistan should be applicable to all the provinces although under this devolution a certain degree of preferential treatment can be apportioned to Balochistan because of its special conditions.
We hope that the jirga will highlight as well as compress the long tally of demands that appear in the media; and that the Balochistan Assembly is able to formulate a final list that is acceptable to all, including elements that have fled into the mountains and are engaged in what they see as some kind of “liberation struggle”. Most demands related to administration are aimed at reducing the interference of the federal government in the province. This applies not only to the bureaucracy but also to such forces as the frontier constabulary and the police. The biggest “nationalist” demand grows out of what modern-day textbooks call “resource-based” nationalism.
The “feelings” of the Baloch must be understood with sympathy. Their focus on the resources of the province has become sharp over the years because of lack of development in the province. Had Balochistan been developed into a modern self-sufficient province, no one would have become conscious of what Pakistan extracts from its soil and how it is disposed of. But now the law that guides the control of the natural resources and their royalties and ownership will have to be revisited. A survey of what the Baloch leaders have highlighted in the past will give us a measure of the scale of the task lying ahead of the federation.
Economic backwardness hounds areas in Ormara, where Pakistan’s modern naval base is constructed; Chaghai and Kharan, where the nuclear test was conducted and where copper and gold are being mined; Lasbela, where an industrial town and strategic facilities are located; Dera Bugti, known for its gas wells; Quetta and Bolan, where coal is being mined. And so on. Balochistan is 78 percent without electricity; and 79 percent of its population is without the facility of gas. Balochistan has just 3.4 percent of all gas consumers, as compared to 64 percent of Punjab.
If peace is arranged in Balochistan, much can be given to Balochistan in return for a lot of new land that can be opened for exploration to enhance Pakistan’s national capacity to produce energy. But the final solution must attract the people of Balochistan. Because its population is relatively small, constitutional provisions can be made to create this attraction so that the rest of the provinces can collectively benefit from Balochistan’s natural endowments without making the people there feel cheated. In return Balochistan must make itself governable by strengthening the writ of the state in its territory. (Daily Times)
Balochistan matters (Dawn)
THE Shaheed Benazir Bhutto Reconciliatory Committee on Balochistan that was formed last April is finally showing signs of stirring. On Sunday, it revealed a roadmap incorporating among other things a plan to work on reconciliation, reconstruction of national institutions in the province and the reallocation of resources. A jirga is scheduled for later this week to discuss the strategy that has President’s Zardari’s approval. It is to be hoped that there are no delays and its composition will be inclusive of all opinion. The government, in all sincerity, should attempt to implement the proposals aimed at dispelling Baloch grievances and bringing back the alienated people of the province into the national mainstream. True, there is some doubt on this score considering that some very concrete proposals made by a parliamentary committee in 2005 to address Balochistan’s woes fell by the wayside. But unlike the previous political dispensation, this government is the outcome of a popular mandate and there is greater pressure on it to turn in a better performance.
This is the right time to strive — and to be seen as doing so — for Balochistan’s uplift. The ceasefire declared by Baloch militants last month has largely held while the army has scaled back its operations. It may be difficult to effect a reconciliation among the various aggrieved segments of society at the moment, especially in view of the thousands of ordinary civilians who were made to feel the military’s wrath during an intense operation against the militants. But it is imperative that the path leading to reconciliation is paved with positive actions involving major development in the province, greater provincial autonomy, more equitable resource-sharing and job opportunities for the Baloch many of whom feel that outsiders are being given preference in employment.
Promises have to be translated into reality to make the Baloch have a real sense of ownership in their province. These include making the necessary constitutional amendments envisaged by the roadmap and promised earlier by the prime minister who said after the February polls that the Concurrent List would be abolished within a year to allow the provinces more autonomy in their affairs. It is equally important to give a fair hearing to Balochistan’s demand for more equitable resource distribution. It is incumbent on the new National Finance Commission to ensure that the next award guarantees satisfactory gains for the province which has long wanted factors such as poverty and under-development to be among the main criteria for distribution. Balochistan, along with the other smaller provinces, has strongly felt the injustice of a population-based formula that has favoured Punjab, and it is about time its voice was heard in this regard. Failing to do so would mean a return to militancy in the province and the consequent weakening of the state. (Dawn)
Read more...
New Pak effort against terrorism encouraging: US, Canadian dailies
WASHINGTON: A US and a Canadian daily found Pakistan’s new efforts against terrorism ‘encouraging’ and said US should respond accordingly. An editorial in the Honolulu Star-Bulletin noted that the anti-Taliban lashkars are poorly armed with aging rifles, while Taliban fighters are equipped with rocket launchers and heavy guns. “However, newly elected President Asif Ali Zardari this month arranged for the purchase of assault rifles and other small arms from China to better arm the lashkars.” The National Post, a Canadian newspaper, said that besides encouraging volunteer militias against Taliban, The Pakistani military has also accepted nearly three dozen US special forces trainers to help improve the effectiveness of their own counterterrorism forces. “Both, admittedly, are but small first steps. But at least they are steps in the right direction,” the Post stresses. The Canadian daily alleges: “Our troops have occasionally witnessed Pakistani agents and border guards loading Taliban trucks or cheering them on as they drive over the Pakistan border and into Afghanistan.” “Since General Musharraf resigned earlier this year, the situation in the tribal regions has worsened, and there have emerged hints that the mood in Islamabad has changed,” the editorial states. khalid hasan (Daily Times)
New Pakistani effort against terrorists encouraging: US daily
By Khalid Hasan
WASHINGTON: Recent actions taken by the new democratic leadership of Pakistan give encouraging signs of a new effort against the terrorists, and the US should respond accordingly, says an editorial in the Honolulu Star-Bulletin.
Noting that Osama bin Laden and the Taliban have found a haven in the northwestern territories of Pakistan, near the Afghanistan border, the newspaper recalled that last month President Bush had authorised strikes by US troops into Pakistan from Afghanistan and Sen Barack Obama had called for such action more than a year ago, with or without Pakistan's approval, in cases of "actionable intelligence" about terrorist targets in the region. The newspaper argued that ideally, Pakistani forces would carry out the offensives, but anti-Taliban militias or lashkars are poorly armed with aging rifles, while Taliban fighters are equipped with rocket launchers and heavy guns. “However, newly elected President Asif Ali Zardari this month arranged for the purchase of assault rifles and other small arms from China to better arm the lashkars,” the editorial noted.
While pointing out that the US has spent more than $10 billion in counterterrorism assistance to Pakistan's military since 2001, the newspaper admitted that Americans are widely distrusted by Pakistanis. Changes in Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence Directorate, which has been “aiding terrorists,” are encouraging, said the editorial, while taking note of the fact that the new government had replaced the head of that agency with a new chief (now in Washington for meetings with CIA director Michael V Hayden). Recalling that Gen David H Petraeus this week becomes head of the US Central Command, in charge of US forces in the Middle East and South and Central Asia, the Honolulu daily suggested that he should regard coordination of military objectives with Pakistan's non-military needs as essential for a new approach to be successful. (Daily Times)
Read more...
New Pakistani effort against terrorists encouraging: US daily
By Khalid Hasan
WASHINGTON: Recent actions taken by the new democratic leadership of Pakistan give encouraging signs of a new effort against the terrorists, and the US should respond accordingly, says an editorial in the Honolulu Star-Bulletin.
Noting that Osama bin Laden and the Taliban have found a haven in the northwestern territories of Pakistan, near the Afghanistan border, the newspaper recalled that last month President Bush had authorised strikes by US troops into Pakistan from Afghanistan and Sen Barack Obama had called for such action more than a year ago, with or without Pakistan's approval, in cases of "actionable intelligence" about terrorist targets in the region. The newspaper argued that ideally, Pakistani forces would carry out the offensives, but anti-Taliban militias or lashkars are poorly armed with aging rifles, while Taliban fighters are equipped with rocket launchers and heavy guns. “However, newly elected President Asif Ali Zardari this month arranged for the purchase of assault rifles and other small arms from China to better arm the lashkars,” the editorial noted.
While pointing out that the US has spent more than $10 billion in counterterrorism assistance to Pakistan's military since 2001, the newspaper admitted that Americans are widely distrusted by Pakistanis. Changes in Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence Directorate, which has been “aiding terrorists,” are encouraging, said the editorial, while taking note of the fact that the new government had replaced the head of that agency with a new chief (now in Washington for meetings with CIA director Michael V Hayden). Recalling that Gen David H Petraeus this week becomes head of the US Central Command, in charge of US forces in the Middle East and South and Central Asia, the Honolulu daily suggested that he should regard coordination of military objectives with Pakistan's non-military needs as essential for a new approach to be successful. (Daily Times)
Read more...
Listen Hamid Gul: The controversial Pakistani policy of creating strategic depth in Afghanistan has now become a noose around our neck.
Hope and fear in NWFP
Tuesday, October 28, 2008
Khalid Aziz
FATA and the NWFP are in the midst of "interesting times." According to the Chinese such periods are unstable and bring a whirlpool of difficulties. Pakistan has entered a sinkhole of problems and will need adroit handling to prevent a further slide.
When Pakistan joined the war on terrorism in 2001 it conceived an impractical game plan of trying to play two contradictions against each other. Gen Musharraf had prevailed on the US to accept a policy of more lenient handling of the Afghan Taliban by military and intelligence operations inside Pakistan, compared to a more coercive treatment of foreigners and al-Qaeda. This policy was implemented by Gen Musharraf to keep intact the goodwill of the Pakhtun political forces in Afghanistan as an asset to balance the increasing influence of India, as well to avert the ethnic backlash of the Pakhtuns in FATA and the NWFP in sympathy for Afghan Pakhtuns.
As the US pressure increased on the Afghan Taliban inside Afghanistan they needed to create a new centre of gravity to prevent their movement from falling apart. Pakistan's duality regarding the Taliban came in handy and they turned the Pakistani strategy on its head and entered the political and military space in FATA, the NWFP and Balochistan from 2002. This was the period when many Taliban who fled the war in Afghanistan found refuge inside Pakistan. Pakistani ambivalence in dealing with this problem within its territory has come in for a lot of criticism from the US; this soft policy has been considered collusive and used as a proof of secret dealings between the militants and Pakistani intelligence services.
The controversial Pakistani policy of creating strategic depth in Afghanistan has now become a noose around our neck. The giving of refuge to the Afghan militants in FATA allowed them to quickly recruit a following amongst marginalised Pakhtuns who inhabited these isolated regions and they were quickly radicalised. The presence of Afghan Taliban elements in FATA permitted an easy resurrection of their militant ideology. Training camps were established in the isolated region outside the control of the military. Gradually militant bands began to launch raids into Afghanistan. However, owing to the tribalism prevalent in the region it did not permit such bands to make a major difference in the pattern of the overall fighting inside Afghanistan. The reason for this is plain; FATA warriors could not venture further than about an hour's distance from the Durand Line. This limit on their area of operation was forced by the aerial and artillery reaction by NATO or US forces; it normally took about an hour for the Western reaction to occur and that was the limit of the depth of operations from FATA. After 2007 the region opposite Waziristan was thickly populated by Afghan intelligence that quickly reported incursions, reducing attacks from this source. Previously the contribution of violence by FATA tribesmen could not be more than five percent of the total insurgent attacks inside Afghanistan. However, the availability of a bolt hole for escaping Afghan Taliban leaders to Pakistani territory remains an area of criticism.
Where Pakistan was hurt most by its policy of ambivalence was the radicalisation of the NWFP's population, especially in Malakand and some other parts of the province. It has been suggested that the MMA government, which ruled the NWFP from 2002 to 2007, was complicit. It is true that during this period there was a reduction of violence in the NWFP, but not in FATA. Apparently, FATA was chosen as the centre of fighting to divert charges of collusion against the MMA government.
The increased level of violence in FATA and the NWFP has created a security crisis, as well as a humanitarian one, with a large displacement of people from the area of operations. Local populations condemn both the government and the militants for their miseries. Such discontent will generate future challenges and needs to be handled immediately within a framework of assistance, protection and early return to original locations. However, this can only happen after stability has been assured in the disturbed regions.
At the macro level the economy is generating another set of challenges that include increase in prices, inflation and rising unemployment in the NWFP. Apparently the worsening of this triad will add to the ranks of the discontented that may join the militants. This view of Pakistan's economic woes suggests that Pakistan's friends must loosen up their purse strings to assist, or prepare to spend on more fighting which would then become a never-ending litany of death and destruction.
If one remained fixed within this narrative one would think that nothing good was happening in Pakistan. That's not true. The resolution passed by Parliament regarding terrorism is truly remarkable. This for the first time provides a basis for the long-term strategising of efforts against terrorism. Secondly, through the resolution the Pakistani people have given their consent to a definite policy of dealing with terrorism in a holistic manner. Thirdly, the government has accepted the sanctity of Afghan territory and has thus condemned the provision of safe havens within Pakistani territory.
It is now for the government to use this opportunity to create strategies and supporting legislation to make the resolution meaningful. A resolution is not law and thus not binding. But it provides a direction to the government. If Pakistan now fails to build on the principles laid down by the resolution the fault will lie with the government. While Pakistan has been trying in the National Assembly to get to grips with the problems related to terrorism, the US policy related to drone attacks is a cause of concern and creates a lot of ill will against the US – each attack reduces the good will for the US. The drone attack near Miranshah only six hours after the passage of the resolution clearly challenged the principle laid in paragraph four of the resolution that condemns violation of Pakistan's sovereignty. This attack is not a good sign and the US must reconsider its drones policy, because it is not winning the Americans any friends. It also embarrasses an ally which has begun to shape events in a better manner than before.
As Gen Petraeus takes over at the end of October, Pakistani security establishment needs to game-plan the strategy of "surge" which would very likely be brought into play by the US in Afghanistan and perhaps in FATA. Higher casualties and displacement of large numbers of people has been a by-product of the surge in Iraq. It is not the best policy for this region. A surge in diplomatic handling of the militants will bring higher dividends and greater stability. Militancy cannot be ended but can definitely be brought to a minimal level. Thus, the situation in Pakistan shows areas of hope. But at the same time there are other areas of concern that create fear in the mind; there is therefore a need for prudence and careful planning in the days to come. (The News)
The writer is a former chief secretary of NWFP and heads the Regional Institute of Policy Research. Email: azizkhalid@gmail.com
Read more...
Tuesday, October 28, 2008
Khalid Aziz
FATA and the NWFP are in the midst of "interesting times." According to the Chinese such periods are unstable and bring a whirlpool of difficulties. Pakistan has entered a sinkhole of problems and will need adroit handling to prevent a further slide.
When Pakistan joined the war on terrorism in 2001 it conceived an impractical game plan of trying to play two contradictions against each other. Gen Musharraf had prevailed on the US to accept a policy of more lenient handling of the Afghan Taliban by military and intelligence operations inside Pakistan, compared to a more coercive treatment of foreigners and al-Qaeda. This policy was implemented by Gen Musharraf to keep intact the goodwill of the Pakhtun political forces in Afghanistan as an asset to balance the increasing influence of India, as well to avert the ethnic backlash of the Pakhtuns in FATA and the NWFP in sympathy for Afghan Pakhtuns.
As the US pressure increased on the Afghan Taliban inside Afghanistan they needed to create a new centre of gravity to prevent their movement from falling apart. Pakistan's duality regarding the Taliban came in handy and they turned the Pakistani strategy on its head and entered the political and military space in FATA, the NWFP and Balochistan from 2002. This was the period when many Taliban who fled the war in Afghanistan found refuge inside Pakistan. Pakistani ambivalence in dealing with this problem within its territory has come in for a lot of criticism from the US; this soft policy has been considered collusive and used as a proof of secret dealings between the militants and Pakistani intelligence services.
The controversial Pakistani policy of creating strategic depth in Afghanistan has now become a noose around our neck. The giving of refuge to the Afghan militants in FATA allowed them to quickly recruit a following amongst marginalised Pakhtuns who inhabited these isolated regions and they were quickly radicalised. The presence of Afghan Taliban elements in FATA permitted an easy resurrection of their militant ideology. Training camps were established in the isolated region outside the control of the military. Gradually militant bands began to launch raids into Afghanistan. However, owing to the tribalism prevalent in the region it did not permit such bands to make a major difference in the pattern of the overall fighting inside Afghanistan. The reason for this is plain; FATA warriors could not venture further than about an hour's distance from the Durand Line. This limit on their area of operation was forced by the aerial and artillery reaction by NATO or US forces; it normally took about an hour for the Western reaction to occur and that was the limit of the depth of operations from FATA. After 2007 the region opposite Waziristan was thickly populated by Afghan intelligence that quickly reported incursions, reducing attacks from this source. Previously the contribution of violence by FATA tribesmen could not be more than five percent of the total insurgent attacks inside Afghanistan. However, the availability of a bolt hole for escaping Afghan Taliban leaders to Pakistani territory remains an area of criticism.
Where Pakistan was hurt most by its policy of ambivalence was the radicalisation of the NWFP's population, especially in Malakand and some other parts of the province. It has been suggested that the MMA government, which ruled the NWFP from 2002 to 2007, was complicit. It is true that during this period there was a reduction of violence in the NWFP, but not in FATA. Apparently, FATA was chosen as the centre of fighting to divert charges of collusion against the MMA government.
The increased level of violence in FATA and the NWFP has created a security crisis, as well as a humanitarian one, with a large displacement of people from the area of operations. Local populations condemn both the government and the militants for their miseries. Such discontent will generate future challenges and needs to be handled immediately within a framework of assistance, protection and early return to original locations. However, this can only happen after stability has been assured in the disturbed regions.
At the macro level the economy is generating another set of challenges that include increase in prices, inflation and rising unemployment in the NWFP. Apparently the worsening of this triad will add to the ranks of the discontented that may join the militants. This view of Pakistan's economic woes suggests that Pakistan's friends must loosen up their purse strings to assist, or prepare to spend on more fighting which would then become a never-ending litany of death and destruction.
If one remained fixed within this narrative one would think that nothing good was happening in Pakistan. That's not true. The resolution passed by Parliament regarding terrorism is truly remarkable. This for the first time provides a basis for the long-term strategising of efforts against terrorism. Secondly, through the resolution the Pakistani people have given their consent to a definite policy of dealing with terrorism in a holistic manner. Thirdly, the government has accepted the sanctity of Afghan territory and has thus condemned the provision of safe havens within Pakistani territory.
It is now for the government to use this opportunity to create strategies and supporting legislation to make the resolution meaningful. A resolution is not law and thus not binding. But it provides a direction to the government. If Pakistan now fails to build on the principles laid down by the resolution the fault will lie with the government. While Pakistan has been trying in the National Assembly to get to grips with the problems related to terrorism, the US policy related to drone attacks is a cause of concern and creates a lot of ill will against the US – each attack reduces the good will for the US. The drone attack near Miranshah only six hours after the passage of the resolution clearly challenged the principle laid in paragraph four of the resolution that condemns violation of Pakistan's sovereignty. This attack is not a good sign and the US must reconsider its drones policy, because it is not winning the Americans any friends. It also embarrasses an ally which has begun to shape events in a better manner than before.
As Gen Petraeus takes over at the end of October, Pakistani security establishment needs to game-plan the strategy of "surge" which would very likely be brought into play by the US in Afghanistan and perhaps in FATA. Higher casualties and displacement of large numbers of people has been a by-product of the surge in Iraq. It is not the best policy for this region. A surge in diplomatic handling of the militants will bring higher dividends and greater stability. Militancy cannot be ended but can definitely be brought to a minimal level. Thus, the situation in Pakistan shows areas of hope. But at the same time there are other areas of concern that create fear in the mind; there is therefore a need for prudence and careful planning in the days to come. (The News)
The writer is a former chief secretary of NWFP and heads the Regional Institute of Policy Research. Email: azizkhalid@gmail.com
Read more...
![[col12.gif]](http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_Vbc4oO2rGiw/SQa9nLqDBHI/AAAAAAAAAb8/jpF8KIfg7mo/s1600/col12.gif)
![[col12a.gif]](http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_Vbc4oO2rGiw/SQa9gkCCarI/AAAAAAAAAb0/9irysGdxlKg/s1600-h/col12a.gif)
![[col3.gif]](http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_Vbc4oO2rGiw/SQa7PFtXTwI/AAAAAAAAAbs/zcEOxw5v6uQ/s1600/col3.gif)
Monday, 27 October 2008
Time to purge ISI from the pro-Taliban and pro-Sipah-e-Sahaba goons...
Spanish report ties ISI to Taliban
* Claims agency funded training camps and weapons acquisition
* Pakistan army chief vehemently denies Madrid claim
Daily Times Monitor
MADRID: A confidential Spanish Defence Ministry report has alleged Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence agency helped arm the Taliban in 2005 for assassination plots against the Afghan government.
The confidential report, obtained by Cadena Ser radio and posted on the station's website on Wednesday, also alleges ISI helped the Taliban procure roadside bombs.
“The Taliban, with the help of Al Qaeda and Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), received explosives that were to be activated at long distance,” according to the report.
“The plan was that the Taliban used these devices against vehicles to assassinate ... even though it did not specify against what type of targets,” according to the report.
Training camps: CIFAS, Spain’s military intelligence body, also noted the “possible existence of training camps for the production of improvised explosives devices (IEDs) in Pakistani territory, where Taliban received training, support and information from the Pakistani secret service.”
The report says ISI planned to have the Taliban use the explosives “to assassinate high-ranking officials.”
The August 2005 document does not describe its sources and Cadena Ser did not say how it obtained the report.
Denial: Chief Pakistani army spokesman Maj. Gen. Athar Abbas said on Wednesday the Spanish report was “baseless, unfounded and part of a malicious, well-orchestrated propaganda campaign to malign the ISI.”
“ISI is the first line of defence of Pakistan and certain quarters are attempting to weaken our national intelligence system," Abbas said, without elaborating.
In Spain, the Defence Ministry and prime minister's office said they had no comment.
Western intelligence agencies have long suspected elements of Pakistan's spy service have aided the Taliban in neighbouring Afghanistan.
But this report appears to be the first leaked to the media that spells out such a connection in writing.
Fernando Reinares, a terrorism analyst at the Elcano Royal Institute in Madrid and former chief counter terrorism adviser at Spain's Interior Ministry, said the document appeared to be an internal report intended for high-level officials.
Spain has about 800 soldiers deployed in northwest Afghanistan.
Reinares said the report on the alleged ISI-Taliban link is in keeping with information from other Western spy agencies.
“The intelligence services have done nothing more then confirm a reality which has also been reported by other Western agencies,” he told The Associated Press.
Reinares said Spain has developed a strong military and police intelligence operation in Pakistan, particularly since the deadly terrorist attacks of March 11, 2004 on commuter trains in Madrid.
A 2006 report by a British Defence Ministry think-tank discussed an ISI-Taliban link and said the Pakistani spy agency was supporting terrorism in Afghanistan, but the opinions expressed in the document did not constitute official government policy.
Despite Wednesday's strong denial though, one Pakistani government spokeswoman acknowledged in August that the government needs to root out Taliban sympathisers from its intelligence service.
Some analysts say elements in the spy agency may want to retain the Taliban as a bulwark against long-time rival India, believing Pakistan's strategic interests are best served if Afghanistan remains a weak state. (Daily Times, 4 October 2008)
Read more...
* Claims agency funded training camps and weapons acquisition
* Pakistan army chief vehemently denies Madrid claim
Daily Times Monitor
MADRID: A confidential Spanish Defence Ministry report has alleged Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence agency helped arm the Taliban in 2005 for assassination plots against the Afghan government.
The confidential report, obtained by Cadena Ser radio and posted on the station's website on Wednesday, also alleges ISI helped the Taliban procure roadside bombs.
“The Taliban, with the help of Al Qaeda and Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), received explosives that were to be activated at long distance,” according to the report.
“The plan was that the Taliban used these devices against vehicles to assassinate ... even though it did not specify against what type of targets,” according to the report.
Training camps: CIFAS, Spain’s military intelligence body, also noted the “possible existence of training camps for the production of improvised explosives devices (IEDs) in Pakistani territory, where Taliban received training, support and information from the Pakistani secret service.”
The report says ISI planned to have the Taliban use the explosives “to assassinate high-ranking officials.”
The August 2005 document does not describe its sources and Cadena Ser did not say how it obtained the report.
Denial: Chief Pakistani army spokesman Maj. Gen. Athar Abbas said on Wednesday the Spanish report was “baseless, unfounded and part of a malicious, well-orchestrated propaganda campaign to malign the ISI.”
“ISI is the first line of defence of Pakistan and certain quarters are attempting to weaken our national intelligence system," Abbas said, without elaborating.
In Spain, the Defence Ministry and prime minister's office said they had no comment.
Western intelligence agencies have long suspected elements of Pakistan's spy service have aided the Taliban in neighbouring Afghanistan.
But this report appears to be the first leaked to the media that spells out such a connection in writing.
Fernando Reinares, a terrorism analyst at the Elcano Royal Institute in Madrid and former chief counter terrorism adviser at Spain's Interior Ministry, said the document appeared to be an internal report intended for high-level officials.
Spain has about 800 soldiers deployed in northwest Afghanistan.
Reinares said the report on the alleged ISI-Taliban link is in keeping with information from other Western spy agencies.
“The intelligence services have done nothing more then confirm a reality which has also been reported by other Western agencies,” he told The Associated Press.
Reinares said Spain has developed a strong military and police intelligence operation in Pakistan, particularly since the deadly terrorist attacks of March 11, 2004 on commuter trains in Madrid.
A 2006 report by a British Defence Ministry think-tank discussed an ISI-Taliban link and said the Pakistani spy agency was supporting terrorism in Afghanistan, but the opinions expressed in the document did not constitute official government policy.
Despite Wednesday's strong denial though, one Pakistani government spokeswoman acknowledged in August that the government needs to root out Taliban sympathisers from its intelligence service.
Some analysts say elements in the spy agency may want to retain the Taliban as a bulwark against long-time rival India, believing Pakistan's strategic interests are best served if Afghanistan remains a weak state. (Daily Times, 4 October 2008)
Read more...
In Asfandyar Wali’s defence
by Gulmina Bilal
Asfandyar Wali Khan has fled the country. Or so people will have you believe. In recent days, friends and family have bombarded me with questions and snide remarks about his whereabouts. Some have found this to be an excellent material for text-message jokes about Mr Wali. Others have expressed disappointment and anger. People ask as to how Asfandyar can “run away” in fear from a terrorist attack? How he could have accepted the security of the Presidency? How can he claim to be the leader of the Pakhtuns when he has left them in the lurch, they ask? Does he really expect to be accepted as the leader of the Pakhtuns now that he has left the province burning in the violent extremist fire? His critics ask as to how come he did not commiserate with the people injured in the suicide bomb blast over Eid? How can he leave the province when it is facing acute flour shortage? How can he leave the province when the internally displaced people of Bajaur Agency are in agony?
Another set of allegations against the Awami National Party and the person of Asfandyar Wali is that they have received money from the US to turn a blind eye towards US clandestine and overt activities in the province. Rumours abound of dollars being brought in suitcases into the party headquarters—i.e., the Bacha Khan Markaz in Peshawar. I must confess that initially when these rumours surfaced I countered them with jokes like “suitcases get heavy. We accept online transfers and even American Express.” However, in a country which thrives on rumour mongering, and that too political rumour mongering, I decided to give my point of view. This article is an attempt to do that, although it is not being written at either the party’s or the party’s behest. The views expressed are strictly my own.
Asfandyar Wali Khan has not fled the country. He is away from the country, no doubt, and is busy with personal and party commitments abroad. Undoubtedly, I would imagine that he must be concerned about his security. Anyone who has even been mugged, let alone been the target of a suicide attack, would be. How many of us have started avoided crowded places like high profile hotels in the wake of suicide bombings in the country? Why can’t political leaders be allowed to confess that they are concerned about their own security? Sure, they have more responsibility. That is why it is said that you should never congratulate anyone for winning an election. His/her life just got tougher because of the responsibilities that come with the election. Asfandyar Wali Khan is the leader of a party that has been voted into power by the majority of the inhabitants of Pukhtunkhwa. He therefore has more responsibility and it is precisely this responsibility that makes him the subject of suicide attacks, rumours, snide remarks from his critics and heightened expectations by his supporters.
No one is denying that the country as a whole, and the province of Pakhtunkhwa in particular, is confronted with the worst ever challenges. The list of these challenges is long and all equally important. For instance, when we talk about security, we have to talk about all kinds of security, including food security, energy security and, the most basic of all, life security. The people of Swat and Bajaur are particularly insecure, adding internal displacement to the problem. However, is it realistic to expect that Asfandyar Wali Khan visit each and every refugee of the Bajaur camp?
He is the leader of the party and not the party itself. To say that the “party has folded” just because one individual is out of the country is to dispense with the whole party politics structure and democracy. Other leaders and parliamentarians and members of the party are very much in the country, in their constituencies, in the government and are trying to address the problems confronting the province. They are facing the same threats of violence and bombs, yet they trudge along. Of course, some of them are taking security measures, such as not flying official flags on their cars, as the media has reported, but is that to be taken as a sign of cowardice? Is it cowardice to protect yourself, or is it intelligence? A three-year- old child will take risks because s/he does not have a concept of fear. Adults protect themselves because intelligence has taught them the concept of fear.
The people are well within their right to expect the ANP-PPP coalition government to provide them security. Perhaps, in some cases the government can do a lot more. But, then, if we look at the politics of the region, can we honestly say that this is a 100 day old problem which has not been resolved by the almost 240 days old government? Isn’t the challenge confronting us complex and multi-faceted with numerous reasons, interests, players and implications? Are the people of Bajaur internally displaced today only because of the alleged incompetence of the ANP-PPP coalition government? Is Swat a no- go area because the provincial government is allegedly complacent? Are the people concerned about bombs going off just because Asfandyar Wali is not in the country?
As for the other allegation of the “dollars in suitcases,” given so that the ANP will turn a blind eye, consider the following: Newspapers every day are publishing reports of how the ANP leaders are being threatened by the extremists. Their houses are being fired upon. Will you accept money to turn a blind eye against acts committed against yourself, your families and property? Also, if one were to be politically cynical one could perhaps also ask as to whether the Americans really need to spend money to get things done their way? Over the years, haven’t we as a country been losing parts of our sovereignty anyways?
Years ago, the late Wali Khan penned a book titled Facts are Facts. Perhaps we need to seek new facts and divorce them from baseless rumours.
The writer is an Islamabad-based freelance consultant and a member of the Awami National Party. Email: gbaanp@ gmail.com (Daily The News)
Read more...
Asfandyar Wali Khan has fled the country. Or so people will have you believe. In recent days, friends and family have bombarded me with questions and snide remarks about his whereabouts. Some have found this to be an excellent material for text-message jokes about Mr Wali. Others have expressed disappointment and anger. People ask as to how Asfandyar can “run away” in fear from a terrorist attack? How he could have accepted the security of the Presidency? How can he claim to be the leader of the Pakhtuns when he has left them in the lurch, they ask? Does he really expect to be accepted as the leader of the Pakhtuns now that he has left the province burning in the violent extremist fire? His critics ask as to how come he did not commiserate with the people injured in the suicide bomb blast over Eid? How can he leave the province when it is facing acute flour shortage? How can he leave the province when the internally displaced people of Bajaur Agency are in agony?
Another set of allegations against the Awami National Party and the person of Asfandyar Wali is that they have received money from the US to turn a blind eye towards US clandestine and overt activities in the province. Rumours abound of dollars being brought in suitcases into the party headquarters—i.e., the Bacha Khan Markaz in Peshawar. I must confess that initially when these rumours surfaced I countered them with jokes like “suitcases get heavy. We accept online transfers and even American Express.” However, in a country which thrives on rumour mongering, and that too political rumour mongering, I decided to give my point of view. This article is an attempt to do that, although it is not being written at either the party’s or the party’s behest. The views expressed are strictly my own.
Asfandyar Wali Khan has not fled the country. He is away from the country, no doubt, and is busy with personal and party commitments abroad. Undoubtedly, I would imagine that he must be concerned about his security. Anyone who has even been mugged, let alone been the target of a suicide attack, would be. How many of us have started avoided crowded places like high profile hotels in the wake of suicide bombings in the country? Why can’t political leaders be allowed to confess that they are concerned about their own security? Sure, they have more responsibility. That is why it is said that you should never congratulate anyone for winning an election. His/her life just got tougher because of the responsibilities that come with the election. Asfandyar Wali Khan is the leader of a party that has been voted into power by the majority of the inhabitants of Pukhtunkhwa. He therefore has more responsibility and it is precisely this responsibility that makes him the subject of suicide attacks, rumours, snide remarks from his critics and heightened expectations by his supporters.
No one is denying that the country as a whole, and the province of Pakhtunkhwa in particular, is confronted with the worst ever challenges. The list of these challenges is long and all equally important. For instance, when we talk about security, we have to talk about all kinds of security, including food security, energy security and, the most basic of all, life security. The people of Swat and Bajaur are particularly insecure, adding internal displacement to the problem. However, is it realistic to expect that Asfandyar Wali Khan visit each and every refugee of the Bajaur camp?
He is the leader of the party and not the party itself. To say that the “party has folded” just because one individual is out of the country is to dispense with the whole party politics structure and democracy. Other leaders and parliamentarians and members of the party are very much in the country, in their constituencies, in the government and are trying to address the problems confronting the province. They are facing the same threats of violence and bombs, yet they trudge along. Of course, some of them are taking security measures, such as not flying official flags on their cars, as the media has reported, but is that to be taken as a sign of cowardice? Is it cowardice to protect yourself, or is it intelligence? A three-year- old child will take risks because s/he does not have a concept of fear. Adults protect themselves because intelligence has taught them the concept of fear.
The people are well within their right to expect the ANP-PPP coalition government to provide them security. Perhaps, in some cases the government can do a lot more. But, then, if we look at the politics of the region, can we honestly say that this is a 100 day old problem which has not been resolved by the almost 240 days old government? Isn’t the challenge confronting us complex and multi-faceted with numerous reasons, interests, players and implications? Are the people of Bajaur internally displaced today only because of the alleged incompetence of the ANP-PPP coalition government? Is Swat a no- go area because the provincial government is allegedly complacent? Are the people concerned about bombs going off just because Asfandyar Wali is not in the country?
As for the other allegation of the “dollars in suitcases,” given so that the ANP will turn a blind eye, consider the following: Newspapers every day are publishing reports of how the ANP leaders are being threatened by the extremists. Their houses are being fired upon. Will you accept money to turn a blind eye against acts committed against yourself, your families and property? Also, if one were to be politically cynical one could perhaps also ask as to whether the Americans really need to spend money to get things done their way? Over the years, haven’t we as a country been losing parts of our sovereignty anyways?
Years ago, the late Wali Khan penned a book titled Facts are Facts. Perhaps we need to seek new facts and divorce them from baseless rumours.
The writer is an Islamabad-based freelance consultant and a member of the Awami National Party. Email: gbaanp@ gmail.com (Daily The News)
Read more...
Pakistan's Army is successfully achieving its aims in operation against terrorists in Bajaur...
Bajaur: an interim assessment
The Frontier Corps (FC) inspector-general in Bajaur, Major-General Tariq Khan, has told visiting journalists that the army has flushed out militants from some of their strongholds and regained control of most of the troubled spots, including the contested Lowi Sam. The reported death toll has been as follows: about 1,500 militants have been killed while at least 300 foreigners have been captured since August last. On the Pakistani side, 73 soldiers — 42 belonging to the Army and 31 to the FC — have lost their lives while 269 others have been injured.
Is the army going to leave Bajaur in the near future? No, according to Maj-Gen Khan, who thinks it may take “several months to extirpate the militants”. He said, “An immediate withdrawal of the army from the region was not possible as the operation might last another few months” and that “four additional wings of FC would be deployed to the area soon”. The determination of the army to stay put in the agency is in line with the “consensual” resolution of the parliament which recommended operation against militants and negotiation with those willing to abide by the Pakistan Constitution.
The army chief, General Ashfaq Pervaiz Kayani, has reiterated that the army will back the parliament’s decision to seek negotiation while protecting the integrity of Pakistan’s territory. The fact that 300 foreigners have been arrested from Bajaur alone reemphasises the role the army has to play to come to the help of the people living in the Tribal Areas. In Bajaur, increasingly the local people are forming posses of armed resistance to the Taliban-Al Qaeda combine and expect the national army to back them up as they take on the alien groups.
This is a positive interim assessment of the operation in Bajaur, markedly different in its aspects from what is going on in Swat, a region that had stayed for five years under the control of the clerical alliance, the MMA, ruling in the NWFP. The operation in Bajaur is more focused because success here is going to affect other tribal areas around it. The terrorists had gotten hold of strategic places like Lowi Sam and converted the houses there into bunkers. The return of Lowi Sam to government control means that the roads to Dir in Swat and Mohmand will now not be easily available to the Taliban to affect the outcome of the battle going on in Swat.
Bajaur is linked even more easily to the province of Kunar in Afghanistan. Lately, there was a trickle of Afghan fighters coming in to help the Taliban and Al Qaeda in their fight against the Pakistan army. The ISAF-NATO forces have been alerted to this trespass that will clearly influence the result of the operation. There is also news that some kind of reinforcement of the Bajaur-Kunar border is being carried out too. According to the army, 200,000 Bajauri people have had to flee from the agency because of the battle taking place on the ground and from the air.
Bajaur was not properly assessed for its strategic value after 2001 as a potential hiding place of the fleeing Taliban and Al Qaeda elements. Indeed, Islamabad was completely unmindful of the rapid internal change taking place here. Therefore by 2005, there were some “32,000 Afghans” living in camps in Bajaur, cannon-fodder for such religious movements as Tehreek-e-Nafaz-e-Shariat-e-Mohammadi (TNSM) and Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) with top Al Qaeda leaders surrounded by foreign warriors as they surveyed the agency as their future caliphate from where to challenge the world.
There are many factors that can bring pressure to bear on the operation. Foremost is the task of looking after the displaced Bajauri population at present forced to live in the NWFP. These camps are not very different from the ones in which the displaced Afghans had to live for decades. Their camps may breed the same kind of violence seen in areas where these Afghan refugees have concentrated. The authorities must therefore quickly start reconstruction and psychological rehabilitation of the people in the areas now pacified by the military operation. If possible, the injection of funds into Bajaur must go in parallel to the military operations.
Bajaur has a large population, given its smaller area compared to other tribal agencies. Its economy is rudimentary, as in other agencies, and is dependent on what its expatriates in Karachi and abroad send home. There is a dire need for the generation of a local economy to remove reliance on smuggling. This is the aspect of the problem that has not been looked at before. In some ways the local tribes are dependent for their incomes today on the “foreigners” brought in by Al Qaeda. The Al Qaeda economy must be replaced by Bajaur’s own, brought in by the state agencies from outside with the help of the international community. (Daily Times)
Read more...
The Frontier Corps (FC) inspector-general in Bajaur, Major-General Tariq Khan, has told visiting journalists that the army has flushed out militants from some of their strongholds and regained control of most of the troubled spots, including the contested Lowi Sam. The reported death toll has been as follows: about 1,500 militants have been killed while at least 300 foreigners have been captured since August last. On the Pakistani side, 73 soldiers — 42 belonging to the Army and 31 to the FC — have lost their lives while 269 others have been injured.
Is the army going to leave Bajaur in the near future? No, according to Maj-Gen Khan, who thinks it may take “several months to extirpate the militants”. He said, “An immediate withdrawal of the army from the region was not possible as the operation might last another few months” and that “four additional wings of FC would be deployed to the area soon”. The determination of the army to stay put in the agency is in line with the “consensual” resolution of the parliament which recommended operation against militants and negotiation with those willing to abide by the Pakistan Constitution.
The army chief, General Ashfaq Pervaiz Kayani, has reiterated that the army will back the parliament’s decision to seek negotiation while protecting the integrity of Pakistan’s territory. The fact that 300 foreigners have been arrested from Bajaur alone reemphasises the role the army has to play to come to the help of the people living in the Tribal Areas. In Bajaur, increasingly the local people are forming posses of armed resistance to the Taliban-Al Qaeda combine and expect the national army to back them up as they take on the alien groups.
This is a positive interim assessment of the operation in Bajaur, markedly different in its aspects from what is going on in Swat, a region that had stayed for five years under the control of the clerical alliance, the MMA, ruling in the NWFP. The operation in Bajaur is more focused because success here is going to affect other tribal areas around it. The terrorists had gotten hold of strategic places like Lowi Sam and converted the houses there into bunkers. The return of Lowi Sam to government control means that the roads to Dir in Swat and Mohmand will now not be easily available to the Taliban to affect the outcome of the battle going on in Swat.
Bajaur is linked even more easily to the province of Kunar in Afghanistan. Lately, there was a trickle of Afghan fighters coming in to help the Taliban and Al Qaeda in their fight against the Pakistan army. The ISAF-NATO forces have been alerted to this trespass that will clearly influence the result of the operation. There is also news that some kind of reinforcement of the Bajaur-Kunar border is being carried out too. According to the army, 200,000 Bajauri people have had to flee from the agency because of the battle taking place on the ground and from the air.
Bajaur was not properly assessed for its strategic value after 2001 as a potential hiding place of the fleeing Taliban and Al Qaeda elements. Indeed, Islamabad was completely unmindful of the rapid internal change taking place here. Therefore by 2005, there were some “32,000 Afghans” living in camps in Bajaur, cannon-fodder for such religious movements as Tehreek-e-Nafaz-e-Shariat-e-Mohammadi (TNSM) and Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) with top Al Qaeda leaders surrounded by foreign warriors as they surveyed the agency as their future caliphate from where to challenge the world.
There are many factors that can bring pressure to bear on the operation. Foremost is the task of looking after the displaced Bajauri population at present forced to live in the NWFP. These camps are not very different from the ones in which the displaced Afghans had to live for decades. Their camps may breed the same kind of violence seen in areas where these Afghan refugees have concentrated. The authorities must therefore quickly start reconstruction and psychological rehabilitation of the people in the areas now pacified by the military operation. If possible, the injection of funds into Bajaur must go in parallel to the military operations.
Bajaur has a large population, given its smaller area compared to other tribal agencies. Its economy is rudimentary, as in other agencies, and is dependent on what its expatriates in Karachi and abroad send home. There is a dire need for the generation of a local economy to remove reliance on smuggling. This is the aspect of the problem that has not been looked at before. In some ways the local tribes are dependent for their incomes today on the “foreigners” brought in by Al Qaeda. The Al Qaeda economy must be replaced by Bajaur’s own, brought in by the state agencies from outside with the help of the international community. (Daily Times)
Read more...
Ordinary people in Swat battle Taliban
Swat lashkar battles Taliban
* Tribesmen kill 20 Taliban after botched attempt to abduct an elder
* Taliban behead one tribesman, kill 6 others
* 62 tribesmen ‘abducted’
* 3 civilians killed as Taliban target barbershop
* 11 Taliban killed in Bajaur Agency
MINGORA: Tribesmen killed 20 Taliban in clashes that followed a botched attempt to abduct an elder in Swat on Sunday. Taliban meanwhile beheaded a tribesman and abducted dozens of others.
Police said a group of pro-Mullah Fazlullah Taliban were trying to hustle Pir Samiullah – chief of a lashkar (tribal militia fighting Taliban) – from his home in the Mandaldag area of Matta tehsil to a getaway car when dozens of local tribesmen confronted them and snatched him back.
Dilawar Bangash, the Swat police chief, said hundreds of Taliban later returned, seized three members of the militia and beheaded one of them on a road before a large crowd.
“This is a lesson for anyone who tries to oppose us,” they told the people according to accounts gathered later by police.
Meanwhile, the lashkar was gathering men from the surrounding area who engaged the Taliban in an hours-long gunbattle. Bangash said 20 Taliban, six militiamen and four bystanders were killed in the shooting and another police official said several tribesmen were reported missing.
Among the killed Taliban were four commanders including Shamsher, a bomb making expert, and two close aides of Fazlullah. Muslim Khan, a Taliban spokesman contacted by telephone, confirmed a clash but said only three Taliban died. He claimed that 12 tribesmen were killed and another 62 abducted.
Barbershop: Three civilians were killed as Taliban targeted a barbershop in Sambat area of Swat. In Totani Bandai, Taliban attacked a military checkpost injuring a soldier. Fifty suspected Taliban were arrested in Kooza Bandai.
Bajaur: In the nearby Bajaur Agency, Taliban attacked a security post on the outskirts of agency headquarters Khar. Troops retaliated, killing six Taliban. Five more fighters were killed when troops attacked a suspected Taliban base in Charmang district, another security official said. staff report/agencies (Daily Times)
Read more...
* Tribesmen kill 20 Taliban after botched attempt to abduct an elder
* Taliban behead one tribesman, kill 6 others
* 62 tribesmen ‘abducted’
* 3 civilians killed as Taliban target barbershop
* 11 Taliban killed in Bajaur Agency
MINGORA: Tribesmen killed 20 Taliban in clashes that followed a botched attempt to abduct an elder in Swat on Sunday. Taliban meanwhile beheaded a tribesman and abducted dozens of others.
Police said a group of pro-Mullah Fazlullah Taliban were trying to hustle Pir Samiullah – chief of a lashkar (tribal militia fighting Taliban) – from his home in the Mandaldag area of Matta tehsil to a getaway car when dozens of local tribesmen confronted them and snatched him back.
Dilawar Bangash, the Swat police chief, said hundreds of Taliban later returned, seized three members of the militia and beheaded one of them on a road before a large crowd.
“This is a lesson for anyone who tries to oppose us,” they told the people according to accounts gathered later by police.
Meanwhile, the lashkar was gathering men from the surrounding area who engaged the Taliban in an hours-long gunbattle. Bangash said 20 Taliban, six militiamen and four bystanders were killed in the shooting and another police official said several tribesmen were reported missing.
Among the killed Taliban were four commanders including Shamsher, a bomb making expert, and two close aides of Fazlullah. Muslim Khan, a Taliban spokesman contacted by telephone, confirmed a clash but said only three Taliban died. He claimed that 12 tribesmen were killed and another 62 abducted.
Barbershop: Three civilians were killed as Taliban targeted a barbershop in Sambat area of Swat. In Totani Bandai, Taliban attacked a military checkpost injuring a soldier. Fifty suspected Taliban were arrested in Kooza Bandai.
Bajaur: In the nearby Bajaur Agency, Taliban attacked a security post on the outskirts of agency headquarters Khar. Troops retaliated, killing six Taliban. Five more fighters were killed when troops attacked a suspected Taliban base in Charmang district, another security official said. staff report/agencies (Daily Times)
Read more...
![[col5.gif]](http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_Vbc4oO2rGiw/SQV0ssNBI0I/AAAAAAAAAbc/p8tBTr1OM3Q/s1600/col5.gif)
![[col5a.gif]](http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_Vbc4oO2rGiw/SQV0oMeVwPI/AAAAAAAAAbU/vfi52T3kK48/s1600-h/col5a.gif)
Sunday, 26 October 2008
Iqbal's and Jinnah's vision of Pakistan - Dr Javid Iqbal
Shame on Dr. Israr Ahmed and Dr. Safdar Mehmood for distorting the vision of Jinnah and Iqbal.
![[op1a.gif]](http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_Vbc4oO2rGiw/SQTh5rzkyJI/AAAAAAAAAbE/3SOjLNEOsPE/s1600/op1a.gif)
![[op1b.gif]](http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_Vbc4oO2rGiw/SQTh0Cr5EFI/AAAAAAAAAa8/WY2Av36MRb0/s1600/op1b.gif)
Read more...
Read more...
Aftab Iqbal's slap on the face of anti-PPP journalists. Good News Pakistan. Well done Zardari. Hamid Mir Reports from China.
Aftab Iqbal's slap on the face of pro-Taliban journalists (e.g. Ansar Abbasi and Kashif Abbasi). Good News Pakistan. Well done, Zardari.
![[colum2a.gif]](http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_Vbc4oO2rGiw/SQTf8es35MI/AAAAAAAAAa0/Wiru4w1QI1Y/s1600/colum2a.gif)
Good news from China, A success of Zardari's diplomacy - By Hamid Mir
![[col2.gif]](http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_Vbc4oO2rGiw/SQVzPgcpYMI/AAAAAAAAAbM/oqNUwwczgP0/s1600/col2.gif)
Read more...
Good news from China, A success of Zardari's diplomacy - By Hamid Mir
![[col2.gif]](http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_Vbc4oO2rGiw/SQVzPgcpYMI/AAAAAAAAAbM/oqNUwwczgP0/s1600-h/col2.gif)
Read more...
The missing persons in Pakistan and the supporters of Taliban in Pakistani media and politics...
SOME COMMENTS
Is there no possibility that the majority of missing might have joined the cause of the taliban and fighting for them and are not allowed to returm. Some of them might have been killed. Some could have been handed over to the American.
Why should we not look into all the possibilities. Musharaf is gone finished. If people think we should hang him and his family as suggested by Ms Senior Citizen. I suppose we should hang the other half a million too. Pakistan needs a very serious and violent revolution. At least 100,000 to be slaughtered from all walks of life. Only that could shake up the nation.
Long Live Pakistan
Stop the satanic invador.
Protect Pakistan fron Talibani Terrorist.
Support your Gallant Army of Pakistan.
m_khaleeq@btinternet.com
.........
#
MalangBaba Says:
October 26th, 2008 at 9:10 pm
comment-top
A son of Pakistan named Aimal Kansi was arrested by FBI and US military commandos from a hotel in DG Khan on June 17, 1997. This was the first incident and probably last incident where a Pakistani citizen was abducted and escorted out of the country by American soldiers. The operation to abduct Mr. Kansi was given by Bill Clinton and approved by Pakistan government.
The ruler of Pakistan was no other than Mr. Nawaz Sharif who as a Prime Minister granted approval to American operation. Mr. Kansi was arrested in broad day light, air lifted to a sectret location and then transported to USA on a special plane. All the operation was in government’s full knowledge and NS government facilitated the operation by providing intelligence and logistic support to USA commandos.
http://www.fas.org/irp/cia/news/pr61797.html
Mr. Kansi was later tried and executed in USA.
http://islamtoday.20m.com/custom.html
Abductions, illegal confinements, and handing over people to another country are not only illegal but also immoral acts.
Mr. Sharif should accept responsibility for approving Mr. Kansi’s illegal abduction and his ultimate death before sheding crocodile tears on Jehadi abductions.
Zia also abducted, tortured and killed thousands in his tenure. Mr. Sharif didn’t raise his voice then. I appreciate his support for abductees but he should also show some remorse for his similar past actions.
Jamhooriat Says:
October 26th, 2008 at 11:07 pm
comment-top
@Malang Baba
As being a die hard jiyala, while trying to score points against NS, u forgot that ur beloved leader MBBS (MOhtarma Benazir Bhutto Shaheed) had alleaged Aimal Kansi of her assissination plot that could not be successful. First u clarfy that to others that what is PPP stance for Aimal Kansi?? You support his plan to kill Benazir?? and even if that was not true, what was objective of Benazir to present Aimal Kansi as her enemy?? to get US sympathy and playing a double game to get power at any cost??
Also dont forget that any way Aimal Kansi had been a CIA employee that he never denied.
MalangBaba Says:
@Jamhooriat,
U r trying to twist the point I wanted to make. My point was that Mush was not the pioneer of abductions and allowing American Operations on our soil. Zia and NS did the same nd other right wingers like Jamaat Islami supported such crimes.
There is no doubt that Kansi was a fugitive and criminal. I am not pleading his innocence. I am objecting to the way he was abducted and shifted to USA. That was a clear violation of the law of the land. Can U deny that this shameful episode of our history happened under NS regime?
I am not sure if the story about Kansi’s plots against BB are correct. Even if that is correct that does not mean that NS government’s acts of allowing American agression on our soil were justified.
I agree Kansi was a CIA employee. So were Jihadies including Osama and Talabn and many of the abductees under Mush regime.
I know U and other Ziaists have no answer except hurling personal insults and Galam Galoch but still some one should speak to counter propaganda.
I am totally in support of an independent inquiry of ‘missing people issue’. Most of the abductions have happened in Punjab and no one stops NS party to start investigations. They have no guts to do that, I bet.
This whole drama is staged just for media to keep support of urban right wingers behind him. He is completely supporting PPP government. The unanimous resolution by parliament is a prime example of hypocricy of right winger parties who support Talban in public but support military and US in parliament.
busybee Says:
Unfortunately all I can say is that these are all gimmik…. a trailor to be shown to the public that we care…. How many questions, objections, resignations have been raised so far in response to Bajaur unrest? No body aised a finger. When it came to their own families their own persons they yell. Look at Asfendyar Wali, ALtaf, Benazir’s children. They are all born with the silver spoon how can they feel the agony of the poor? In Islamabad the posters are hanging in favour of Kashmiris that who will console this mother??? on Indian brutality, but did they thought about what is happening at home??? it is so sad affair. Has anyone raised a voice about how Islamabad looks like Bagdad? How the concrete, traffic jams armed soldiers, effect the nerves of a common person? No as long as their own skin is out of danger. Musharraf is still thinking to get rid of Chaudries and get hold of Q league and launch himself back in the politics so he can have his share in what ever we can manage to get from IMF. THESE PEOPLE ARE SICK PEOPLE
.......
MalangBaba Says:
“Can you please let us know how many people were handed ober to US by Nawaz Sharif. ”
I know for sure one name i.e. Aimal Kansi. As I wrote earlier NS allowed US commandos to operate in Pakistan, conduct operation in DG Khan to arrest Kansi, provided intelligence to US, gave logistic support for air lifting Kansi from DG Khan to a secret location and lastly smuggling him out of the country on special plane. This was a FBA and CIA combined operation. NS allowed this operation on personal request from Clinton. NS knew that Kansi will be executed.
By all means I consider illegal detentions as brutal and direct violation of both Pakistan and international laws. There can be no justification of kidnapping of people by state agencies. ISI or Army are not allowed to arrest ppl. They are not police. ISI started arresting people in the days of Zia. They didn’t spare even University professors. I remember ISI kidnapped three Quaid-e-Azam University professors (Dr. Jamil Omar, Tariq Ahsan and Mohammed Salim) from their homes and kept them in secret jail. They were disappeared for several months and severely tortured. Then an international movement was started by international HR orgs that forced Zia to bring them for trial in military court.
http://prism.cs.umd.edu/papers/Min07:humanrights/index/hr-1982.pdf
I knew Jamil Omar during my professional association with QA University Islamabad. It was a shock of life time to saw his disappearence and later lobg jail term for no crime other than freedom of speech.
ISI needs to be kept under civilian control. Present government is trying to control and tame this beast. Unfortunately ISI has a lot of friends in religious parties and press. When ISI was put under civilian control, there was a huge criticism. Please support civilian democratic government so that it can control institutions like ISI.
I think NS should work with government to start parliamentry investigation of missing ppl case. That is the only way to find a real truth.
......
nota Says:
@MalangaBaba
@Nayyar Sohail
The case of Aimal Kansi is a FACT that can’t be denied. It did happen when Nawaz Sharif was in power so there is no question it was done with his approval, though it was under immese pressure I am sure BUT IT WAS STILL NOT JUSTIFIED!!!
(Side note: Being from DG Khan myself, one story I have heard says Awais Leghari s/o Farooq Leghari was involved in entrapping Kansi as he was friends wih him and it is Awais who had invited Kansi over when he was picked up. Besides the $2 million blood money, the IT ministry was a payoff of that “cooperation” as well. Another version states it was Awais’ uncle Jaffer who was involved. By the way, it is not just a local story. And it is this case that gave us the famous “I am sure the people over there will turn in their mothers for $20,000, let alone $2 million” quote)
http://www.onlinenews.com.pk/details.php?id=37676
http://www.indianexpress.com/res/web/pIe/ie/daily/19970806/21850393.html
To be fair, here is another story that puts the blame squarely on Nawaz Sharif and Ch. Nisar:
http://www.karachipage.com/news/Jan_00/010100.html
“…It was this underhand Sharif deal with the Clinton administration that caused President Farooq Leghari-Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif political honeymoon to an end only four months after their official working relationship began with the ascension of the latter to power in February 1997, a source close to Sharif disclosed.
The illegal handover of Kansi miffed Leghari, triggering the serious differences between him and Nawaz, which culminated in the president’s resignation, he added. According to sources, the root cause of the heart burning between Leghari and Nawaz was over the modus operandi of Kansi’s handover to the Americans. Officials told The News that it all began when the Americans traced Aimal Kansi in Dera Ghazi Khan and requested the relevant Pakistani officials to help arrest and extradite him.
After Nawaz’s formal approval, a secret operation conducted by a joint team of the US Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and a premier intelligence agency of Pakistan arrested Kansi in a lightening swoop in a DG Khan hotel, the official said. Until this time, all the laws of the land were followed and Kansi was kept in the safe custody of Pakistani intelligence authorities despite US pressure to hand him over immediately, they added.
After the intelligence authorities insisted on following the standard procedure before extraditing Aimal Kansi, the then US ambassador to Pakistan Thomas Simon Jr called up Secretary of State Madeleine Albright to apprise her of his problem, a top officials told The News on condition of anonymity.
After getting directions from Albright, Simon contacted Chaudhry Nisar Ali, who was also the senior minister and was acting as self-appointed acting prime minister in the absence of Nawaz Sharif, who was on a tour to Turkey at the time, he recalled. The official said Nisar immediately contacted the head of the premier intelligence agency and ordered him to hand over Kansi to the FBI sleuths without bothering about legal formalities….”
........
Kansi himself stated:
…”I was never produced before a court of law in Pakistan. I was kept in custody in a cell in the United States Embassy for three days before being flown to the US,” he claimed.
“I am very disappointed with the Pakistani government which should have intervened in my case, but they are never able to take a stand against the US.”
He said he chose to target CIA employees as “the agency plays a major role in shaping US policy … and because I could target them conveniently”.
He denied charges that he or his father had worked for the CIA or that he had killed the CIA operatives to avenge his father’s death.
…
He also rejected claims that Farooq Ahmad Khan Leghari, then President of Pakistan, or his relatives played a role in his arrest.
“There is absolutely no truth in the allegations that Farooq Leghari or his tribe played a role in my arrest. They are innocent.”
(Was he telling the truth in this statement or just covering up and letting them off the hook?)
http://www.bbc.co.uk/pressoffice/pressreleases/stories/2002/11_november/14/kansi_execution.shtml
Read more...
Is there no possibility that the majority of missing might have joined the cause of the taliban and fighting for them and are not allowed to returm. Some of them might have been killed. Some could have been handed over to the American.
Why should we not look into all the possibilities. Musharaf is gone finished. If people think we should hang him and his family as suggested by Ms Senior Citizen. I suppose we should hang the other half a million too. Pakistan needs a very serious and violent revolution. At least 100,000 to be slaughtered from all walks of life. Only that could shake up the nation.
Long Live Pakistan
Stop the satanic invador.
Protect Pakistan fron Talibani Terrorist.
Support your Gallant Army of Pakistan.
m_khaleeq@btinternet.com
.........
#
MalangBaba Says:
October 26th, 2008 at 9:10 pm
comment-top
A son of Pakistan named Aimal Kansi was arrested by FBI and US military commandos from a hotel in DG Khan on June 17, 1997. This was the first incident and probably last incident where a Pakistani citizen was abducted and escorted out of the country by American soldiers. The operation to abduct Mr. Kansi was given by Bill Clinton and approved by Pakistan government.
The ruler of Pakistan was no other than Mr. Nawaz Sharif who as a Prime Minister granted approval to American operation. Mr. Kansi was arrested in broad day light, air lifted to a sectret location and then transported to USA on a special plane. All the operation was in government’s full knowledge and NS government facilitated the operation by providing intelligence and logistic support to USA commandos.
http://www.fas.org/irp/cia/news/pr61797.html
Mr. Kansi was later tried and executed in USA.
http://islamtoday.20m.com/custom.html
Abductions, illegal confinements, and handing over people to another country are not only illegal but also immoral acts.
Mr. Sharif should accept responsibility for approving Mr. Kansi’s illegal abduction and his ultimate death before sheding crocodile tears on Jehadi abductions.
Zia also abducted, tortured and killed thousands in his tenure. Mr. Sharif didn’t raise his voice then. I appreciate his support for abductees but he should also show some remorse for his similar past actions.
Jamhooriat Says:
October 26th, 2008 at 11:07 pm
comment-top
@Malang Baba
As being a die hard jiyala, while trying to score points against NS, u forgot that ur beloved leader MBBS (MOhtarma Benazir Bhutto Shaheed) had alleaged Aimal Kansi of her assissination plot that could not be successful. First u clarfy that to others that what is PPP stance for Aimal Kansi?? You support his plan to kill Benazir?? and even if that was not true, what was objective of Benazir to present Aimal Kansi as her enemy?? to get US sympathy and playing a double game to get power at any cost??
Also dont forget that any way Aimal Kansi had been a CIA employee that he never denied.
MalangBaba Says:
@Jamhooriat,
U r trying to twist the point I wanted to make. My point was that Mush was not the pioneer of abductions and allowing American Operations on our soil. Zia and NS did the same nd other right wingers like Jamaat Islami supported such crimes.
There is no doubt that Kansi was a fugitive and criminal. I am not pleading his innocence. I am objecting to the way he was abducted and shifted to USA. That was a clear violation of the law of the land. Can U deny that this shameful episode of our history happened under NS regime?
I am not sure if the story about Kansi’s plots against BB are correct. Even if that is correct that does not mean that NS government’s acts of allowing American agression on our soil were justified.
I agree Kansi was a CIA employee. So were Jihadies including Osama and Talabn and many of the abductees under Mush regime.
I know U and other Ziaists have no answer except hurling personal insults and Galam Galoch but still some one should speak to counter propaganda.
I am totally in support of an independent inquiry of ‘missing people issue’. Most of the abductions have happened in Punjab and no one stops NS party to start investigations. They have no guts to do that, I bet.
This whole drama is staged just for media to keep support of urban right wingers behind him. He is completely supporting PPP government. The unanimous resolution by parliament is a prime example of hypocricy of right winger parties who support Talban in public but support military and US in parliament.
busybee Says:
Unfortunately all I can say is that these are all gimmik…. a trailor to be shown to the public that we care…. How many questions, objections, resignations have been raised so far in response to Bajaur unrest? No body aised a finger. When it came to their own families their own persons they yell. Look at Asfendyar Wali, ALtaf, Benazir’s children. They are all born with the silver spoon how can they feel the agony of the poor? In Islamabad the posters are hanging in favour of Kashmiris that who will console this mother??? on Indian brutality, but did they thought about what is happening at home??? it is so sad affair. Has anyone raised a voice about how Islamabad looks like Bagdad? How the concrete, traffic jams armed soldiers, effect the nerves of a common person? No as long as their own skin is out of danger. Musharraf is still thinking to get rid of Chaudries and get hold of Q league and launch himself back in the politics so he can have his share in what ever we can manage to get from IMF. THESE PEOPLE ARE SICK PEOPLE
.......
MalangBaba Says:
“Can you please let us know how many people were handed ober to US by Nawaz Sharif. ”
I know for sure one name i.e. Aimal Kansi. As I wrote earlier NS allowed US commandos to operate in Pakistan, conduct operation in DG Khan to arrest Kansi, provided intelligence to US, gave logistic support for air lifting Kansi from DG Khan to a secret location and lastly smuggling him out of the country on special plane. This was a FBA and CIA combined operation. NS allowed this operation on personal request from Clinton. NS knew that Kansi will be executed.
By all means I consider illegal detentions as brutal and direct violation of both Pakistan and international laws. There can be no justification of kidnapping of people by state agencies. ISI or Army are not allowed to arrest ppl. They are not police. ISI started arresting people in the days of Zia. They didn’t spare even University professors. I remember ISI kidnapped three Quaid-e-Azam University professors (Dr. Jamil Omar, Tariq Ahsan and Mohammed Salim) from their homes and kept them in secret jail. They were disappeared for several months and severely tortured. Then an international movement was started by international HR orgs that forced Zia to bring them for trial in military court.
http://prism.cs.umd.edu/papers/Min07:humanrights/index/hr-1982.pdf
I knew Jamil Omar during my professional association with QA University Islamabad. It was a shock of life time to saw his disappearence and later lobg jail term for no crime other than freedom of speech.
ISI needs to be kept under civilian control. Present government is trying to control and tame this beast. Unfortunately ISI has a lot of friends in religious parties and press. When ISI was put under civilian control, there was a huge criticism. Please support civilian democratic government so that it can control institutions like ISI.
I think NS should work with government to start parliamentry investigation of missing ppl case. That is the only way to find a real truth.
......
nota Says:
@MalangaBaba
@Nayyar Sohail
The case of Aimal Kansi is a FACT that can’t be denied. It did happen when Nawaz Sharif was in power so there is no question it was done with his approval, though it was under immese pressure I am sure BUT IT WAS STILL NOT JUSTIFIED!!!
(Side note: Being from DG Khan myself, one story I have heard says Awais Leghari s/o Farooq Leghari was involved in entrapping Kansi as he was friends wih him and it is Awais who had invited Kansi over when he was picked up. Besides the $2 million blood money, the IT ministry was a payoff of that “cooperation” as well. Another version states it was Awais’ uncle Jaffer who was involved. By the way, it is not just a local story. And it is this case that gave us the famous “I am sure the people over there will turn in their mothers for $20,000, let alone $2 million” quote)
http://www.onlinenews.com.pk/details.php?id=37676
http://www.indianexpress.com/res/web/pIe/ie/daily/19970806/21850393.html
To be fair, here is another story that puts the blame squarely on Nawaz Sharif and Ch. Nisar:
http://www.karachipage.com/news/Jan_00/010100.html
“…It was this underhand Sharif deal with the Clinton administration that caused President Farooq Leghari-Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif political honeymoon to an end only four months after their official working relationship began with the ascension of the latter to power in February 1997, a source close to Sharif disclosed.
The illegal handover of Kansi miffed Leghari, triggering the serious differences between him and Nawaz, which culminated in the president’s resignation, he added. According to sources, the root cause of the heart burning between Leghari and Nawaz was over the modus operandi of Kansi’s handover to the Americans. Officials told The News that it all began when the Americans traced Aimal Kansi in Dera Ghazi Khan and requested the relevant Pakistani officials to help arrest and extradite him.
After Nawaz’s formal approval, a secret operation conducted by a joint team of the US Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and a premier intelligence agency of Pakistan arrested Kansi in a lightening swoop in a DG Khan hotel, the official said. Until this time, all the laws of the land were followed and Kansi was kept in the safe custody of Pakistani intelligence authorities despite US pressure to hand him over immediately, they added.
After the intelligence authorities insisted on following the standard procedure before extraditing Aimal Kansi, the then US ambassador to Pakistan Thomas Simon Jr called up Secretary of State Madeleine Albright to apprise her of his problem, a top officials told The News on condition of anonymity.
After getting directions from Albright, Simon contacted Chaudhry Nisar Ali, who was also the senior minister and was acting as self-appointed acting prime minister in the absence of Nawaz Sharif, who was on a tour to Turkey at the time, he recalled. The official said Nisar immediately contacted the head of the premier intelligence agency and ordered him to hand over Kansi to the FBI sleuths without bothering about legal formalities….”
........
Kansi himself stated:
…”I was never produced before a court of law in Pakistan. I was kept in custody in a cell in the United States Embassy for three days before being flown to the US,” he claimed.
“I am very disappointed with the Pakistani government which should have intervened in my case, but they are never able to take a stand against the US.”
He said he chose to target CIA employees as “the agency plays a major role in shaping US policy … and because I could target them conveniently”.
He denied charges that he or his father had worked for the CIA or that he had killed the CIA operatives to avenge his father’s death.
…
He also rejected claims that Farooq Ahmad Khan Leghari, then President of Pakistan, or his relatives played a role in his arrest.
“There is absolutely no truth in the allegations that Farooq Leghari or his tribe played a role in my arrest. They are innocent.”
(Was he telling the truth in this statement or just covering up and letting them off the hook?)
http://www.bbc.co.uk/pressoffice/pressreleases/stories/2002/11_november/14/kansi_execution.shtml
Read more...
Zardari & Kayani are real benefactors of Pakistan: Their strategy on war on terror is working much better than the double-cross strategy of Mush...
A two-pronged approach
EVIDENTLY the ‘neutral’ tribesmen’s resolve to take up arms against the Taliban is paying dividends. If this were not the case, the Taliban supporters among the politicians would not have spoken so vehemently against what to them is a spontaneous and indigenous movement that poses a serious threat to the militants. Latest reports say the Mamoond tribesmen are ‘desperately trying’ to seek peace with the security forces. The Mamoond sub-district in Bajaur Agency is a major Taliban stronghold and some of the leading militant chiefs, including Taliban deputy chief Maulvi Faqir Mohammad, belong to this area. The Mamoonds’ decision to approach the authorities for peace talks comes in the wake of the pounding the militants’ strongholds received from the security forces. No wonder, as a report from Peshawar informs us, even the Taliban have agreed to let the Mamoond elders talk to the government. The authorities have made it abundantly clear that they will talk to the militants only after they lay down arms.
There are several reasons why the situation appears a little less bleak these days. The Taliban have overreached themselves. They overestimated their strength and forgot that no government worth its salt could indefinitely ignore a rebellion of such proportions. They even set up a parallel government and ran their own judicial system. Worse for them, in their zeal to prove their power of mischief, they failed to distinguish between military and civilian targets and carried out bomb blasts which killed more civilians than soldiers. Some of their crimes that sent a wave of repugnance against these self-proclaimed champions of Islam included the bombing of Eid congregations, peace jirgas, at least one funeral procession and school buses. The tribesmen have reacted with justified anger because the fighting has turned their territory into a war zone, dislocating their means of livelihood and making thousands of people homeless.
With the army now relieved of its political baggage, one can expect undivided attention to the pursuit of the war against militancy. The security operations must continue for the time being but the government should never give up dialogue as an option and talk from a position of strength to those who lay down arms. At the same time, the tribal belt’s economic development must be carried out with speed to undo the effects of the war and plan for the future so as to give the tribesmen a stake in peace. (Dawn)
Read more...
EVIDENTLY the ‘neutral’ tribesmen’s resolve to take up arms against the Taliban is paying dividends. If this were not the case, the Taliban supporters among the politicians would not have spoken so vehemently against what to them is a spontaneous and indigenous movement that poses a serious threat to the militants. Latest reports say the Mamoond tribesmen are ‘desperately trying’ to seek peace with the security forces. The Mamoond sub-district in Bajaur Agency is a major Taliban stronghold and some of the leading militant chiefs, including Taliban deputy chief Maulvi Faqir Mohammad, belong to this area. The Mamoonds’ decision to approach the authorities for peace talks comes in the wake of the pounding the militants’ strongholds received from the security forces. No wonder, as a report from Peshawar informs us, even the Taliban have agreed to let the Mamoond elders talk to the government. The authorities have made it abundantly clear that they will talk to the militants only after they lay down arms.
There are several reasons why the situation appears a little less bleak these days. The Taliban have overreached themselves. They overestimated their strength and forgot that no government worth its salt could indefinitely ignore a rebellion of such proportions. They even set up a parallel government and ran their own judicial system. Worse for them, in their zeal to prove their power of mischief, they failed to distinguish between military and civilian targets and carried out bomb blasts which killed more civilians than soldiers. Some of their crimes that sent a wave of repugnance against these self-proclaimed champions of Islam included the bombing of Eid congregations, peace jirgas, at least one funeral procession and school buses. The tribesmen have reacted with justified anger because the fighting has turned their territory into a war zone, dislocating their means of livelihood and making thousands of people homeless.
With the army now relieved of its political baggage, one can expect undivided attention to the pursuit of the war against militancy. The security operations must continue for the time being but the government should never give up dialogue as an option and talk from a position of strength to those who lay down arms. At the same time, the tribal belt’s economic development must be carried out with speed to undo the effects of the war and plan for the future so as to give the tribesmen a stake in peace. (Dawn)
Read more...
The PMLN, the PMLQ, the Jama’at-e Islami, the JUIF, the Tehreek-e Insaf and a host of Islamist groups take a naïve view of violence in the tribal area
Blind to the threat —Dr Hasan-Askari Rizvi
If the Taliban agenda was nothing more than the expulsion of US and NATO troops from Afghanistan their efforts to expand their domain to some of the settled districts of the NWFP makes no sense. And what is the justification of the sectarian violence in Kurram Agency?
The government and major opposition parties are euphoric over the unanimous passage of the resolution on militancy in the tribal areas during the joint session of parliament. They think that they have evolved a credible approach to dealing with the insurgency and its violent fallout in mainland Pakistan.
The government is pleased with the resolution because it can easily project this development as an indication of growing political harmony among Pakistan’s diverse political actors. Opposition parties had initially used the joint session to build pressure on the government. The PMLN leadership, for instance, criticised the government for its refusal to honour the commitment to restore all superior court judges through an executive order. The government also faced criticism for its inability to halt the current economic downslide. The unanimous resolution eases some pressure on the government for the time being.
The PMLN, the Jama’at-e Islami and the JUIF are happy that the resolution neutralises, if not negates, the official argument that the war on terror is Pakistan’s war. The resolution accommodates the major positions of these parties on militancy and the operations in the tribal areas by calling for the withdrawal of regular troops from the region.
The resolution serves the interests of the Pakistani Taliban, who must be pleased that the resolution endorses their major demands without asking for any reciprocal commitment. It suggests the end of the army operation and consequent withdrawal, something the Taliban have been demanding since the beginning of the operation. It also calls for negotiations with the Taliban on the contentious issues.
What does the government get in return? Nothing. The Taliban have not made any commitment so far on suspending their violent activities in Pakistan and Afghanistan in response to the resolution, not to speak of agreeing to function within the framework of the Pakistani constitution.
The optimism surrounding the passage of this resolution is misplaced. It is well known that a parliamentary resolution, even when adopted unanimously, is not binding on the government. It has moral and political implications, but they are usually not acted upon. Even if they are, it is selective. It would be interesting to know how many members were present in the session with the resolution was approved ‘unanimously’.
The resolution is a good declaration of intent, with emphasis on the peaceful and negotiated settlement of differences. However, it does not outline ways and means to operationalised its basic ideas into concrete policy measures. Some suggestions are not likely to be implemented at all, which will start a new polemical debate between the government and the opposition.
Representatives of the military provided detailed briefing to the parliamentarians to underline the major threat to internal security and stability posed by the Taliban, and to highlight that the Taliban were trying to establish an alternate authority by paralysing the Pakistani state. The current political government shares this perspective. The president and the prime minister have issued several statements over the last two months supporting military action. It is clear from their policy statements that they would like these operations to continue till state authority is firmly established.
The army wanted the political parties to support it in its venture in the tribal areas. Such support is needed because the army and paramilitary forces have lost over three thousand personnel in these operations over the last five years.
Yet the resolution does not have a word of sympathy for the armed forces, which is likely to disappoint them. Parliamentarians should have appreciated their efforts and then asked for limited or no use of force in the tribal areas. It seems that the parliamentarians hardly paid any attention to the briefings and drafted the resolution based on their pre-briefing perspectives.
The Islamist perspective, which does not view the Taliban as a threat to Pakistan, seems to dominate the resolution. The Taliban are portrayed as one of the ‘stakeholders’ in the political equation. There is no condemnation of suicide attacks or the blowing up of girls’ schools or public executions.
The PMLN, the PMLQ, the Jama’at-e Islami, the JUIF, the Tehreek-e Insaf and a host of Islamist groups take a naïve view of violence in the tribal areas and beyond. Instead of viewing the Taliban as Pakistan’s adversary, they sympathise with them as they are fighting US and NATO troops in Afghanistan. They hold the view that the Taliban will have no reason to use violence if American troops quit Afghanistan, since Pakistan’s support for the war on terror is the main cause of insurgency east of the Durand Line. In other words, changes have to be made in Pakistan’s policies, not in the Taliban’s.
American presence in Afghanistan can be viewed as one of the factors responsible for the Taliban resurgence. However, by now, the Taliban have expanded their agenda to include the establishment of a political and administrative domain in and around the tribal areas by neutralising the writ of the Pakistani state.
If the Taliban agenda was nothing more than the expulsion of US and NATO troops from Afghanistan their efforts to expand their domain to some of the settled districts of the NWFP makes no sense: no American troops are present in these areas. And what is the justification of the sectarian violence in Kurram Agency?
It is not clear if US troops in Afghanistan can be put under pressure by the Taliban policy of threatening Pakistani businesspeople and warning them against involvement in any ventures that are unacceptable to the Taliban. The main target of the Taliban is the Pakistani state, yet the resolution fails to take this into account.
Given the expanded Taliban agenda, the government of Pakistan will find it difficult to completely withdraw forces from the tribal areas and leave the security of the region to the insufficiently trained and equipped paramilitary forces. The resolution gives some leverage to the government by suggesting that the army be replaced “where possible with civilian law enforcement agencies with enhanced capacity”. However, the opposition expects a total cessation of military operations, which the government cannot initiate in the absence of a commitment by the Taliban to respect Pakistani state authority and end all violence.
If the opposition parties, the JUIF and parliamentarians from the tribal areas are interesting in evolving an amicable settlement of the trouble in the tribal areas, they should set up a committee for initiating non-official dialogue with the Taliban leadership to formulate proposals for a possible solution. Both sides will be expected to interact within the framework of the constitution. If some credible proposals can be evolved, the opposition would have a better case for implementing the parliamentary resolution. (Daily Times)
Dr Hasan-Askari Rizvi is a political and defence analyst
Read more...
If the Taliban agenda was nothing more than the expulsion of US and NATO troops from Afghanistan their efforts to expand their domain to some of the settled districts of the NWFP makes no sense. And what is the justification of the sectarian violence in Kurram Agency?
The government and major opposition parties are euphoric over the unanimous passage of the resolution on militancy in the tribal areas during the joint session of parliament. They think that they have evolved a credible approach to dealing with the insurgency and its violent fallout in mainland Pakistan.
The government is pleased with the resolution because it can easily project this development as an indication of growing political harmony among Pakistan’s diverse political actors. Opposition parties had initially used the joint session to build pressure on the government. The PMLN leadership, for instance, criticised the government for its refusal to honour the commitment to restore all superior court judges through an executive order. The government also faced criticism for its inability to halt the current economic downslide. The unanimous resolution eases some pressure on the government for the time being.
The PMLN, the Jama’at-e Islami and the JUIF are happy that the resolution neutralises, if not negates, the official argument that the war on terror is Pakistan’s war. The resolution accommodates the major positions of these parties on militancy and the operations in the tribal areas by calling for the withdrawal of regular troops from the region.
The resolution serves the interests of the Pakistani Taliban, who must be pleased that the resolution endorses their major demands without asking for any reciprocal commitment. It suggests the end of the army operation and consequent withdrawal, something the Taliban have been demanding since the beginning of the operation. It also calls for negotiations with the Taliban on the contentious issues.
What does the government get in return? Nothing. The Taliban have not made any commitment so far on suspending their violent activities in Pakistan and Afghanistan in response to the resolution, not to speak of agreeing to function within the framework of the Pakistani constitution.
The optimism surrounding the passage of this resolution is misplaced. It is well known that a parliamentary resolution, even when adopted unanimously, is not binding on the government. It has moral and political implications, but they are usually not acted upon. Even if they are, it is selective. It would be interesting to know how many members were present in the session with the resolution was approved ‘unanimously’.
The resolution is a good declaration of intent, with emphasis on the peaceful and negotiated settlement of differences. However, it does not outline ways and means to operationalised its basic ideas into concrete policy measures. Some suggestions are not likely to be implemented at all, which will start a new polemical debate between the government and the opposition.
Representatives of the military provided detailed briefing to the parliamentarians to underline the major threat to internal security and stability posed by the Taliban, and to highlight that the Taliban were trying to establish an alternate authority by paralysing the Pakistani state. The current political government shares this perspective. The president and the prime minister have issued several statements over the last two months supporting military action. It is clear from their policy statements that they would like these operations to continue till state authority is firmly established.
The army wanted the political parties to support it in its venture in the tribal areas. Such support is needed because the army and paramilitary forces have lost over three thousand personnel in these operations over the last five years.
Yet the resolution does not have a word of sympathy for the armed forces, which is likely to disappoint them. Parliamentarians should have appreciated their efforts and then asked for limited or no use of force in the tribal areas. It seems that the parliamentarians hardly paid any attention to the briefings and drafted the resolution based on their pre-briefing perspectives.
The Islamist perspective, which does not view the Taliban as a threat to Pakistan, seems to dominate the resolution. The Taliban are portrayed as one of the ‘stakeholders’ in the political equation. There is no condemnation of suicide attacks or the blowing up of girls’ schools or public executions.
The PMLN, the PMLQ, the Jama’at-e Islami, the JUIF, the Tehreek-e Insaf and a host of Islamist groups take a naïve view of violence in the tribal areas and beyond. Instead of viewing the Taliban as Pakistan’s adversary, they sympathise with them as they are fighting US and NATO troops in Afghanistan. They hold the view that the Taliban will have no reason to use violence if American troops quit Afghanistan, since Pakistan’s support for the war on terror is the main cause of insurgency east of the Durand Line. In other words, changes have to be made in Pakistan’s policies, not in the Taliban’s.
American presence in Afghanistan can be viewed as one of the factors responsible for the Taliban resurgence. However, by now, the Taliban have expanded their agenda to include the establishment of a political and administrative domain in and around the tribal areas by neutralising the writ of the Pakistani state.
If the Taliban agenda was nothing more than the expulsion of US and NATO troops from Afghanistan their efforts to expand their domain to some of the settled districts of the NWFP makes no sense: no American troops are present in these areas. And what is the justification of the sectarian violence in Kurram Agency?
It is not clear if US troops in Afghanistan can be put under pressure by the Taliban policy of threatening Pakistani businesspeople and warning them against involvement in any ventures that are unacceptable to the Taliban. The main target of the Taliban is the Pakistani state, yet the resolution fails to take this into account.
Given the expanded Taliban agenda, the government of Pakistan will find it difficult to completely withdraw forces from the tribal areas and leave the security of the region to the insufficiently trained and equipped paramilitary forces. The resolution gives some leverage to the government by suggesting that the army be replaced “where possible with civilian law enforcement agencies with enhanced capacity”. However, the opposition expects a total cessation of military operations, which the government cannot initiate in the absence of a commitment by the Taliban to respect Pakistani state authority and end all violence.
If the opposition parties, the JUIF and parliamentarians from the tribal areas are interesting in evolving an amicable settlement of the trouble in the tribal areas, they should set up a committee for initiating non-official dialogue with the Taliban leadership to formulate proposals for a possible solution. Both sides will be expected to interact within the framework of the constitution. If some credible proposals can be evolved, the opposition would have a better case for implementing the parliamentary resolution. (Daily Times)
Dr Hasan-Askari Rizvi is a political and defence analyst
Read more...
In Pakistan: ‘Everyone is an economist’ including the illiterate Taliban lover Javed Chaudhry...
‘Everyone is an economist’
With global and national economies coinciding in their historic downturn, it is open season for all kinds of theorisers in English and Urdu to offer doomsday diagnoses of the “I-told-you-so” variety. Pakistan is condemned by some such analysts for having become “a slave of capitalism” in general and a tame camp-follower of the United States and its handmaiden institutions, the World Bank and the IMF, in particular, always looking for crumbs when it could presumably have an economic system all of its own. Armchair economists stare direly at you from the TV frame to warn you of what lies ahead unless Pakistan says goodbye to the global coalition against terror led by America.
Fortunately, Dr Akbar Zaidi, an eminent Pakistani economist, some of whose books are prescribed texts at school and college levels, has published a timely article in a paper which describes the free-for-all, one-sided debate going on in the media which tells us how hopelessly Pakistan and the world are mired in crises that no one can resolve. The government in power is hauled over the coals by these media pundits for “doing nothing” and each lobby is putting forward its own recommendations, unmindful of the fact that they are actually contradictory.
Here is Dr Zaidi’s description of the scene: “The huge media explosion, particularly in the electronic media but also in the English newspapers, has revealed how bare Pakistan’s scholarly cupboard is, and how charlatans have been crowned kings...Today, the electronic media has made bankers, businessmen, stockbrokers and journalists experts on the intricacies of economic and financial issues of which most know very little. Personal anecdotes, and not even informed opinion, replace any sound academic or general discussion about Pakistan’s economy or about the international financial crisis...Barring very few exceptions, most supposedly informed guests on these channels cannot distinguish between the capital market, capital investment or the capital account, yet speak with an authority which only reveals their complete ignorance”.
The plaint is justified if you take a cursory view of a day’s media mediations on the national economy. There is the politician in power who has to bear the brunt of the uninformed public that is burning tyres on the road; and there is his opponent who is actually secretly overjoyed that the crisis has come in handy to discredit the incumbent government and bring it down. The incumbent politician has his pet line serving as a diagnosis of what is happening to the economy. He points behind his back and says the crisis is inherited by him from the illegitimate past government of General Pervez Musharraf and that his government is now manfully engaged in the sanitary function of clearing up the rubbish (gandh) left behind by it.
The opposed politician, equally at sea about the economy, holds forth on the total lack of preparation of the government for handling the crisis which would have been tackled quickly and successfully if his party had been in power. Despite facts to the contrary, he accuses the government of not referring the crisis to the experts and of not having an actual plan on how to confront the meltdown. If monetary tightening is taken in hand to break the rupee’s headlong fall, he sides with the industrialist asking for low interest rates; if prices soar because of the “passing on of the real cost” on to the consumer, he stands on the road calling the government inhumane and insensitive to the plight of the common man.
Surprisingly, there is a third category of the politician too. He is the one who is supposed to have left behind the gandh. His job is the most convenient. He trundles out the good figures when the economy was supposed to be growing at the rate of 8 percent of the GDP and compares them to the deterioration that has taken place since the new government took over after the 2008 elections. In the final analysis, apparently, no one is to blame and the economy is hurtling down without a cause, if you listen to these gentlemen.
With due apologies to Dr Zaidi, one would like to add a fourth category of ‘expert’ who castigates the other three and, believe it or not, helps boost the ratings of his TV channel too [i.e. Javed Chaudhry, the notorious Taliban lover journalist]. He is best represented by the media’s top sound-bite expert whose favourite epithet for the politicians and rulers of Pakistan is haramkhor. He gives the audience a potted history of capitalism in which Jews figure as the first conspirators who thought up riba as the curse that will doom humanity and allow the Zionists to control the world. As long as Pakistan’s economy is under the dreaded regime of riba it doesn’t have a chance of a snowball in hell to survive, according to this view.
When will we get a break from such people? (Daily Times)
Read more...
With global and national economies coinciding in their historic downturn, it is open season for all kinds of theorisers in English and Urdu to offer doomsday diagnoses of the “I-told-you-so” variety. Pakistan is condemned by some such analysts for having become “a slave of capitalism” in general and a tame camp-follower of the United States and its handmaiden institutions, the World Bank and the IMF, in particular, always looking for crumbs when it could presumably have an economic system all of its own. Armchair economists stare direly at you from the TV frame to warn you of what lies ahead unless Pakistan says goodbye to the global coalition against terror led by America.
Fortunately, Dr Akbar Zaidi, an eminent Pakistani economist, some of whose books are prescribed texts at school and college levels, has published a timely article in a paper which describes the free-for-all, one-sided debate going on in the media which tells us how hopelessly Pakistan and the world are mired in crises that no one can resolve. The government in power is hauled over the coals by these media pundits for “doing nothing” and each lobby is putting forward its own recommendations, unmindful of the fact that they are actually contradictory.
Here is Dr Zaidi’s description of the scene: “The huge media explosion, particularly in the electronic media but also in the English newspapers, has revealed how bare Pakistan’s scholarly cupboard is, and how charlatans have been crowned kings...Today, the electronic media has made bankers, businessmen, stockbrokers and journalists experts on the intricacies of economic and financial issues of which most know very little. Personal anecdotes, and not even informed opinion, replace any sound academic or general discussion about Pakistan’s economy or about the international financial crisis...Barring very few exceptions, most supposedly informed guests on these channels cannot distinguish between the capital market, capital investment or the capital account, yet speak with an authority which only reveals their complete ignorance”.
The plaint is justified if you take a cursory view of a day’s media mediations on the national economy. There is the politician in power who has to bear the brunt of the uninformed public that is burning tyres on the road; and there is his opponent who is actually secretly overjoyed that the crisis has come in handy to discredit the incumbent government and bring it down. The incumbent politician has his pet line serving as a diagnosis of what is happening to the economy. He points behind his back and says the crisis is inherited by him from the illegitimate past government of General Pervez Musharraf and that his government is now manfully engaged in the sanitary function of clearing up the rubbish (gandh) left behind by it.
The opposed politician, equally at sea about the economy, holds forth on the total lack of preparation of the government for handling the crisis which would have been tackled quickly and successfully if his party had been in power. Despite facts to the contrary, he accuses the government of not referring the crisis to the experts and of not having an actual plan on how to confront the meltdown. If monetary tightening is taken in hand to break the rupee’s headlong fall, he sides with the industrialist asking for low interest rates; if prices soar because of the “passing on of the real cost” on to the consumer, he stands on the road calling the government inhumane and insensitive to the plight of the common man.
Surprisingly, there is a third category of the politician too. He is the one who is supposed to have left behind the gandh. His job is the most convenient. He trundles out the good figures when the economy was supposed to be growing at the rate of 8 percent of the GDP and compares them to the deterioration that has taken place since the new government took over after the 2008 elections. In the final analysis, apparently, no one is to blame and the economy is hurtling down without a cause, if you listen to these gentlemen.
With due apologies to Dr Zaidi, one would like to add a fourth category of ‘expert’ who castigates the other three and, believe it or not, helps boost the ratings of his TV channel too [i.e. Javed Chaudhry, the notorious Taliban lover journalist]. He is best represented by the media’s top sound-bite expert whose favourite epithet for the politicians and rulers of Pakistan is haramkhor. He gives the audience a potted history of capitalism in which Jews figure as the first conspirators who thought up riba as the curse that will doom humanity and allow the Zionists to control the world. As long as Pakistan’s economy is under the dreaded regime of riba it doesn’t have a chance of a snowball in hell to survive, according to this view.
When will we get a break from such people? (Daily Times)
Read more...
Is Nawaz Sharif a principled politician? Rauf Klasra exposes the deal (in offing) between PML-N & PML-Q. Chaudhries & Sharifs united to plunder...
![[col11.gif]](http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_Vbc4oO2rGiw/SQQyOGr4YuI/AAAAAAAAAas/xn1FrMWswFs/s1600/col11.gif)
![[col11a.gif]](http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_Vbc4oO2rGiw/SQQyKCHrmBI/AAAAAAAAAak/qCmRQ3CCO1s/s1600/col11a.gif)
"RAW Totay": The conspiracy theory parrots. The supporters of Sipah-e-Sahaba and Taliban remember Lal Masjid and shed crocodile tears....
In this op-ed, Asadullah Ghalib spanks "RAW Totay" (e.g. Javed Chaudhry, Hamid Mir, Kashif Abbasi, Ansar Abbasi, Orya Maqbool Jan, Irfan Siddiqi): The conspiracy theory parrots. Shame on the supporters of extremist of Lal Masjid, Sipah-e-Sahaba and Taliban and the crocodile tears....
![[1100508210-2+raw.gif]](http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_Vbc4oO2rGiw/SQQvwO6_6UI/AAAAAAAAAac/6zKMCa9vy3o/s1600/1100508210-2%2Braw.gif)
Everyone at fault, except us. Why is it that everything that goes against us becomes a conspiracy?
Read more...
![[1100508210-2+raw.gif]](http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_Vbc4oO2rGiw/SQQvwO6_6UI/AAAAAAAAAac/6zKMCa9vy3o/s1600-h/1100508210-2+raw.gif)
Also read:
Asinine and anodyne in '09?: The industry of conspiracy theory in Pakistan
Everyone at fault, except us. Why is it that everything that goes against us becomes a conspiracy?
International conspiracies against Pakistan - an eye opener for conspiracy theorists
Read more...
Javed Chaudhry - the mouth piece of Taliban and Sipah-e-Sahaba compares Taliban with Hazra Imam Hussain (R.A.)
Javed Chaudhry is on the payroll of anti-Pakistan forces which are currently sponsoring Taliban and Sipah-e-Sahaba and their supporters in Pakistani media and politics.
![[1100116738-2+yazid.gif]](http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_Vbc4oO2rGiw/SQQqsfmE-5I/AAAAAAAAAZ8/LqZIubngGfk/s1600/1100116738-2%2Byazid.gif)
http://express.com.pk/epaper/Article.aspx?newsID=1100116738&Date=20070130&Issue=NP_LHE
COMMENTS
YLH:
I read that article by Javed Chaudhry… and frankly I disagree with it completely.
The conflict at Karbala was essentially a power struggle between Banu Omeyya and Banu Hashim… Muawiyah, being a prudent and wise man, had sought to compromise with the family of the Prophet (PBUH)… but his son made the huge mistake of antagonizing the masses by ordering the butchery at Karbala… we mourn the family of the prophet because it was a great tragedy.
Taliban on the other hand persecuted inter alia the shias, sunnis, hazaras, women etc… how can anyone compare them to Imam Hussain's sacrifice¦ god knows. Perhaps Mongol Horde under Genghis Khan is a much better analogy But then you have people like Mullah Zaheer running amuck making a mockery of our country, our people and our religion, and people like Javed Chaudhry around to encourage this.
Ahsan:
I did go through the article of Javed Chaudhry that Adnan indicated. I have read his other Urdu essays as well and I appreciate his Urdu writing. He writes beautiful language. I have no hesitation to put Bush and Yazyd in the same bag, but I can not put the Taliban on the same pedestal as Husayn? It is not the question of the religion or belief . It is simply based on reason. The Taliban do not have the same moral standing as “Hysayn"?. If any thing, they are immoral in my view. They are not fighting for Islam or for any thing good. The war between Bush and Taliban is a war between two tyrants. The less tyrant (Taliban) is fighting against the big tyrant (Bush) to perpetuate the tyranny over their own nation and their own people. Comparing a worse with the worst does not make him better (good). He still remains bad.
Umer:
#
Umer says:
February 1st, 2007 5:37 pm
Guyz, may I propose something. We all agree that
(1) The vast vast majority of Shia an Sunni DO consider themselves as Muslims first and anything else second, and that is how it should be.
(2) There are some Sunnis who cross the line in condemning the Shia for their practices and some time (very very infrequently) even say hurtful things about people who the Shia (and most Muslims in general) hold especially dear. We all agree that this is just wrong thing to do.
(3) There are some Shia who cross the line in condemning the Sunnis and some time (very very infrequently) even say hurtful things about people who the Sunnis (and most Muslims in general) hold especially dear. We all agree that this is just wrong thing to do.
(4) Most Sunnis and most Shias do, in fact, respect each other’s practices and see themselves as Muslims first. We should all try to focus on strengthening these feelings and not falling for the minorities described in (2) and (3).
YLH:
The problem with our society is the lack of tolerance and/or giving the benefit of doubt to the other. Only god knows how he came to the conclusion that I was “denying” the Karbala massacre and the tragedy unleashed on the family of the Prophet… perhaps it is the “holier than thou” attitude that plagues Wahabis and Shias alike that is the problem here. I quote my original post here and ask if others too can draw the same conclusions…
[quote comment="32363"]I read that article by Javed Chaudhry… and frankly I disagree with it completely.
The conflict at Karbala was essentially a power struggle between Banu Omeyya and Banu Hashim¦
Muawiyah, being a prudent and wise man, had sought to compromise with the family of the Prophet (PBUH) but his son made the huge mistake of antagonizing the masses by ordering the butchery at Karbala¦ we mourn the family of the prophet because it was a great tragedy.
Taliban on the other hand persecuted inter alia the shias, sunnis, hazaras, women etc¦ how can anyone compare them to Imam Hussain's sacrifice¦ god knows. Perhaps Mongol Horde under Genghis Khan is a much better analogy
But then you have people like Mullah Zaheer running amuck¦ making a mockery of our country, our people and our religion¦ and people like Javed Chaudhry around to encourage this.[/quote]
Clearly my point that Imam Hussain’s sacrifice should not be compared to taliban has been lost.
Eidee Mian,
It is amazing that you accuse me who was brought up in shiite dominated household of being a “Wahabi”. If objectivity is being “Wahabi” then so be it. However my point - which clearly missed you- was that comparing Taliban to Imam Hussain (as Javed Chaudhry has done in the article quoted by Adnan Siddiqui) is a travesty.
I am afraid I have read history of that period too closely not to see the real power struggle that was going on and the role of Abdullah Bin Zubair in egging on Imam Hussain to make way for his own claim. This does not take away from the supreme tragedy that Karbala is nor does it take away from the character and life of Imam Hussain.
.......
The partial view of reality from Pakistan
Khaled Ahmed’s Urdu Press Review
http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=story_1-7-2002_pg3_5
Daily Times, pakistan, July 1, 2002
Award-winning columnist Javed Chaudhry writing in Jang (25 June 2002) stated
that under the Taliban there was peace in Afghanistan from Amu to Torkham.
Thieves had their hands cut, fornicators were stoned to death, and shopkeepers
guilty of fiddling with the scales were lashed. There was hunger and famine but a goldsmith could carry his bag of gold safely from Termez to Chaman. In Afghanistan of Taliban there was zero crime and hundred percent justice. There was tolerance, self-sacrifice, hospitality and modesty. But the West did not tolerate it. It killed the Taliban and said let there be murder, rape and theft, no veil, but a lot of prostitution. The Taliban were declared terrorist and replaced with liberal modern and educated bacha (children) of America and Europe. The liberals of the world celebrated. Now women are raped and men abducted and released on ransom, and there is poppy cultivation which the Taliban had got rid of. The Dostam militia in Mazar Sharif is broadcasting songs from the mosque loudspeakers. Women are without modesty. A BBC film on Mazar Sharif shown to the German parliament made the members cry. There is a club of homosexuals in Kandahar and there are obscene pictures being sold in Mazar Sharif. The West hated the beard of the Taliban but it can’t smell the stench rising from the corpse that Afghanistan has become after the Taliban.
The other side of the picture under the Taliban was always there, perhaps not recognised by the Urdu press and the ministry of religious affairs, and ignored by the establishment under the tutelage of the ISI and the army. The savagery of the Taliban in the guise of Islam was catalogued also in the Pakistani English press. The prostitution among the formerly respectable ladies of Kabul went on under the Taliban too and this column cannot repeat who all enjoyed this ‘service’. The Jaish-Harkat boys killed the Shia in Kabul. The fact of the persecution of the non-Pushtun and non-Sunni was not hidden. The pettiness of beating up the football players and kite-flyers paled before the bastinado applied to the luckless women forced to come to the streets to feed their orphaned children. The Hazaras were starved, the populace of Mazar Sharif was savaged in the brief interregnum when the Taliban made a commitment to the local commanders then went back on it, thus establishing that they were untrustworthy and had to be fought to the last. They killed a Shia leader after his surrender. They hosted the rebels from Tajikistan, Uzbekistan and Chechnya, and threatened Iran, which isolated and besieged the hapless ruin of a country they wanted to rule. It is not only the West, but the entire neighbourhood of Afghanistan – all Islamic republics – who wanted and achieved the death of the Taliban government. Pakistan colluded with this satanism and consequently suffered isolation internationally till its own survival was at stake in 2001. The UN Security Council resolutions related to Afghanistan – on which China either signed or abstained – affixed the stamp of global disapproval on what the Taliban and Pakistan were doing in Afghanistan. What is happening now in Afghanistan is the consequence of the policy the two parties pursued. No one else is to blame for it. What is happening in Pakistan today is also linked to the policy pursued by Pakistan during this period.
..........
SECOND OPINION:Subtexts of Kashmir policy —Khaled Ahmed’s Urdu Press Review
http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=story_23-7-2004_pg3_3
Columnist Javed Chaudhry wrote in Jang (5 June 2004) that at a seminar in Washington Carnegie Institute speakers came to the conclusion that unless the factories of jihad were closed the problem of terrorism would become worse. Mufti Shamzai of Karachi was such a factory of jihad. He was non-sectarian and believed in the unity of all Muslims. But since he was a factory of jihad, resentful of the powers that inflicted suffering on the Muslims of the World, he had to be shut down. He was killed like the Hamas founder Sheikh Yassin. This is a message for all Muslims and it says: ‘We have to save our great religious leaders from America and its friends who think that the factories of mujahideen have to be shut down’.
Mufti Shamzai was a factory of jihad that has gone wrong for Pakistan for many reasons. His pupils are now trying to do to Pakistan what Pakistan’s innocent citizens don’t deserve. It is easy to say that the Jews or the Americans killed him just like Sheikh Yassin but hard to prove it. It certainly reflects on the state of our mind.
Read more...
Hussian Haqqani gives Kashif Abbassi some good spanking.
Kashif Abbasi is a media juooni: The TV face/ mouth pieces of Taliban in Pakistan.
Regime of ‘hostile’ TV anchors
Daily Times - Saturday, June 21, 2008
Two particular encounters on two TV channels Thursday night revealed the mind of the “misplaced or hostile anchor” in Pakistan. The first was a discussion among a group of TV journalists on the accusation levelled against them that they are no longer impartial in their conduct of talk shows and tend to favour a political stance. The “consensus” was that encroachments on institutions of representative democracy by military rulers could not be viewed with impartiality, and that a show of partiality was dictated by the anchors’ loyalty to the Constitution. One opinion was that this obligatory partiality must be accompanied by “objectivity”; but it was not clear how the state of being “objective” could be reconciled with the state of being “partial”.
The other discussion was an interview with Pakistan’s ambassador Mr Hussain Haqqani by a TV journalist noted for his acerbity of approach and bias. The topic was the attack made by NATO-ISAF forces inside Mohmand Agency which resulted in the death of 13 Pakistani troops, souring Pakistan’s relations between Washington. The ambassador, while acknowledging his duty to bring the umbrage of Pakistan to the notice of the Washington Administration in the most forceful of terms, also charged the TV person with the obligation of looking objectively at the situation in which Pakistan found itself. He asked him if he took account of the ground realities in the Tribal Areas where the war against terrorism was clearly in the national interest of Pakistan. The ambassador argued for “realism” in the handling of such crises as the one resulting from the attack in the Mohmand area. But the TV anchor demanded that Pakistan approach the United Nations for a solution to the problem of the growing breach of Pakistan’s “sovereignty” and “territorial integrity”. The ambassador pointed out that the Security Council was an arena of power play, not a kind of Supreme Court where all plaintiffs were equal. The TV anchor then fell back on the argument of “national pride” and claimed to represent the people of Pakistan, arguing in favour of Pakistan opting out of the international war on terrorism. He had no answer, however, to the question about what Pakistan would do after that, after its various trouble spots are bombed by a combination of forces united inside the US Security Council.
The patriotically “partial” TV anchors began by opposing a military ruler and are now caught in a situation of political bias under democracy because of the dictates of their partiality. The 2008 elections have delivered a political battlefield where elected parties are trying to move together despite their different recipes and solutions. What should the TV anchors do now? Normally, they should have moved back and become neutral, letting the discussions be fairly judged by the viewers, but they continue to pose as arbiters and decide on their own such matters as the “mandate” of the 2008 elections, the “immorality” of the NRO, and the rough dismissal of President Musharraf from his job. But when matters are in dispute between elected parties and in parliament, it is the duty of the media to remain impartial in order to allow the people to make their own judgements.
While highlighting the “complaints” against the TV channels, one must be clear, however, about the over-all role played by our electronic journalism. Despite their early “philosophical” gropings, the TV channels are a sine qua non of our lives and their foibles of “partiality” are dwarfed by their achievement of creating awareness among the people on all other economic and social matters. For example, in Punjab, Chief Minister Shahbaz Sharif is taking action, correctly, after watching TV reports on the malfunction of government institutions.
A sense of pride and sovereignty may take nations into war and humiliate them without making them understand what went wrong. This happened to Germany in the Second World War and in recent times to Serbia whose people, proud and sovereign, hate the world today for not understanding why they were killing Bosnians and Kosovars. But states don’t only feel aroused emotionally. They can also be cold-blooded. They can be motivated only by their self-interest whose pursuit might negate the state’s pride and sovereignty. When Iran and America confront each other, both tend to fly off the handle. In contrast, in Europe, where many nationalist wars were fought in the past, few feel as aroused.
Why shouldn’t a state feel emotional? Because being emotional may be contrary to its national interests. These interests are almost always economic. This is perfectly understandable because as long as a nation is prosperous and not dependent on outside creditors, its pride and sovereignty remain intact. But if a state is neglectful of its economy and pursues other emotional goals either unrelated or hostile to its economy it is bound to impose suffering on its people through the growth of poverty. And nothing removes pride and sovereignty from a nation more cruelly and quickly than poverty. Let us not forget that the organisation which kidnapped and beheaded the American journalist Daniel Pearl in 2002 called itself National Movement for the Restoration of Pakistani Sovereignty.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BtOYSEhdWMQ&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I5GxmWsWmtA&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_3fanwU4Blo&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YSyY2ZWXsH4&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zh5vOhew0aE&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2WIaagFjVFA&feature=related
Some Comments:
H Khan
I have kept Hussian Haqqani in disdain for quite sometime but here he gave Kashif Abbassi some good spanking.
FarazA
LOL... kashif took some serious beating... this little patheritc chaos creater wasn't able to answer a single question asked by Haqanni. Amazing journalist
H Khan:
This Kashif Abbassi represents the height of pathetic journalism in Pakistan. As one could see he has no training in journalism and how journalist should present themselves in front of dignitaries. Journalistic protocol has not even touched these types of idiots.
Kashif was interviewing Pakistani Ambassador to the USA in his office (which is the Embassy of Pakistan in Washington D C) while he was wearing some faded jeans.
My no means this was an interview but a solid ruthless bashing by Hussian Haqqani and he made Kashif Abbassi an example out of.
abaig:
True, this Kashif Abbasi (I've stopped watching his arrogant programs) interviewed Foreign Minister of PML-Q govt Khurshid Kasuri, some one year back. He was his usual arrogant and was in no mood to listen to the 4 point agenda Khurshid Kasuri gave on Kashmir. After some time, Khurshid Kasuri asked Kashif some questions back asking for solutuions to Kashmir problems .... leaving kashif answer-less and shame-less!
In this interview also, he rightly pointed out that we are emotional nation and we do not understand that we must expect equal footing ONLY if we are equal in heights and standing to USA. Eyes to eyes can be seen with someone equal to us!
The basic thing that these guys lack is "TEHZEEB" to talk to any dignitary. They think they're over-smart. Governor Salman Taseer rightly says, "They'll come to their senses, if their salaries are reduced from 10,00,000 to 10,000"
SSAAD:
Clue less idiots like Mr. Abbasi should at least google things before they start their stupid, populist rants. The way he shamelessly got his ass handed to him by HH should be an eye opener for him. Essentially HH told him to keep his trap shut!
I see Hamid Mir, Kamran and this idiot as all in the same league of BS, populist, wanna-be hard talking journalists without having the fundamentals of journalism or even common knowledge under their belts!
dara Says:
November 19th, 2008
I don’t understand what that Kashif Abassi the brave warrior thing is?
I agree up to the fact that we need to criticize and question government people, but when answer has received then there is no need to argue and being judgemental.
Kashif Abbasi sounds like immature and partisan. Every one has opinion and Kashif has aright to have one but as anchor you put a question but never react to answer the way kKashif does.
I hope you take my critical analysis in good faith.
Read more...
Regime of ‘hostile’ TV anchors
Daily Times - Saturday, June 21, 2008
Two particular encounters on two TV channels Thursday night revealed the mind of the “misplaced or hostile anchor” in Pakistan. The first was a discussion among a group of TV journalists on the accusation levelled against them that they are no longer impartial in their conduct of talk shows and tend to favour a political stance. The “consensus” was that encroachments on institutions of representative democracy by military rulers could not be viewed with impartiality, and that a show of partiality was dictated by the anchors’ loyalty to the Constitution. One opinion was that this obligatory partiality must be accompanied by “objectivity”; but it was not clear how the state of being “objective” could be reconciled with the state of being “partial”.
The other discussion was an interview with Pakistan’s ambassador Mr Hussain Haqqani by a TV journalist noted for his acerbity of approach and bias. The topic was the attack made by NATO-ISAF forces inside Mohmand Agency which resulted in the death of 13 Pakistani troops, souring Pakistan’s relations between Washington. The ambassador, while acknowledging his duty to bring the umbrage of Pakistan to the notice of the Washington Administration in the most forceful of terms, also charged the TV person with the obligation of looking objectively at the situation in which Pakistan found itself. He asked him if he took account of the ground realities in the Tribal Areas where the war against terrorism was clearly in the national interest of Pakistan. The ambassador argued for “realism” in the handling of such crises as the one resulting from the attack in the Mohmand area. But the TV anchor demanded that Pakistan approach the United Nations for a solution to the problem of the growing breach of Pakistan’s “sovereignty” and “territorial integrity”. The ambassador pointed out that the Security Council was an arena of power play, not a kind of Supreme Court where all plaintiffs were equal. The TV anchor then fell back on the argument of “national pride” and claimed to represent the people of Pakistan, arguing in favour of Pakistan opting out of the international war on terrorism. He had no answer, however, to the question about what Pakistan would do after that, after its various trouble spots are bombed by a combination of forces united inside the US Security Council.
The patriotically “partial” TV anchors began by opposing a military ruler and are now caught in a situation of political bias under democracy because of the dictates of their partiality. The 2008 elections have delivered a political battlefield where elected parties are trying to move together despite their different recipes and solutions. What should the TV anchors do now? Normally, they should have moved back and become neutral, letting the discussions be fairly judged by the viewers, but they continue to pose as arbiters and decide on their own such matters as the “mandate” of the 2008 elections, the “immorality” of the NRO, and the rough dismissal of President Musharraf from his job. But when matters are in dispute between elected parties and in parliament, it is the duty of the media to remain impartial in order to allow the people to make their own judgements.
While highlighting the “complaints” against the TV channels, one must be clear, however, about the over-all role played by our electronic journalism. Despite their early “philosophical” gropings, the TV channels are a sine qua non of our lives and their foibles of “partiality” are dwarfed by their achievement of creating awareness among the people on all other economic and social matters. For example, in Punjab, Chief Minister Shahbaz Sharif is taking action, correctly, after watching TV reports on the malfunction of government institutions.
A sense of pride and sovereignty may take nations into war and humiliate them without making them understand what went wrong. This happened to Germany in the Second World War and in recent times to Serbia whose people, proud and sovereign, hate the world today for not understanding why they were killing Bosnians and Kosovars. But states don’t only feel aroused emotionally. They can also be cold-blooded. They can be motivated only by their self-interest whose pursuit might negate the state’s pride and sovereignty. When Iran and America confront each other, both tend to fly off the handle. In contrast, in Europe, where many nationalist wars were fought in the past, few feel as aroused.
Why shouldn’t a state feel emotional? Because being emotional may be contrary to its national interests. These interests are almost always economic. This is perfectly understandable because as long as a nation is prosperous and not dependent on outside creditors, its pride and sovereignty remain intact. But if a state is neglectful of its economy and pursues other emotional goals either unrelated or hostile to its economy it is bound to impose suffering on its people through the growth of poverty. And nothing removes pride and sovereignty from a nation more cruelly and quickly than poverty. Let us not forget that the organisation which kidnapped and beheaded the American journalist Daniel Pearl in 2002 called itself National Movement for the Restoration of Pakistani Sovereignty.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BtOYSEhdWMQ&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I5GxmWsWmtA&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_3fanwU4Blo&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YSyY2ZWXsH4&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zh5vOhew0aE&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2WIaagFjVFA&feature=related
Some Comments:
H Khan
I have kept Hussian Haqqani in disdain for quite sometime but here he gave Kashif Abbassi some good spanking.
FarazA
LOL... kashif took some serious beating... this little patheritc chaos creater wasn't able to answer a single question asked by Haqanni. Amazing journalist
H Khan:
This Kashif Abbassi represents the height of pathetic journalism in Pakistan. As one could see he has no training in journalism and how journalist should present themselves in front of dignitaries. Journalistic protocol has not even touched these types of idiots.
Kashif was interviewing Pakistani Ambassador to the USA in his office (which is the Embassy of Pakistan in Washington D C) while he was wearing some faded jeans.
My no means this was an interview but a solid ruthless bashing by Hussian Haqqani and he made Kashif Abbassi an example out of.
abaig:
True, this Kashif Abbasi (I've stopped watching his arrogant programs) interviewed Foreign Minister of PML-Q govt Khurshid Kasuri, some one year back. He was his usual arrogant and was in no mood to listen to the 4 point agenda Khurshid Kasuri gave on Kashmir. After some time, Khurshid Kasuri asked Kashif some questions back asking for solutuions to Kashmir problems .... leaving kashif answer-less and shame-less!
In this interview also, he rightly pointed out that we are emotional nation and we do not understand that we must expect equal footing ONLY if we are equal in heights and standing to USA. Eyes to eyes can be seen with someone equal to us!
The basic thing that these guys lack is "TEHZEEB" to talk to any dignitary. They think they're over-smart. Governor Salman Taseer rightly says, "They'll come to their senses, if their salaries are reduced from 10,00,000 to 10,000"
SSAAD:
Clue less idiots like Mr. Abbasi should at least google things before they start their stupid, populist rants. The way he shamelessly got his ass handed to him by HH should be an eye opener for him. Essentially HH told him to keep his trap shut!
I see Hamid Mir, Kamran and this idiot as all in the same league of BS, populist, wanna-be hard talking journalists without having the fundamentals of journalism or even common knowledge under their belts!
dara Says:
November 19th, 2008
I don’t understand what that Kashif Abassi the brave warrior thing is?
I agree up to the fact that we need to criticize and question government people, but when answer has received then there is no need to argue and being judgemental.
Kashif Abbasi sounds like immature and partisan. Every one has opinion and Kashif has aright to have one but as anchor you put a question but never react to answer the way kKashif does.
I hope you take my critical analysis in good faith.
Read more...
Muslims should stand up and denounce al-Qaeda: The extremist Wahhabi ideology and the rise of Talibans in Pakistan...
Muslims should stand up and denounce al-Qaeda
The recent wide distribution of a DVD, Obsession: Radical Islam's War Against the West, by a New York-based tax-exempt organization has provoked an angry response from Muslims and non-Muslims. Now a second wave of distribution via direct mailings to households in swing states is taking place. The politics of this distribution so close to the presidential election aside, it is the Muslim response to the DVD that raises some interesting and intriguing questions.
There is no denying that the film leaves a residue of bad taste, not only against the perpetrators of violence but also, as I explained in my last column two weeks ago, against the whole body of Islam.
The DVD contends that radical Islam - read Islam - is on the warpath to destroy Western civilization. While one could and should point out the superimposition and juxtaposition of historic images from Nazi Germany with contemporary footage from suicide bombers to equate Islam with Nazism, this is not my purpose here. I want to focus on the Muslim response to such provocation and argue that they could do better than a now-familiar knee-jerk response. To put it bluntly, moderate and peace-loving Muslims are also to blame for the confusion between radical and mainstream Islam.
Anyone with more than a cursory knowledge of Islam knows that Islam, just as other great religions of the world, is not a monolith. It has hundreds of sects and groups based on varying interpretations of Islamic sacred texts and Islamic cultural traditions. So why doesn't the peaceful majority become enraged and denounce the fanatic murderers who claim to be pious Muslims, but in their deeds and actions are anything but? Why can't the majority declare them outside the pale of Islam and shut off their oxygen?
A bit of history might explain the reasons.
The roots of present-day Islamic militancy can be traced to 18th-century Arabia when a preacher by the name of Abdul Wahab took the peninsula by storm when he started a revival movement to rid Islam of its cultural trappings and return to the pristine teachings of the eighth century. A political accommodation with Ibn Saud, a tribal chief, resulted in the establishment of the kingdom of Saudi Arabia where the House of Saud ruled the country and all matters religious were left to the followers of Abdul Wahab.
However, somewhere in the course of history, the pristine and sublime turned into a coarse and uncompromising dogma.
Using petrodollars and encouragement by the West, this bizarre mind-set was exported to Pakistan - and many other Muslim countries - and used unabashedly to wage jihad against the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan in the 1980s.
Since the majority of Muslims do not subscribe to the extreme Wahhabi philosophy of al-Qaeda, why don't they stand up in defiance?
Muslims have always taken solace and pride in the mostly hypothetical and metaphysical concept of Ummah, or the worldwide community of believers. This prevents them from declaring other Muslims outside the pale of Islam.
They have been, in all fairness, shouting condemnations of al-Qaeda from the minarets and rooftops and have labeled their actions un-Islamic. But they have not - and they should - cross the threshold and declare them outside the circle of the religion. In this, they are no different than other world religions where there is always hesitation to kick people out.
Another hurdle in the way of such a pronouncement is the lack of a central authority in Sunni Islam. Unlike the Shias, where a strong religious hierarchy speaks for them, the Sunnis have traditionally relied on individual scholars to issue edicts to interpret religion.
A divide between those Muslims who believe Islam is a peaceful religion and can co-exist with other religions and philosophies and those who believe violence is the only way to achieve their objective of dominance is beginning to surface. But it needs to be strengthened.
If the Muslims in the West wish to be understood and respected, and if they wish to counter the toxic propaganda put forth in films like Obsession, then they ought to be doing more than just giving public statements and addressing church groups. They should publicly reject the brand of Islam championed by al-Qaeda and the Taliban.
For a great majority of Muslims in the world, and particularly those living in the West, the al-Qaeda philosophy is a bizarre chimera conceived through the amalgamation of historic grievances, politics, and a selective and self-serving interpretation of religion with an eye toward domination. For their own sakes, Muslims should reject this monster.
Permanent Link
Dr. S. Amjad Hussain is a Toledo surgeon whose column appears every other week in The Blade.
» E-mail him at aghaji@buckeye-express.com
» Read more Dr. Hussain columns at www.toledoblade.com/hussain
Read more...
The recent wide distribution of a DVD, Obsession: Radical Islam's War Against the West, by a New York-based tax-exempt organization has provoked an angry response from Muslims and non-Muslims. Now a second wave of distribution via direct mailings to households in swing states is taking place. The politics of this distribution so close to the presidential election aside, it is the Muslim response to the DVD that raises some interesting and intriguing questions.
There is no denying that the film leaves a residue of bad taste, not only against the perpetrators of violence but also, as I explained in my last column two weeks ago, against the whole body of Islam.
The DVD contends that radical Islam - read Islam - is on the warpath to destroy Western civilization. While one could and should point out the superimposition and juxtaposition of historic images from Nazi Germany with contemporary footage from suicide bombers to equate Islam with Nazism, this is not my purpose here. I want to focus on the Muslim response to such provocation and argue that they could do better than a now-familiar knee-jerk response. To put it bluntly, moderate and peace-loving Muslims are also to blame for the confusion between radical and mainstream Islam.
Anyone with more than a cursory knowledge of Islam knows that Islam, just as other great religions of the world, is not a monolith. It has hundreds of sects and groups based on varying interpretations of Islamic sacred texts and Islamic cultural traditions. So why doesn't the peaceful majority become enraged and denounce the fanatic murderers who claim to be pious Muslims, but in their deeds and actions are anything but? Why can't the majority declare them outside the pale of Islam and shut off their oxygen?
A bit of history might explain the reasons.
The roots of present-day Islamic militancy can be traced to 18th-century Arabia when a preacher by the name of Abdul Wahab took the peninsula by storm when he started a revival movement to rid Islam of its cultural trappings and return to the pristine teachings of the eighth century. A political accommodation with Ibn Saud, a tribal chief, resulted in the establishment of the kingdom of Saudi Arabia where the House of Saud ruled the country and all matters religious were left to the followers of Abdul Wahab.
However, somewhere in the course of history, the pristine and sublime turned into a coarse and uncompromising dogma.
Using petrodollars and encouragement by the West, this bizarre mind-set was exported to Pakistan - and many other Muslim countries - and used unabashedly to wage jihad against the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan in the 1980s.
Since the majority of Muslims do not subscribe to the extreme Wahhabi philosophy of al-Qaeda, why don't they stand up in defiance?
Muslims have always taken solace and pride in the mostly hypothetical and metaphysical concept of Ummah, or the worldwide community of believers. This prevents them from declaring other Muslims outside the pale of Islam.
They have been, in all fairness, shouting condemnations of al-Qaeda from the minarets and rooftops and have labeled their actions un-Islamic. But they have not - and they should - cross the threshold and declare them outside the circle of the religion. In this, they are no different than other world religions where there is always hesitation to kick people out.
Another hurdle in the way of such a pronouncement is the lack of a central authority in Sunni Islam. Unlike the Shias, where a strong religious hierarchy speaks for them, the Sunnis have traditionally relied on individual scholars to issue edicts to interpret religion.
A divide between those Muslims who believe Islam is a peaceful religion and can co-exist with other religions and philosophies and those who believe violence is the only way to achieve their objective of dominance is beginning to surface. But it needs to be strengthened.
If the Muslims in the West wish to be understood and respected, and if they wish to counter the toxic propaganda put forth in films like Obsession, then they ought to be doing more than just giving public statements and addressing church groups. They should publicly reject the brand of Islam championed by al-Qaeda and the Taliban.
For a great majority of Muslims in the world, and particularly those living in the West, the al-Qaeda philosophy is a bizarre chimera conceived through the amalgamation of historic grievances, politics, and a selective and self-serving interpretation of religion with an eye toward domination. For their own sakes, Muslims should reject this monster.
Permanent Link
Dr. S. Amjad Hussain is a Toledo surgeon whose column appears every other week in The Blade.
» E-mail him at aghaji@buckeye-express.com
» Read more Dr. Hussain columns at www.toledoblade.com/hussain
Read more...
Realities of Pakistan's woes not apparent to all
THE RECENT bombing of the Marriott Hotel in the heart of the Pakistani capital, Islamabad, underscores the menace of religious fanaticism that now threatens Pakistan also. When the air cleared, 70 people lay dead and close to 300 wounded. The incident sent shock waves through not only Pakistan and Afghanistan, but also through the power corridors of Washington.
Afghanistan is a quagmire, and a decisive military victory in that country is not possible. Pakistan has been accused of not doing enough to curb al-Qaeda and the Taliban operating from the sanctuaries in its tribal areas and thus being indirectly responsible for the failure in Afghanistan.
In reality there are four different wars being waged from the tribal areas of Pakistan. There is the war against the occupation forces in Afghanistan. There is a war against the Pakistani government and the Pakistani army. There is a war, supported by elements in the Pakistani army, to contain Indian influence in Afghanistan. And now the war has spilled over and is being waged against the common man in Pakistan who does not subscribe to al-Qaeda and the Taliban brand of Islam.
U.S. lawmakers have been, for the last few years, very critical of Pakistan and have questioned the wisdom of giving Pakistan $10 billion over the last six years while not having much in return to show for it. This simplistic money-for-action equation, however, is nave at best and hypocritical at worst. Let us step back and examine on-the-ground realities that may be different from what appears from Washington and even from Islamabad.
The situation in the tribal areas of Pakistan, complex as it is, can be pared down to three important interlocking elements.
First, there is a pervasive anti-American feeling among Pakistanis, just as there is elsewhere in the world. These sentiments cut across all segments of society. There is also a pervasive feeling that the war on terror is in fact a war against Islam. These sentiments have hardened since my three-part report published in The Blade in May, 2005, on the subject.
Second, the shouts of jihad against the occupation forces in Afghanistan aside, most Pakistanis are religious, but not militant or fanatics. As such, they are no different from, say, observant Christians, Jews, or followers of other religions.
The pivotal piece in this equation is the fact that the ouster of foreign forces from Afghanistan is not the ultimate aim of al-Qaeda and the Taliban. The aim is to control Pakistan and establish a Taliban-style government in the country. That end point, in their limited worldview, would solve all their socio-economic ills.
So why can't the majority of Pakistanis see through this charade and realize that in the long run they stand to lose not only their moderate to liberal way of life but their country as well? I am sure the experts in the White House and the Pentagon continue to mull this critical question.
The answer lies in the peculiar mind-set that believes that the enemy of my enemy is my friend. The deep resentment felt toward American foreign policy and its effects on the people in the Middle East and South Asia is enough for ordinary people to withhold criticism of al-Qaeda and the Taliban even though they disagree with their harsh and uncompromising interpretation of religion.
For the people of Pakistan in general and for those Pakistanis living along the northwest frontier in particular, the al-Qaeda-Taliban fight against the occupation forces in Afghanistan is not their fight.
Since al-Qaeda and the Taliban have framed this fight in religious terms and exploited the prevailing anti-American sentiments in Pakistan, the attitude of most Pakistanis can be explained by the German word schadenfreude, which means taking pleasure in the misery of others.
But the recent foray of the Taliban into the Northwest Frontier Province of Pakistan is making them think twice about the enemy-of-my-enemy-is-my-
friend mind-set.
The enemy of my enemy also proves to be my enemy when he indiscriminately bombs civilians, orders the closing of girls' schools, forbids barbers to shave beards, and forbids women to venture outside their homes.
This is happening in the Swat Valley in the north and in many other districts of the province. In Peshawar, the provincial capital, their activities are limited to forcing the closing of video and music shops.
The writing is clearly on the wall.
Dr. S. Amjad Hussain is a Toledo surgeon whose column appears every other week in The Blade.
» E-mail him at aghaji@buckeye-express.com
» Read more Dr. Hussain columns at www.toledoblade.com/hussain
Read more...
Afghanistan is a quagmire, and a decisive military victory in that country is not possible. Pakistan has been accused of not doing enough to curb al-Qaeda and the Taliban operating from the sanctuaries in its tribal areas and thus being indirectly responsible for the failure in Afghanistan.
In reality there are four different wars being waged from the tribal areas of Pakistan. There is the war against the occupation forces in Afghanistan. There is a war against the Pakistani government and the Pakistani army. There is a war, supported by elements in the Pakistani army, to contain Indian influence in Afghanistan. And now the war has spilled over and is being waged against the common man in Pakistan who does not subscribe to al-Qaeda and the Taliban brand of Islam.
U.S. lawmakers have been, for the last few years, very critical of Pakistan and have questioned the wisdom of giving Pakistan $10 billion over the last six years while not having much in return to show for it. This simplistic money-for-action equation, however, is nave at best and hypocritical at worst. Let us step back and examine on-the-ground realities that may be different from what appears from Washington and even from Islamabad.
The situation in the tribal areas of Pakistan, complex as it is, can be pared down to three important interlocking elements.
First, there is a pervasive anti-American feeling among Pakistanis, just as there is elsewhere in the world. These sentiments cut across all segments of society. There is also a pervasive feeling that the war on terror is in fact a war against Islam. These sentiments have hardened since my three-part report published in The Blade in May, 2005, on the subject.
Second, the shouts of jihad against the occupation forces in Afghanistan aside, most Pakistanis are religious, but not militant or fanatics. As such, they are no different from, say, observant Christians, Jews, or followers of other religions.
The pivotal piece in this equation is the fact that the ouster of foreign forces from Afghanistan is not the ultimate aim of al-Qaeda and the Taliban. The aim is to control Pakistan and establish a Taliban-style government in the country. That end point, in their limited worldview, would solve all their socio-economic ills.
So why can't the majority of Pakistanis see through this charade and realize that in the long run they stand to lose not only their moderate to liberal way of life but their country as well? I am sure the experts in the White House and the Pentagon continue to mull this critical question.
The answer lies in the peculiar mind-set that believes that the enemy of my enemy is my friend. The deep resentment felt toward American foreign policy and its effects on the people in the Middle East and South Asia is enough for ordinary people to withhold criticism of al-Qaeda and the Taliban even though they disagree with their harsh and uncompromising interpretation of religion.
For the people of Pakistan in general and for those Pakistanis living along the northwest frontier in particular, the al-Qaeda-Taliban fight against the occupation forces in Afghanistan is not their fight.
Since al-Qaeda and the Taliban have framed this fight in religious terms and exploited the prevailing anti-American sentiments in Pakistan, the attitude of most Pakistanis can be explained by the German word schadenfreude, which means taking pleasure in the misery of others.
But the recent foray of the Taliban into the Northwest Frontier Province of Pakistan is making them think twice about the enemy-of-my-enemy-is-my-
friend mind-set.
The enemy of my enemy also proves to be my enemy when he indiscriminately bombs civilians, orders the closing of girls' schools, forbids barbers to shave beards, and forbids women to venture outside their homes.
This is happening in the Swat Valley in the north and in many other districts of the province. In Peshawar, the provincial capital, their activities are limited to forcing the closing of video and music shops.
The writing is clearly on the wall.
Dr. S. Amjad Hussain is a Toledo surgeon whose column appears every other week in The Blade.
» E-mail him at aghaji@buckeye-express.com
» Read more Dr. Hussain columns at www.toledoblade.com/hussain
Read more...
Javed Chaudhry - the mouth piece of Taliban and Sipah-e-Sahaba, the champion of yellow journalism in Pakistan
In his recent jihad against writers and columnists who are acutely critical of Taliban and their supporters in ISI and politics, the notorious pro-Taliban and pro-Sipah-e-Sahaba yellow journalist, Javed Chaudhary, has crossed all limits of decency.
![[Javed+Chaudhry+on+Najam+Sethi+and+Salman+Taseer.gif]](http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_Vbc4oO2rGiw/SQQaJroxoGI/AAAAAAAAAZs/t2u6a09uDyY/s1600/Javed%2BChaudhry%2Bon%2BNajam%2BSethi%2Band%2BSalman%2BTaseer.gif)
Some Comments:
offstage Says:
November 22nd, 2008
OUR FUTURE Dr…..Yes….Yeh Bhashan dainay walay Javed Ch. sahib aik zamanay mein Nawaz Sharif kay sath Singapore Sarkari MUFTAY tour par gaay thay, aur wapis aa kar column Likha tha, ” AUR WAZIR A AZAM KI AANKHON MEIN CHAMAK THI”( I must request Javed Ch. that some time, he must include his that Column in his own programme) Javed Ch.Praised a lot Nawaz Sharif Vision and pain for poor Pakistani Nation.Even Javed told the readers, that Nawaz Sharif was CRYING, and he was having TEARS in his EYES….for POOR Pakistani Nation….Drop scene was !!! nawaz Sharif acquired the Railway lands, and Qarz Utaro Mulk Sanwaro” Railway land was basically for flats for poor pakistanis,As Singaporean Prime Minister Build Flats for his poor salried people…I have No Idea, any one POOR Pakistani have that Flat in Singaporean Style.All that time This Javed Ch.was silent..Bhalla WHY ?Because of that TRIP and other Lifafas.No Question to Nawaz Sharif of taj Company Money and other scandles.Now he is giving Bhashan, anyone know on What Costs ????? yes this is a Question.I will tell you…. Lekin Dekhtay rahain pkpolitics”KAL TAKK”
10-21-2008,
Gondal.T
Re: Anti-Pakistan Journalist & Experts
since most of the references and quotes are from ''Asia Times on line '' on this forum I would ask the members to see the other side of the picture as well , specially about the editor of this newspaper Mr.Najam sethi.It is in urdu
http://express.com.pk/epaper/PoPupwindow.aspx?newsID=1100505090&Issue=NP_LHE&Date=20081021
Hasher
Re: Anti-Pakistan Journalist & Experts
Gondal, Najam Sethi is the editor of The Daily Times and not of the Asia Times. As for his biography, i've posted details in another thread. And as for the article you attached here by Javed Chaudhry, its trash journalism at its very worst. Such ad hominem attacks based on lies and jealousy have no place on a respectable, serious forum like this. Please discuss issues and not personalities.
Hasher
Re: Anti-Pakistan Journalist & Experts
The issue is the credibility of the source which is quoted often.The serious thing is the alleged speech of Mr sathi in India which was said to be anti Pakistan.The issue can be his NGO which is funded by west however since the author never proved his allegations or believed that those facts need no further proves the benefit of doubt goes to Mr sethi.However there must be script of his speech somewhere and Mr javed chaudhary is reputed journalist but mr sethi was never liked around lahore press club for unknown reasons unlike other left wing journalists like Zafayab ahmmad, hussein naqi and so many others who had their respect from opponents for honesty and dedication to the cause.
Hasher
Re: Anti-Pakistan Journalist & Experts
Gondal the '97 incidence is an infamous one and the details are known widely. The speech which Sethi gave in India was not controversial and he had given the exact same speech at the Command and Staff College in Quetta a few weeks before. Nawaz had his goons and the local police pick Sethi up to settle some scores and claimed that the ISI had him in their custody. However ISI immediately denied this and gave public statements saying they absolutely did not consider him a security threat. If you search this forum you'll find details of this case and some articles detailing how then ISI chief (Gen. Mehmood Ahmed I believe) helped secure his release and refused to bow to the political pressure to detain and 'teach him a lesson'.
affendi
Re: Anti-Pakistan Journalist & Experts
i dont think it was 97, because i am sure that musharraf was asked by nawaz sharif to 'lock him up and throw the keys away' or something to that effect. musharraf politely refused, saying that he could not do such a thing. here's the incident in sethi's own words.
Quote:
My case was quite bizarre. An armed posse of the Punjab Police and the IB [Intelligence Bureau] smashed its way into my bedroom at 2:30 am on May 8th, 1999, beat up my wife and me, gagged me, blindfolded me, handcuffed me and dragged me away. I was in their custody for many hours. Then I was handed over to the ISI. The ISI kept me in a safe house first in Lahore and then in Islamabad . It investigated everything, found that the treason charges against me were trumped up politically by the Prime Minister (PM) and then confidentially told me that it was under pressure from the PM to court martial me. But it said that Gen Mush [sic] was against the idea of any military involvement in my case and was telling the PM that the civilians should handle it.
Gondal.T
Re: Anti-Pakistan Journalist & Experts
I think if something was wrong in speech the case should have been made open and open trial should have taken place instead of ''sena zori''.Tolerance is required which always lacked in our agencies who would cover their weakness in litigation by third degree.I don,t understand what happened to Musharaf once he was in power and same story was repeated with hundreds of people.However monitoring of funds transfer from abroad should be made fool proof and any transaction from out of the country to any NGO may it be of Najam sethi or Hafiz saeed should have record of donors which should be audited on regular basis and made public
Hasher
Re: Anti-Pakistan Journalist & Experts
Gondal, the point is that the Javed Chaudhry article you posted is complete and absolute rubbish. Even for a lafafa journalist like him, this is about the very lowest you can stoop to, where you're making ridiculous accusations against people in the hope that some of them will stick with some of the people and would thus destroy the other person's repute.
Sethi is far from being a perfect man or even a very good one, however the brand of journalism he practices is far superior to what the likes of Javed Chaudhry (who incidentally, is a mouthpiece of the local Talibans as well) could ever aspire to. The purpose of this thread is to analyze the trends and motives behind these anti-Pakistan journalists and their nefarious output, and not to engage in rumor mongering, charactor assassination and certainly not to spread more anti-Pakistan & pro-Taliban propaganda.
2. It was not the 'agencies' in this case who were engaging in these practices but rather the democratically elected PM using the regular police force to settle personal and political scores.
3. While many (including myself) may differ from what people like Sethi believe in and their vision of of our country, to accuse them of being "foreign agents" is simply ridiculous and leads to a further fragmentation of our society and promotes intolerance and narrow-minded rigidity. The purpose of having a free media is to engage in debates about differing visions of our country's future that diferent people have.
4. The very same Islamists who today are riling against 'liberals' like Sethi, were in the forefront of opposition to the establishment of Pakistan. Today, they've somehow become custodians of our 'ideology' (invented in the '80s) and are quick to accuse all their opponents of being traitors or 'foreign agents.' We must move beyond this.
......
Abbas Ather's Letter to the Taliban lover Javed Chaudhry
![[1100506957-2+spanking.gif]](http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_Vbc4oO2rGiw/SQQm1oJoEXI/AAAAAAAAAZ0/x7xOtICC4u8/s1600/1100506957-2%2Bspanking.gif)
...
Tanveer Qaiser Shahid - 28 Feb 2009
Read more...
Some Comments:
offstage Says:
November 22nd, 2008
OUR FUTURE Dr…..Yes….Yeh Bhashan dainay walay Javed Ch. sahib aik zamanay mein Nawaz Sharif kay sath Singapore Sarkari MUFTAY tour par gaay thay, aur wapis aa kar column Likha tha, ” AUR WAZIR A AZAM KI AANKHON MEIN CHAMAK THI”( I must request Javed Ch. that some time, he must include his that Column in his own programme) Javed Ch.Praised a lot Nawaz Sharif Vision and pain for poor Pakistani Nation.Even Javed told the readers, that Nawaz Sharif was CRYING, and he was having TEARS in his EYES….for POOR Pakistani Nation….Drop scene was !!! nawaz Sharif acquired the Railway lands, and Qarz Utaro Mulk Sanwaro” Railway land was basically for flats for poor pakistanis,As Singaporean Prime Minister Build Flats for his poor salried people…I have No Idea, any one POOR Pakistani have that Flat in Singaporean Style.All that time This Javed Ch.was silent..Bhalla WHY ?Because of that TRIP and other Lifafas.No Question to Nawaz Sharif of taj Company Money and other scandles.Now he is giving Bhashan, anyone know on What Costs ????? yes this is a Question.I will tell you…. Lekin Dekhtay rahain pkpolitics”KAL TAKK”
10-21-2008,
Gondal.T
Re: Anti-Pakistan Journalist & Experts
since most of the references and quotes are from ''Asia Times on line '' on this forum I would ask the members to see the other side of the picture as well , specially about the editor of this newspaper Mr.Najam sethi.It is in urdu
http://express.com.pk/epaper/PoPupwindow.aspx?newsID=1100505090&Issue=NP_LHE&Date=20081021
Hasher
Re: Anti-Pakistan Journalist & Experts
Gondal, Najam Sethi is the editor of The Daily Times and not of the Asia Times. As for his biography, i've posted details in another thread. And as for the article you attached here by Javed Chaudhry, its trash journalism at its very worst. Such ad hominem attacks based on lies and jealousy have no place on a respectable, serious forum like this. Please discuss issues and not personalities.
Hasher
Re: Anti-Pakistan Journalist & Experts
The issue is the credibility of the source which is quoted often.The serious thing is the alleged speech of Mr sathi in India which was said to be anti Pakistan.The issue can be his NGO which is funded by west however since the author never proved his allegations or believed that those facts need no further proves the benefit of doubt goes to Mr sethi.However there must be script of his speech somewhere and Mr javed chaudhary is reputed journalist but mr sethi was never liked around lahore press club for unknown reasons unlike other left wing journalists like Zafayab ahmmad, hussein naqi and so many others who had their respect from opponents for honesty and dedication to the cause.
Hasher
Re: Anti-Pakistan Journalist & Experts
Gondal the '97 incidence is an infamous one and the details are known widely. The speech which Sethi gave in India was not controversial and he had given the exact same speech at the Command and Staff College in Quetta a few weeks before. Nawaz had his goons and the local police pick Sethi up to settle some scores and claimed that the ISI had him in their custody. However ISI immediately denied this and gave public statements saying they absolutely did not consider him a security threat. If you search this forum you'll find details of this case and some articles detailing how then ISI chief (Gen. Mehmood Ahmed I believe) helped secure his release and refused to bow to the political pressure to detain and 'teach him a lesson'.
affendi
Re: Anti-Pakistan Journalist & Experts
i dont think it was 97, because i am sure that musharraf was asked by nawaz sharif to 'lock him up and throw the keys away' or something to that effect. musharraf politely refused, saying that he could not do such a thing. here's the incident in sethi's own words.
Quote:
My case was quite bizarre. An armed posse of the Punjab Police and the IB [Intelligence Bureau] smashed its way into my bedroom at 2:30 am on May 8th, 1999, beat up my wife and me, gagged me, blindfolded me, handcuffed me and dragged me away. I was in their custody for many hours. Then I was handed over to the ISI. The ISI kept me in a safe house first in Lahore and then in Islamabad . It investigated everything, found that the treason charges against me were trumped up politically by the Prime Minister (PM) and then confidentially told me that it was under pressure from the PM to court martial me. But it said that Gen Mush [sic] was against the idea of any military involvement in my case and was telling the PM that the civilians should handle it.
Gondal.T
Re: Anti-Pakistan Journalist & Experts
I think if something was wrong in speech the case should have been made open and open trial should have taken place instead of ''sena zori''.Tolerance is required which always lacked in our agencies who would cover their weakness in litigation by third degree.I don,t understand what happened to Musharaf once he was in power and same story was repeated with hundreds of people.However monitoring of funds transfer from abroad should be made fool proof and any transaction from out of the country to any NGO may it be of Najam sethi or Hafiz saeed should have record of donors which should be audited on regular basis and made public
Hasher
Re: Anti-Pakistan Journalist & Experts
Gondal, the point is that the Javed Chaudhry article you posted is complete and absolute rubbish. Even for a lafafa journalist like him, this is about the very lowest you can stoop to, where you're making ridiculous accusations against people in the hope that some of them will stick with some of the people and would thus destroy the other person's repute.
Sethi is far from being a perfect man or even a very good one, however the brand of journalism he practices is far superior to what the likes of Javed Chaudhry (who incidentally, is a mouthpiece of the local Talibans as well) could ever aspire to. The purpose of this thread is to analyze the trends and motives behind these anti-Pakistan journalists and their nefarious output, and not to engage in rumor mongering, charactor assassination and certainly not to spread more anti-Pakistan & pro-Taliban propaganda.
2. It was not the 'agencies' in this case who were engaging in these practices but rather the democratically elected PM using the regular police force to settle personal and political scores.
3. While many (including myself) may differ from what people like Sethi believe in and their vision of of our country, to accuse them of being "foreign agents" is simply ridiculous and leads to a further fragmentation of our society and promotes intolerance and narrow-minded rigidity. The purpose of having a free media is to engage in debates about differing visions of our country's future that diferent people have.
4. The very same Islamists who today are riling against 'liberals' like Sethi, were in the forefront of opposition to the establishment of Pakistan. Today, they've somehow become custodians of our 'ideology' (invented in the '80s) and are quick to accuse all their opponents of being traitors or 'foreign agents.' We must move beyond this.
......
Abbas Ather's Letter to the Taliban lover Javed Chaudhry
![[1100506957-2+spanking.gif]](http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_Vbc4oO2rGiw/SQQm1oJoEXI/AAAAAAAAAZ0/x7xOtICC4u8/s1600-h/1100506957-2+spanking.gif)
...
Tanveer Qaiser Shahid - 28 Feb 2009
Read more...
Saturday, 25 October 2008
Almost one million people of Parachinar remain stranded for more than a year by the criminals of Taliban, Sipah-e-Sahaba & Al-Qaeda, sponsored by ISI
Appeal for help to the international community
PESHAWAR: Delay in reopening road delays return of peace to Kurram
By Zulfiqar Ali
PESHAWAR, Oct 23: Delay in reopening of Thall-Parachinar Road despite an agreement, reached between the warring tribes of Kurram tribal region in Murree on Oct 16, is likely to shatter people’s confidence.
Under the peace agreement, signed by the rival parties, a 30-member jirga had to proceed to Parachinar on Wednesday last by road to end yearlong blockade of the area bordering Afghanistan.
Former federal minister Malik Waris Khan Afridi, who is leading the jirga, told Dawn that plan had been revised and mediators comprising notables and former parliamentarians from Fata and Hangu district along with 34 local elders were likely to go to Parachinar on Saturday.
“Both parties want lasting peace and have agreed to reopen the main road and resolve the disputes. Now this is the government’s responsibility to facilitate the process for the jirga to proceed to the area by road in order to rebuild confidence of the local people,” he maintained.
He said that further delay in reopening of the main road might shatter peace process, adding that according to the agreement negligence on the part of the local administration or any other government agency might be considered a deliberate move to sabotage the peace process.
“If administration takes jirga members to Parachinar by helicopters then it will not serve the purpose and will spoil all the efforts,” he said and urged that the government should rein in trouble makers to save the peace process.
Upper parts of Kurram had remained cut off from the rest of the country since November 6 last when fierce clashes broke out in the region.
The blockade had badly affected socio-economic activities in the region which forced local people to travel to Peshawar via Afghanistan.
The political administration had made an abortive attempt to open the road in June last for transporting food to Parachinar but the convoy was attacked near Sadda in Lower Kurram.
Sajjid Hussain, an MNA from the area, said that around 1,600 people had been killed and more then 3,000 wounded in fighting, causing large scale displacement and destruction. He said that Fata Secretariat in coordination with the Federal Interior Ministry was working out a plan for road safety.
Sources said that one of the reasons for delaying visit of jirga was immediate transfer of political agent Mohammad Azam Khan, who was posted as managing director of Sarhad Tourism Corporation.
Officials said that as the political agent was transferred after he was promoted to grade 20. Only grade 19 officer can be posted as political agent of Kurram.
“Transfer of Azam Khan at this very moment was not a wise decision on the part of the government.
His transfer conveys a clear message that government is not sincere in restoration of peace in Kurram,” said a jirga member from Parachinar. He said that Azam Khan should stay in Parachinar once joint jirga reached by road to start dialogue.
Sources said that normalcy was fast returning to Kurram valley and rival groups had voluntarily vacated trenches in sensitive areas and stopped plundering and destroying each other properties.
In Parachinar town, the administrative headquarters, local elders have voluntarily placed complete ban on display of weapons. Peace committees have been set up to check the movement of miscreants. (Dawn)
Please consider signing this petition.
SOS from Pakistan - Save Pakistani Shias Petition
http://www.petitiononline.com/ShiaSOS/petition.html
Read more...
PESHAWAR: Delay in reopening road delays return of peace to Kurram
By Zulfiqar Ali
PESHAWAR, Oct 23: Delay in reopening of Thall-Parachinar Road despite an agreement, reached between the warring tribes of Kurram tribal region in Murree on Oct 16, is likely to shatter people’s confidence.
Under the peace agreement, signed by the rival parties, a 30-member jirga had to proceed to Parachinar on Wednesday last by road to end yearlong blockade of the area bordering Afghanistan.
Former federal minister Malik Waris Khan Afridi, who is leading the jirga, told Dawn that plan had been revised and mediators comprising notables and former parliamentarians from Fata and Hangu district along with 34 local elders were likely to go to Parachinar on Saturday.
“Both parties want lasting peace and have agreed to reopen the main road and resolve the disputes. Now this is the government’s responsibility to facilitate the process for the jirga to proceed to the area by road in order to rebuild confidence of the local people,” he maintained.
He said that further delay in reopening of the main road might shatter peace process, adding that according to the agreement negligence on the part of the local administration or any other government agency might be considered a deliberate move to sabotage the peace process.
“If administration takes jirga members to Parachinar by helicopters then it will not serve the purpose and will spoil all the efforts,” he said and urged that the government should rein in trouble makers to save the peace process.
Upper parts of Kurram had remained cut off from the rest of the country since November 6 last when fierce clashes broke out in the region.
The blockade had badly affected socio-economic activities in the region which forced local people to travel to Peshawar via Afghanistan.
The political administration had made an abortive attempt to open the road in June last for transporting food to Parachinar but the convoy was attacked near Sadda in Lower Kurram.
Sajjid Hussain, an MNA from the area, said that around 1,600 people had been killed and more then 3,000 wounded in fighting, causing large scale displacement and destruction. He said that Fata Secretariat in coordination with the Federal Interior Ministry was working out a plan for road safety.
Sources said that one of the reasons for delaying visit of jirga was immediate transfer of political agent Mohammad Azam Khan, who was posted as managing director of Sarhad Tourism Corporation.
Officials said that as the political agent was transferred after he was promoted to grade 20. Only grade 19 officer can be posted as political agent of Kurram.
“Transfer of Azam Khan at this very moment was not a wise decision on the part of the government.
His transfer conveys a clear message that government is not sincere in restoration of peace in Kurram,” said a jirga member from Parachinar. He said that Azam Khan should stay in Parachinar once joint jirga reached by road to start dialogue.
Sources said that normalcy was fast returning to Kurram valley and rival groups had voluntarily vacated trenches in sensitive areas and stopped plundering and destroying each other properties.
In Parachinar town, the administrative headquarters, local elders have voluntarily placed complete ban on display of weapons. Peace committees have been set up to check the movement of miscreants. (Dawn)
Please consider signing this petition.
SOS from Pakistan - Save Pakistani Shias Petition
http://www.petitiononline.com/ShiaSOS/petition.html
Read more...
Taliban receiving a good beating by Pakistan Army in Bajaur.
Taliban receiving a good beating by Pakistan Army in Bajaur. A bad day for Ansar Abbasi, Hamid Mir and other supporters of Taliban and Sipah-e-Sahaba.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/urdu/pakistan/story/2008/10/081025_bajur_visit_fz.shtml
Read more...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/urdu/pakistan/story/2008/10/081025_bajur_visit_fz.shtml
Read more...
Swat: A Police Officer Slaughtered; Taliban's spokesperson accepts the responsibility. Shame on you Imran Khan and Hamid Gul.
Spokesperson of Taliban/Al-Qaeda/Sipah-e-Sahaba, Muslim Khan, has accepted the responsibility of slaughtering the personnel of Pakistan's security forces (police, FC, Army) in Swat.
What do Imran Khan and Hamid Gul say about this acceptance of responsibility by the Taliban?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/urdu/pakistan/story/2008/10/081025_swat_securityman_bodies.shtml
Read more...
What do Imran Khan and Hamid Gul say about this acceptance of responsibility by the Taliban?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/urdu/pakistan/story/2008/10/081025_swat_securityman_bodies.shtml
Read more...
Letting someone else rule the Tribal Areas
As Mr Shaukat Tareen, the finance advisor, makes his last-ditch efforts to arrange a $4.5 billion short-term bailout for the economy, PMLN leaders Chaudhry Nisar Ali Khan and Raja Zafarul Haq have spoken at a press conference in Islamabad asking the government to set up a committee to implement the “consensual” resolution on national security. On the economic front, none of our “friends” has so far declared up front that it will bail out Pakistan with a bilateral loan. All aid is linked to Pakistan’s ability and willingness to fight its own war in the Tribal Areas to its logical conclusion. Therefore one hopes that the PMLN leaders have interpreted the National Security resolution in a broad sense and don’t simply insist on the cessation of military operations. The opposition leader in the National Assembly, Mr Nisar Ali Khan, has demanded a permanent “monitoring” committee of the parliament that should ensure the implementation of the resolution “in 48 hours”. He referred to a recent case of investigation of an engineering student and asked the government to stop victimising innocent people in the name of the war against terrorism. But Mr Khan’s reference to “two earlier occasions” when signed agreements were not implemented means that he fears that his party’s interpretation of the national security resolution may not be accepted by the government. This time, however, the text of the resolution is so broad and inclusive that the government can remain embarked on its current policy of giving full backing to the army in its operations in the Tribal Areas without being accused fairly of violating it. The “enemy” is watching the scene very carefully to see whether its position continues to be eroded because of the operations in Bajaur and Swat or dissension in Islamabad loads the dice in its favour once again.
The assumption behind support for the policy of cessation of operations — followed by negotiations with the Taliban-Al Qaeda combine — is that the Tribal Areas have become occupied by rebellious elements because of Pakistan’s unfair linkage with the American war in Afghanistan, and that a delinking from the Americans and Europeans in Afghanistan will at once pacify the territory east of the Durand Line and relocate the war inside Afghanistan once again with Pakistan sitting back comfortably and watching the show as it did in the 1990s. But nothing of this sort is going to happen.
The fundamental question here is whether Pakistan will allow its territory to be occupied and increasingly controlled by the rebels or militants or terrorists or try to do what all states must do: regain the writ of the state in the said region before force of practice over time gives the Taliban and Al Qaeda elements the right to retain control and negotiate an actual informal separation of the region from the rest of Pakistan. In other words, Pakistan is faced with the possibility of tacitly agreeing — through negotiation from a position of weakness — to allow someone else to rule the Tribal Areas under an agreement. But since Pakistan has kept the Tribal Areas in a kind of administrative limbo, the negotiators may be inclined to let “the local people run their territory” if they would leave the rest of Pakistan alone. This kind of arrangement will be based only after first assuming that the Taliban are our own people enraged by our change of policy in Afghanistan and that Al Qaeda actually does not exist. But the consequences of thus buying security for the rest of Pakistan by letting the Emirate of South Waziristan rule the Tribal Areas will be disastrous. The ideology under which the Tribal Areas will be ruled in such a situation will always be unsettling for the rest of Pakistan living under the 1973 Constitution and its Federal Shariat Court amendment that makes all laws Islamic. Indeed, in such a situation the “leakage” from the more stringent ideology of the Taliban would continue because of the presence of tens of thousands of madrassas in Pakistan and the dominance of the religious parties in the big cities. The MMA government in the NWFP had tried to but failed to import the Taliban brand of Islam through its Hasba Bill but today some parts of the province are under the de facto control of that law.
The consequences of “separating” the Tribal Areas in the hope that the war will shift into Afghanistan would be terminally damaging for Pakistan. The neighbours of Afghanistan will not allow a repeat of the 1997 and 1998 massacres of Mazar-e-Sharif when the Pashtun Taliban tried to complete their conquest of the non-Pashtun north. If the Tribal Areas of Pakistan continue to be used as a kind of “strategic depth” for war in Afghanistan, the rest of Pakistan will succumb to the school-burning and citizen-beheading ideology of the terrorists waiting to “negotiate” with us. (Daily Times)
Read more...
The assumption behind support for the policy of cessation of operations — followed by negotiations with the Taliban-Al Qaeda combine — is that the Tribal Areas have become occupied by rebellious elements because of Pakistan’s unfair linkage with the American war in Afghanistan, and that a delinking from the Americans and Europeans in Afghanistan will at once pacify the territory east of the Durand Line and relocate the war inside Afghanistan once again with Pakistan sitting back comfortably and watching the show as it did in the 1990s. But nothing of this sort is going to happen.
The fundamental question here is whether Pakistan will allow its territory to be occupied and increasingly controlled by the rebels or militants or terrorists or try to do what all states must do: regain the writ of the state in the said region before force of practice over time gives the Taliban and Al Qaeda elements the right to retain control and negotiate an actual informal separation of the region from the rest of Pakistan. In other words, Pakistan is faced with the possibility of tacitly agreeing — through negotiation from a position of weakness — to allow someone else to rule the Tribal Areas under an agreement. But since Pakistan has kept the Tribal Areas in a kind of administrative limbo, the negotiators may be inclined to let “the local people run their territory” if they would leave the rest of Pakistan alone. This kind of arrangement will be based only after first assuming that the Taliban are our own people enraged by our change of policy in Afghanistan and that Al Qaeda actually does not exist. But the consequences of thus buying security for the rest of Pakistan by letting the Emirate of South Waziristan rule the Tribal Areas will be disastrous. The ideology under which the Tribal Areas will be ruled in such a situation will always be unsettling for the rest of Pakistan living under the 1973 Constitution and its Federal Shariat Court amendment that makes all laws Islamic. Indeed, in such a situation the “leakage” from the more stringent ideology of the Taliban would continue because of the presence of tens of thousands of madrassas in Pakistan and the dominance of the religious parties in the big cities. The MMA government in the NWFP had tried to but failed to import the Taliban brand of Islam through its Hasba Bill but today some parts of the province are under the de facto control of that law.
The consequences of “separating” the Tribal Areas in the hope that the war will shift into Afghanistan would be terminally damaging for Pakistan. The neighbours of Afghanistan will not allow a repeat of the 1997 and 1998 massacres of Mazar-e-Sharif when the Pashtun Taliban tried to complete their conquest of the non-Pashtun north. If the Tribal Areas of Pakistan continue to be used as a kind of “strategic depth” for war in Afghanistan, the rest of Pakistan will succumb to the school-burning and citizen-beheading ideology of the terrorists waiting to “negotiate” with us. (Daily Times)
Read more...
A postmortem of anti-democracy journalists; A mirror to Ansar Abbasi, Kashif Abbasi, Hamid Mir, Mushtaq Minhas and other supporters of Taliban.
![[1100507337-2.gif]](http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_Vbc4oO2rGiw/SQLNsCvLQaI/AAAAAAAAAZc/HJVTUF0s6hw/s1600/1100507337-2.gif)
![[1100508619-2.gif]](http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_Vbc4oO2rGiw/SQV7KR0aJ4I/AAAAAAAAAbk/kOLWZnZA6LI/s1600-h/1100508619-2.gif)
The anti-PPP forces, ISI, the right wing and the pro-Taliban elements in Pakistan - By Ayaz Amir
Is there anything more to see?
Friday, October 24, 2008
By by Ayaz Amir
Of all our leaders thrown up by the vicissitudes of events, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto alone had the talent and drive to reverse these trends and build a new Pakistan as he vowed to do when he assumed power in December 1971 after the army's catastrophic defeat in East Pakistan (by then Bangladesh). But his autocratic tendencies, honed to an unusual degree, earned him bitter enemies. And he went to war in Balochistan when as a popularly-elected leader he should have sought conciliation and co-existence with the elected leaders of that province. He had put a lid on dissent but when that lid had to be lifted when elections were held in 1977, emotions long suppressed burst into the open, assuming the shape of an agitation which from protest against election rigging was transformed into a movement calling for the establishment of Islamic rule.
In one of his many policy blunders Bhutto had chosen a seemingly compliant junior general as the army chief. Little could Bhutto have known that Gen Ziaul Haq was a closet maulvi, a hidden fundamentalist. He bided his time and struck when Bhutto's fortunes were at their lowest ebb in the summer of 1977. On seizing power Zia proclaimed Islamisation as his aim and sought to create a religious constituency for himself by patronising religious elements, especially the right wing Jamaat-i-Islami which was close to his heart, and fostering a cult of false and hypocritical religiosity which still has Pakistan in its grip.
The first Afghan 'jihad' (1979 onwards) against the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan had a profound impact on Pakistani society. It proved to be http://www.blogger.com/img/blank.gifPakistan's introduction to a new culture: one based on the Kalashnikov rifle and the heroin trade. Pakistan's ISI was the conduit through which assistance was funnelled to the Afghan 'mujahideen'. As a result of this involvement the ISI evolved into a behemoth with its fingers and tentacles in every aspect of national policy.
Since the rallying cry of the Afghan resistance was Islam, and since Islamist parties to varying degrees were the spear-carriers of that struggle, the trend towards religiosity or religious revivalism started earlier by Zia was strengthened. Talibanism – whether in the form of the Lal Masjid contingent, Maulvi Fazlullah in Swat or Baitullah Mahsud in Waziristan – are but manifestations of a phenomenon which has grown these past 30 years, ever since that fateful movement against Bhutto in 1977.
The use of F-16s and helicopter gunships won't reverse this trend. If anything, fighting this war as an appendage or pawn of the United States distorts the whole argument by portraying the Taliban as holy warriors pitted against an evil empire. If we are to meet this challenge we have, as a matter of tactics if nothing else, to (1) keep the US at a distance and (2) strengthen the competence of the Pakistani state. Else we are lost.
Indeed, the first requirement of our present situation is for the state to function better. For that to begin happening we have to put an end to the culture of nepotism, cronyism and corruption which have become the hallmarks of our style of governance. If key appointments are not to be made on merit, if cronies and hangers-on who may have rendered private services in the past but who have little otherwise to recommend them for high state offices are not shown the door, if the size of the government, bloated beyond all reasonable measure, is not reduced, if fat (and there is plenty of it around) is not cut, if wasteful expenditure (and there is plenty of that too around) is not eliminated, if the governing class (and this means all parties) don't begin to look more serious, we are not going to come out of our present troubles.
We say these are not ordinary times. Why don't we then take extraordinary measures to make people realise that the captains and pilots on deck are serious? Let the cabinet look like a war and not a passenger train. We can do without a new GHQ in these dire times and why do we want refurbished F-16s? Fighting India is no longer an option in anyone's mind. Do we need F-16s to use against our own tribesmen?
Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry (remember him?) for all his faults, and he may have had many, touched people's hearts by taking on the mighty and protecting the poor and defenceless. Ordinary people looked up to the Supreme Court because of this. Our various leaderships have yet to galvanize the nation in a similar manner.
Email: chakwal@comsats.net.pk
Read more...
Friday, October 24, 2008
By by Ayaz Amir
Of all our leaders thrown up by the vicissitudes of events, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto alone had the talent and drive to reverse these trends and build a new Pakistan as he vowed to do when he assumed power in December 1971 after the army's catastrophic defeat in East Pakistan (by then Bangladesh). But his autocratic tendencies, honed to an unusual degree, earned him bitter enemies. And he went to war in Balochistan when as a popularly-elected leader he should have sought conciliation and co-existence with the elected leaders of that province. He had put a lid on dissent but when that lid had to be lifted when elections were held in 1977, emotions long suppressed burst into the open, assuming the shape of an agitation which from protest against election rigging was transformed into a movement calling for the establishment of Islamic rule.
In one of his many policy blunders Bhutto had chosen a seemingly compliant junior general as the army chief. Little could Bhutto have known that Gen Ziaul Haq was a closet maulvi, a hidden fundamentalist. He bided his time and struck when Bhutto's fortunes were at their lowest ebb in the summer of 1977. On seizing power Zia proclaimed Islamisation as his aim and sought to create a religious constituency for himself by patronising religious elements, especially the right wing Jamaat-i-Islami which was close to his heart, and fostering a cult of false and hypocritical religiosity which still has Pakistan in its grip.
The first Afghan 'jihad' (1979 onwards) against the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan had a profound impact on Pakistani society. It proved to be http://www.blogger.com/img/blank.gifPakistan's introduction to a new culture: one based on the Kalashnikov rifle and the heroin trade. Pakistan's ISI was the conduit through which assistance was funnelled to the Afghan 'mujahideen'. As a result of this involvement the ISI evolved into a behemoth with its fingers and tentacles in every aspect of national policy.
Since the rallying cry of the Afghan resistance was Islam, and since Islamist parties to varying degrees were the spear-carriers of that struggle, the trend towards religiosity or religious revivalism started earlier by Zia was strengthened. Talibanism – whether in the form of the Lal Masjid contingent, Maulvi Fazlullah in Swat or Baitullah Mahsud in Waziristan – are but manifestations of a phenomenon which has grown these past 30 years, ever since that fateful movement against Bhutto in 1977.
The use of F-16s and helicopter gunships won't reverse this trend. If anything, fighting this war as an appendage or pawn of the United States distorts the whole argument by portraying the Taliban as holy warriors pitted against an evil empire. If we are to meet this challenge we have, as a matter of tactics if nothing else, to (1) keep the US at a distance and (2) strengthen the competence of the Pakistani state. Else we are lost.
Indeed, the first requirement of our present situation is for the state to function better. For that to begin happening we have to put an end to the culture of nepotism, cronyism and corruption which have become the hallmarks of our style of governance. If key appointments are not to be made on merit, if cronies and hangers-on who may have rendered private services in the past but who have little otherwise to recommend them for high state offices are not shown the door, if the size of the government, bloated beyond all reasonable measure, is not reduced, if fat (and there is plenty of it around) is not cut, if wasteful expenditure (and there is plenty of that too around) is not eliminated, if the governing class (and this means all parties) don't begin to look more serious, we are not going to come out of our present troubles.
We say these are not ordinary times. Why don't we then take extraordinary measures to make people realise that the captains and pilots on deck are serious? Let the cabinet look like a war and not a passenger train. We can do without a new GHQ in these dire times and why do we want refurbished F-16s? Fighting India is no longer an option in anyone's mind. Do we need F-16s to use against our own tribesmen?
Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry (remember him?) for all his faults, and he may have had many, touched people's hearts by taking on the mighty and protecting the poor and defenceless. Ordinary people looked up to the Supreme Court because of this. Our various leaderships have yet to galvanize the nation in a similar manner.
Email: chakwal@comsats.net.pk
Read more...
Drone attacks and ground assaults - By Rahimullah Yusufzai
Drone attacks and ground assaults
Saturday, October 25, 2008
Rahimullah Yusufzai
Whether it was General Pervez Musharraf's dictatorship or Asif Ali Zardari's democratic set-up, the government came to the conclusion that it cannot afford to antagonize the US by trying to attack the CIA-operated Predator planes that fly unchallenged over Pakistan's tribal areas and frequently fire missiles at targets deemed hostile to America and its allies. Apart from the occasional feeble protests at violation of our airspace and sovereignty, the preferred policy has always been to express ignorance about such attacks even if innocent Pakistanis are killed, injured and maimed.
Under Musharraf, the unwise policy of claiming responsibility for missile strikes launched by the US military was quickly discarded after it became evident that Pakistan's security forces were becoming target of retaliatory suicide bombings by the militants. Days after the Pakistan Army claimed responsibility for the US missile attack that killed 82 young students at a madressah in Bajaur, it was shocked by a suicide bombing at a military training centre in Dargai in which 42 soldiers lost their lives. Keeping quiet or feigning ignorance over US military intrusions and missile attacks was a better policy than taking ownership of assaults that were committed by someone else.
The policy now being followed is to ignore the missile strikes by the US drones and try and stop ground forces crossing the Pak-Afghan border and attacking Pakistani villages in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA). The decision to combat intrusions into Pakistani territory was prompted by the US Special Operation Forces' provocative attack recently on a Pakistani hamlet near Angoor Adda in South Waziristan and the killing of 20 innocent villagers, including five women and four children. That those killed were all civilians was borne out by the fact that the authorities in South Waziristan paid cash compensation to the heirs of the deceased in a bid to do some damage control and calm down angry tribesmen seeking revenge against the US for its act of unprovoked aggression. It is true that sections of the US and western media still refer to those killed in this ground offensive as militants and terrorists and President George W Bush's administration has refused to admit its mistake and apologize for the crime of killing innocent people. But this is nothing new and such an arrogant attitude has created a lot more enemies for the US and made it one of the least liked countries in the world.
In private conversation, senior government functionaries argue that an attack on the US drones entering Pakistani territory would escalate tension on the Pak-Afghan border and affect relations with the US. It is pointed out that Pakistan Air Force's F-16 jet-fighters were capable of shooting down the pilotless planes that fly at heights of 18,000 to 20,000 feet or the Pakistan Army's long-range artillery guns could hit the drones while flying at low altitude. The anti-aircraft guns normally cannot reach or hit targets at the height at which the Predator or the new Reaper pilotless planes fly. Even while flying at low altitude, the drones come down rapidly at a lightning speed and would, therefore, not be easy for a normal anti-aircraft artillery gun to target accurately.
The policy then is to let the US drones attack any number of targets in the tribal areas bordering Afghanistan and hope that the Hellfire missiles being fired at hideouts of suspected militants in populated areas would cause fewer civilian casualties. There is always concern that the "collateral damage" would trigger protests in the country and could have political repercussions. But efforts are made not to let the situation go out of control. One such effort recently seen was the decision to scramble Mirage planes into the skies of North Waziristan and scare away the drones that had been flying over Pakistani villages for hours. The US spy planes reportedly flew out of Pakistani airspace much to the applause and satisfaction of the tribal population of North Waziristan even though the Mirages never fired at the drones. However, this isn't done every time the US drones intrude into Pakistani territory.
On two other occasions, however, the situation could have gone out of hand as there was real worry over escalation of hostilities on the Durand Line border between Afghanistan and Pakistan. Once near Angoor Adda where South Waziristan is bounded by Afghanistan's Paktika province, Pakistan Army troops released artillery flares to light up the night-time sky and then the soldiers and the tribesmen fired at US jet-fighters and helicopters that clearly were intending to intrude into Pakistani territory for a possible ground assault. The magnesium-powder used in the parachute flares lit up the area with its whitish-reddish light and made it risky for the US Special Forces to attempt another ground operation in South Waziristan. The tribesmen, among them militants, used the Russian-made Dachaka guns to fire at the intruding choppers, which then landed in Afghan territory close to the border instead of crossing into Pakistani territory. A US Army brigadier contacted a Pakistan Army brigadier soon after the incident and threatened to send in B-52 bombers to 'plaster' Pakistani forces in the border area. The Pakistani military officer refused to be intimidated and asked his American counterpart to go ahead and do whatever he wanted. Later, senior US military officials contacted top Pakistan Army officers to calm down the situation and explain the circumstances in which the American brigadier made his provocative remarks to his Pakistani counterpart.
In the second instance, a similar incident happened on the border between North Waziristan and Afghanistan's Khost province. The Chinook helicopters bringing US Special Forces reportedly turned back after the artillery flares released by Pakistan Army troops lit up the sky and made an intrusion very risky. The two incidents apparently sent the message home to the US military that the Pakistani armed forces would act if another ground offensive was attempted. Pakistan Army chief General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani's warning that violation of Pakistan's territorial sovereignty would not be tolerated was, therefore, meant to be taken seriously. However, it is another matter that the military at this stage doesn't want to escalate tension with the US by attacking the intruding drones but it is willing to prevent ground offensives in Pakistani territory.
With regard to the US drone attacks, it needs to be conceded that some of the missile strikes have been fairly accurate in taking out foreign militants and their Pakistani hosts in both South and North Waziristan. The estimate by an unnamed senior Pakistan government functionary that 98 per cent of the US missile strikes were right on target may be far-fetched, but the fact remains that technology and human intelligence provided by the scores of Pakistani and Afghan tribesmen spying for the US have enabled the Americans to attack militants while they are holding meetings, taking meals or sleeping. Without ground intelligence using the GPS to point out potential targets, the drones may not succeed in going for the kill. There seem to be hundreds of informers working for the US in the tribal areas without the knowledge and agreement of the Pakistan government and the Taliban militants may not be wrong when they claim to have apprehended some of them and then have them summarily executed or beheaded.
The tribal borderlands have become dangerous places with all those revenge killings and blood-feuds and the bloodshed is bound to increase now that the government has made it a policy to assist anti-Taliban tribesmen to raise armed lashkars to fight the militants. It is a gamble that may or may not pay off in achieving the government objective of weakening the militants' control in FATA and some of the Frontier districts but it would certainly sow the seeds of further polarization in the heavily-armed tribal society and forever pit one tribe or clan against another.
Also, the US military through its drone attacks in Pakistani territory would surely manage to kill some of its enemies but every missile strike invariably causes civilian deaths and contributes to the anti-America and pro-Taliban sentiment. Avoiding civilian casualties in aerial strikes is impossible and the US has already learnt it at great cost to its reputation that the "collateral damage" in Afghanistan has made the war against Taliban un-winnable. It surely would not want to meet the same fate while fighting the so-called 'war on terror" in Pakistan.
The writer is resident editor of The News in Peshawar. Email: rahimyusufzai @yahoo.com (The News)
Read more...
Saturday, October 25, 2008
Rahimullah Yusufzai
Whether it was General Pervez Musharraf's dictatorship or Asif Ali Zardari's democratic set-up, the government came to the conclusion that it cannot afford to antagonize the US by trying to attack the CIA-operated Predator planes that fly unchallenged over Pakistan's tribal areas and frequently fire missiles at targets deemed hostile to America and its allies. Apart from the occasional feeble protests at violation of our airspace and sovereignty, the preferred policy has always been to express ignorance about such attacks even if innocent Pakistanis are killed, injured and maimed.
Under Musharraf, the unwise policy of claiming responsibility for missile strikes launched by the US military was quickly discarded after it became evident that Pakistan's security forces were becoming target of retaliatory suicide bombings by the militants. Days after the Pakistan Army claimed responsibility for the US missile attack that killed 82 young students at a madressah in Bajaur, it was shocked by a suicide bombing at a military training centre in Dargai in which 42 soldiers lost their lives. Keeping quiet or feigning ignorance over US military intrusions and missile attacks was a better policy than taking ownership of assaults that were committed by someone else.
The policy now being followed is to ignore the missile strikes by the US drones and try and stop ground forces crossing the Pak-Afghan border and attacking Pakistani villages in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA). The decision to combat intrusions into Pakistani territory was prompted by the US Special Operation Forces' provocative attack recently on a Pakistani hamlet near Angoor Adda in South Waziristan and the killing of 20 innocent villagers, including five women and four children. That those killed were all civilians was borne out by the fact that the authorities in South Waziristan paid cash compensation to the heirs of the deceased in a bid to do some damage control and calm down angry tribesmen seeking revenge against the US for its act of unprovoked aggression. It is true that sections of the US and western media still refer to those killed in this ground offensive as militants and terrorists and President George W Bush's administration has refused to admit its mistake and apologize for the crime of killing innocent people. But this is nothing new and such an arrogant attitude has created a lot more enemies for the US and made it one of the least liked countries in the world.
In private conversation, senior government functionaries argue that an attack on the US drones entering Pakistani territory would escalate tension on the Pak-Afghan border and affect relations with the US. It is pointed out that Pakistan Air Force's F-16 jet-fighters were capable of shooting down the pilotless planes that fly at heights of 18,000 to 20,000 feet or the Pakistan Army's long-range artillery guns could hit the drones while flying at low altitude. The anti-aircraft guns normally cannot reach or hit targets at the height at which the Predator or the new Reaper pilotless planes fly. Even while flying at low altitude, the drones come down rapidly at a lightning speed and would, therefore, not be easy for a normal anti-aircraft artillery gun to target accurately.
The policy then is to let the US drones attack any number of targets in the tribal areas bordering Afghanistan and hope that the Hellfire missiles being fired at hideouts of suspected militants in populated areas would cause fewer civilian casualties. There is always concern that the "collateral damage" would trigger protests in the country and could have political repercussions. But efforts are made not to let the situation go out of control. One such effort recently seen was the decision to scramble Mirage planes into the skies of North Waziristan and scare away the drones that had been flying over Pakistani villages for hours. The US spy planes reportedly flew out of Pakistani airspace much to the applause and satisfaction of the tribal population of North Waziristan even though the Mirages never fired at the drones. However, this isn't done every time the US drones intrude into Pakistani territory.
On two other occasions, however, the situation could have gone out of hand as there was real worry over escalation of hostilities on the Durand Line border between Afghanistan and Pakistan. Once near Angoor Adda where South Waziristan is bounded by Afghanistan's Paktika province, Pakistan Army troops released artillery flares to light up the night-time sky and then the soldiers and the tribesmen fired at US jet-fighters and helicopters that clearly were intending to intrude into Pakistani territory for a possible ground assault. The magnesium-powder used in the parachute flares lit up the area with its whitish-reddish light and made it risky for the US Special Forces to attempt another ground operation in South Waziristan. The tribesmen, among them militants, used the Russian-made Dachaka guns to fire at the intruding choppers, which then landed in Afghan territory close to the border instead of crossing into Pakistani territory. A US Army brigadier contacted a Pakistan Army brigadier soon after the incident and threatened to send in B-52 bombers to 'plaster' Pakistani forces in the border area. The Pakistani military officer refused to be intimidated and asked his American counterpart to go ahead and do whatever he wanted. Later, senior US military officials contacted top Pakistan Army officers to calm down the situation and explain the circumstances in which the American brigadier made his provocative remarks to his Pakistani counterpart.
In the second instance, a similar incident happened on the border between North Waziristan and Afghanistan's Khost province. The Chinook helicopters bringing US Special Forces reportedly turned back after the artillery flares released by Pakistan Army troops lit up the sky and made an intrusion very risky. The two incidents apparently sent the message home to the US military that the Pakistani armed forces would act if another ground offensive was attempted. Pakistan Army chief General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani's warning that violation of Pakistan's territorial sovereignty would not be tolerated was, therefore, meant to be taken seriously. However, it is another matter that the military at this stage doesn't want to escalate tension with the US by attacking the intruding drones but it is willing to prevent ground offensives in Pakistani territory.
With regard to the US drone attacks, it needs to be conceded that some of the missile strikes have been fairly accurate in taking out foreign militants and their Pakistani hosts in both South and North Waziristan. The estimate by an unnamed senior Pakistan government functionary that 98 per cent of the US missile strikes were right on target may be far-fetched, but the fact remains that technology and human intelligence provided by the scores of Pakistani and Afghan tribesmen spying for the US have enabled the Americans to attack militants while they are holding meetings, taking meals or sleeping. Without ground intelligence using the GPS to point out potential targets, the drones may not succeed in going for the kill. There seem to be hundreds of informers working for the US in the tribal areas without the knowledge and agreement of the Pakistan government and the Taliban militants may not be wrong when they claim to have apprehended some of them and then have them summarily executed or beheaded.
The tribal borderlands have become dangerous places with all those revenge killings and blood-feuds and the bloodshed is bound to increase now that the government has made it a policy to assist anti-Taliban tribesmen to raise armed lashkars to fight the militants. It is a gamble that may or may not pay off in achieving the government objective of weakening the militants' control in FATA and some of the Frontier districts but it would certainly sow the seeds of further polarization in the heavily-armed tribal society and forever pit one tribe or clan against another.
Also, the US military through its drone attacks in Pakistani territory would surely manage to kill some of its enemies but every missile strike invariably causes civilian deaths and contributes to the anti-America and pro-Taliban sentiment. Avoiding civilian casualties in aerial strikes is impossible and the US has already learnt it at great cost to its reputation that the "collateral damage" in Afghanistan has made the war against Taliban un-winnable. It surely would not want to meet the same fate while fighting the so-called 'war on terror" in Pakistan.
The writer is resident editor of The News in Peshawar. Email: rahimyusufzai @yahoo.com (The News)
Read more...
Friday, 24 October 2008
Asif Ali Zardari and the real killers of Benazir Bhutto, i.e. the unholy nexus of pro-Taliban establishment (ISI, bureaucracy) & mullahs in Pakistan
![[p10-5.gif]](http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_Vbc4oO2rGiw/SQGUAv7TGaI/AAAAAAAAAZU/EDNruotJtJ8/s1600/p10-5.gif)
Well done, Zardari. You need to do more to address genuine concerns of our Baloch brothers and sisters...
More for the Baloch
WHILE the debate over which should come first in Balochistan, development or peace, is a never-ending one, no progress can be made on either unless a well-thought-out strategy is put into action. Considering that this has not happened over several decades of simmering Baloch discontent, President Zardari’s pledge to restore peace in the troubled province and make it secure for exploring energy resources seems too good to be true. Similar promises have been made time and again but military action, human rights abuses and the utter failure to improve socio-economic conditions have rendered them worthless.
Today Baloch militants may have decided to suspend anti-state activities (although the Dera Bugti bomb blast last Sunday gives a different impression), but it will be difficult to sustain the peace unless sweeping measures are taken to deliver on promises made to the Baloch by different governments. Balochistan is a mineral-rich province and its gas fields are crucial to sustaining Pakistan’s energy requirements. Conversely, it is the poorest in terms of human development; no surprise here as the province has a small share even in its own earnings with the centre delaying the payment of billions of rupees in gas royalties.
President Zardari’s words must be matched with actions if it is really the intent of this government to transform the province, and the first goal in this regard must be to win over the people’s trust. At present, the government’s policies and the military’s excesses that have caused so many to ‘disappear’, to be killed, to be rendered homeless, have alienated thousands of Baloch civilians. Moreover, a large number of them believe that development projects such as the Gwadar Port aim to bring in outside labour that would not only deprive the local people of employment opportunities but also change the demographic composition of the area. In these circumstances it is all too natural for separatist emotions to arise from the ashes of slain leaders and broken promises. To nip these in the bud — although in numerous cases such feelings have already assumed full-blown proportions — a greater measure of provincial autonomy and equitable resource-sharing must be given top priority. The marginalised Baloch must be brought into the national mainstream and made to feel their worth in society and given their rightful due in monetary and political terms. The government has enough on its hands with the Taliban menace. It cannot afford further violence that threatens the state’s integrity.
Read more...
WHILE the debate over which should come first in Balochistan, development or peace, is a never-ending one, no progress can be made on either unless a well-thought-out strategy is put into action. Considering that this has not happened over several decades of simmering Baloch discontent, President Zardari’s pledge to restore peace in the troubled province and make it secure for exploring energy resources seems too good to be true. Similar promises have been made time and again but military action, human rights abuses and the utter failure to improve socio-economic conditions have rendered them worthless.
Today Baloch militants may have decided to suspend anti-state activities (although the Dera Bugti bomb blast last Sunday gives a different impression), but it will be difficult to sustain the peace unless sweeping measures are taken to deliver on promises made to the Baloch by different governments. Balochistan is a mineral-rich province and its gas fields are crucial to sustaining Pakistan’s energy requirements. Conversely, it is the poorest in terms of human development; no surprise here as the province has a small share even in its own earnings with the centre delaying the payment of billions of rupees in gas royalties.
President Zardari’s words must be matched with actions if it is really the intent of this government to transform the province, and the first goal in this regard must be to win over the people’s trust. At present, the government’s policies and the military’s excesses that have caused so many to ‘disappear’, to be killed, to be rendered homeless, have alienated thousands of Baloch civilians. Moreover, a large number of them believe that development projects such as the Gwadar Port aim to bring in outside labour that would not only deprive the local people of employment opportunities but also change the demographic composition of the area. In these circumstances it is all too natural for separatist emotions to arise from the ashes of slain leaders and broken promises. To nip these in the bud — although in numerous cases such feelings have already assumed full-blown proportions — a greater measure of provincial autonomy and equitable resource-sharing must be given top priority. The marginalised Baloch must be brought into the national mainstream and made to feel their worth in society and given their rightful due in monetary and political terms. The government has enough on its hands with the Taliban menace. It cannot afford further violence that threatens the state’s integrity.
Read more...
'Kafeel bhai ko salaam..Mashoor-e-zamana right arm, left arm spin bowler of Ghotki.’
Footloose: Tale of a tragic hero —Salman Rashid
Fourteen years is time enough to forget people one meets. But though I never returned to Ghotki, I never forgot Kafeel Bhai. The thought of how these years would have treated him was never far from my mind
Anyone who had frequently driven around the highways of Pakistan and kept their eyes open back in the 1980s and well into the 90s could just not have missed the eye-catching slogan on the rear bumpers of passing lorries — and there was scarcely a long-distance hauler that did not bear this slogan. ‘Kafeel bhai ko salaam,’ it would say in the Nastaliq script. But the clincher was the ending, also in Urdu: ‘Mashoor-e-zamana right arm, left arm spin bowler of Ghotki.’
How can that be, I, who gives not a fig for cricket, used to think driving behind such a lorry. This man in one-horse Ghotki is surely a lunatic who does not know what spin bowling with the right arm or the other one meant. But the slogan was persistent through the years and I one day resolved to check out Ghotki for myself. For the benefit of those who have not even heard of this place, Ghotki, situated sixty kilometres northeast of Sukkur on National Highway 5, has now been a district headquarters for some years. Back in the eighties, it was a hick little town.
It was in November 1994 that I found myself on a street with furniture workshops asking for Kafeel Bhai. I found him in the back of a badly-lit workshop sanding a chair. Seeing me approach, he got up, dusted his hands and came bounding towards me in a barrage of greeting. It was almost as if he, conscious of his fame, had been waiting for fans to start pouring in.
Kafeel Bhai talked as if he had wanted someone, just anyone, to come around and hear him out. He was born Kafeel Ahmed Siddiqui in 1958. His father Khalil, a native of Jhansi (India) was a veteran Muslim Leaguer and, so I was told, a close associate of Jinnah’s who surnamed him Pakistani. The young country whose name he carried saw this good man settling in Ghotki where Kafeel was born and went to school which ended at matriculation. Even as a child he possessed great ability with the paintbrush, but small town Pakistan was hardly the place to put this artistic talent to good use. Also, the family was sufficiently well-off for the boy never really having to worry about a profession.
While still in school in the early 1970s, Kafeel began to play cricket as a left arm spinner with the ambition of getting into the national team. Jim Laker (of Australia?) who had taken a record of nineteen wickets in 1956 was his idol and for the sake of Pakistan Kafeel wanted to break this apparently unbeatable record. From photos he had, he painted Laker’s portrait, placed it a vantage so that his hero looked upon him and taught himself to bowl with the right arm ‘just like Laker’. Now with this ability of being able to bowl with both arms, he thought he could floor any batsmen with his variety he could offer in a single over.
The station of the true master of his craft is at the top. Kafeel did not want to play small-time cricket anymore. But fortune passed him by; he was, he says briefly, ignored by the selectors. His best playing years were wasted in the long wait and he gave up the game sometime in the 1980s because he could not reach the national team. The man who, as he looked at it, could have turned the world on its head with his remarkable ability and won a great name for himself and country was heartbroken. The dream of taking twenty wickets for Pakistan receded into the distance and with fame evading him thus, Kafeel set his sights elsewhere.
‘I wanted to be well-known so I started painting trucks,’ he said. With a wicker basket for his paint cans and brushes he haunted the truck stops of Ghotki to paint truck art. When the drivers and their assistants were not watching, he slyly added his slogan. By and by there were few lorries that did not bear his tag-line; the legend of the ambidextrous bowler began to be sprinkled across the land. He claimed that his renown had travelled to France and in the summer of ‘93, a team of Frenchmen visited him to invite him to travel to their country and paint their airliners.
But Kafeel would have nothing to do with a ‘two-bit country like France.’ He only wanted to do whatever he could for Pakistan. In any case, they had rejected his pre-condition to add his tag-line on every machine he painted.
In his heyday he would not ‘spare’ any vehicle. Car, lorry, tonga, donkey cart, bicycle — even the lotas in mosque latrines, they all carried the salaam notice. (He took me to a mosque and the bottoms of the lotas in the toilet were indeed inscribed!) Those were days of dakoo raj in Sindh and once Kafeel was kidnapped by a bunch of outlaws. Discovering who he was, they had him paint their names on their respective weapons. Our man obliged, appending each inscription with a ‘Kafeel bhai ko salaam.’ Not long after, the outlaws having been gunned down, the police came looking for the man.
Like Kafeel the cricketer, Kafeel the artist could write and paint with both hands with equal facility without the script showing any sign of awkwardness. He could do it right side up and upside down or he could do mirror writing in Urdu and Sindhi scripts. But he never asked for money for his work. ‘Because an artist’s work is priceless and it is bad form to seek recompense for art.’ If people wished to pay him, Kafeel held his pocket open for them to drop in the cash which he dutifully took home to his mother.
Unmarried at that time, he told me marriage was his last priority because he first wished to achieve the height of fame. He was sure that he was well on his way ‘or why would an educated person like you come to sit at my feet?’ As we were parting that day, I asked him if I could do something for him. ‘The time to do things for me is past,’ he said without a twinge of sadness and thanked me for taking the trouble to see him. In the bazaar where we said our farewells, everyone seemed to know him. I commented on it and he said, ‘Like rivers that fall into the great ocean, they all come to me.’
I saw men young and old, Hindu and Muslim, Sindhi, Punjabi and Mohajir came up to him and he greeted them one and all by kissing their hands. Then my tonga pulled away and the last I saw of left arm, right arm spin bowler Kafeel Bhai of Ghotki was him surrounded by a sea of bobbing heads.
In between this interview, on my request Kafeel changed into his old and fraying flannels that accentuated his spindly legs and slight frame. He led me to a garden and there showed me his amazing ambidextrous bowling. They might have called them ‘flighted deliveries’, but since I cannot tell a googly from silly point or anything else I was not the best judge of Kafeel’s craft.
Fourteen years is time enough to forget people one meets. But though I never returned to Ghotki, I never forgot Kafeel Bhai. The thought of how these years would have treated him was never far from my mind. Could he have kept his cheerfulness despite the heart that he said was broken? Or would he be swamped with despondency? It was last June that I was in Sukkur again and took time off to travel to Ghotki. The furniture shops were all there and I eventually fetched up at the one where I had met Kafeel a decade and a half ago. He was no longer there.
The owner told me that Khalil Ahmed Pakistani had disposed of the property in Ghotki and moved his family to Karachi some years earlier. Kafeel was still a bachelor at that time. No one had a forwarding address, nor too were any relatives living in Ghotki who could tell me where to look for my man. Is it possible that Karachi with its opportunities has seen the flowering of the artist hiding in the slim frame of Kafeel Ahmed Siddiqui? Is it possible that someone who knows of him will read this piece and puts me in touch with him again?
Salman Rashid is a travel writer and knows Pakistan like the back of his hand. He can be reached at odysseus@link.net.pk (Daily Times)
Read more...
Fourteen years is time enough to forget people one meets. But though I never returned to Ghotki, I never forgot Kafeel Bhai. The thought of how these years would have treated him was never far from my mind
Anyone who had frequently driven around the highways of Pakistan and kept their eyes open back in the 1980s and well into the 90s could just not have missed the eye-catching slogan on the rear bumpers of passing lorries — and there was scarcely a long-distance hauler that did not bear this slogan. ‘Kafeel bhai ko salaam,’ it would say in the Nastaliq script. But the clincher was the ending, also in Urdu: ‘Mashoor-e-zamana right arm, left arm spin bowler of Ghotki.’
How can that be, I, who gives not a fig for cricket, used to think driving behind such a lorry. This man in one-horse Ghotki is surely a lunatic who does not know what spin bowling with the right arm or the other one meant. But the slogan was persistent through the years and I one day resolved to check out Ghotki for myself. For the benefit of those who have not even heard of this place, Ghotki, situated sixty kilometres northeast of Sukkur on National Highway 5, has now been a district headquarters for some years. Back in the eighties, it was a hick little town.
It was in November 1994 that I found myself on a street with furniture workshops asking for Kafeel Bhai. I found him in the back of a badly-lit workshop sanding a chair. Seeing me approach, he got up, dusted his hands and came bounding towards me in a barrage of greeting. It was almost as if he, conscious of his fame, had been waiting for fans to start pouring in.
Kafeel Bhai talked as if he had wanted someone, just anyone, to come around and hear him out. He was born Kafeel Ahmed Siddiqui in 1958. His father Khalil, a native of Jhansi (India) was a veteran Muslim Leaguer and, so I was told, a close associate of Jinnah’s who surnamed him Pakistani. The young country whose name he carried saw this good man settling in Ghotki where Kafeel was born and went to school which ended at matriculation. Even as a child he possessed great ability with the paintbrush, but small town Pakistan was hardly the place to put this artistic talent to good use. Also, the family was sufficiently well-off for the boy never really having to worry about a profession.
While still in school in the early 1970s, Kafeel began to play cricket as a left arm spinner with the ambition of getting into the national team. Jim Laker (of Australia?) who had taken a record of nineteen wickets in 1956 was his idol and for the sake of Pakistan Kafeel wanted to break this apparently unbeatable record. From photos he had, he painted Laker’s portrait, placed it a vantage so that his hero looked upon him and taught himself to bowl with the right arm ‘just like Laker’. Now with this ability of being able to bowl with both arms, he thought he could floor any batsmen with his variety he could offer in a single over.
The station of the true master of his craft is at the top. Kafeel did not want to play small-time cricket anymore. But fortune passed him by; he was, he says briefly, ignored by the selectors. His best playing years were wasted in the long wait and he gave up the game sometime in the 1980s because he could not reach the national team. The man who, as he looked at it, could have turned the world on its head with his remarkable ability and won a great name for himself and country was heartbroken. The dream of taking twenty wickets for Pakistan receded into the distance and with fame evading him thus, Kafeel set his sights elsewhere.
‘I wanted to be well-known so I started painting trucks,’ he said. With a wicker basket for his paint cans and brushes he haunted the truck stops of Ghotki to paint truck art. When the drivers and their assistants were not watching, he slyly added his slogan. By and by there were few lorries that did not bear his tag-line; the legend of the ambidextrous bowler began to be sprinkled across the land. He claimed that his renown had travelled to France and in the summer of ‘93, a team of Frenchmen visited him to invite him to travel to their country and paint their airliners.
But Kafeel would have nothing to do with a ‘two-bit country like France.’ He only wanted to do whatever he could for Pakistan. In any case, they had rejected his pre-condition to add his tag-line on every machine he painted.
In his heyday he would not ‘spare’ any vehicle. Car, lorry, tonga, donkey cart, bicycle — even the lotas in mosque latrines, they all carried the salaam notice. (He took me to a mosque and the bottoms of the lotas in the toilet were indeed inscribed!) Those were days of dakoo raj in Sindh and once Kafeel was kidnapped by a bunch of outlaws. Discovering who he was, they had him paint their names on their respective weapons. Our man obliged, appending each inscription with a ‘Kafeel bhai ko salaam.’ Not long after, the outlaws having been gunned down, the police came looking for the man.
Like Kafeel the cricketer, Kafeel the artist could write and paint with both hands with equal facility without the script showing any sign of awkwardness. He could do it right side up and upside down or he could do mirror writing in Urdu and Sindhi scripts. But he never asked for money for his work. ‘Because an artist’s work is priceless and it is bad form to seek recompense for art.’ If people wished to pay him, Kafeel held his pocket open for them to drop in the cash which he dutifully took home to his mother.
Unmarried at that time, he told me marriage was his last priority because he first wished to achieve the height of fame. He was sure that he was well on his way ‘or why would an educated person like you come to sit at my feet?’ As we were parting that day, I asked him if I could do something for him. ‘The time to do things for me is past,’ he said without a twinge of sadness and thanked me for taking the trouble to see him. In the bazaar where we said our farewells, everyone seemed to know him. I commented on it and he said, ‘Like rivers that fall into the great ocean, they all come to me.’
I saw men young and old, Hindu and Muslim, Sindhi, Punjabi and Mohajir came up to him and he greeted them one and all by kissing their hands. Then my tonga pulled away and the last I saw of left arm, right arm spin bowler Kafeel Bhai of Ghotki was him surrounded by a sea of bobbing heads.
In between this interview, on my request Kafeel changed into his old and fraying flannels that accentuated his spindly legs and slight frame. He led me to a garden and there showed me his amazing ambidextrous bowling. They might have called them ‘flighted deliveries’, but since I cannot tell a googly from silly point or anything else I was not the best judge of Kafeel’s craft.
Fourteen years is time enough to forget people one meets. But though I never returned to Ghotki, I never forgot Kafeel Bhai. The thought of how these years would have treated him was never far from my mind. Could he have kept his cheerfulness despite the heart that he said was broken? Or would he be swamped with despondency? It was last June that I was in Sukkur again and took time off to travel to Ghotki. The furniture shops were all there and I eventually fetched up at the one where I had met Kafeel a decade and a half ago. He was no longer there.
The owner told me that Khalil Ahmed Pakistani had disposed of the property in Ghotki and moved his family to Karachi some years earlier. Kafeel was still a bachelor at that time. No one had a forwarding address, nor too were any relatives living in Ghotki who could tell me where to look for my man. Is it possible that Karachi with its opportunities has seen the flowering of the artist hiding in the slim frame of Kafeel Ahmed Siddiqui? Is it possible that someone who knows of him will read this piece and puts me in touch with him again?
Salman Rashid is a travel writer and knows Pakistan like the back of his hand. He can be reached at odysseus@link.net.pk (Daily Times)
Read more...
An analysis of the Parliament's National Consensus Resolution on War on Terror. How the agents of Taliban are trying to misinterpret the Resolution...
Interpreting the ‘national consensus’
After making public a variety of clashing views, all parties in the joint parliamentary session in Islamabad have produced a unanimous 14-point document of “national consensus” on the war on terror. This is an important moment in Pakistan’s history in so far as the politicians did not sabotage the session as they appeared to indicate earlier, but agreed to make an effort to arrive at a consensus over the crisis of terrorism in Pakistan. Needless to say, any “consensus” among people of differing points of view had to be abstract and broad, which is what the agreed document is. The corollary to that is that its interpretations will abound in the days to come.
For starters, the newspapers produced varying headlines on Thursday reflecting their separate understanding of what has been agreed to. Papers that were worried about the “dialogue” taking place with the terrorists blazoned the part that said there would be talks only with those who would lay down arms. The document actually says: “Dialogue will be encouraged with all those elements willing to abide by the Constitution of Pakistan and rule of law”. This is a most lucid pledge given by the joint session that negotiations will not be held with the militant violators of the law. One can say that this is where the PPP-led government has scored a victory.
The other headline claimed that “the army operations will cease” and that dialogue would be a first priority to meet the challenge of terrorism. “Army will not be used in FATA”, proclaimed another such headline. And one headline said: “No military operations; the army will be withdrawn”. This twist on the consensus document refers us to the section that says, “The challenge of militancy and extremism must be met through developing a consensus and dialogue with all genuine stakeholders”. And the suspension of military operations and withdrawal of the army is assumed from the section that says, “That the state shall establish its writ...(using customary means)...and that the military will be replaced as early as possible by civilian law-enforcement agencies...”.
There was even a headline that said, “Pakistan’s foreign policy will be changed”, meaning perhaps that Pakistan will get out of the international coalition against terrorism. However, an overhaul of the entire issue of militancy and insurgency in the Tribal Areas as well as in Balochistan is promised in the opening sentence of the consensus resolution: “We need an urgent review of our national security strategy and revisiting the methodology of combating terrorism in order to restore peace and stability to Pakistan and the region though an independent foreign policy”. But this remains subject to the interpretation of the government. The opposition, however, will hold it to the implied undertaking that it would change policy in consultation inside the parliament.
On the other hand, the government will steadily make reference to the section that says: “That Pakistan’s sovereignty and territorial integrity shall be safeguarded. The nation stands united against any incursions and invasions of the homeland, and calls upon the government to deal with it effectively”. Read it together with the pledge given in the sentence, “That Pakistan’s territory shall not be used for any kind of attacks on other countries and all foreign fighters, if found shall be expelled from our soil” and you have given the government the latitude to take on the Taliban of all varieties plus their overlord Al Qaeda because they are invading Afghanistan across the Durand Line.
The normal outcome of such a broad and “inclusive” consensus is that bickering starts over what it means, at two levels. First, there will be some altercation between the government and the opposition over how to go about implementing this consensus. And, second, there will be quarrels within the opposition parties whose leaders have signed the document and “betrayed the party cause”. This bickering is normally supposed to give space to the government to continue its policy based on objective conditions. The national issue remains politicised, producing some dissonance in a national environment that everybody thinks should be consensual.
The document is an achievement of the PPP government. Despite the negative jurisprudence of some signed inter-party documents of the past, it was able to persuade leaders of radically differing views to sign under the 14 points that did not all reflect their position. Will the army facing the terrorists in the Tribal Areas be reassured by the production of this document in the parliament? There is no doubt that it will be less put off now than before by a lack of national consensus, but it will still have to work under the familiar democratic ambiance of dissent in the media where the opposition is able to make a strong appearance.
The army will remain deployed because of the threat to Pakistan’s survival as a state. Islamabad will not allow the country to be isolated internationally simply because it needs outside help to survive economically. And it will cooperate with Afghanistan and India to explore ways and means to reduce the triangular conflict of interests. All this is for the good. (Daily Times)
Read more...
After making public a variety of clashing views, all parties in the joint parliamentary session in Islamabad have produced a unanimous 14-point document of “national consensus” on the war on terror. This is an important moment in Pakistan’s history in so far as the politicians did not sabotage the session as they appeared to indicate earlier, but agreed to make an effort to arrive at a consensus over the crisis of terrorism in Pakistan. Needless to say, any “consensus” among people of differing points of view had to be abstract and broad, which is what the agreed document is. The corollary to that is that its interpretations will abound in the days to come.
For starters, the newspapers produced varying headlines on Thursday reflecting their separate understanding of what has been agreed to. Papers that were worried about the “dialogue” taking place with the terrorists blazoned the part that said there would be talks only with those who would lay down arms. The document actually says: “Dialogue will be encouraged with all those elements willing to abide by the Constitution of Pakistan and rule of law”. This is a most lucid pledge given by the joint session that negotiations will not be held with the militant violators of the law. One can say that this is where the PPP-led government has scored a victory.
The other headline claimed that “the army operations will cease” and that dialogue would be a first priority to meet the challenge of terrorism. “Army will not be used in FATA”, proclaimed another such headline. And one headline said: “No military operations; the army will be withdrawn”. This twist on the consensus document refers us to the section that says, “The challenge of militancy and extremism must be met through developing a consensus and dialogue with all genuine stakeholders”. And the suspension of military operations and withdrawal of the army is assumed from the section that says, “That the state shall establish its writ...(using customary means)...and that the military will be replaced as early as possible by civilian law-enforcement agencies...”.
There was even a headline that said, “Pakistan’s foreign policy will be changed”, meaning perhaps that Pakistan will get out of the international coalition against terrorism. However, an overhaul of the entire issue of militancy and insurgency in the Tribal Areas as well as in Balochistan is promised in the opening sentence of the consensus resolution: “We need an urgent review of our national security strategy and revisiting the methodology of combating terrorism in order to restore peace and stability to Pakistan and the region though an independent foreign policy”. But this remains subject to the interpretation of the government. The opposition, however, will hold it to the implied undertaking that it would change policy in consultation inside the parliament.
On the other hand, the government will steadily make reference to the section that says: “That Pakistan’s sovereignty and territorial integrity shall be safeguarded. The nation stands united against any incursions and invasions of the homeland, and calls upon the government to deal with it effectively”. Read it together with the pledge given in the sentence, “That Pakistan’s territory shall not be used for any kind of attacks on other countries and all foreign fighters, if found shall be expelled from our soil” and you have given the government the latitude to take on the Taliban of all varieties plus their overlord Al Qaeda because they are invading Afghanistan across the Durand Line.
The normal outcome of such a broad and “inclusive” consensus is that bickering starts over what it means, at two levels. First, there will be some altercation between the government and the opposition over how to go about implementing this consensus. And, second, there will be quarrels within the opposition parties whose leaders have signed the document and “betrayed the party cause”. This bickering is normally supposed to give space to the government to continue its policy based on objective conditions. The national issue remains politicised, producing some dissonance in a national environment that everybody thinks should be consensual.
The document is an achievement of the PPP government. Despite the negative jurisprudence of some signed inter-party documents of the past, it was able to persuade leaders of radically differing views to sign under the 14 points that did not all reflect their position. Will the army facing the terrorists in the Tribal Areas be reassured by the production of this document in the parliament? There is no doubt that it will be less put off now than before by a lack of national consensus, but it will still have to work under the familiar democratic ambiance of dissent in the media where the opposition is able to make a strong appearance.
The army will remain deployed because of the threat to Pakistan’s survival as a state. Islamabad will not allow the country to be isolated internationally simply because it needs outside help to survive economically. And it will cooperate with Afghanistan and India to explore ways and means to reduce the triangular conflict of interests. All this is for the good. (Daily Times)
Read more...
Abbas Ather exposes Ansar Abbasi, the notorious agent of the forces of darkness, the real enemy of Chief Justice and democracy.
In his op-ed in Daily Express, Abbas Ather exposes Ansar Abbasi, the notorious agent of the forces of darkness (i.e. the unholy nexus of Jamaat-e-Islami, ISI, and jihadi and sectarian organizations in Pakistan).
It was Ansar Abbasi who released the first media report against the so-called corruption of Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry. As a result, it was widely reported in national and international media that there is a link to the Chief Justice being suspended and the appointment of his son, Dr. Arsalan Iftikhar Chaudhry, as Additional Superintendent of Police after numerous amendments to the Police Service of Pakistan rules and the fact that he had twice flunked the Central Superior Services (CSS) exam that is required for that level of position.
http://www.emagine-group.com/behindthechairmansdoor/2007/03/21/an-aside-on-the-judicial-crisis-in-pakistan/
Ansar Abbasi also played a very cunning and hypocritical role by creating misunderstanding between the Chief Justice and the newly elected government of the Pakistan Peoples Party. For example, Ansar Abbasi in a news item revealed that the immediately after his restoration, Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhary would suspend the National Reconciliation Ordinance (NRO), thus effectively putting Asif Zardari and other leaders of PPP behind bars.
Ansar Abbasi is the same notorious journalist who recently tried to justify the terrorist attack on the Islamabad Marriott Hotel by 'revealing' that the Hotel was a secret station of American marines, and hence the act of terrorism was justified against that target.
Shame on you Ansar Abbasi. You are Ghaddar (traitor) Abbasi.
![[1100506729-2.gif]](http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_Vbc4oO2rGiw/SQF64h4pPnI/AAAAAAAAAZM/4okUJVWkId0/s1600/1100506729-2.gif)
Read more...
It was Ansar Abbasi who released the first media report against the so-called corruption of Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry. As a result, it was widely reported in national and international media that there is a link to the Chief Justice being suspended and the appointment of his son, Dr. Arsalan Iftikhar Chaudhry, as Additional Superintendent of Police after numerous amendments to the Police Service of Pakistan rules and the fact that he had twice flunked the Central Superior Services (CSS) exam that is required for that level of position.
http://www.emagine-group.com/behindthechairmansdoor/2007/03/21/an-aside-on-the-judicial-crisis-in-pakistan/
Ansar Abbasi also played a very cunning and hypocritical role by creating misunderstanding between the Chief Justice and the newly elected government of the Pakistan Peoples Party. For example, Ansar Abbasi in a news item revealed that the immediately after his restoration, Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhary would suspend the National Reconciliation Ordinance (NRO), thus effectively putting Asif Zardari and other leaders of PPP behind bars.
Ansar Abbasi is the same notorious journalist who recently tried to justify the terrorist attack on the Islamabad Marriott Hotel by 'revealing' that the Hotel was a secret station of American marines, and hence the act of terrorism was justified against that target.
Shame on you Ansar Abbasi. You are Ghaddar (traitor) Abbasi.
Read more...
Who is behind the attacks on WAPDA offices? Who is manufacturing violent demonstrations against the democratic government?
Who is behind the attacks on WAPDA offices? Who is manufacturing violent demonstrations against the Federal Government in the guise of protests against load-shedding and electricity bills? Beware of the unholy nexus of Jamaat-e-Islami and ISI. Shahbaz Sharif must advise the party members of PML-N to stay away from this conspiracy against democracy... (Aftab Iqbal)
![[colum2a.gif]](http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_Vbc4oO2rGiw/SQF20Z4t7ZI/AAAAAAAAAZE/BzRZe9Hfq48/s1600/colum2a.gif)
Read more...
Read more...
Haroon-ur-Rashid, a brilliant columnist, a follower of General Zia-ul-Haq and Zia's son Imran Khan...
koilon ki dallali main munh kala
In this op-ed piece, Haroon-ur-Rashid is trying to present General Zia-ul-Haq, the worst of all dictators in Pakistan's history, as the real hero of Islam and Pakistan, and the real hero of the Afghan jihad (actually the Afghan fasad).
Fools such as Haroon-ur-Rashid have a romantic vision of Khilafat-e-Abbasia and the so-called Golden Period of Islam etc. His imagination is usually culminated in his praise for idiots such as General Zia-ul-Haq, General Hamid Gul, General Akhtar Abdur Rehman, and other goons of ISI and religio-political parties including Qazi Hussain Ahmed and Imran Khan.
Indeed General Zia was an American mercenary, an example of the unholy nexus of mullah and military in Pakistan, a culprit behind sectarianism and ethnicism in Pakistan (e.g. Sipah-e-Shahaba and MQM), a culprit behind the Kalashnikov and heroin culture in this poor country. But why would Haroon-ur-Rashid write about these issues? He is not paid for writing facts.
![[col4.gif]](http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_Vbc4oO2rGiw/SQFyxjwR6XI/AAAAAAAAAY8/2C9oazD1E4Q/s1600/col4.gif)
A Comment:
tharapolitics said: Haroon-ur-Rashid, the undeclared propaganda secretary of Imran Khan.... Shame on you and your leader....
Can Imran Khan be Pakistan's Obama? Haroon-ur-Rashid, the ex-lover of General Zia, Akhtar Abdul Rehman & Hamid Gul found his lost love in Imran Khan
Read more...
In this op-ed piece, Haroon-ur-Rashid is trying to present General Zia-ul-Haq, the worst of all dictators in Pakistan's history, as the real hero of Islam and Pakistan, and the real hero of the Afghan jihad (actually the Afghan fasad).
Fools such as Haroon-ur-Rashid have a romantic vision of Khilafat-e-Abbasia and the so-called Golden Period of Islam etc. His imagination is usually culminated in his praise for idiots such as General Zia-ul-Haq, General Hamid Gul, General Akhtar Abdur Rehman, and other goons of ISI and religio-political parties including Qazi Hussain Ahmed and Imran Khan.
Indeed General Zia was an American mercenary, an example of the unholy nexus of mullah and military in Pakistan, a culprit behind sectarianism and ethnicism in Pakistan (e.g. Sipah-e-Shahaba and MQM), a culprit behind the Kalashnikov and heroin culture in this poor country. But why would Haroon-ur-Rashid write about these issues? He is not paid for writing facts.
A Comment:
tharapolitics said:
Haroon ur Rashid, wrote “excellent” regarding bringing democracy in parties.
Surprisingly, his today column is without any praising statement for Imran Khan.
Harron Rasheed’s changing stance on heroic personalities:
-Start writing columns praising JI
-Switch to support to Zia and Akhtar Abdul Rehman in 80’s
-Wrote for IJI
-Then next hero was Mian Nawaz in 90’s
-Sudden change and shift stance to Abdul Sattar Eidhi and Hamid Gul in late 90’s
-Next his hero was “Maulana Akram Awan” (Shahnoor Studio fame)
-Then MMA
-Since two years Imran Khan
and TODAY Khawja Asif
Nice to see “a person” who is famous for “Qabza Group” in Rawalpindi is preaching us for “revolution” bla bla bla…..
Also read:
Haroon-ur-Rashid, the undeclared propaganda secretary of Imran Khan.... Shame on you and your leader....
Can Imran Khan be Pakistan's Obama? Haroon-ur-Rashid, the ex-lover of General Zia, Akhtar Abdul Rehman & Hamid Gul found his lost love in Imran Khan
Read more...
Nzaria-e-Pakistan (The Ideology of Pakistan) and the Mullah-Military alliance in Pakistan... Nazir Naji
In this op-ed in Jang, Nazir Naji explain how the so-called ideology of Pakistan (Nazaria-e-Pakistan) was manufactured by the unholy nexus of Mullahs (Jamaat-e-Islami, Dr. Israr Ahmed, Dr. Safdar Mehmood) and Military (General Sher Ali, General Yahaya Khan, other officials of ISI) in 1971 with the blessings of the USA. As a result, the real ideologies of Jinnah and Iqbal were distorted, and a narrow sectarian agenda was implemented in the name of the so called Islamist ideology of Pakistan. Today, if the majority of Pakistani youths are confused about the ideology of Pakistan and do not have much knowledge about the ideas and principles of Jinnah and Iqbal, the real culprits behind this confusion are "intellectuals" such as Dr Safdar Mehmood, Dr Israr Ahmed, and other leaders or supporters of jihadi and sectarian organizations int his country, the real baqiyaat of Zia and Yahya.
![[col8.gif]](http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_Vbc4oO2rGiw/SQFvF0d9OWI/AAAAAAAAAYs/C8Y1kpR5QLE/s1600/col8.gif)
Read more...
Read more...
Thursday, 23 October 2008
Once upon a time, there was a benevolent leader namely George W. Bush who was very lenient on ISI's role in sponsoring terrorism...
Amir Ahmed Khan notes that Pakistani politicians, army and intelligence agencies need to adopt a concerted, robust strategy on the war on terrorism. Also, they need to develop confidence building measures with the regional and international players namely USA, China and NATO.
Read the three reasons because of which the USA officials are currently upset with the Pakistan Government, particularly its intelligence agencies.
For example: “American Officials told AZ that whenever they informed Pakistan army about the high level target , the target would escape”.
Amir Ahmed Khan reports that the American officials have warned Pakistan that if it did not address the three major concerns, then the day may not be too far, when Pakistan (its Government, people, media, and politicians) might say that:
Once upon a time, there was a benevolent American leader namely George W. Bush who was very lenient on ISI's role in sponsoring terrorism...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/urdu/pakistan/story/2008/10/081022_parliament_resolution_aak.shtml
Read more...
Read the three reasons because of which the USA officials are currently upset with the Pakistan Government, particularly its intelligence agencies.
For example: “American Officials told AZ that whenever they informed Pakistan army about the high level target , the target would escape”.
Amir Ahmed Khan reports that the American officials have warned Pakistan that if it did not address the three major concerns, then the day may not be too far, when Pakistan (its Government, people, media, and politicians) might say that:
Once upon a time, there was a benevolent American leader namely George W. Bush who was very lenient on ISI's role in sponsoring terrorism...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/urdu/pakistan/story/2008/10/081022_parliament_resolution_aak.shtml
Read more...
The blood thirsty beasts of the conservative parties in Pakistan, namely: Jamaat Islami, Imran Khan, Hamid Gul, and other agents of ISI and Taliban...
![[col8.gif]](http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_Vbc4oO2rGiw/SQAdY-pmySI/AAAAAAAAAYU/xd3dedK8fIQ/s1600/col8.gif)
Struggling against sectarianism: Shia-Sunni ecumenism: Views of Dr Israr Ahmed and Allama Kalbe Sadiq
Struggling against sectarianism: Shia-Sunni ecumenism
By Yoginder Sikand
In an unprecedented move, last week thousands of Sunni and Shia Muslims gathered together in Lucknow to collectively offer prayers to mark the festival of Eid at the end of the fasting month of Ramadan. Two men were behind this monumental effort, both Lucknow-based Islamic clerics—the noted Sunni scholar Maulana Khalid Rashid Firanghi Mahali and the well-known Shia scholar and social activist, Maulana Kalbe Sadiq.
I have had the honour of meeting and interviewing Maulana Kalbe Sadiq on several occasions. I have also visited the remarkable educational institutions that he runs in Lucknow and Aligarh. He strikes me as a firm champion of women's rights, inter-faith harmony and Muslim education, and he argues for all these from an Islamic perspective, Insisting that this is precisely what Islam itself mandates. He is also a Passionate advocate of Shia-Sunni dialogue and unity, in this being somewhat of an exception for the Indian ulema community.
Some years ago, Maulana Kalbe Sadiq penned a slim booklet in Urdu arguing the urgent need for Shia-Sunni understanding Titled 'Shia Sunni Mufahamat ki Zarurat wa Ahmiyat' ('The Need for and Importance of Shia-Sunni Understanding'). It is a summary of the arguments presented in a booklet bearing the same title written by the noted Pakistani Sunni Scholar Dr Israr Ahmad. At the outset, Maulana Kalbe Sadiq admits that he differs with Israr Ahmad on some points but then adds that, overall, his book is worthy of respect and is a sincere effort', a major contribution to the cause of Shia-Sunni unity which, he writes, numerous contemporary Shia leaders, not least Ayatollah Khomeini, have also passionately supported.
Drawing on Israr Ahmad's arguments, which he approvingly quotes, Maulana Kalbe Sadiq writes that since both Shias and Sunnis follow the same religion(deen), believe in the Sovereignty of God' and 'obedience to the Prophet', and also consider the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) to be the 'seal of the prophets', they are fellow Muslims. Israr Ahmad, writes Maulana Kalbe Sadiq, admits that there are certain differences (ikhtilafat) in the ways Shias and Sunnis interpret Islam, but this does not mean, he says, that they are different communities. 'Differences and communalism are two different things', Israr Ahmad stresses. He adds that the Quran itself indicates that 'differences in things are a reflection of a divine principle of creation', for differences characterize various aspects of nature, including 'people's looks, languages and mentalities'. Such differences, including those between Shias and Sunnis, Israr Ahmad writes, must be accepted and tolerated, rather than being sought to be wiped out or destroyed by issuing fatwas of infidelity, for that, he says, leads to a form of communalism which is itself 'not less than infidelity and polytheism.
The zeal to condemn others as infidels, Maulana Kalbe Sadiq quotes Israr Ahmad as writing, 'stems from the urge to dominate others.' 'While differences in interpretation can arise out of noble motives, the former urge can never', he adds. In other words, Israr Ahmad argues, Shia and Sunni clerics who engage in fierce polemical battles, seeking to brand each other as out of the pale of Islam, are not motivated by genuine religious sensitivities. He laments the fact that 'Today, the situation is such that the mullahs of each Muslim sect do not agree to anything less than branding the followers of the other Muslim sects as kafirs'. Their actions, he says, can only prove detrimental to the greater interests of Muslims and the Faith, for 'when such sectarian communalism erupts between religious leaders then people begin even to doubt God's Book.' This, he claims, is what is happening among many Muslim youth today, for, as he writes, 'the youth say that the maulvis keep fighting among themselves and so they do not know whom to listen to'.
Differences characterise not just Shias and Sunnis but also the different Sunni groups, Israr Ahmad notes, although he admits that in the former case they may be, in some senses, greater. The Shias and Sunnis have different sources of Hadith, traditions attributed to the Prophet, and although this magnifies their differences further it does not mean that they can or should consider the other as infidels or out of the pale of Islam for both regard the Prophet's practice or Sunnah as worthy of emulation. Israr Ahmad, Maulana Kalbe Sadiq approvingly notes, also critiques the argument put forward by some Sunni extremists who claim that the Shias do not believe in the present Quran and so must be branded as heretics. He insists that the vast majority of the Shias do indeed regard the present Quran as authentic. Israr Ahmad does, however, critique certain Shia beliefs as erroneous, which he does not find in accordance with Sunni understandings, but at the same time he insists, Kalbe Sadiq quotes him as saying, that 'Error in matters of [these] beliefs cannot be used as an argument for declaring [Shias] as kafirs.'
Kalbe Sadiq believes that Shia-Sunni strife is actively fanned by half-baked 'mullahs' (whom he distinguishes from what he refers to as ulema or religious scholars) as well as politicians. He opines that ordinary Shias and Sunnis really have no fundamental problems with each other. Stoking sectarian strife is a means for mullahs to press their claim as representatives and leaders of their sects and, on that basis, to garner resources and prestige. In this regard, he quotes Israr Ahmad as referring to a Hadith report attributed to the Prophet, according to which a time would soon come when nothing of Islam would be left but its name, and nothing of the Quran but its letters. At this time, Muslims will have grand mosques but shall be bereft of guidance. Their ulema would be the worst of people under the skies, and they shall give birth to dangerous forms of strife (fitna) that shall, in turn, strike at them. Kalbe Sadiq approvingly quotes Israr Ahmad as announcing that this Hadith report is true, for, he writes, 'Today we find that this is indeed the case, with our ulema having made religion a source of livelihood. They are interested only in producing divisions and fanning sectarianism in the Muslim ummah so as to promote what they see as their own interests. They know well that by doing so their position will be strengthened because then people will flock to them in order to engage in heated polemical battles with other Muslim sects.'
Echoing Israr Ahmad, Maulana Kalbe Sadiq claims that Shia-Sunni conflicts only help anti-Islamic forces, including advocates of Zionism and Western Imperialism, and that, in many cases, they might actually be produced and promoted by these forces, whose major concern is to weaken and divide the Muslims. The Quran, both of them write, calls for Muslims to dialogue with People of the Book. That being the case, they ask, is it not also an Islamic duty for fellow Muslims, Shias and Sunnis, to dialogue with each other? For this purpose, Kalbe Sadiq suggests that Shias and Sunnis abstain from actions that are known to hurt each other's sensibilities. He also advises the ulema of both groups to 'rise above their sectarian differences' to work together to promote unity between the two groups 'for the sake of the Faith and the entire Muslim ummah'.
Presumably, the recent joint Eid prayers in Lucknow were one step in that direction. Judging by the fact that a fairly large number of Shias and Sunnis heeded that call and, for the first time, prayed together shoulder to shoulder, it appears that growing numbers of Muslims might finally be waking up to the urgent need for intra-Muslim ecumenism.
9th Oct 2008, 02:59 am.
http://www.unnindia.com/english/story.php?Id=3186
Read more...
Wednesday, 22 October 2008
Imran Khan admitted to the Fountain House mental hospital . Talibo-phillia and Zardari-phobia diagnosed - "Twisted News Report"
In his latest sermon, immediately after returning from his visit to Australia, Imran Khan has advised that instead of foreign tours, President Asif Zardari must try to serve the Pakistani nation.
In response to a critical question by a "RAW cum CIA agent", Imran Khan explained that since he had already sufficiently served the Pakistani nation through his Tehreek-e-Insaf (established at the grassroots level in Pakistan), his Australian tour was intended to serve the Australian nation.
Imran Khan has been immediately taken to The Fountain House, which is is a unique institution in Lahore for the rehabilitation of chronic psychiatric patients. The institution is expected to do whatever it could within its limited resources to treat Imran Khan's disease known as Talibo-phillia and Zardari-phobia.
For a historical account of Imran Khan's disease, read Abbas Ather's column:
http://letusbuildpakistan.blogspot.com/2008/10/imran-khan-mental-hospital-and-zardari.html
For a detailed account of Imran Khan's recent tour of Australia, read this special report:
http://letusbuildpakistan.blogspot.com/2008/10/imran-khans-double-tongue-in-australia.html
Read more...
In response to a critical question by a "RAW cum CIA agent", Imran Khan explained that since he had already sufficiently served the Pakistani nation through his Tehreek-e-Insaf (established at the grassroots level in Pakistan), his Australian tour was intended to serve the Australian nation.
Imran Khan has been immediately taken to The Fountain House, which is is a unique institution in Lahore for the rehabilitation of chronic psychiatric patients. The institution is expected to do whatever it could within its limited resources to treat Imran Khan's disease known as Talibo-phillia and Zardari-phobia.
For a historical account of Imran Khan's disease, read Abbas Ather's column:
http://letusbuildpakistan.blogspot.com/2008/10/imran-khan-mental-hospital-and-zardari.html
For a detailed account of Imran Khan's recent tour of Australia, read this special report:
http://letusbuildpakistan.blogspot.com/2008/10/imran-khans-double-tongue-in-australia.html
Read more...
Pakistan is united against terrorists of Taliban, Al-Qaeda, Sipah-e-Sahaba & other jihadi & sectarian organizations. Parliament passes resolution.
Parliament passes 14-point resolution on national security
Updated at: 1025 PST, Wednesday, October 22, 2008
ISLAMABAD: The Parliament on Wednesday unanimously endorsed a 14-point resolution on national policy regarding internal security and war against terrorism.
Prime Minister Syed Yousuf Raza Gilani tabled the resolution in the joint in-camera session of parliament chaired by speaker Dr. Fehmida Mirza. Members of parliament unanimously passed the resolution.
Earlier, joint parliamentary draft committee discussed and finalized the 14-point recommendations on national security in a meeting presided over by Federal Minister for Information and Broadcasting, Sherry Rehman at the Parliament House today.
According to sources, the resolution asks government to hold dialogue only with militants who lay down arms and compensate all soldiers and civilians who embraced martyrdom in fight against terror. It also asks government to defend the territorial integrity of the country and retaliate any attempt of foreign misadventure. Lastly, the resolution urges government to flush foreign militants out of the tribal areas.
Prime Minister Gilani was consulted to finalise the draft of the resolution, sources added. (The News)
......
It is a bad day for Taliban and their supporters in Pakistani media, e.g. Ansar Abbasi, Kashif Abbasi, Mushtaq Minhas and Hamid Mir.
Well done, Zardari. Well done, PPP, PML-N, ANP, MQM, JUI and other parties which have expressed their unanimous support for the war on terror.
Here is the link to BBC dot com article:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/urdu/pakistan/story/2008/10/081022_parliament_res_adopted_rh.shtml
Historic 14-point anti-terrorism resolution adopted unanimously :
Nation united against terrorism: parliament
* Dialogue will be primary instrument of conflict resolution
* Redistribution of resources to resolve Balochistan violence
* Civil agencies will replace military in troubled areas
* Compensation for violence victims, rehabilitation for the displaced
By Irfan Ghauri and Muhammad Bilal
ISLAMABAD: In a historic resolution on Wednesday, the parliament said the Pakistani nation was united against terrorism and sectarian violence and would tackle the problem by addressing its root causes.
The 14-point resolution, drafted after two days of rigorous negotiations, was passed unanimously. Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani moved the resolution, which he said would serve as policy guideline to the government in framing a national security strategy.
“Extremism, militancy and terrorism in all forms and manifestations pose a grave danger to the stability and integrity of the country,” the resolution said. “Dictatorial regimes in the past pursued policies aimed at perpetuating their own power at the cost of national interest. “We need an urgent review of our national security strategy and revisiting the methodology of combating terrorism in order to restore peace and stability to Pakistan and the region through an independent foreign policy.”
Dialogue: The parliament decided that “dialogue must now be the highest priority, as a principal instrument of conflict management and resolution”, but also said talks would only “be encouraged with all those elements willing to abide by the constitution of Pakistan and rule of law”.
The legislators decided that all foreign fighters, “if found, shall be expelled from Pakistan’s soil”.
The parliament vowed that Pakistan’s sovereignty and territorial integrity would be safeguarded. “The nation stands united against any incursions and invasions of the homeland, and calls upon the government to deal with it effectively,” the resolution said, but added: “Pakistan’s territory shall not be used for any kind of attacks on other countries.”
They also decided that “the development of troubled zones, particularly the Tribal Areas, and the NWFP must also be pursued through all possible ways and legitimate means to create genuine stakeholders in peace. New economic opportunities shall be created in order to bring the less privileged areas at par with the rest of Pakistan”.
Balochistan: On the problem in Balochistan, the resolution called for “a political dialogue with the people, addressing of their grievances and redistribution of resources shall be enhanced and accelerated”.
It said the federation must be strengthened “through the process of democratic pluralism, social justice, religious values and tolerance, and equitable resource sharing between the provinces as enshrined in the Constitution of 1973”.
Military: The state must ensure rule of law, the unanimous resolution said, and “when it has to intervene to protect the lives of its citizens, caution must be exercised to avoid casualties of non-combatants in conflict zones”. The legislators demanded that military be replaced with civilian law enforcement agencies in the conflict zones as early as possible, “with enhanced capacity and a sustainable political system achieved through a consultative process”.
The state must establish its writ, they demanded, but through “confidence building mechanisms by using customary and local [jirgas]”. Pakistan’s strategic interests must be protected “by developing stakes in regional peace and trade, both on the western and eastern borders”.
Compensation and rehabilitation: The parliament decided that the “mechanisms for internal security be institutionalised by paying compensation to victims of violence; and rehabilitate those displaced”.
The parliament also decided to form a committee to periodically review “the implementation of the principles framed and roadmap given in the resolution”. The committee will frame its own rules when it meets.(Daily Times)
.........
Consensus resolution
THE MPs have finally come up with a consensus resolution and this in itself is an achievement. Beyond that, one would be hard put to discover substance in the 14-point resolution read out to parliament by the prime minister on Wednesday. Between the opposition and the government, which side has given more is a matter of opinion. Keen to get a parliamentary endorsement of its policies, the government seems to have conceded more than the opposition. There is no reference to the war against terrorism in the resolution hammered out after a 15-day in-camera session of the two houses. The Taliban and Al Qaeda have not been named; instead the MNAs and senators confine themselves to noting “with great concern” that “extremism, militancy and terrorism” pose a threat to Pakistan’s stability and integrity. How to combat this menace has not been spelled out in specific terms, even though the resolution calls for “an urgent review” of the national security strategy. While the demand for “an independent foreign policy” could be considered a dig at the Musharraf government’s take on events, the resolution does not recommend what aberrations in Pakistan’s external relations need to be removed.
The resolution places emphasis on dialogue and calls it the “principal instrument of conflict management”. To that extent it breaks no new ground, for the PPP-led government too stands pledged to talks — an idea that is gaining ground in American and European capitals as well. However, the PPP government says it will talk to those militants who lay down arms. The resolution only indirectly concedes the government’s right to use force by pleading that collateral damage be avoided when the security forces “intervene” to ensure the government’s writ. On the question of sovereignty, it has maintained a fine balance. While the resolution asks the government to “deal” with incursions into Pakistan, it says the country should not be allowed to be used for acts of terrorism against other states, and that foreign militants be expelled.
Let us count our blessings: at one stage it appeared the opposition would walk away. That it did not do so and that finally the MPs managed to hammer out a consensus resolution is a matter of thanksgiving. Apparently our boys are growing. For the first time since the unity shown at the time of Musharraf’s exit, all parties have once again come together, even if the diluted resolution disappoints the nation, which had expected something more concrete from the people’s representatives. Nawaz Sharif had spoken a lot and made no secret of his reservations about the government’s war on terror, but his party too finally went along. Perhaps the resolution is a first step towards evolving what eventually could become a forceful, result-oriented national consensus. (Dawn)
Read more...
Updated at: 1025 PST, Wednesday, October 22, 2008
ISLAMABAD: The Parliament on Wednesday unanimously endorsed a 14-point resolution on national policy regarding internal security and war against terrorism.
Prime Minister Syed Yousuf Raza Gilani tabled the resolution in the joint in-camera session of parliament chaired by speaker Dr. Fehmida Mirza. Members of parliament unanimously passed the resolution.
Earlier, joint parliamentary draft committee discussed and finalized the 14-point recommendations on national security in a meeting presided over by Federal Minister for Information and Broadcasting, Sherry Rehman at the Parliament House today.
According to sources, the resolution asks government to hold dialogue only with militants who lay down arms and compensate all soldiers and civilians who embraced martyrdom in fight against terror. It also asks government to defend the territorial integrity of the country and retaliate any attempt of foreign misadventure. Lastly, the resolution urges government to flush foreign militants out of the tribal areas.
Prime Minister Gilani was consulted to finalise the draft of the resolution, sources added. (The News)
......
It is a bad day for Taliban and their supporters in Pakistani media, e.g. Ansar Abbasi, Kashif Abbasi, Mushtaq Minhas and Hamid Mir.
Well done, Zardari. Well done, PPP, PML-N, ANP, MQM, JUI and other parties which have expressed their unanimous support for the war on terror.
Here is the link to BBC dot com article:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/urdu/pakistan/story/2008/10/081022_parliament_res_adopted_rh.shtml
Historic 14-point anti-terrorism resolution adopted unanimously :
Nation united against terrorism: parliament
* Dialogue will be primary instrument of conflict resolution
* Redistribution of resources to resolve Balochistan violence
* Civil agencies will replace military in troubled areas
* Compensation for violence victims, rehabilitation for the displaced
By Irfan Ghauri and Muhammad Bilal
ISLAMABAD: In a historic resolution on Wednesday, the parliament said the Pakistani nation was united against terrorism and sectarian violence and would tackle the problem by addressing its root causes.
The 14-point resolution, drafted after two days of rigorous negotiations, was passed unanimously. Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani moved the resolution, which he said would serve as policy guideline to the government in framing a national security strategy.
“Extremism, militancy and terrorism in all forms and manifestations pose a grave danger to the stability and integrity of the country,” the resolution said. “Dictatorial regimes in the past pursued policies aimed at perpetuating their own power at the cost of national interest. “We need an urgent review of our national security strategy and revisiting the methodology of combating terrorism in order to restore peace and stability to Pakistan and the region through an independent foreign policy.”
Dialogue: The parliament decided that “dialogue must now be the highest priority, as a principal instrument of conflict management and resolution”, but also said talks would only “be encouraged with all those elements willing to abide by the constitution of Pakistan and rule of law”.
The legislators decided that all foreign fighters, “if found, shall be expelled from Pakistan’s soil”.
The parliament vowed that Pakistan’s sovereignty and territorial integrity would be safeguarded. “The nation stands united against any incursions and invasions of the homeland, and calls upon the government to deal with it effectively,” the resolution said, but added: “Pakistan’s territory shall not be used for any kind of attacks on other countries.”
They also decided that “the development of troubled zones, particularly the Tribal Areas, and the NWFP must also be pursued through all possible ways and legitimate means to create genuine stakeholders in peace. New economic opportunities shall be created in order to bring the less privileged areas at par with the rest of Pakistan”.
Balochistan: On the problem in Balochistan, the resolution called for “a political dialogue with the people, addressing of their grievances and redistribution of resources shall be enhanced and accelerated”.
It said the federation must be strengthened “through the process of democratic pluralism, social justice, religious values and tolerance, and equitable resource sharing between the provinces as enshrined in the Constitution of 1973”.
Military: The state must ensure rule of law, the unanimous resolution said, and “when it has to intervene to protect the lives of its citizens, caution must be exercised to avoid casualties of non-combatants in conflict zones”. The legislators demanded that military be replaced with civilian law enforcement agencies in the conflict zones as early as possible, “with enhanced capacity and a sustainable political system achieved through a consultative process”.
The state must establish its writ, they demanded, but through “confidence building mechanisms by using customary and local [jirgas]”. Pakistan’s strategic interests must be protected “by developing stakes in regional peace and trade, both on the western and eastern borders”.
Compensation and rehabilitation: The parliament decided that the “mechanisms for internal security be institutionalised by paying compensation to victims of violence; and rehabilitate those displaced”.
The parliament also decided to form a committee to periodically review “the implementation of the principles framed and roadmap given in the resolution”. The committee will frame its own rules when it meets.(Daily Times)
.........
Consensus resolution
THE MPs have finally come up with a consensus resolution and this in itself is an achievement. Beyond that, one would be hard put to discover substance in the 14-point resolution read out to parliament by the prime minister on Wednesday. Between the opposition and the government, which side has given more is a matter of opinion. Keen to get a parliamentary endorsement of its policies, the government seems to have conceded more than the opposition. There is no reference to the war against terrorism in the resolution hammered out after a 15-day in-camera session of the two houses. The Taliban and Al Qaeda have not been named; instead the MNAs and senators confine themselves to noting “with great concern” that “extremism, militancy and terrorism” pose a threat to Pakistan’s stability and integrity. How to combat this menace has not been spelled out in specific terms, even though the resolution calls for “an urgent review” of the national security strategy. While the demand for “an independent foreign policy” could be considered a dig at the Musharraf government’s take on events, the resolution does not recommend what aberrations in Pakistan’s external relations need to be removed.
The resolution places emphasis on dialogue and calls it the “principal instrument of conflict management”. To that extent it breaks no new ground, for the PPP-led government too stands pledged to talks — an idea that is gaining ground in American and European capitals as well. However, the PPP government says it will talk to those militants who lay down arms. The resolution only indirectly concedes the government’s right to use force by pleading that collateral damage be avoided when the security forces “intervene” to ensure the government’s writ. On the question of sovereignty, it has maintained a fine balance. While the resolution asks the government to “deal” with incursions into Pakistan, it says the country should not be allowed to be used for acts of terrorism against other states, and that foreign militants be expelled.
Let us count our blessings: at one stage it appeared the opposition would walk away. That it did not do so and that finally the MPs managed to hammer out a consensus resolution is a matter of thanksgiving. Apparently our boys are growing. For the first time since the unity shown at the time of Musharraf’s exit, all parties have once again come together, even if the diluted resolution disappoints the nation, which had expected something more concrete from the people’s representatives. Nawaz Sharif had spoken a lot and made no secret of his reservations about the government’s war on terror, but his party too finally went along. Perhaps the resolution is a first step towards evolving what eventually could become a forceful, result-oriented national consensus. (Dawn)
Read more...
The notorious Taliban lover Ansar Abbasi's venom against Nawaz Sharif
This time, the notorious mouthpiece of Taliban/Al-Qaeda/Sipah-e-Sahaba, Ansar Abbasi has spoken against Nawaz Sharif's PML-N. Abbasi is in pain because Nawaz Sharif and his PML-N have decided to support the PPP/ANP/JUI coalition in the Center and the NWFP in their war against terrorists of Taliban/Al-Qaeda/Sipah-e-Sahaba. Shame on you Ansar Abbasi. Actually, you are Ghaddar Abbasi.
![[1318.gif]](http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_Vbc4oO2rGiw/SP9IE-zVttI/AAAAAAAAAX8/-0BHzgbRXDM/s1600/1318.gif)
Read more...
Read more...
Pakistan's war on terror, the discussion in the parliament and the political point scoring by PML-N and PML-Q - Nasim Zehra
Parliament's role in fighting terror
Wednesday, October 22, 2008
Nasim Zehra
The writer is an Islamabad-based security analyst
Almost two weeks into the in-camera session on the security situation, and especially the tribal areas, many questions regarding its usefulness are being raised. For example, are we closer to having evolved a better policy response to Pakistan's security problem? Are we closer to having evolved a policy for the tribal areas that is any different from what the government has hitherto been pursuing? Are we headed towards greater and broader political ownership of policy? Is there a greater national consensus behind ownership of the policy?
There are no straightforward answers to these questions, simply because the in-camera session is only one of the many elements within the broader policy formulation and policy implementation context in which there are many other elements influencing policy and its implementation.
For example, the briefing has been taking place against the backdrop of significant actions. These have ranged from major military operations in Bajaur and Swat to a peace agreement between the warring groups in the Kurram agency; from high-level engagement with the United States government on operational-level cooperation, including training and equipment, to ongoing negotiations within the Tripartite Commission framework on Pakistan-Afghanistan border issues; from ongoing dialogue with Kabul to the convening of the Pakistani-Afghan mini-jirga; from the emergence in the tribal areas of the local lashkars now disenchanted by the militant leadership they had earlier supported to the Oct 14 fatwa by the Muttahida Ulema Council in Lahore declaring that suicide bombing is un-Islamic and only the State has the right to declare jihad.
All these factors underscore the important reality that under discussion in Parliament is an ongoing situation. The challenge and the policy under discussion is one that Pakistan has been confronted with for over half-a-decade. Consequently, there is also a response dynamic, however flawed and inadequate, that is already at work. This is a major limiting factor in a situation if the political demand, as in this case, of a section of politicians would be to go back to the drawing board and draw a fresh policy. Such a demand and expectation would be inherently flawed; one that fails to appreciate the dynamics of policy formulation and implementation. However, what would be more practical if the critics of the existing policy would recommend potentially more effective policy alternatives. Such an undertaking would require a coherent and logical presentation, backed by facts and experiential wisdom, of recommended policy alternatives.
The response of the politicians from the non-ruling parties, especially the PML-N and PML-Q, has combined political point-scoring with some serious engagement with the process issues related to the briefing. Meanwhile, the diminishing interest of the PPP parliamentarians prompted the Speaker to urge them to take greater interest.
On the process issue, the PML-N made a major contribution towards making the present session into a genuinely parliamentary discussion session. Originally the government had planned it to be a limited purpose session in which the Parliament would be presented the ground situation by the Director General of Military Operations to be followed by two questions each from all present political parties. The government responded positively to the PML-N's recommendations. These included that the Q&A be spread over a day and be followed by another presentation by a government representative presenting the government's present and mid-term threat perception and its broader impact on the country, the contents of the Pakistan-US cooperation agreement and recommended policy options to deal with the situation. As a consequence the briefing has extended into a two-week plus session. That the session was extended on the opposition's demand and all representatives are getting an opportunity to participate in the discussion means that a democratic exercise in underway. The process of debate and dialogue is intrinsic and crucial to genuine democracy. To that extent the session is a plus.
However, how valuable this session is for policy formulation and, indeed, for public good and overall national security will depend on its final outcome. And that depends largely on the non-ruling parties. The government has conceded to their process recommendations and these non-ruling parties must demonstrate to the public that they have practical wisdom to a policy that is already in operation. It is a policy that now seems to be showing some mixed results but criticisms too are aplenty.
Policymakers and parliamentarians, however, do not have the luxury to indulge constantly in rhetoric and points-scoring. For the positions that they acquire through public vote, the parliamentarians opt for a constitutional undertaking to be responsible for competent management of state and society through appropriate laws, structures and processes. This is what the public now expects from the parliamentarians as they debate the security problem in the Parliament.
Some of the point-scoring is almost inevitable. The PML-Q, PML-N and others from the non-ruling parties have been repeating their criticism of the tribal area policy and also of the in-camera briefings. They mostly insist that "this is not our war" and demand that Pakistan discontinue its close cooperation with the US on this war on terrorism which is now being fought on Pakistani territory. They demand dialogue with the militants and argue that because of pro-US policies Pakistani security forces have launched military operations in the tribal areas against Pakistani citizens and killing many innocent civilians.
The parliamentarians' criticism of the briefing has been that the information regarding the ground situation and policy content provided to them has already been available in the public arena. For example, they complain that they have not been provided any new facts regarding the government's commitments made to the US about Pakistan's clearance to US operations in the tribal areas and support to US operations in Afghanistan. The PML-N and PML-Q may not be entirely wrong. Yet this criticism alone will only signal poverty of serious and responsible politics. There are enough information and facts available to the non-ruling parties to make detailed, viable and concrete suggestions for improving the existing security policy especially dealing with the tribal areas. The PML-N will soon be suggesting to the prime minister to set up a smaller all-parliamentary committee which must get a more detailed briefing on the security situation and the committee should make concrete recommendations for policy improvement.
To the extent that this will keep all the parties involved in a dialogue process over the question of security this would be a positive move. However, as concrete recommendations for substantive policy improvement those have not been forthcoming from any political party. It is time that Pakistan's political parties get more serious about what it takes to run the business of state and society. It certainly takes more serious and competent mind work. Rhetoric and good intentions alone won't do it. (The News)
Email: nasimzehra@hotmail.com
Read more...
Wednesday, October 22, 2008
Nasim Zehra
The writer is an Islamabad-based security analyst
Almost two weeks into the in-camera session on the security situation, and especially the tribal areas, many questions regarding its usefulness are being raised. For example, are we closer to having evolved a better policy response to Pakistan's security problem? Are we closer to having evolved a policy for the tribal areas that is any different from what the government has hitherto been pursuing? Are we headed towards greater and broader political ownership of policy? Is there a greater national consensus behind ownership of the policy?
There are no straightforward answers to these questions, simply because the in-camera session is only one of the many elements within the broader policy formulation and policy implementation context in which there are many other elements influencing policy and its implementation.
For example, the briefing has been taking place against the backdrop of significant actions. These have ranged from major military operations in Bajaur and Swat to a peace agreement between the warring groups in the Kurram agency; from high-level engagement with the United States government on operational-level cooperation, including training and equipment, to ongoing negotiations within the Tripartite Commission framework on Pakistan-Afghanistan border issues; from ongoing dialogue with Kabul to the convening of the Pakistani-Afghan mini-jirga; from the emergence in the tribal areas of the local lashkars now disenchanted by the militant leadership they had earlier supported to the Oct 14 fatwa by the Muttahida Ulema Council in Lahore declaring that suicide bombing is un-Islamic and only the State has the right to declare jihad.
All these factors underscore the important reality that under discussion in Parliament is an ongoing situation. The challenge and the policy under discussion is one that Pakistan has been confronted with for over half-a-decade. Consequently, there is also a response dynamic, however flawed and inadequate, that is already at work. This is a major limiting factor in a situation if the political demand, as in this case, of a section of politicians would be to go back to the drawing board and draw a fresh policy. Such a demand and expectation would be inherently flawed; one that fails to appreciate the dynamics of policy formulation and implementation. However, what would be more practical if the critics of the existing policy would recommend potentially more effective policy alternatives. Such an undertaking would require a coherent and logical presentation, backed by facts and experiential wisdom, of recommended policy alternatives.
The response of the politicians from the non-ruling parties, especially the PML-N and PML-Q, has combined political point-scoring with some serious engagement with the process issues related to the briefing. Meanwhile, the diminishing interest of the PPP parliamentarians prompted the Speaker to urge them to take greater interest.
On the process issue, the PML-N made a major contribution towards making the present session into a genuinely parliamentary discussion session. Originally the government had planned it to be a limited purpose session in which the Parliament would be presented the ground situation by the Director General of Military Operations to be followed by two questions each from all present political parties. The government responded positively to the PML-N's recommendations. These included that the Q&A be spread over a day and be followed by another presentation by a government representative presenting the government's present and mid-term threat perception and its broader impact on the country, the contents of the Pakistan-US cooperation agreement and recommended policy options to deal with the situation. As a consequence the briefing has extended into a two-week plus session. That the session was extended on the opposition's demand and all representatives are getting an opportunity to participate in the discussion means that a democratic exercise in underway. The process of debate and dialogue is intrinsic and crucial to genuine democracy. To that extent the session is a plus.
However, how valuable this session is for policy formulation and, indeed, for public good and overall national security will depend on its final outcome. And that depends largely on the non-ruling parties. The government has conceded to their process recommendations and these non-ruling parties must demonstrate to the public that they have practical wisdom to a policy that is already in operation. It is a policy that now seems to be showing some mixed results but criticisms too are aplenty.
Policymakers and parliamentarians, however, do not have the luxury to indulge constantly in rhetoric and points-scoring. For the positions that they acquire through public vote, the parliamentarians opt for a constitutional undertaking to be responsible for competent management of state and society through appropriate laws, structures and processes. This is what the public now expects from the parliamentarians as they debate the security problem in the Parliament.
Some of the point-scoring is almost inevitable. The PML-Q, PML-N and others from the non-ruling parties have been repeating their criticism of the tribal area policy and also of the in-camera briefings. They mostly insist that "this is not our war" and demand that Pakistan discontinue its close cooperation with the US on this war on terrorism which is now being fought on Pakistani territory. They demand dialogue with the militants and argue that because of pro-US policies Pakistani security forces have launched military operations in the tribal areas against Pakistani citizens and killing many innocent civilians.
The parliamentarians' criticism of the briefing has been that the information regarding the ground situation and policy content provided to them has already been available in the public arena. For example, they complain that they have not been provided any new facts regarding the government's commitments made to the US about Pakistan's clearance to US operations in the tribal areas and support to US operations in Afghanistan. The PML-N and PML-Q may not be entirely wrong. Yet this criticism alone will only signal poverty of serious and responsible politics. There are enough information and facts available to the non-ruling parties to make detailed, viable and concrete suggestions for improving the existing security policy especially dealing with the tribal areas. The PML-N will soon be suggesting to the prime minister to set up a smaller all-parliamentary committee which must get a more detailed briefing on the security situation and the committee should make concrete recommendations for policy improvement.
To the extent that this will keep all the parties involved in a dialogue process over the question of security this would be a positive move. However, as concrete recommendations for substantive policy improvement those have not been forthcoming from any political party. It is time that Pakistan's political parties get more serious about what it takes to run the business of state and society. It certainly takes more serious and competent mind work. Rhetoric and good intentions alone won't do it. (The News)
Email: nasimzehra@hotmail.com
Read more...
The PPP Government in the Center and the PML-N Government in the Punjab must not pursue politically motivated cases against PML-Q and its leadership
![[col8.gif]](http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_Vbc4oO2rGiw/SP7L8spbEhI/AAAAAAAAAXs/zKWtZ4Hgjeg/s1600/col8.gif)
Tuesday, 21 October 2008
A snapshot of Taliban's brutalities in Pakistan - BBC Blog by Arif Shamim
In his latest blog on BBC Urdu dot com, Arif Shamim shows and comments on the real picture of Taliban. Will the supporters of Taliban (Imran Khan, Hamid Gul, Mushtaq Minhas etc) still remain in the state of denial? or attribute the atrocities of our indigenous ISI made Talibans to other countries such as the USA and India?
Taliban ka jo yaar hay, ghaddar hay ghaddar hay
Ghaddaron ko, phaansi do
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/urdu/2008/10/post_357.html
People are happy on both sides of the border.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/urdu/india/story/2008/10/081021_kashmir_trade_resume_np.shtml
Read more...
Taliban ka jo yaar hay, ghaddar hay ghaddar hay
Ghaddaron ko, phaansi do
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/urdu/2008/10/post_357.html
People are happy on both sides of the border.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/urdu/india/story/2008/10/081021_kashmir_trade_resume_np.shtml
Read more...
India, Pakistan resume Kashmir trade after 60 years: A great day for peace lovers in Pakistan and India, A bad news for Taliban & their supporters...
Kashmiri leaders hail trade launching as victory
SRINAGAR: Kashmiri leaders on Tuesday hailed the opening of cross-LoC trade as a victory. “This is the first step toward achieving economic independence for Kashmir,” APHC leader Mirwaiz Omer Farooq said. The opening of the trade route has been a key demand of Kashmiri separatists. However, they said India still needed to acknowledge Kashmir was disputed, and should be prepared to address the issue of the future of the region. AJK President Raja Zulqarnain said the event was a positive development, but not the resolution to the dispute. He said, however, it was a step in that direction. agencies (Daily Times)
India, Pakistan resume Kashmir trade after 60 years
Tuesday, 21 Oct, 2008 | 01:18 PM PST |
Kashmiri fruit dealer drive towards the Line of control, Kashmir's de facto border in Baramulla.—AP
President Zardari delivers on his promise of reinforcing peace in the region.
ISALAMABAD: India and Pakistan began trading between their respective parts of Kashmir for the first time in six decades on Tuesday, raising hopes of a drop in tension in the disputed Himalayan region.
A convoy of 13 trucks carrying mostly apples set off on a historic trip to Azad Kashmir from occupied Kashmir, with 14 trucks with Pakistani goods making the journey in the opposite direction.
‘It is a historic day which will surely help the economy of both parts of Kashmir,’ said occupied Kashmir’s Governor N.N. Vohra, as he flagged off the convoy from Salamabad, 12 kilometres (seven miles) from the heavily militarised Line of Control.
‘I hope it will herald peace in the region,’ he said.
Villagers here cheered and waved at the truck drivers as they steered their vehicles out of a warehouse, as traditional drum-beaters entertained the crowd.
The crossing is the first time that vehicles will be allowed to cross Aman Setu or Peace Bridge on the LoC since India and Pakistan fought a war over the region in 1947.
Security was tight for the trade opening, with even the fruit subject to stringent security checks.
‘The items were scanned in x-ray machines here before allowing the truckers to take them across,’ a police officer Faisal Qayoom said.
The opening of the trade route has been a key demand of Kashmiri separatists.
Kashmiri truckers said they were delighted about the resumption of trade.
‘I am very happy to be part of this historic moment,’ said Ghulam Hassan Baba, a driver from Srinagar.
‘It is a big leap forward,’ said Mubeen Shah, head of the traders’ federation in occupied Kashmir.
Separatists, however, say India still needs to acknowledge that Kashmir is disputed, and be prepared to address the underlying issue of the future of the region.
http://www.dawn.net/wps/wcm/connect/Dawn%20Content%20Library/dawn/news/pakistan/india-pakistan-resume-kashmir-trade-after-60-years
http://www.bbc.co.uk/urdu/india/story/2008/10/081021_kashmir_trade_rza.shtml
Making the borders ‘irrelevant’?
As fifteen trucks laden with “gift items” cross
the Line of Control (LoC) in Kashmir today, a first step will have been taken in “making borders irrelevant”, a policy agreed between Pakistan and India. The decision on this policy was taken last month by the PPP coalition government and agreed to by New Delhi. The idea is to replace an earlier policy of confrontation in which neither party was making headway with a lateral attempt to “to solve the Kashmir dispute by creating ‘soft borders’ and allowing free movement of goods and people”.
What has been thrown open is the Srinagar-Muzaffarabad route. Another route between Poonch and Rawlakot will be open for trade on October 30. Under an agreement, the trucks will cross the LoC at the two designated points twice a week and no customs duty will be imposed on the traded goods. Traders on both sides will conduct business through barter, as no banking facility exists at this stage. A total of 21 items have been approved for import and export by the Joint Working Group of India and Pakistan.
The route just opened is familiar to few old Kashmiris because the last time it was used was 60 years ago. This was Indian Kashmir’s only link with the outside world in those days. It is all-weather and shorter than the only road coming from India, snaking through Jammu on a road often blocked in winters. Any strategist with imagination — and strategy is self-defeating without imagination — will know the advantages that will accrue to Pakistan from this arrangement. He will know that Pakistan’s stance of not accepting the LoC as an international boundary would be upheld as trade punctures the putative frontier.
The Indian side has agreed to this puncturing of the LoC clearly in favour of Pakistan’s stance by popularising the idea of “making boundaries irrelevant”. The use of the plural for boundary is of a piece with India’s traditional stance on the boundaries existing between India and Pakistan, a familiar stance of a status quo country. While Pakistan is constrained from objecting to the trade route on the basis of its doctrine of non-acceptance of the LoC as a sealed boundary, India is happy that it is adhering to its old status quo doctrine, inviting Pakistan to open up to India instead of confronting India.
The truth of the matter is that neither India nor Pakistan has been able to impose its solution on the Kashmir dispute. They have tried wars and they have tried diplomacy, but both have been forced to wake up to the fact that they cannot have their way in the disputed territory on the basis of their separate and mutually exclusive policies. On the Pakistani side, the stance taken on the LoC has forced it to modify the earlier inflexible attitude towards an easing of contacts including trade with India. The attitude of shying away from contact has evolved out of the revisionist strategy of the state demanding a solution of the dispute before any “normalisation” is allowed.
Pakistan’s former foreign minister, Mr Khursheed Mehmood Kasuri, had said in August 2007 that that any solution to the Kashmir problem could not be “ideal” for the concerned parties, but that both parties would have to make concessions to resolve the problem. He had added, “Ultimately, a solution to Kashmir will be one that is not the best perceived either by a majority of Indians, a majority of Pakistanis or a majority of Kashmiris”. The two mainstream parties of Pakistan, the PPP and the PMLN, had already expressed their resolve to seek normalisation with India in the Charter of Democracy in 2006.
Unfortunately, the word “irrelevant” has not been favoured in discussions on TV channels. That is understandable because of its extrapolation to the rest of the Indo-Pak boundary, but its application to the latest trade route is not at all against the interests of Pakistan. On the ground, Pakistan’s position is strong in so far as the people on both sides of the LoC want to have a freer intercourse and would rather have the LoC “punctured” than sterilised. That is why the decision taken by India and Pakistan to ease interaction across the LoC after the earthquake in Kashmir in 2005 was accepted. Indeed, a recent food emergency in the Valley could have been averted had the cross-LoC trade been open.
In a way Pakistan’s options have become clearer after its confrontation with terrorism inside its boundaries. The government and the army would not like to be distracted by trouble with India while they are trying to re-establish the writ of the state in the Tribal Areas. Also, the economic crisis looming large in the coming months would be reduced in its intensity somewhat if headway is made in expanding trade links with India all across the international frontier. Of course, this can happen without Pakistan formally giving up its traditional stance on the status of Jammu & Kashmir. (Daily Times)
Read more...
SRINAGAR: Kashmiri leaders on Tuesday hailed the opening of cross-LoC trade as a victory. “This is the first step toward achieving economic independence for Kashmir,” APHC leader Mirwaiz Omer Farooq said. The opening of the trade route has been a key demand of Kashmiri separatists. However, they said India still needed to acknowledge Kashmir was disputed, and should be prepared to address the issue of the future of the region. AJK President Raja Zulqarnain said the event was a positive development, but not the resolution to the dispute. He said, however, it was a step in that direction. agencies (Daily Times)
India, Pakistan resume Kashmir trade after 60 years
Tuesday, 21 Oct, 2008 | 01:18 PM PST |
Kashmiri fruit dealer drive towards the Line of control, Kashmir's de facto border in Baramulla.—AP
President Zardari delivers on his promise of reinforcing peace in the region.
ISALAMABAD: India and Pakistan began trading between their respective parts of Kashmir for the first time in six decades on Tuesday, raising hopes of a drop in tension in the disputed Himalayan region.
A convoy of 13 trucks carrying mostly apples set off on a historic trip to Azad Kashmir from occupied Kashmir, with 14 trucks with Pakistani goods making the journey in the opposite direction.
‘It is a historic day which will surely help the economy of both parts of Kashmir,’ said occupied Kashmir’s Governor N.N. Vohra, as he flagged off the convoy from Salamabad, 12 kilometres (seven miles) from the heavily militarised Line of Control.
‘I hope it will herald peace in the region,’ he said.
Villagers here cheered and waved at the truck drivers as they steered their vehicles out of a warehouse, as traditional drum-beaters entertained the crowd.
The crossing is the first time that vehicles will be allowed to cross Aman Setu or Peace Bridge on the LoC since India and Pakistan fought a war over the region in 1947.
Security was tight for the trade opening, with even the fruit subject to stringent security checks.
‘The items were scanned in x-ray machines here before allowing the truckers to take them across,’ a police officer Faisal Qayoom said.
The opening of the trade route has been a key demand of Kashmiri separatists.
Kashmiri truckers said they were delighted about the resumption of trade.
‘I am very happy to be part of this historic moment,’ said Ghulam Hassan Baba, a driver from Srinagar.
‘It is a big leap forward,’ said Mubeen Shah, head of the traders’ federation in occupied Kashmir.
Separatists, however, say India still needs to acknowledge that Kashmir is disputed, and be prepared to address the underlying issue of the future of the region.
http://www.dawn.net/wps/wcm/connect/Dawn%20Content%20Library/dawn/news/pakistan/india-pakistan-resume-kashmir-trade-after-60-years
http://www.bbc.co.uk/urdu/india/story/2008/10/081021_kashmir_trade_rza.shtml
Making the borders ‘irrelevant’?
As fifteen trucks laden with “gift items” cross
the Line of Control (LoC) in Kashmir today, a first step will have been taken in “making borders irrelevant”, a policy agreed between Pakistan and India. The decision on this policy was taken last month by the PPP coalition government and agreed to by New Delhi. The idea is to replace an earlier policy of confrontation in which neither party was making headway with a lateral attempt to “to solve the Kashmir dispute by creating ‘soft borders’ and allowing free movement of goods and people”.
What has been thrown open is the Srinagar-Muzaffarabad route. Another route between Poonch and Rawlakot will be open for trade on October 30. Under an agreement, the trucks will cross the LoC at the two designated points twice a week and no customs duty will be imposed on the traded goods. Traders on both sides will conduct business through barter, as no banking facility exists at this stage. A total of 21 items have been approved for import and export by the Joint Working Group of India and Pakistan.
The route just opened is familiar to few old Kashmiris because the last time it was used was 60 years ago. This was Indian Kashmir’s only link with the outside world in those days. It is all-weather and shorter than the only road coming from India, snaking through Jammu on a road often blocked in winters. Any strategist with imagination — and strategy is self-defeating without imagination — will know the advantages that will accrue to Pakistan from this arrangement. He will know that Pakistan’s stance of not accepting the LoC as an international boundary would be upheld as trade punctures the putative frontier.
The Indian side has agreed to this puncturing of the LoC clearly in favour of Pakistan’s stance by popularising the idea of “making boundaries irrelevant”. The use of the plural for boundary is of a piece with India’s traditional stance on the boundaries existing between India and Pakistan, a familiar stance of a status quo country. While Pakistan is constrained from objecting to the trade route on the basis of its doctrine of non-acceptance of the LoC as a sealed boundary, India is happy that it is adhering to its old status quo doctrine, inviting Pakistan to open up to India instead of confronting India.
The truth of the matter is that neither India nor Pakistan has been able to impose its solution on the Kashmir dispute. They have tried wars and they have tried diplomacy, but both have been forced to wake up to the fact that they cannot have their way in the disputed territory on the basis of their separate and mutually exclusive policies. On the Pakistani side, the stance taken on the LoC has forced it to modify the earlier inflexible attitude towards an easing of contacts including trade with India. The attitude of shying away from contact has evolved out of the revisionist strategy of the state demanding a solution of the dispute before any “normalisation” is allowed.
Pakistan’s former foreign minister, Mr Khursheed Mehmood Kasuri, had said in August 2007 that that any solution to the Kashmir problem could not be “ideal” for the concerned parties, but that both parties would have to make concessions to resolve the problem. He had added, “Ultimately, a solution to Kashmir will be one that is not the best perceived either by a majority of Indians, a majority of Pakistanis or a majority of Kashmiris”. The two mainstream parties of Pakistan, the PPP and the PMLN, had already expressed their resolve to seek normalisation with India in the Charter of Democracy in 2006.
Unfortunately, the word “irrelevant” has not been favoured in discussions on TV channels. That is understandable because of its extrapolation to the rest of the Indo-Pak boundary, but its application to the latest trade route is not at all against the interests of Pakistan. On the ground, Pakistan’s position is strong in so far as the people on both sides of the LoC want to have a freer intercourse and would rather have the LoC “punctured” than sterilised. That is why the decision taken by India and Pakistan to ease interaction across the LoC after the earthquake in Kashmir in 2005 was accepted. Indeed, a recent food emergency in the Valley could have been averted had the cross-LoC trade been open.
In a way Pakistan’s options have become clearer after its confrontation with terrorism inside its boundaries. The government and the army would not like to be distracted by trouble with India while they are trying to re-establish the writ of the state in the Tribal Areas. Also, the economic crisis looming large in the coming months would be reduced in its intensity somewhat if headway is made in expanding trade links with India all across the international frontier. Of course, this can happen without Pakistan formally giving up its traditional stance on the status of Jammu & Kashmir. (Daily Times)
Read more...
Shia Sunni Dialogue in Pakistan: Why and How
By Abdul Malik Mujahid
When in a Karachi Shia masjid a suicide bomber killed worshipers on a recent Friday, the first people who rushed to the rescue were worshipers from the nearby Sunni mosque in the Sindh Madrasah. They tried to save lives and comfort the injured before the police and others could arrive. I came to know about this because a Shia writer wrote about it in the Pakistani daily newspaper Dawn. Shias have similarly come forward to help their Sunni neighbors in crises. It has been reported that Shia and Sunni both regularly participate in each other’s funeral prayers.
May Allah bless those hearts moved by the needs of others. People like these are the true faithful whose actions reflect their character. These are the silent majority of Pakistanis who need to work with each other to isolate the terrorists amongst them and the extremists who support them.
This silent majority must come together through dialog to defeat the terrorists who have been responsible for killing as many as 4,000 Pakistanis in the past 15 years through their sectarian violence.
Seven reasons why a dialog between Shia and Sunni is needed:
* Theological differences between Shia and Sunni are old and are better left for Allah to judge, as He knows best and has said that He is the final judge of religious disagreements (Quran 16:12). The killing of Shias or Sunnis will not resolve these disputes.
* The principle of “no compulsion in matters of faith” (Quran 2:256) is not just limited to Muslim-non-Muslim relations. It applies to Muslim interpretations of Islam as well. This instruction of God serves as a guideline for the Muslim community to not impose one's interpretation on others. That is why throughout history, not only have Hanafis and Shafis worked with each other despite differences, but Shias and Sunnis have lived and worked side by side with each other as well.
* When human beings sit down and talk to each other, they learn to respect each other.
* Dialog allows parties to understand each other better by allowing participants to acquire direct knowledge about beliefs instead of relying on propaganda and stereotypical images. (Quran 49:6-12)
* It is Haram to kill a human being. Killing a human being is like killing the whole of humanity. By talking to each other, Shias and Sunnis will be able to save lives, which is like saving the whole of humanity. (Quran 5:32)
* Revenge is not justice. Killing in revenge is unjust, inhuman, and un-Islamic. Retribution through the state, which the Quran sanctions via capital punishment does not amount to individuals taking the law in their hands or killing an innocent person in revenge. The call for, "an eye for an eye," does not mean an innocent eye for an innocent eye; it means the eye of the perpetrator for the eye of the victim.
* Even if some Shias and Sunnis consider each other enemies, the Quran asks us to be just even toward one's enemy "O you who believe! Stand out firmly for Allah, as witnesses to fair dehttp://www.blogger.com/img/gl.bold.gifaling, and let not the hatred of others to you make you swerve to wrong and depart from justice. Be just: that is next to Piety: and fear Allah. For Allah is well-acquainted with all that you do." [Quran 5:8]
Some considerations for dialog:
The Shia community is a large community in Pakistan and that there are many differences between one Shia group and another. This is why it is important that dialog between Sunnis and Shias becomes a movement and a process throughout society instead of everyone waiting for one high powered dialog to yield some results at the leadership level. Here are some preliminary thoughts on how a dialog between Shias and Sunnis can be beneficial for each party.
Goals of dialog
Although I consider dialog a process that is beneficial to society, it is necessary that everyone involved recognize some of its tangible benefits. The following are a set of achievable goals for Shia-Sunni dialog.
* Developing an agenda of common concerns
* Identifying issues of conflict
* Issuing joint Fatwas against the killings
* Isolating extremists on each side
* Preventing a potential conflict or mediating an existing conflict
* Clearing up stereotypes about each other
* Setting up joint task forces to deal with outstanding issues
Who should participate in the dialog
* Imams and caretakers of Masjids
* Students of Madrassas
* University students
* National level religious leadership
* Shia and Sunni media persons
* Shia and Sunni businesspersons
Mechanism of dialog
Dialog is a process that should occur at all levels of society. In the 1960s in Pakistan, when Shia- Sunni fights were far less significant, city officers used to convene joint meetings of Shia and Sunni leaders to chalk out Muharram plans so no confusion would result in rioting. These government-arranged dialogs helped keep conflicts at a minimum. Considering the current level of mistrust, it will be beneficial if civil society takes initiatives for dialog at all levels of society.
* Private Dialog: Host roundtable discussions initially at the top leadership level that should later expand to include
* thers working on different committees.
* Public Dialog: Shia and Sunni both use public forums and media to speak to each other's audiences
* Visiting each other’s Masjids to enhance confidence and to demonstrate that they are not supportive of the extremists who isolate each other.
* Shia-Sunni Dinners: Masjids and social associations should invite Shia and Sunni friends to eat with each other publicly.
Publicity of dialog
Publicity of the dialog will generate hope and confidence in it and will empower those in dialog vis-a-vis the extremists.
* Media should facilitate self-criticism and introspection by the religious leadership
* Those leaders who participate in dialog should be recognized through interviews, reports, and documentaries
* Investigative reports should be aired and published about the truth behind sectarian propaganda
* It is important for society to honor those Shia and Sunni leaders who take initiative and demonstrate leadership in participating in dialog. Sunnis, being members of the majority community, have the higher level of responsibility towards initiating and participating in dialog
Sponsors of Dialog
Funding always facilitates the beginning of a process in civil society. Every task requires time and money. While participating organizations and individuals can take care of their own costs, it would be very rewarding if some individuals and businesses came forward with funds to sponsor and host these dialogs. Pak-Americans can start a dialog in North America where there is no conflict in the Shia-Sunni community and take it to Pakistan by sponsoring the first meeting of such a nature.
Beyond Dialog
Considering that Shias and Sunnis live side by side throughout Pakistan, they are not un-known to each other, and considering that most of them have nothing to do with the current extremism which is responsible for the killings and violence, it is important for the moderate majority to come up with a few initiatives which are beneficial for Shia- Sunni harmony. These could be communicated in the print form or in any other media. They should discuss the following themes and/or use the methods outlined here:
* Khutba points which can help harmony
* What type of talk can hurt at personal level
* What is common between Shias and Sunnis
* Common Hadith between Shias and Sunnis
* What is hate speech
* Islamic teachings of tolerance
* A Shia-Sunni security force, jointly safeguarding each other’s houses of worship will be a significant blow to the extremist agenda.
Conclusion
Shia-Sunni sectarian terrorism is part of the undeclared civil war Pakistan is going through. The secthttp://www.blogger.com/img/gl.bold.gifarian violence declined after the establishment of a religious opposition group (MMA) that included Shias along with Sunnis, but the violence has recently restarted after the terrible incidents in Quetta. If a dialog was in place, that terrorism would have failed to restart sectarian violence.
The Quran, the Prophet Muhammad, peace and blessings be upon him, the Kaba and the five pillars of Islam are common to Shias and Sunnis. That is why no one in Islamic history has stopped Shias from performing Hajj, although the Kaba has always been in the control of Sunnis. Even today, when those currently in charge of the Kaba are part of a predominantly Salafi establishment, which maintains extremely negative views of Shias, Shias like other Muslims are free to perform Hajj. Shias on the other hand, since the 1979 Iranian revolution, are ordered by Imam Khumaini to pray behind these same Salafi imams instead of praying separately.
This mutual recognition gives us hope that a dialog can bear fruit of peace and harmony between both the communities.
http://www.yespakistan.com/security/shia-sunni-dialog.asp
Read more...
When in a Karachi Shia masjid a suicide bomber killed worshipers on a recent Friday, the first people who rushed to the rescue were worshipers from the nearby Sunni mosque in the Sindh Madrasah. They tried to save lives and comfort the injured before the police and others could arrive. I came to know about this because a Shia writer wrote about it in the Pakistani daily newspaper Dawn. Shias have similarly come forward to help their Sunni neighbors in crises. It has been reported that Shia and Sunni both regularly participate in each other’s funeral prayers.
May Allah bless those hearts moved by the needs of others. People like these are the true faithful whose actions reflect their character. These are the silent majority of Pakistanis who need to work with each other to isolate the terrorists amongst them and the extremists who support them.
This silent majority must come together through dialog to defeat the terrorists who have been responsible for killing as many as 4,000 Pakistanis in the past 15 years through their sectarian violence.
Seven reasons why a dialog between Shia and Sunni is needed:
* Theological differences between Shia and Sunni are old and are better left for Allah to judge, as He knows best and has said that He is the final judge of religious disagreements (Quran 16:12). The killing of Shias or Sunnis will not resolve these disputes.
* The principle of “no compulsion in matters of faith” (Quran 2:256) is not just limited to Muslim-non-Muslim relations. It applies to Muslim interpretations of Islam as well. This instruction of God serves as a guideline for the Muslim community to not impose one's interpretation on others. That is why throughout history, not only have Hanafis and Shafis worked with each other despite differences, but Shias and Sunnis have lived and worked side by side with each other as well.
* When human beings sit down and talk to each other, they learn to respect each other.
* Dialog allows parties to understand each other better by allowing participants to acquire direct knowledge about beliefs instead of relying on propaganda and stereotypical images. (Quran 49:6-12)
* It is Haram to kill a human being. Killing a human being is like killing the whole of humanity. By talking to each other, Shias and Sunnis will be able to save lives, which is like saving the whole of humanity. (Quran 5:32)
* Revenge is not justice. Killing in revenge is unjust, inhuman, and un-Islamic. Retribution through the state, which the Quran sanctions via capital punishment does not amount to individuals taking the law in their hands or killing an innocent person in revenge. The call for, "an eye for an eye," does not mean an innocent eye for an innocent eye; it means the eye of the perpetrator for the eye of the victim.
* Even if some Shias and Sunnis consider each other enemies, the Quran asks us to be just even toward one's enemy "O you who believe! Stand out firmly for Allah, as witnesses to fair dehttp://www.blogger.com/img/gl.bold.gifaling, and let not the hatred of others to you make you swerve to wrong and depart from justice. Be just: that is next to Piety: and fear Allah. For Allah is well-acquainted with all that you do." [Quran 5:8]
Some considerations for dialog:
The Shia community is a large community in Pakistan and that there are many differences between one Shia group and another. This is why it is important that dialog between Sunnis and Shias becomes a movement and a process throughout society instead of everyone waiting for one high powered dialog to yield some results at the leadership level. Here are some preliminary thoughts on how a dialog between Shias and Sunnis can be beneficial for each party.
Goals of dialog
Although I consider dialog a process that is beneficial to society, it is necessary that everyone involved recognize some of its tangible benefits. The following are a set of achievable goals for Shia-Sunni dialog.
* Developing an agenda of common concerns
* Identifying issues of conflict
* Issuing joint Fatwas against the killings
* Isolating extremists on each side
* Preventing a potential conflict or mediating an existing conflict
* Clearing up stereotypes about each other
* Setting up joint task forces to deal with outstanding issues
Who should participate in the dialog
* Imams and caretakers of Masjids
* Students of Madrassas
* University students
* National level religious leadership
* Shia and Sunni media persons
* Shia and Sunni businesspersons
Mechanism of dialog
Dialog is a process that should occur at all levels of society. In the 1960s in Pakistan, when Shia- Sunni fights were far less significant, city officers used to convene joint meetings of Shia and Sunni leaders to chalk out Muharram plans so no confusion would result in rioting. These government-arranged dialogs helped keep conflicts at a minimum. Considering the current level of mistrust, it will be beneficial if civil society takes initiatives for dialog at all levels of society.
* Private Dialog: Host roundtable discussions initially at the top leadership level that should later expand to include
* thers working on different committees.
* Public Dialog: Shia and Sunni both use public forums and media to speak to each other's audiences
* Visiting each other’s Masjids to enhance confidence and to demonstrate that they are not supportive of the extremists who isolate each other.
* Shia-Sunni Dinners: Masjids and social associations should invite Shia and Sunni friends to eat with each other publicly.
Publicity of dialog
Publicity of the dialog will generate hope and confidence in it and will empower those in dialog vis-a-vis the extremists.
* Media should facilitate self-criticism and introspection by the religious leadership
* Those leaders who participate in dialog should be recognized through interviews, reports, and documentaries
* Investigative reports should be aired and published about the truth behind sectarian propaganda
* It is important for society to honor those Shia and Sunni leaders who take initiative and demonstrate leadership in participating in dialog. Sunnis, being members of the majority community, have the higher level of responsibility towards initiating and participating in dialog
Sponsors of Dialog
Funding always facilitates the beginning of a process in civil society. Every task requires time and money. While participating organizations and individuals can take care of their own costs, it would be very rewarding if some individuals and businesses came forward with funds to sponsor and host these dialogs. Pak-Americans can start a dialog in North America where there is no conflict in the Shia-Sunni community and take it to Pakistan by sponsoring the first meeting of such a nature.
Beyond Dialog
Considering that Shias and Sunnis live side by side throughout Pakistan, they are not un-known to each other, and considering that most of them have nothing to do with the current extremism which is responsible for the killings and violence, it is important for the moderate majority to come up with a few initiatives which are beneficial for Shia- Sunni harmony. These could be communicated in the print form or in any other media. They should discuss the following themes and/or use the methods outlined here:
* Khutba points which can help harmony
* What type of talk can hurt at personal level
* What is common between Shias and Sunnis
* Common Hadith between Shias and Sunnis
* What is hate speech
* Islamic teachings of tolerance
* A Shia-Sunni security force, jointly safeguarding each other’s houses of worship will be a significant blow to the extremist agenda.
Conclusion
Shia-Sunni sectarian terrorism is part of the undeclared civil war Pakistan is going through. The secthttp://www.blogger.com/img/gl.bold.gifarian violence declined after the establishment of a religious opposition group (MMA) that included Shias along with Sunnis, but the violence has recently restarted after the terrible incidents in Quetta. If a dialog was in place, that terrorism would have failed to restart sectarian violence.
The Quran, the Prophet Muhammad, peace and blessings be upon him, the Kaba and the five pillars of Islam are common to Shias and Sunnis. That is why no one in Islamic history has stopped Shias from performing Hajj, although the Kaba has always been in the control of Sunnis. Even today, when those currently in charge of the Kaba are part of a predominantly Salafi establishment, which maintains extremely negative views of Shias, Shias like other Muslims are free to perform Hajj. Shias on the other hand, since the 1979 Iranian revolution, are ordered by Imam Khumaini to pray behind these same Salafi imams instead of praying separately.
This mutual recognition gives us hope that a dialog can bear fruit of peace and harmony between both the communities.
http://www.yespakistan.com/security/shia-sunni-dialog.asp
Read more...
Talking peace with militants in Tribal Areas: Let us not hurry into another appeasement. Khalid Aziz
Talking peace with militants
Tuesday, October 21, 2008
by Khalid Aziz
Since April of this year the military changed the method of fighting the insurgency in FATA and the NWFP. Prior to 'Operation Zalzala,' which was conducted in the Mahsud area of South Waziristan from January to April, the military strategy was guided by a minimalist response. However, this led to poor results with declining morale among troops. It also created a perception in people's mind that the government was ambivalent in its approach. Although the Pakistani military has begun to challenge the supremacy of the militants in Bajaur and Swat, the policy needs to be refined to make it more robust. In Bajaur a difficult decision was taken to challenge the highly trained group of militants, many of whom, like Qari Ziaur Rehman, belonged to the Afghan Taliban movement. A large number of other Central Asian militants are also present here. Only a detailed investigation will shed light on how and from where such militants are able to enter Bajaur and Swat. Information suggests that such infiltration is occurring from Tajikistan and the Kunar and Nuristan provinces of Afghanistan. If that is so, one would like to know the reason why no counteraction is taken to block this route by Afghanistan?
The TTP in Waziristan is relatively quiet and under pressure of a possible split between its North and South components. In North Waziristan, Gul Bahadur has announced his separation from the TTP on the grounds that it is unnecessarily fighting the Pakistani military while, according to him, the threat is from foreign troops in Afghanistan. Therefore, except for Bajaur and Swat, where serious fighting is going on, matters are calm for the time being. However, the spread of the insurgency into Dir adjacent to Swat is a real possibility. The situation in Afghanistan is not good and remains precarious. The US is carrying out a review of its policies there. The situation is not working out favourably for the allies. This conclusion is at variance with British foreign secretary David Milliband's comments that the situation in Afghanistan was not bad. There is something which is not going right and has forced both the US and the UK to agree to direct talks between Kabul and the militants. The first round of secret talks between the Afghan militants and Kabul took place in Makkah in September. These were attended by the Afghan Taliban, the Hizb-e-Islami, and representatives of the Afghan government with the UK and Saudi Arabia as moderators.
Pakistan should have been deeply involved in formulating a counterinsurgency policy during the special session of the National Assembly. The terms for the use of the air force and the artillery should have been debated to reduce the painful fallout of the collateral deaths. In this connection the government provided intensive briefings in camera to members of the National Assembly. A lot of effort went into this exercise aimed at creating a national consensus about the war. Maulana Fazlur Rehman of the JUI-F recommended during the proceedings that an opportunity should be given to the militants to put forward their own point of view. This was rightly rejected.
However, it is sad that the members lost interest in these important proceedings and the Speaker tried unsuccessfully to persuade them to take more interest. This showed that the political parties have a myopic attitude towards national security and used the occasion for political point scoring instead of seriously discussing details of a counterinsurgency strategy; secondly the parliament wasted a good opportunity to steer the country out of problems by providing foreign policy guidelines for the conduct of this war. The message to the military clearly is, "Look, we are too busy with our own matters to be bothered about issue of insurgency." If this is the case, then we have let down those who are sacrificing their lives in the ongoing operations.
The offer by the TTP to hold talks with the government was made in the background of events narrated above. What does it mean and how should the government react? The offer of holding peace talks by the TTP has to be considered in the light of many of our existential problems. First we find that Pakistani public is looking for peace. Thus, the public's sentiment is for ending the military operations. Secondly, the public has been badly hurt by the worsening day-to-day problems. We have a declining economy, food and oil shortages and an adverse balance of payment which has badly affected the value of the rupee. The galloping inflation has made the life of an average Pakistani very difficult indeed. Apparently the attempt by some of the religious parties in the National Assembly to secure a hearing for the militants in the secret briefing was, to say the least, distasteful. How can anyone in one's right senses think of similarity of treatment for rebels and the military fighting them?
The opposition parties have demanded that Pakistan should delink itself from the war and stop partnering the US. However, no one is willing to spell out how our enormous problems will be resolved even if the policy was changed? I guess we are emotional in our utterances and out of touch with the geostrategic reality facing us. The plain fact is that Pakistan has so seriously mishandled its external relations that it will find it difficult to get help. An astute observer Barnett Ruben said many years ago that Pakistan is a rentier state which plays its policies to attract resources from foreign countries and will therefore remain unstable. If the opposition parties want to change Pakistani policies they should provide details of their alternative plan. It makes no sense to criticise a situation without offering alternative solutions.
This explanation of the situation shows that Pakistan is doing better than before in the military field. However, the overall economic and financial conditions have deteriorated. But the worst aspect is the lack of coherence and unity of purpose on the political front as witnessed by the performance of Parliament and the attitude of political parties which want to make capital out of a security threat facing the state.
Therefore, what should be the response to the militants' offer of talks? First, the government must have an agreed framework regarding the talks. Only if the militants follow the process can any meaningful progress be achieved. The agreed framework must have clauses to penalise violations, with the militants required to provide financial sureties, as well as a commitment not to violate ceasefires.
If one looks at the fate of previous peace talks with the militants--Ladha in 2004, Sarrarogha in 2005, North Waziristan in 2006 and Swat in 2008--all of them ended in failure and the militants succeeded in getting their prisoners released, and received hefty compensations, in addition. In short, these were appeasements and not agreements. Let us not hurry into another appeasement. (The News)
The writer is a former chief secretary of NWFP and heads the Regional Institute of Policy Research. Email: azizkhalid @gmail.com
Read more...
Tuesday, October 21, 2008
by Khalid Aziz
Since April of this year the military changed the method of fighting the insurgency in FATA and the NWFP. Prior to 'Operation Zalzala,' which was conducted in the Mahsud area of South Waziristan from January to April, the military strategy was guided by a minimalist response. However, this led to poor results with declining morale among troops. It also created a perception in people's mind that the government was ambivalent in its approach. Although the Pakistani military has begun to challenge the supremacy of the militants in Bajaur and Swat, the policy needs to be refined to make it more robust. In Bajaur a difficult decision was taken to challenge the highly trained group of militants, many of whom, like Qari Ziaur Rehman, belonged to the Afghan Taliban movement. A large number of other Central Asian militants are also present here. Only a detailed investigation will shed light on how and from where such militants are able to enter Bajaur and Swat. Information suggests that such infiltration is occurring from Tajikistan and the Kunar and Nuristan provinces of Afghanistan. If that is so, one would like to know the reason why no counteraction is taken to block this route by Afghanistan?
The TTP in Waziristan is relatively quiet and under pressure of a possible split between its North and South components. In North Waziristan, Gul Bahadur has announced his separation from the TTP on the grounds that it is unnecessarily fighting the Pakistani military while, according to him, the threat is from foreign troops in Afghanistan. Therefore, except for Bajaur and Swat, where serious fighting is going on, matters are calm for the time being. However, the spread of the insurgency into Dir adjacent to Swat is a real possibility. The situation in Afghanistan is not good and remains precarious. The US is carrying out a review of its policies there. The situation is not working out favourably for the allies. This conclusion is at variance with British foreign secretary David Milliband's comments that the situation in Afghanistan was not bad. There is something which is not going right and has forced both the US and the UK to agree to direct talks between Kabul and the militants. The first round of secret talks between the Afghan militants and Kabul took place in Makkah in September. These were attended by the Afghan Taliban, the Hizb-e-Islami, and representatives of the Afghan government with the UK and Saudi Arabia as moderators.
Pakistan should have been deeply involved in formulating a counterinsurgency policy during the special session of the National Assembly. The terms for the use of the air force and the artillery should have been debated to reduce the painful fallout of the collateral deaths. In this connection the government provided intensive briefings in camera to members of the National Assembly. A lot of effort went into this exercise aimed at creating a national consensus about the war. Maulana Fazlur Rehman of the JUI-F recommended during the proceedings that an opportunity should be given to the militants to put forward their own point of view. This was rightly rejected.
However, it is sad that the members lost interest in these important proceedings and the Speaker tried unsuccessfully to persuade them to take more interest. This showed that the political parties have a myopic attitude towards national security and used the occasion for political point scoring instead of seriously discussing details of a counterinsurgency strategy; secondly the parliament wasted a good opportunity to steer the country out of problems by providing foreign policy guidelines for the conduct of this war. The message to the military clearly is, "Look, we are too busy with our own matters to be bothered about issue of insurgency." If this is the case, then we have let down those who are sacrificing their lives in the ongoing operations.
The offer by the TTP to hold talks with the government was made in the background of events narrated above. What does it mean and how should the government react? The offer of holding peace talks by the TTP has to be considered in the light of many of our existential problems. First we find that Pakistani public is looking for peace. Thus, the public's sentiment is for ending the military operations. Secondly, the public has been badly hurt by the worsening day-to-day problems. We have a declining economy, food and oil shortages and an adverse balance of payment which has badly affected the value of the rupee. The galloping inflation has made the life of an average Pakistani very difficult indeed. Apparently the attempt by some of the religious parties in the National Assembly to secure a hearing for the militants in the secret briefing was, to say the least, distasteful. How can anyone in one's right senses think of similarity of treatment for rebels and the military fighting them?
The opposition parties have demanded that Pakistan should delink itself from the war and stop partnering the US. However, no one is willing to spell out how our enormous problems will be resolved even if the policy was changed? I guess we are emotional in our utterances and out of touch with the geostrategic reality facing us. The plain fact is that Pakistan has so seriously mishandled its external relations that it will find it difficult to get help. An astute observer Barnett Ruben said many years ago that Pakistan is a rentier state which plays its policies to attract resources from foreign countries and will therefore remain unstable. If the opposition parties want to change Pakistani policies they should provide details of their alternative plan. It makes no sense to criticise a situation without offering alternative solutions.
This explanation of the situation shows that Pakistan is doing better than before in the military field. However, the overall economic and financial conditions have deteriorated. But the worst aspect is the lack of coherence and unity of purpose on the political front as witnessed by the performance of Parliament and the attitude of political parties which want to make capital out of a security threat facing the state.
Therefore, what should be the response to the militants' offer of talks? First, the government must have an agreed framework regarding the talks. Only if the militants follow the process can any meaningful progress be achieved. The agreed framework must have clauses to penalise violations, with the militants required to provide financial sureties, as well as a commitment not to violate ceasefires.
If one looks at the fate of previous peace talks with the militants--Ladha in 2004, Sarrarogha in 2005, North Waziristan in 2006 and Swat in 2008--all of them ended in failure and the militants succeeded in getting their prisoners released, and received hefty compensations, in addition. In short, these were appeasements and not agreements. Let us not hurry into another appeasement. (The News)
The writer is a former chief secretary of NWFP and heads the Regional Institute of Policy Research. Email: azizkhalid @gmail.com
Read more...
Owning the war AND Ayaz Amir's attitude of denial toward Taliban and terroirsts
Owning the war
Tuesday, October 21, 2008
by Muhammad Saleem
This is with reference to Ayaz Amir's article 'Our priceless talent for wasting time and money', published in this newspaper on Oct 17. Being a member of parliament, Mr Amir is certainly in a better position to throw light on the context and the content of the briefing.
One would think that his article would be a more serious and informed analysis of the exercise than that of others who were not part of the briefing's audience. Regrettably that was not the case. The key points that he discusses focus on the briefing itself, arguments on the ownership of the war, the content presented by the army (about which, as he points out, his party asked no questions), analysis of the root of the problem, and his vehement denial of the presence of foreign fighters.
Mr Amir seems to raise these issues with the aim of taking a swipe at the government. His democratic right could best be practised inside parliament since that is where the debate is taking place. By demonising the important parliamentary exercire in print, the only purpose that is being served is that the terrorist threat has been demonised. Also, it comes as a bit of a shock that while its own MPs are being attacked by terrorists the PML-N continues to deny the gravity of the threat.
The PML-N certainly treads a delicate path especially when it comes to the issue of terrorism. It has to represent its constituency, which is as much at risk from terrorism as others in the country. At the same time, it has to continue political point-scoring as a part of its bid to call elections before 2013. However, after a recent suicide attack on a party MP's residence in Bhakkar one would have though that the PML-N would review its rhetoric on this issue.
As far as the article is concerned, the writer on the one hand traces the roots of the problem to Zia's Islamisation. And on the other, he says that there was no insurgency, no Nek Mohammads and no Taliban in FATA in 2001.
The obvious question is that if there were no insurgency before 2001, then how is Zia to be blamed for the current crisis? Even more shocking is Mr Amir's denial of the presence of foreign fighters in the tribal areas. This flies in the face of scores of newspaper reports last year, especially during March and April when there were news stories of infighting between Maulvi Nazir and his group and around 10,000 Uzbeks led by Tahir Yuldashev – who is also based in Pakistan Clashes between the two groups had caused the deaths of over 200 combatants during the said period. Surely, this is proof that foreign fighters do exist in Pakistan.
Declaring the ongoing session as an exercise in futility is a negation of the PML-N's own demand for a joint session to discuss the most important challenge confronting the country. In any case, even if the party had not demanded such a thing, the session was important not least because of the need for developing a national response to this critical issue. The terrorists need to know that the elected representatives have a role in the crisis and will not be silent spectators.
The fact is that the PML-N has lost the argument on the war being a non-issue. 'Dialogue' was one proposal it advocated, which the government agrees with. However, lines have to be drawn when challenges to the state's writ continue, when kidnappings and public execution of our forces continue and when terrorists expand their circle of activity from the troubled region to the main centres of the country.
We would be doing the biggest disservice to the nation if we continue to disagree on the ownership of the war. FATA and other regions in Pakistan happen to be places where global acts of terrorism are planned, and at times executed. So if we indulge in the mindless debate of whose war it is, are we suggesting that these terrorists be let off the hook? By calling it America's war, Mr Amir and others are implying that Pakistan has no threat from these elements – which is clearly not the case. One last question: How many Karsaz, Liaquat Bagh, Marriott, Wah, and Bhakkar tragedies are required for our MPs to start owning this war? (The News)
The writer is a freelance contributor.
Read more...
Tuesday, October 21, 2008
by Muhammad Saleem
This is with reference to Ayaz Amir's article 'Our priceless talent for wasting time and money', published in this newspaper on Oct 17. Being a member of parliament, Mr Amir is certainly in a better position to throw light on the context and the content of the briefing.
One would think that his article would be a more serious and informed analysis of the exercise than that of others who were not part of the briefing's audience. Regrettably that was not the case. The key points that he discusses focus on the briefing itself, arguments on the ownership of the war, the content presented by the army (about which, as he points out, his party asked no questions), analysis of the root of the problem, and his vehement denial of the presence of foreign fighters.
Mr Amir seems to raise these issues with the aim of taking a swipe at the government. His democratic right could best be practised inside parliament since that is where the debate is taking place. By demonising the important parliamentary exercire in print, the only purpose that is being served is that the terrorist threat has been demonised. Also, it comes as a bit of a shock that while its own MPs are being attacked by terrorists the PML-N continues to deny the gravity of the threat.
The PML-N certainly treads a delicate path especially when it comes to the issue of terrorism. It has to represent its constituency, which is as much at risk from terrorism as others in the country. At the same time, it has to continue political point-scoring as a part of its bid to call elections before 2013. However, after a recent suicide attack on a party MP's residence in Bhakkar one would have though that the PML-N would review its rhetoric on this issue.
As far as the article is concerned, the writer on the one hand traces the roots of the problem to Zia's Islamisation. And on the other, he says that there was no insurgency, no Nek Mohammads and no Taliban in FATA in 2001.
The obvious question is that if there were no insurgency before 2001, then how is Zia to be blamed for the current crisis? Even more shocking is Mr Amir's denial of the presence of foreign fighters in the tribal areas. This flies in the face of scores of newspaper reports last year, especially during March and April when there were news stories of infighting between Maulvi Nazir and his group and around 10,000 Uzbeks led by Tahir Yuldashev – who is also based in Pakistan Clashes between the two groups had caused the deaths of over 200 combatants during the said period. Surely, this is proof that foreign fighters do exist in Pakistan.
Declaring the ongoing session as an exercise in futility is a negation of the PML-N's own demand for a joint session to discuss the most important challenge confronting the country. In any case, even if the party had not demanded such a thing, the session was important not least because of the need for developing a national response to this critical issue. The terrorists need to know that the elected representatives have a role in the crisis and will not be silent spectators.
The fact is that the PML-N has lost the argument on the war being a non-issue. 'Dialogue' was one proposal it advocated, which the government agrees with. However, lines have to be drawn when challenges to the state's writ continue, when kidnappings and public execution of our forces continue and when terrorists expand their circle of activity from the troubled region to the main centres of the country.
We would be doing the biggest disservice to the nation if we continue to disagree on the ownership of the war. FATA and other regions in Pakistan happen to be places where global acts of terrorism are planned, and at times executed. So if we indulge in the mindless debate of whose war it is, are we suggesting that these terrorists be let off the hook? By calling it America's war, Mr Amir and others are implying that Pakistan has no threat from these elements – which is clearly not the case. One last question: How many Karsaz, Liaquat Bagh, Marriott, Wah, and Bhakkar tragedies are required for our MPs to start owning this war? (The News)
The writer is a freelance contributor.
Read more...
The Taliban terrorists in Pakistan are being funded by drug trade in Afghanistan - Who are the sponsors? CIA, NATO and the Karzai Government
Getting Afghanistan together
President Asif Ali Zardari is supposed to have told the visiting US Assistant Secretary of State, Mr Richard Boucher, that the growing production of drugs in Afghanistan was having ill effects in Pakistan since the terrorists were now being funded increasingly with drug money. He said one reason terrorism had increased was Pakistan’s interdiction of the drug routes in Pakistan, and if the war against terrorism had to be won the allied forces in Afghanistan must stop drug production in Afghanistan. This was important, he argued, because the battle in Pakistan was turning and local tribal lashkars were increasingly taking on the intruders.
There are differing accounts of the scale of poppy production in Afghanistan, which is later turned into heroin and smuggled out of Afghanistan. The total money thus made in Afghanistan is said to be around $4 billion, out of which a trickle coming into the hands of the terrorists in Pakistan is enough to tilt the scales. According to Pakistan, 28 out of the 34 provinces of Afghanistan are producing poppy, but the British Foreign Secretary Mr David Miliband says only 16 are still involved in it. Whatever the right figure, some money from drugs is coming into the coffers of Al Qaeda from this sector. Of course, this is not the only source of income the terrorists have. The Taliban run their own government, taking their cut from the smuggling activity going on in the area under their control.
The flaw lay in the early US policy in Afghanistan when the Americans wanted as many Afghan elements on their side as possible because of the Rumsfeldian policy of having a minimum of American soldiers on ground. The warlords, already notorious for changing sides and amassing illegal wealth through smuggling and kidnapping for ransom, were actually bought off with millions of dollars. Later these warlords allowed massive cultivation of poppy in areas under their control and began another round of global circulation of heroin with Afghanistan marked on it as country of origin.
This has affected governance in Afghanistan. The warlords have jealously guarded their territories and not allowed the Karzai government to extend its outreach from the city of Kabul. What is worse, the government has got involved in the smuggling of drugs or facilitating it for a cut because funds are scarce or are monitored so strictly by the donors that the rulers have problems of personal liquidity. As we have seen from the attitudes bred by heroin-smuggling in Pakistan in the early 1990s, the rulers in Kabul might actually be looking at heroin as Afghanistan’s “response” to what they see as neglect on the part of the international community.
What is worse is that Britain has set another trend that must demoralise the Karzai government and everyone else. Two important British personages in Afghanistan have stated that the war in Afghanistan cannot be won and that the only way to solve the problem of terrorism was to negotiate with the Taliban. As The Economist put it: “Two reported sets of comments by senior British figures — the ambassador to Kabul, Sherard Cowper-Coles, and the recently-departed British military commander (of the Helmand province), Brigadier Mark Carleton-Smith — have raised concern that the British are tiring of the fight”. Now both gentlemen are saying that they were “misrepresented”, causing more confusion.
The Pakistani establishment must detect a trend in allied thinking that cannot encourage it too much. The Americans have come down very hard on Pakistan every time it has engaged in dialogue with the militants and made “peace” deals with them. In fact the claim was that each deal made in the Tribal Areas had led to the escalation in the Taliban forays into Afghanistan. But now the British have set off a new “retreating” opinion which is being repeated by the Americans commanders too because they know that the Bush Administration is about to leave the scene. The joint UK-US line is that the time to leave for them will draw near as the Afghan army and police get on with the job in sufficient numbers. Mr Miliband is looking forward to the day the Afghan army will increase from its present strength of 65,000 to 134,000 by 2012.
The war in Afghanistan is for the long term. Both Afghanistan and Pakistan have to fight it and both will have to be helped by the international community if it doesn’t want to become hostage to the global strategy of Al Qaeda. The year 2008 is crucial because this is where the global economy will demonstrate its ability to survive. This is also the year when Al Qaeda will have to be taken on in real earnest. Or the economic survival of Afghanistan and Pakistan will be negated by the anarchic dominance of the terrorists. (Daily Times)
Read more...
President Asif Ali Zardari is supposed to have told the visiting US Assistant Secretary of State, Mr Richard Boucher, that the growing production of drugs in Afghanistan was having ill effects in Pakistan since the terrorists were now being funded increasingly with drug money. He said one reason terrorism had increased was Pakistan’s interdiction of the drug routes in Pakistan, and if the war against terrorism had to be won the allied forces in Afghanistan must stop drug production in Afghanistan. This was important, he argued, because the battle in Pakistan was turning and local tribal lashkars were increasingly taking on the intruders.
There are differing accounts of the scale of poppy production in Afghanistan, which is later turned into heroin and smuggled out of Afghanistan. The total money thus made in Afghanistan is said to be around $4 billion, out of which a trickle coming into the hands of the terrorists in Pakistan is enough to tilt the scales. According to Pakistan, 28 out of the 34 provinces of Afghanistan are producing poppy, but the British Foreign Secretary Mr David Miliband says only 16 are still involved in it. Whatever the right figure, some money from drugs is coming into the coffers of Al Qaeda from this sector. Of course, this is not the only source of income the terrorists have. The Taliban run their own government, taking their cut from the smuggling activity going on in the area under their control.
The flaw lay in the early US policy in Afghanistan when the Americans wanted as many Afghan elements on their side as possible because of the Rumsfeldian policy of having a minimum of American soldiers on ground. The warlords, already notorious for changing sides and amassing illegal wealth through smuggling and kidnapping for ransom, were actually bought off with millions of dollars. Later these warlords allowed massive cultivation of poppy in areas under their control and began another round of global circulation of heroin with Afghanistan marked on it as country of origin.
This has affected governance in Afghanistan. The warlords have jealously guarded their territories and not allowed the Karzai government to extend its outreach from the city of Kabul. What is worse, the government has got involved in the smuggling of drugs or facilitating it for a cut because funds are scarce or are monitored so strictly by the donors that the rulers have problems of personal liquidity. As we have seen from the attitudes bred by heroin-smuggling in Pakistan in the early 1990s, the rulers in Kabul might actually be looking at heroin as Afghanistan’s “response” to what they see as neglect on the part of the international community.
What is worse is that Britain has set another trend that must demoralise the Karzai government and everyone else. Two important British personages in Afghanistan have stated that the war in Afghanistan cannot be won and that the only way to solve the problem of terrorism was to negotiate with the Taliban. As The Economist put it: “Two reported sets of comments by senior British figures — the ambassador to Kabul, Sherard Cowper-Coles, and the recently-departed British military commander (of the Helmand province), Brigadier Mark Carleton-Smith — have raised concern that the British are tiring of the fight”. Now both gentlemen are saying that they were “misrepresented”, causing more confusion.
The Pakistani establishment must detect a trend in allied thinking that cannot encourage it too much. The Americans have come down very hard on Pakistan every time it has engaged in dialogue with the militants and made “peace” deals with them. In fact the claim was that each deal made in the Tribal Areas had led to the escalation in the Taliban forays into Afghanistan. But now the British have set off a new “retreating” opinion which is being repeated by the Americans commanders too because they know that the Bush Administration is about to leave the scene. The joint UK-US line is that the time to leave for them will draw near as the Afghan army and police get on with the job in sufficient numbers. Mr Miliband is looking forward to the day the Afghan army will increase from its present strength of 65,000 to 134,000 by 2012.
The war in Afghanistan is for the long term. Both Afghanistan and Pakistan have to fight it and both will have to be helped by the international community if it doesn’t want to become hostage to the global strategy of Al Qaeda. The year 2008 is crucial because this is where the global economy will demonstrate its ability to survive. This is also the year when Al Qaeda will have to be taken on in real earnest. Or the economic survival of Afghanistan and Pakistan will be negated by the anarchic dominance of the terrorists. (Daily Times)
Read more...