‘Pakistan saved China from embarrassment on Xinjiang violence’

* Both countries have not fully utilised political ties for economic gains

* New Chinese embassy issue different from US embassy’s expansion

By Sajjad Malik

ISLAMABAD: Pakistan played a key role in dissuading certain Muslim countries from taking the issue of violence in China’s Xinjiang region to the Organisation of the Islamic Conference and saved Beijing from embarrassment, Chinese Ambassador Lou Zhaohui said on Friday.

“Yes, Pakistan played its role in doing so,” the ambassador said in response to a question, adding that certain western countries were fanning the Muslim Uighurs’ issue to incite violence.

Addressing reporters at the Chinese embassy highlight the importance of President Asif Ali Zardari’s frequent visits to China, he said they had been instrumental in transforming the relations from political to economic.

Zhaohui said Pakistan had been helpful in dealing with the East Turkestan Islamic Movement (ETIM) militants and curbing violence in Xinjiang where nearly 20 million Muslims lived.

Political ties: On comparison between China’s relations with India and Pakistan, the ambassador said China and India were moving towards improving economic relations despite political differences and the border issue, but Pakistan and China had not fully exploited the depth of their political ties for economic gains.

Zhaohui said China had provided $1.5 billion to Pakistan since 1998, which was unprecedented in Chinese history. He said the development of the Gwadar Port was the only project undertaken by China in another country.

He said China was presently involved in 120 projects in Pakistan and over 1,000 Chinese engineers were working on these projects. He expressed satisfaction over the security arrangements of the Chinese nationals.

Zhaohui said both the countries had been already cooperating in the energy sector and President Zardari’s resent visits were also aimed at increasing cooperation in the hydropower and agriculture sectors.

Embassy: To a question, he said China was building a new embassy in Islamabad, which was different from the expansion of the US embassy. He said China would not bring in its security officials to guard the embassy as it had full confidence in Pakistan’s security system.

He said Pakistan had made considerable progress in the economic recovery and security situation since the present government assumed office. He expressed full support for the government in bringing peace and stability in the region.

The ambassador added that peace in Afghanistan was vital for peace in the region, adding China was playing its role in this regard.

Read more...

Islam, Ziaism and hypocrisy: A matter of faith

A matter of faith —Salman Tarik Kureshi

It is the frightful institutions General Zia-ul Haq promoted and the retrograde educational systems he erected that have polluted the intellectual atmosphere of the land and given birth to today’s bigoted, obscurantist political culture

It is the month we in this part of the world have known for centuries as ‘Ramzan Sharif’, but which we now find corrected to ‘Ramadan-ul Kareem’. The prayer-time congregations at the big mosque near my home, which comprise numerous members of Karachi’s uber-bourgeoisie alongside more ordinary mortals, are significantly larger than usual.

The frequent discourse of the Pesh Imam who leads the prayers here concerns the Houris in Paradise, in praise of whom he becomes quite ecstatic, extolling their various charms in terms that are vividly physical. His other pet topic relates to the valiant warriors in Swat and Waziristan who are battling against the forces of Evil (he is not, let it be noted, referring to the armed forces of our Islamic Republic). He also sometimes speaks of a certain “tall Ghazi” in the mountains, on whom he invokes the Almighty’s blessings.

Some among the regular congregation at this particular place of worship do find these perorations excessive. But the mosque in question was set up by a certain friendly Islamic country (one known to give royal welcomes to former dictators) and is managed by their Consular Office. Its affairs are therefore beyond intervention by mere members of a congregation. Or is it merely the superstitious guilt of our tax-evading, bribe-negotiating elite that ensures the passive silence of the congregation?

This holiest of months also brings to my mind a certain exceedingly pious gentleman of my acquaintance. More than pious, he is regarded by his friends as something of an authority on matters to do with the Faith. Knowledgeable and especially well read, he greatly admires Hazrat Maulana Rashid Gangohi, the outstanding scholar who was one of the founders of the Deoband madrassa. The gentleman to whom I refer is a kindly soul, who can be depended upon for help by others. However, when in the course of conversation I chanced to remark that the most basic virtue lay in kindness towards others, he contradicted me. Kindness, he contended, was reserved for “pious, practicing Muslims”. As for others, they should be given a chance to mend their ways, after which “they would be Wajibul Qatal”.

Another person I chanced to meet — a finance man, no less — feels that people who do not attend Friday prayers “should simply be killed. Slit their throats!”

Now, this kind of sanguinary verbal ferocity is very different from the traditions of quiet piety and gentle acceptance in which most Muslims were brought up. I claim no expertise to suggest whether this or the other is the ‘correct’ version of Islamic thinking. However, there are certainly many scholars who hold that this aggressive literalism, popularly but incorrectly referred to as ‘fundamentalism’, is a doctrinal innovation of relatively recent origin. It is very much a product of the linear, pseudo-logical thinking that has characterised our violent and intolerant age — an age that began with the full flowering of modern imperialism in the nineteenth century and whose baleful cultural and psychic responses have long outlived their origins.

With this kind of intellectual legacy as a backdrop, what kind of political discourse is possible in Pakistan?

Well, as I pointed out in an earlier offering in these pages, the first political statement of the new Pakistani nation, as expressed by its founder addressing the first session of the new parliament, revolved around policy statements on law and order, black-marketing, corruption and nepotism without reference to any kind of ‘religious’ perspective. The latter was dismissed by the Quaid, stating that “All these angularities of the...Hindu community and the Muslim community...will vanish... not in the religious sense, because that is the personal faith of each individual, but in the political sense as citizens of the State.”

In the three decades between the Quaid’s death and the overthrow and murder of Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, the political debate, one of sometimes cyclonic intensity, revolved around perfectly worldly preoccupations, such as land reform, economic growth, adult franchise, constitutional rule, human rights and the rights of the federating units. Whether Nazimuddin or Ayub or Bhutto was in power, whether he was opposed by Suhrawardy or Mujib or Wali Khan or Bhashani, no specifically ‘Islamic’ nostrum was proposed by way of a solution to national problems. The key political actors all proposed alternate paths to modernisation and propounded contemporary ideologies.

It seems that this kind of ‘Islamic’ thinking was simply not a part of the Pakistani frame of reference, except among a tiny minority. More important, no one accused the other of being a ‘bad’ Muslim, or even thought to suggest that any person was Wajibul Qatal. The Islamic preoccupation (that so seems to obsess us today) was simply not one of the terms of the debate.

But something changed on the July 5, 1977, when we first heard the usurper of the day snarling on the media about his preference for what he called ‘an Islamic system’. It is the frightful institutions he thereafter promoted and the retrograde educational systems he erected that have polluted the intellectual atmosphere of the land and given birth to today’s bigoted, obscurantist political culture and its poisonous fallouts of violent insurgency, terrorism and cold-blooded mass murder.

Now, I am not suggesting that the Pesh Imam I described or any of the well-heeled members of his congregation are even remotely responsible for the horrific waves of violence and destruction continually convulsing the land. But is there not a kind of philosophical connection, a tacit acceptance that such acts of violence, and the war being waged against the state of Pakistan by these elements, are regrettable but somehow ‘understandable’?

While no comparison is being made or even suggested, is it far-fetched to see a kind of rhetorical-philosophical continuum connecting the fulminations of Maulvi Sufi Mohammed to the khatibs of Lal Masjid and still further on to the Pesh Imam I have written about here? Still more disturbing is the silence with which this Pesh Imam’s sermons are greeted by the genteel members of his congregation. Is their/our silence indifference or consent? Certainly, it is a key part of the enabling environment of terror.

To return to 1977, General Zia-ul Haq’s seizure of power was a pivotal point in our history. That seizure was ‘legitimised’ by the courts of this tragic land. The judges who were unwilling to oblige him (and even some like CJ Anwarul Haq of the Doctrine of Necessity fame, who perverted their oaths in his behalf) were removed through a Provisional Constitution Order. Sound familiar? His appalling constitutional innovations and the barbaric laws he promoted were enacted into statutes by the hand-picked, rubber stamp parliament he conjured into being...and then himself dismissed. He promoted and funded the massive multiplication of terrorist-factory madrassas. Even the ‘normal’ educational institutions suffered distortion of their syllabi, toxic textbooks and a total rewriting of the very history of this land of ours.

Finally, there are two points I would invite my reader to note. The first is that this usurper did all that he did against a popular, constitutionally empowered prime minister and parliament and under the shadow of the recently enacted Article 6. Please observe that all proved powerless to stop him.

The second point is that this most retrograde of dictators ruled virtually unshaken for over eleven years...challenged only, but without any diminution of his tenure or his power, by the Bhutto family and the women of this country. It seemed as if he could have been ruling for the rest of our lives. His death was an unexpected, unearned release for the people.

The writer is a marketing consultant based in Karachi. He is also a poet. (Daily Times)

Read more...

General Aslam Beg's Message to Supreme Court

In his letter to Nazir Njai, General Beg admits his implict threat in his message to the Supreme Court of Pakistan.

MQM was established to counter Sindhi nationalists: Beg

Daily Times Monitor

LAHORE: Former army chief Mirza Aslam Beg said on Friday the Muttahida Qaumi Movement (MQM) was established as a political measure to counter the Sindhi nationalist movement following the hanging of PPP founder Zulfikar Ali Bhutto.

Talking to a private TV channel, Beg said the MQM did not exist before 1978 and was established on the directions of General Ziaul Haq, then military ruler, only to counter Sindhi nationalists who had lost Bhutto after Zia’s military coup.

He said the caretaker government under Ghulam Ishaq Khan had decided to support the Islami Jamhoori Ittehad (IJI) to counter the PPP in order to balance the political atmosphere. “I think the formation of the IJI was a right decision at the time,” he said.

Beg said the IJI were the only means that could create a strong opposition at the time.

He said former president Pervez Musharraf had created and supported the Muttahida Majlis-e-Amal (MMA) and the PML-Q to prolong his term in office, but no one had pointed that out.

Beg said he believed the Bahawalpur plane crash that killed Gen Ziaul Haq was “sabotage”.

‘Breaking’ news —Shaukat Qadir

We have been sliding downhill for too long, the slide must stop somewhere. Now is as good a time as any, and better than most, given a COAS who is bending over backwards to establish the principle of civilian supremacy

When I first read in the papers that the intelligence ‘Wonder Boy’ Brigadier Imtiaz Ahmed (retd) alias ‘Billa’ had decided to open his mouth and that he had been running from pillar to post asking people to interview him, I decided he was best ignored. However, I did wonder what treatment succeeded in ridding him of the constipation of years and why. That the disease (or should it be treatment?) was bound to be contagious was a foregone conclusion; and even when asked, I refrained from comment except to ask, “what was unknown that he has now disclosed?”

I have been prompted to write on the subject by PMLN leader Ahsan Iqbal’s ultimatum to the President and the response it has evoked.

What is there about our history that is unknown? Did we not know that the erstwhile IJI was a creation of the Zia-ul-Haq era, to counterbalance the PPP? Did we not know that a number of politicians were bribed to turn-coat and join the IJI? Lt Gen Asad Durrani submitted his affidavit to the Supreme Court naming individuals and sums disbursed by him while he was DG ISI, on the instructions of General Mirza Aslam Beg, then COAS, many years ago. The judgement is still withheld. That one of them has publicly acknowledged it redounds to her credit, but this is not the first time our politicians have been bought or sold, nor is it likely to be the last.

As the DG ISI, Lt Gen Hameed Gul in his first briefing to Benazir Bhutto as prime minister, acknowledged that he and the ISI played a role in creating the IJI.

We all know how the PMLQ took birth with Pervez Musharraf as midwife. We have witnessed the party deserting him and the formation of a ‘Forward Bloc’. We are all aware of how the religious political parties were nurtured by Zia and later by Musharraf. We have witnessed them being bought and sold so many times that it is not possible to predict who they will support tomorrow.

Did we not know that the MQM was another creation of Zia to counterbalance the PPP in the major urban centres of Sindh, Karachi and Hyderabad? Did we not know that when Zia lost control of the MQM and this organisation began to terrorise the two urban centres under its total control, Zia tried to counter it by creating the MQM (Haqiqi)? Did we not know about the MQM’s methods; were we unaware of the Musharraf-MQM nexus? Any doubts as to the latter were put to rest in May 2007.

Did we not know about an announced intention to create a homeland for the ‘mohajirs’? What is the fresh disclosure in the ‘maps of Jinnahpur’? Whether there were any or not, the intent was known publicly.

Who was unaware that Gen Beg made every effort to subvert Benazir Bhutto’s first tenure as PM? Or that he was suitably rewarded by Nawaz Sharif, when he retired, by providing him the funds to set up the organisation called FRIENDS? Who was unaware that, at a time when Benazir Bhutto was seeking reconciliation with India and had ordered the army not to interfere in Indian-held Kashmir, Gen Beg was fighting his private war there, funnelling millions to support it?

However, there is an upside to this public washing of our dirty linen. Whoever had any illusions left about our politicians’ or our military leadership’s role in playing havoc with the country at every given opportunity in our history is likely to lose them. What is more, it throws into stark contrast our current apolitical army leadership.

Other retired friends tell me they feel bad about the damage all this is doing to the army’s reputation. In my view, that is the best part of it all. No institution should be considered to be, or be, above the law. It is time, and more, that senior military officers again become accountable to the people and to the representatives of the people — however contemptible or reprehensible the elected representatives might be. It is also high time that the people begin to hold their representatives accountable.

We have been sliding downhill for too long, the slide must stop somewhere. Now is as good a time as any, and better than most, given a COAS who is bending over backwards to establish the principle of civilian supremacy. I am sure he will pass this test with flying colours, as he has done every one in the past. (Daily Times)

.....

Democracy deficit? —Abbas Rashid

Meanwhile, a former spook with the most unsavoury of reputations has been a feature on the airwaves, making revelations that are clearly politically motivated. What Brigadier Imtiaz Ahmad (retd) has to say about the 1992 operation against the MQM and the absence of any Jinnahpur maps as well as other matters is largely geared to embarrass Nawaz Sharif. The Nawaz camp thinks this is a manoeuvre by the PPP to get them to back off on the issue of the NRO or the minus-one option (PPP minus Zardari). Hopefully, they are wrong.

Again on the issue of General Musharraf’s trial, the PPP regards this primarily as a move to put them in a difficult spot by pitting them against the army. So, there is a pragmatic consideration here on the part of the PPP not going forward on this. At the same time, while Musharraf may have illusions of leading at least a faction of the PML back in Pakistan, it is more likely that given the serious charges against him, he will come to prefer exile to his day in court.

There are also calls to proceed with another case that impinges crucially on the area of civil-military relations, and has been before the Supreme Court for around thirteen years, since 1997. The petitioner, a well-respected former military officer, Air Marshal Asghar Khan (retd) had brought the case against former Army Chief General Aslam Beg (retd), ex-ISI chief Lt Gen Asad Durrani (retd) and ex-chief of Mehran Bank Younis Habib. Essentially, Beg is accused of instructing Durrani to disburse money provided by Habib to the newly formed IJI by way of ‘logistic’ support.

The interesting thing about this case is that in an affidavit before the court, Durrani has admitted to disbursing the money and named the politicians as well as the sums handed over. And, as Justice Saeeduzzaman Siddiqui reminded us in a recent appearance on TV, none among the recipients had denied getting the money. More recently, though, some have.

Regardless, it is Durrani’s claim that he was only obeying a superior officer’s orders and Beg would have us believe that the orders had actually come from the chief executive at the time, President Ghulam Ishaq Khan. And was anyone trying to determine the legality or otherwise of such orders, before carrying them out? How disposed the Supreme Court is to take up this case again remains to be seen.

PM doesn’t mind!

Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani has taken the tension out of the political atmosphere in the country by telling journalists in Karachi on Thursday that he took opposition criticism in his stride. His view was that governments did not fall by “disclosures” of the sort being made on TV channels these days.

Mr Gilani said something more meaningful after coming out of a meeting of the Sindh cabinet. When his attention was drawn to remarks made by PMLN leader Mr Nawaz Sharif that “failure of the PPP-led coalition was becoming failure of democracy”, he said: “I don’t mind what Nawaz Sharif Sahib says”.

He was right in conceding that the party in power has to be long in patience and that the opposition is always more strident in its criticism. Also he can ignore a lot of the criticism being bandied about these days about his government being “inactive”. Being rash in action simply to satisfy a few politicians and some partisan TV anchors might land him in trouble.

Most of the problems facing him are issues of either long gestation or of slow resolution. That the economy is in trouble and terrorism forces the state to lean on international support is also not his fault. There are signs of slow improvement in the economy; and the military operations against the terrorists are not going badly at all. As for Mr Sharif, he is a “friend in opposition” as he himself likes to admit.

The Raza Rabbani committee in parliament is shortly going to present the constitutional amendment that will get us rid of the universally abominated 17th Amendment. After that, the only issue left would be the trial of General (Retd) Musharraf. We hope that the PMLN will not insist upon it to the exclusion of everything else in the longer term interest of political stability in the country, as Saudi King Abdullah is wisely advising. (Daily Times)

Read more...

Terrorist pro-Taliban ex-MP Shah Abdul Aziz freed by judiciary in Pakistan. Shame on you, pro-Taliban judges!

This site has moved to http://criticalppp.com, click this link if you are not redirected
Read more...

No comments: PML-N softens stance on 17th Amendment

PML-N softens stance on 17th Amendment

* Backs off from de-linking 17th Amend from package
* Committee convinces PML-N on amendments to ‘contentious issues’ only

By Irfan Ghauri

ISLAMABAD: The Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) – which was earlier insisting on de-linking the issue of the repeal of the 17th Amendment from the constitutional reforms package – on Thursday agreed that all proposed amendments should be accommodated in a single comprehensive constitutional amendment package.

During a meeting of the Parliamentary Committee on Constitutional Reforms, headed by Senator Raza Rabbani, committee members urged the PML-N to show some flexibility in their stance in order to move ahead on the issue, sources privy to the meeting told Daily Times.

Earlier, the committee discussed the constitutional amendment packages forwarded by various political parties, but decided that matters related to the repeal of the 17th Amendment would be sorted out before taking up other issues proposed in the drafts.

The sources said of the 29 points of the LFO, which later became part of 17th Amendment, all parties agreed on 20 points, however differences remained on the remaining nine.

Of these, seven points were more contentious, as they dealt with the discretionary powers former president Pervez Musharraf had invested in the office of the president.

The pace of the proceedings of the committee had been slackened due to differences between the PPP and PML-N, which insisted that the repeal of 17th Amendment was a separate issue from rest of the constitutional amendments.

Issues: However, the sources said committee members had persuaded the PML-N that the entire 17th Amendment could not be abolished and amendments could be made only to contentious clauses.

The sources said smaller parties in the committee also supported the PPP’s view on the matter, which is based on a comprehensive package and aims to resolve all issues in a single package. They said members of smaller parties also insisted that issues such as provincial autonomy were more important to strengthening the federation and could not be ignored at any cost.

The committee members further contended that outstanding grievances of smaller provinces would stand as they were if the PPP and the PML-N only focused on matters related to the repeal of the 17th Amendment.

The PML-N, however, accepted the arguments and agreed that all proposed amendments would be furnished in a comprehensive package.

The Parliamentary Committee on Constitutional Reforms will continue its discussions for the next two days.

The sources said besides the draft packages proposed by the political parties, the civil society and various bar councils had also forwarded around 90 suggestions for constitutional reforms.

The committee will now start discussions on the preamble and other articles of the constitution.

Meanwhile, talking to reports after the meeting, Committee Chairman Raza Rabbani said the nation would soon hear good news about a consensus constitutional reforms package, however, he did not give any time frame for submitting a final proposal to parliament.

Rabbani said all stakeholders agreed on annulling all controversial amendments previously made to the constitution. (Daily Times)

Read more...

Attack on Hamid Saeed Kazmi and the Taliban inside Islamabad

Feeling insecure in Islamabad

The federal religious affairs minister, Mr Hamid Saeed Kazmi, escaped death at the hands of terrorists on Wednesday at Islamabad’s GPO chowk. He was driving out of his office without much security. His driver has been killed and his guard has sustained wounds. Mr Kazmi has received a bullet in his leg. What is shocking is that everyone knew that he was the target of the terrorists; he had told the government that he might be next in line after the assassination of Allama Naeemi of Lahore earlier in the year.

Let’s first look at why he was in the crosshairs, something which the government thought it could ignore. Despite his last name, Mr Kazmi is not a Shia; he is in fact more vulnerable than a Shia: he belongs to the majority Ahle Sunnat school of thought, also called Barelvi, whom the Taliban think culpable because the Barelvis don’t favour the apostatisation of Shias. More relevantly, he was targeted by the Taliban because he had organised a Pakistan-wide clerical consensus against suicide-bombings.

Mr Kazmi had asked for his security to be beefed-up after he received threats from quarters that he clearly identified with elements that work for the Taliban. He may even have known that these elements were located inside Islamabad. (SSP Islamabad has confirmed that the terrorists who attacked him with Kalashnikovs from their 125cc motorbike were from inside Islamabad and had not entered the capital city from outside.) The truth is that anyone located in Islamabad is a sitting duck because the Taliban are better represented here than any other city in Pakistan.

Pakistan first felt how it was besieged in the capital when the Lal Masjid crisis broke in 2007. The army was called out to evacuate the inmates of the madrassa after it was reported that terrorists were lodged inside it. What came as a shock was the support the Lal Masjid clerics received from the lower middle class and poor community living in its vicinity even after it had become clear to them that they would be defying the Pakistan Army. Once the government got bogged down, Lal Masjid clerics called out their mediators: Fazlur Rehman Khaleel of the banned Harkatul Mujahideen headquartered in Islamabad; Shah Abdul Aziz, recently on trial for beheading a Polish engineer; and Javed Ibrahim Paracha, known as the “Al Qaeda lawyer”.

General Musharraf and his regime were defeated on the issue of Lal Masjid by an errant media. Despite the fact that its clerics clearly betrayed their sectarian identity and declared their allegiance to the Taliban, the surviving head of the Masjid was let off by the Supreme Court. In 2008, the popular view manufactured by the media swung in favour of Lal Masjid even as the world identified it as the high-water mark of the dominance of Taliban and Al Qaeda in Pakistan. For instance, in Holland when the Dutch protested against the building of a mosque, their placards read: “No more Lal Masjids!”

A year after the Lal Masjid incident, Islamabad had still not become fully alert to the “extra-territoriality” of the mosques in the city. One popular Karachi daily editorialised in September 2008: “We are forced to refer to the Lal Masjid affair because 70 new illegal mosques have come up in Islamabad, and the local administration and the Capital Development Authority have done nothing about it. Lal Masjid did not turn into a bastion for militants overnight. The Ghazi brothers gradually expanded the mosque under their control and built new structures, including living quarters for their families”.

Islamabad is not a secure city. Foreign diplomats who live here feel endangered. Many Pakistanis who seek honour in isolationism draw comfort from the fact that “foreigners” are uneasy coming to Islamabad. The truth is that the city has become “Talibanised” among the lower classes that outnumber the rest of its population. Anyone who has held a discussion among the lower middle class student community there would bear witness to this fact. Yet, those Pakistani circles that are endangered would rather focus on how the Americans and other foreigners have made Islamabad unsafe by beefing up their own security arrangements!

Sadly, the TV reporter is querulous in tone when he reports on the “hundreds of barriers” erected by Islamabad police to minimise incidents of terrorism in the city. The media message is: Islamabad is suffering because of the security barriers and the Americans. But this message goes in favour of the Taliban and Al Qaeda who would like nothing more than the removal of all obstacles in Islamabad.

Read more...

Documentary evidence: King Abdullah and Nawaz Sharif's NRO

By: Ahmer Asif

During Sharif (Butt) Brothers public meetings one slogan is often very popular i.e.

DAIKHO DAIKHO KAUN AAYA
SHAER AAYA SHAER AAYA !!!

(Watch out who's come Lion's come Lion's come !!)

I wonder what was wrong with these Sharif lions when they shamelessly signed agreements in December 2000 with the then military ruler Gen. Musharraf and flew to Saudi Arabia with their families and servants leaving behind their hapless partymen.

Below are copies of agreements (call it NRO or deal?) signed by Sharif brothers and a copy of undertaking by Mian Shahbaz Sharif given to Saudi rulers before going to USA for some medical treatment.

Read more...

King Abdullah says that any step against Musharraf could affect Pak-Saudi ties

It is interesting to see that Musharraf's meetings with Saudi king have been distorted and misrepresented by a member of the usual pro-Nawaz, pro-Taliban propaganda cell, i.e. Saleh Zaafir (of The News). It may be noted that Saleh Zaafir, Ansar Abbasi, Muhammad Ahmed Noorani and Shaheen Sehbai (all of them belong to Jang/The News) are known for their links with anti-democracy (military and civil) establishment in Pakistan.

PML-N’s 48-hour ultimatum withdrawn within 48 hours: Don’t involve Saudis in internal affairs, says Nawaz Sharif

* PML-N would not support any undemocratic move to destabilise the PPP government

Staff Report

ISLAMABAD: The Saudi government should not be involved in Pakistan’s political affairs, said Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) chief on Wednesday as his party withdrew a 48-hour deadline it set for the ruling Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) to end a “malicious campaign”.

The APP news agency reported that Nawaz made the comments while addressing a press conference at Chief Minister’s Secretariat. He said the PML-N would not support any undemocratic move to destabilise the PPP government.

Meanwhile, PML-N Senator Pervaiz Rashid told Daily Times his party had withdrawn its ultimatum for the PPP after “achieving the objectives”. He said his party was “quite satisfied” after the prime minister called the Punjab chief over the telephone to renew their commitment to work together. app/staff report

Musharraf ‘upbeat’ after meeting with Saudi king

Thursday, 03 Sep, 2009

Musharraf’s counsel says the former military dictator has a busy schedule in the United States delivering lectures for the next two months and he would decide on his return to Pakistan after November. - AP/File photo

RIYADH: Former president Pervez Musharraf left Jeddah for London on Wednesday afternoon after a three-day visit to Saudi Arabia amid speculations that another Saudi-backed political arrangement was on the cards in Pakistan.

General (retd) Musharraf had a long meeting with King Abdullah that began late on Tuesday night and continued into the early hours of Wednesday. Initially, senior Saudi ministers attended the meeting, but after 45 minutes they left the room and a one-to-one discussion between the king and the former president continued for about two hours and 15 minutes.

What transpired at the meeting was difficult to ascertain, but according to sources close to the former president he would say something about it on returning to London. They said that after the meeting Mr Musharraf was in ‘high spirits’. His body language was ‘positive’ and he sounded ‘very optimistic’.

Officially nothing much has been said by the Saudi side. In a brief news release, the official Saudi Press Agency said: ‘The Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques, King Abdullah bin Abdulaziz Al Saud, received at his palace here today former Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf. During the audience, they held cordial talks. The audience was attended by a number of officials.’

It is an open secret here that President Musharraf resigned from the presidency last year under an arrangement and that the Saudis were one of the guarantors. Under the arrangement, there would be no trial of or court cases against the former president. Washington and London are believed to be among other guarantors.

Sources here say that it would be naive to think that PML-N chief Nawaz Sharif was unaware of the arrangement. And now the guarantors want the arrangement to be respected in letter and in spirit.

Mr Sharif is also expected here next week, during the last days of Ramazan. Public posturing apart, the sources said, Mr Sharif would be aware of the importance of the guarantee given by the Saudis.

It may be mentioned that Mr Musharraf’s was a high-profile visit. Not only did the king send a special plane to bring him to the kingdom, the meeting on Tuesday night was shown on Saudi TV. The SPA also released a picture showing the king engaged in discussion with the former president.

The Saudi initiative needs to be seen against the backdrop of the keen interest taken by Riyadh in political stability in Pakistan. (Dawn)

ISLAMABAD: The almost royal treatment given by the Saudi government to former president Gen (retd) Pervez Musharraf during his visit to Riyadh has thrown his opponents into total confusion.
Reports that King Abdullah sent a special plane to bring the retied general from London to Riyadh have surprised a number of politicians many of whom had received Saudi favours and courtesy.

The reports have sparked speculations that the Saudi ruling family is taking keen interest to defuse tension in Pakistan and try to use its influence to persuade PML-N chief Nawaz Sharif to give up his demand for Gen (retd) Musharraf’s trial for high treason.

It was because of these reports that a PML-N spokesman denied that any Saudi request relating to the former military leader had been made to Mr Sharif. ‘There has been no official message from the Saudi family to Mian Nawaz Sharif in this regard,’ Senator Pervez Rasheed told reporters.

He refused to comment on Musharraf’s visit to Saudi Arabia as a royal guest.

Some observers here attach great importance to the former president’s visit and say that disturbed by the persistent demand for trial made by the PML-N, Gen Musharraf wanted King Abdullah to use his influence and bail him out.

Others say it was a routine visit because Gen Musharraf has good relations with the Saudi royal family and it has nothing to do with the current political situation in the country.

Barrister Mohammad Ali Saif, who claims to be spokesperson and representative of Gen Musharraf in Pakistan, said: ‘The PML-N should see and understand how the former president is being treated by the Saudi government and forget about his (Musharraf) trial for treason.’

He said it was not for the first time that the Saudi government had sent a special plane for Gen Musharraf. In the past also, he added, King Abdullah had offered the facility and Gen Musharraf kept the plane sent by king for some time for his travel to European countries.

Asked if the Saudi government had given any guarantee to the former president that he would not be tried, Mr Saif said: ‘I don’t know anything about this, but there is little possibility of Gen Musharraf facing trial only because the PML-N is asking for that.’

A senior PPP leader pointed out that frequent visits by Saudi intelligence chief Prince Muqrin bin Abdul Aziz to Pakistan before and after the resignation of Gen Musharraf showed the level of Saudi government’s engagement with Pakistan.

In reply to a question about any assurance given by the government to the Saudis about the fate of Gen Musharraf, he said: ‘I am not aware of this, but the way the former president is being treated in the kingdom means he cannot be touched in Pakistan.’

He said it was only the PML-N which was insisting on Musharraf’s trial while other parties were either least concerned or not ‘very serious’ about it.

(DAWN NEWS)

King Abdullah calls on Pakistani leadership to abide by agreement
* Any step against former president could affect Pak-Saudi ties, political stability in Pakistan

Daily Times Monitor

LAHORE: The Saudi authorities have formally sent a message to the Pakistani leadership that they want stability in Pakistan, with King Abdullah urging all stakeholders to abide by an agreement that rules out any action against former president Pervez Musharraf, reported a private TV channel on Tuesday.

Saudi royal family sources said that during a meeting between Interior Minister Rehman Malik and the Saudi king, a “clear message” was given to the government that a confrontation between the PPP and the PML-N and any step against Musharraf could affect the country’s political stability.

The channel reported that the Saudi king played the role of a guarantor at the time of Musharraf’s resignation and assured the former president that no action would be taken against him. The king said if a party or an individual backed out of the agreement reached, Pak-Saudi relations would be affected.

Nawaz travels to Saudi Arabia next week to hold meetings with officials, who would “force him to abide by the agreement”, said the sources, adding that the Saudi king wanted to defuse the tensions because he had been told Musharraf was considering making important disclosures about Nawaz and President Asif Ali Zardari in London that included talk of Saudi Arabia as well.

Musharraf – who is currently in Saudi Arabia – met the Saudi intelligence chief, who was an important player in Nawaz’s return to Pakistan, and discussed issues related to his trial.

These criminal agent rulers of saudi arabia are protecting a mass murdering pig from pakistan. (Daily Times)

Saudi Arabia to the rescue?

Pakistan doesn’t notch up any credit points revealing to the world that its crucial political decisions are taken in/by Saudi Arabia. Yet this has happened once again when General Pervez Musharraf (Retd) — hounded by accusations of treason at home — was invited to Saudi Arabia on Tuesday with full protocol and was probably given assurances that he would not be prosecuted.

Naturally, speculations abound. One is that the Saudi authorities “have formally sent a message to the Pakistani leadership that they want stability in Pakistan, with King Abdullah urging all stakeholders to abide by an agreement that rules out any action against former president Pervez Musharraf”. Another “report” said that King Abdullah had sent to Pakistan a “clear message” that war between the PPP and the PMLN and “any step against Musharraf” could affect the country’s political stability.

No one knows for sure if there was an “agreement” not to prosecute General Musharraf. If there was, who were the parties involved? Yet no one in Pakistan will doubt that the Saudis have stepped in again to prevent Pakistan’s politicians from committing hara-kiri. The King is supposed to have even said that “if a party or an individual backed out of the agreement reached, Pak-Saudi relations would be affected”. And, more tell-tale, Mr Nawaz Sharif is expected to travel to Saudi Arabia where he would be “forced to abide by the agreement”.

What is definitely unreliable rumour-mongering is the “news” that the Saudis have been forced to arrange a “rescue operation” for General Musharraf because he was threatening to make public some shady deal that Mr Sharif, President Zardari and the Saudis had made together. This is more a post-iftar pre-digestive fantasy than a report and will doubtless evaporate as the real news breaks later.

A special relationship has always existed between Saudi Arabia and Pakistan but more recently Saudi “intervention” has taken place to prevent Pakistani politics from breaking rational barriers and descending into violence. The Saudis rescued Mr Sharif from rotting in jail because of their leverage with General Musharraf. They tried to bind Mr Sharif to the “agreement” on restrictive movement, with mixed success. They finally weighed in on his side when General Musharraf made a deal with the Americans to let the PPP leader Ms Benazir Bhutto make a comeback.

It is known to the world that wisdom has fled Pakistan. The country seeks revenge when it should be bothered about the Taliban threat which has hardly disappeared. The Saudis know that our national politics is moving rapidly towards political breakdown because of the multi-directional attacks being launched by politicians against each other, having perhaps reached a point where parliament is of no use. Threats of street battles are being bandied about as the national economy reels from challenges that can be faced only with external help.

Everyone, however, knows that the Pakistan Army doesn’t want to be distracted from its job of fighting the Taliban by a treason case against General Musharraf in which many of its serving and retired officers could be named as accessories. The Saudis, who, more accurately, have a special relationship with the Pakistan Army, also know that it is still the most powerful entity in the country which wishes to remain out of the political melee. Therefore the message from the army, not absorbed inside Pakistan, may be about to be driven home in Saudi Arabia.

It is the familiar PPP-PMLN battle, which has made Pakistan suffer in the past, with PMLQ as the “rejoicing third party” which is currently playing the not so honourable role of egging the two on. A lethal Ramazan War of internal chaos is in the offing unless Saudi Arabia comes to the rescue once again and breaks the clinch. We say this with no sense of pride. Pakistan’s lost external sovereignty is often bemoaned but because of the immaturity and lack of decorum of our politicians we are forced to be grateful that it doesn’t exist.

What is going on is politics of revenge all over again. The adding of General Musharraf to the primitive fires burning in the hearts of our leaders will do Pakistan the kind of damage that can’t be grasped at this stage. This is the wisdom that is easily understood if you are abroad and not a Pakistani. (Daily Times)

Some relevant comments:

(source: pkpolitics)

telengr said:

hi folks…lets disect the two news reports (just for fun )
DAWN says it was all success for Musharraf, judging from his body language and high spirits, but consider the source of thew news…” the sources close to Musharraf”, of course they will say everything good about the result, so its quite biased.
But what really freakes me out, is what Saleh Zafar has reported, he has not drawn any conclusions, he has given the verdict, in very clear words. So lets imagine, how it could be possible, the only way which comes to my mind is, that HRH King Abdullah, first had the high level govt officials leave the room (according to the news, they left after 45 minutes of the meeting), to talk to ex-president in privacy, and then immediately after saying good bye to Musharraf, picked his phone and went ….”Hello Mr. Saleh, here is the report! here is what I told that looser just now…”
if HRH and MUSH met in privacy, who gave this info to Saleh? if not his royal highness then may be MUSH himself?? haha
The editors of The News are trusting this reporter blindly??

imtiaz1959 said:

I’m convinced that the departure of President Musharraf from power was according to the deal and the Saudis,Americans and the Government of United Kingdom are main guarantor
of this deal therefore Nawaz Sharif and his party should come down and adjust their differences with ppp and serve the country because Pakistan is facing great challenges and we need unity to bring country out of crises.

Forgiveness is much better than revenge and Almighty Allah likes it and this is the tradition of our Holy Prophet Mohammad (May peace be upon him) and don’t forget that Gen.Musharraf let Nawaz Sharif & his family go to exile in Saudi Arabia after all he was Mian Sahib’s favorite General if Musharraf did some thing wrong he also did many thing positive for this country.

Bawa said:

@ griffins
sheiks are already sold there conscience, now ( not exactly NOW) they are forcing us to do so…

سول سوسایٹی اور عوام کو چاہئیے کہ شاہ عبدللہ کو بتائیں کہ اپنی اوقات میں رہیں. مسلمان ہونے کی حثیت سے ہم سعودی حکمرانوں کی بہت عزت کرتے ہیں اور پاکستان کی جو وہ امداد کرتے ہیں اسکو بھی عزت کی نگاہ سے دیکھتے ہیں لیکن اسکا مطلب یہ نہیں کہ وہ ہمآرے اندرونی معاملات میں مداخلت کریں، ہمیں یہ بتائیں کہ ہمارا حکمران کون ہوگا، ہماری عدالتوں کی توہین کریں اور اعلی ترین عدالت کے احکامات کے باوجود ہمارے شہریوں کو اٹھا کر لے جائیں. اگر وہ پاکستان کی مدد کرتے ہیں تو ہماری فوج نے بھی انکے اقتدار کو سہارا دے رکھا ہے ورنہ اب تک وہ کہیں جلاوطنی کی زندگی گزار رہے ہوتے

Read more...

Pakistan's Foreign Office: a subsidiary of ISI

BBC Urdu dot com: Pakistan's Foreign Office has always been a subsidiary of ISI

پاکستانی وزارتِ خارجہ: طفیلی ادارہ!

بیورو رپورٹ

اسلام آباد

بے نظیر بھٹو اور نواز شریف نہ صرف بھارت سےبہتر تعلقات بلکہ افغان صورتحال سے بھی پاکستان کو مرحلہ وار الگ کرنے کے خواہش مند تھے۔

آئی ایس آئی کے ایک سابق سربراہ جنرل ریٹائرڈ اسد درانی نے کہا ہے کہ پاکستان کی وزارتِ خارجہ پالیسی ساز ادارہ نہیں بلکہ دی گئی پالیسی پر عمل درآمد کرنے والا ادارہ ہے۔ ان کے بقول پاکستان چونکہ ایک سکیورٹی سٹیٹ ہے اس لیے دفترِ خارجہ کو پالیسی ساز خطوط بڑی حد تک فوج کی جانب سے فراہم کیے جاتے ہیں۔ دفترِ خارجہ کے سفارت کار فراہم کردہ پالیسی پر عمل درآمد کا ذیلی کردار ہی ادا کرسکتے ہیں۔ باالفاظِ دیگر دنیا بھر میں پھیلے ہوئے پاکستانی سفارتخانے دراصل وہ شے فروخت کرنے والے پرچون کاؤنٹر ہیں جسے بنانے میں ان کا یا تو نہایت معمولی کردار ہے یا بالکل نہیں ہے۔ جنرل درانی نے یہ بات اخبار ڈان کے مطابق اسلام آباد میں خارجہ پالیسی کے موضوع پر ہونے والی ایک ورکشاپ میں اپنے مقالے میں کہی۔

روس میں پاکستان کے سابق سفیر شاہد امین نے ورکشاپ سے خطاب کرتے ہوئے کہا کہ دفترِ خارجہ کو پالیسی بنانے کی آزادی کبھی بھی میسر نہیں رہی اور فوج کو ہمیشہ خارجہ اور دفاع کی پالیسی میں بالادستی رہی ہے۔ ایک آمرانہ فضا میں حکمران دفترِ خارجہ سے پیشگی صلاح مشورے کے بغیر فیصلے کرنے کے عادی رہے ہیں اس لیے پالیسی منصوبہ بندی کا تصور پنپ نہیں سکا۔

سابق سکریٹری خارجہ شمشاد احمد نے مذکورہ مقررین کی بات آگے بڑھاتے ہوئے کہا کہ بہت مرتبہ منتخب نمائندوں سے بالا بالا ایسے ناقص فیصلے کیے گئے جو بروقت نہیں تھے۔ لہذا ان میں یا تو تبدیلی کرنی پڑی یا پھران فیصلوں کو یکسر واپس لینا پڑا۔ یہ فیصلہ تاریخ ہی کرسکتی ہے کہ ہم نے یہ پالیسیاں کیوں اور کیسے اپنائیں۔

ضیا دور میں غیرملکی سفارتکار مزے لے لے کر بتاتے تھے کہ پاکستان کے دفترِ خارجہ میں وزارتِ دفاع سے زیادہ فوجی افسر نظر آتے ہیں

]طارق فاطمی

سابق سرکردہ سفارتکار طارق فاطمی نے کہا کہ ضیا دور میں غیرملکی سفارتکار مزے لے لے کر بتاتے تھے کہ پاکستان کے دفترِ خارجہ میں وزارتِ دفاع سے زیادہ فوجی افسر نظر آتے ہیں۔ طارق فاطمی کے بقول افغانستان اور بھارت سے متعلق ہمیشہ دو خارجہ پالیسیاں متوازی انداز میں چلائی گئیں۔ ایک پالیسی دفترِ خارجہ چلاتا تھا اور دوسری پالیسی انٹیلی جنس ایجنسیاں۔ بے نظیر بھٹو اور نواز شریف نہ صرف بھارت سےبہتر تعلقات چاہتے تھے بلکہ افغان صورتحال سے بھی پاکستان کو مرحلہ وار الگ کرنے کے خواہش مند تھے لیکن دونوں رہنماؤں کو انٹیلی جنس ایجنسیوں نے ایسا نہیں کرنے دیا۔

سابق سکریٹری خارجہ تنویر احمد خان نے اپنے مقالے میں پاکستان کی خارجہ پالیسی کی تاریخ پر توجہ مرکوز کرتے ہوئے کہا کہ انیس سو اڑتالیس میں راولپنڈی میں سینئر افسروں کے ایک گروپ نے وزیرِ اعظم لیاقت علی خان کو آمادہ کرلیا کہ وہ سوویت یونین نہیں جائیں گے۔ اس کے بعد لیاقت علی خان امریکہ چلے گئے۔ تنویر احمد خان کے بقول یہ گروپ اس رحجان کا آغاز تھا جسے آج کل ہم اسٹیبلشمنٹ کہتے ہیں۔

خارجہ پالیسی پر یہ اور دیگر ماہرین کے مقالے جامعہ کراچی کے شعبہ بین الاقوامی تعلقات کے سربراہ ڈاکٹر مونس احمر نے ’ فارن پالیسی میکنگ پروسس۔ آ کیس سٹڈی آف پاکستان‘ کے عنوان سے کتابی شکل میں شائع کردیے ہیں۔ ڈاکٹر مونس نے کتاب کے تعارف میں بتایا کہ کس طرح فوج اور انٹیلی جینس ایجنسیاں فارن پالیسی کی تشکیل میں دفترِ خارجہ، پارلیمنٹ، رائے عامہ اور سول سوسائٹی کے کردار پر اثرانداز ہوتی آئی ہیں۔ حالانکہ ان سویلین اداروں کی رائے اگر خارجہ پالیسی میں منعکس ہو تو اس کے سبب بیرونی دنیا سے پاکستان کے تعلقات صحت مند خطوط پر استوار رہ سکتے ہیں

Read more...

From Minus One to Minus Two Formula in Pakistan

Ali Salman's analysis points towards the possibility that the anti-democracy establishment (military and civil bureaucracy) in Pakistan may be behind the campaigns to defame President Zardari and Nawaz Sharif.

مائنس ون نہیں اب مائنس ٹو

علی سلمان

بی بی سی اردو ڈاٹ کام ، لاہور

پیپلز پارٹی اور مسلم لیگ اس نکتے پر تو متفق ہیں کہ کسی بھی صورتحال سے باہمی اختلافات بھلا کر نبٹا جائے گا

مسلم لیگ نون کے سربراہ میاں محمد نواز شریف کو بظاہر اسٹیبلشمنٹ کے انہی ہتھکنڈوں کا سامنا ہے جو پاکستان میں اب تک صرف پیپلز پارٹی کا مقدر رہے ہیں۔

مسلم لیگ نون پر ہونے والے تابڑ توڑ میڈیا حملوں سے بظاہر یوں لگتا ہے کہ نواز شریف یا تو اسٹیبلشمنٹ میں اپنا اعتماد کھو بیٹھے ہیں یا پھر پاکستان کے بااثر حلقے ان سے کوئی ایسی بات منوانا چاہتے ہیں جس پر وہ اڑے ہوئے ہیں۔

مسلم لیگ کے رہنماؤں میں ایک عمومی تاثر ہے کہ یہ پیپلز پارٹی کی سازش ہے اور اس میں اس کے اتحادی ایم کیو ایم وغیرہ شامل ہیں۔ان کا یہ بھی خیال ہے کہ ایسا مسلم لیگ نون کے رہنما نواز شریف کی بڑھتی ہوئی مقبولیت کو کم کرنے کے لیےکیا جارہا ہے۔

پیپلز پارٹی کے حکمران رہنما، مسلم لیگ نون کے طرز تخاطب پر سیخ پا تو ہو رہے ہیں اور مولا جٹ کی بڑھک کے جواب میں نوری نت کا ڈائیلاگ بھی پھینک دیتے ہیں لیکن اس کے باوجود پیپلز پارٹی والے الزام تراشی میں ایک حد کو عبور نہیں کررہے ہیں۔

پی پی کے رہنما کردارکشی کی مہم میں ملوث ہونے کی بار بار تردید کررہے ہیں اور مسلم لیگ کو مشورہ دے رہے ہیں کہ پیپلز پارٹی سے جھگڑنے کی بجائے اسی حوصلے سے ان الزمات کا مقابلہ جس سے پیپلز پارٹی ان سے نمٹتی آئی ہے۔

مسلم لیگ نون میں کچھ رہنماؤں کا پیپلز پارٹی کے ساتھ رویہ نسبتاً مصالحانہ ہے لیکن وہ اس تشویش میں ضرور مبتلا ہیں کہ اچانک ہونے والے ان میڈیا حملوں کے پس پردہ وجوہات کیا ہیں؟ اور کیا یہ کسی گہری سازش کے ابتدائی تانے بانے تو نہیں ہیں؟

خفیہ ایجنسیوں کے ریٹائرڈ سربراہوں نے اچانک کس اشارے پر بیان بازی شروع کی ہے: وفاقی وزیر

بیس برس پرانی اور مسلم لیگ نون کے رہنماؤں کے بقول مردہ کہانیوں کا اچانک منظر عام پر آنا معمول کی صحافتی سرگرمی نہیں ہے۔

پیپلز پارٹی کے ایک وفاقی وزیر کا کہنا ہے کہ مسلم لیگ اس بات پر غور کرے کہ خفیہ ایجنسیوں کے ریٹائرڈ سربراہوں نے اچانک کس اشارے پر بیان بازی شروع کی ہے۔

مسلم لیگ نون کے رہنما کردار کشی کی مہم کی جو بے شمار وجوہات بتاتے ہیں ان میں سے ایک سابق صدر پرویز مشرف کو بغاوت کے مقدمے سے بچانا بھی شامل ہے۔

سیاسی تجزیہ کاروں کا کہنا ہے کہ پہلی بات تو یہ کہ حکمران پیپلز پارٹی کو سابق فوجی صدر پرویز مشرف کو بچانے میں اس کےسوا کوئی خاص دلچسپی نہیں ہے کہ اس پیروں میں بھاری ذمہ داریوں کی بیڑیاں ہیں اور دوسرے یہ کہ پرویز مشرف کو بچانے کے لیے نواز شریف کے اس قسم کے میڈیا ٹرائل کی کوئی خاص ضرورت بھی نہیں تھی کیونکہ اپوزیشن جماعت کے رہنمامشاہد حسین کے بقول اس کے لیے سعودی عرب سے آنے والی ایک ٹیلی فون کال ہی کافی ہے۔

لندن میں صدر مملکت آصف زرداری کی الطاف حسین سے رحمان ملک میں معیت میں ملاقات ہوچکی ہے۔الطاف حسین سابق صدر پرویز مشرف کے ایک بڑے حامی مانے جاتے ہیں۔

اس ملاقات کے بعد وزیر داخلہ رحمان ملک کا سعودی عرب گئے ہیں جہاں ان کا غیر معمولی پرتپاک استقبال ہوا اور اس کے بعد پرویز مشرف کی بھی سعودی عرب موجودگی اس بات کی طرف اشارہ ہے کہ معاملات طے پانے والے ہیں کیونکہ بعض مبصرین کاکہنا ہے کہ سعودی عرب کے شاہی خاندان کے ممنون احسان نواز شریف کے لیے ان کی کوئی حاکمانہ فرمائش ٹالنا مشکل ہوگا۔ مسلم لیگ قاف کے رہنما مشاہد حسین کاکہنا ہے کہ یہ ’فرمائشی‘ کال بس آیا ہی چاہتی ہے۔

مقتدرحلقے وزیراعظم یوسف رضا گیلانی اور وزیر اعلی پنجاب شہباز شریف سے مطمئن دکھائی دیتے ہیں

اگر ایک لمحے کے لیے یہ فرض کرلیا جائے کہ کردار کشی کی مہم کے پس پردہ نہ تو سو فی صد پیپلزپارٹی ہے اور نہ ہی پرویز مشرف کو بچانے کی کوششیں ہیں تو پھر اس نواز مخالف میڈیا مہم کا مقصد ڈھونڈنا اور مشکل ہوجاتا ہے۔

مبصرین کا کہنا ہے کہ سوات آپریشن کے سلسلے میں اپنا وزن پیپلز پارٹی کے پلڑے میں ڈال دینے اور فرینڈلی اپوزیشن کے خطاب حاصل کرلینے کے بعد اگرچہ نواز شریف کا ایک جارح باغی لیڈر کا امیج دھندلا سا گیا ہے لیکن ابھی تک اسٹیبلشمنٹ نواز شریف پراس طرح کا اعتماد کرنے کو تیار نہیں ہے جیسا کہ انہیں ماضی میں حاصل رہا ہے۔

پاکستان میں جو لوگ اسٹیبلشمنٹ کی ریشہ دوانیوں سے تھوڑے بہت بھی آگاہ ہیں وہ جانتے ہیں کہ اسٹیبلشمنٹ کے کچھ حلقے ہمیشہ بے نظیر بھٹو کو سیکیورٹی رسک قراردیتے رہے ہیں اور ان کے بعد اب یہ ’اعزاز‘ صرف صدر آصف زرداری کو حاصل ہے۔ نواز شریف اگرچہ اس ’عہدے‘ پر فائز نہیں ہوئے ہیں لیکن ان کی ضدی طبعیت اسٹیبلشمنٹ کےلیے اب خطرے کی گھنٹی بجانے لگی ہے۔

ایک طویل عرصے تک مارشل لاء کی سختیاں برداشت کرنے والی پاکستانی قوم جب بھی ملک میں بڑھتا ہوا سیاسی انتشار دیکھتی ہے تو وہ ایک نئے مارشل لاء کا خوف محسوس کرنے لگتی ہے۔

پیپلز پارٹی اور مسلم لیگ دونوں ہی اس نکتے پر تو متفق ہیں کہ ایسی کسی بھی صورتحال سے باہمی اختلافات بھلا کر نبٹا جائے گا۔خود فوجی قیادت بھی ملکی حالات کی وجہ سے بظاہر ایسے کسی ایڈونچر کے لیے تیار نظر نہیں آتی۔ کچھ دوسرے مقتدرحلقے بھی وزیراعظم یوسف رضا گیلانی اور وزیر اعلی پنجاب شہباز شریف سے مطمئن دکھائی دیتے ہیں لیکن بعض مبصرین کاکہنا ہے کہ اسٹیبلشمنٹ کی مطلب براری کا ایک درمیانی راستہ بھی ہوسکتا ہے جو مائنیس ون سے بڑھ کر اب مائنیس ٹو فارمولے ہوچکا ہے

Read more...

Hamid Saeed Kazmi shot by the Taliban-Sipah-e-Sahaba alliance in Pakistan

وفاقی وزیر کے ڈرائیور یونس کی معذور والدہ نے اپنے مرحوم بیٹے کے جوتے تھام رکھے ہی

The Deobandi-Wahhabi terrorists in Pakistan attack Federal Minister for Religious Affairs. Driver Killed.

Hamid Saeed Kazmi, an eminent Sunni (Barelvi) scholar was deeply despised by the pro-Taliban Deobandi-Wahhabi alliance in Pakistan, enshrined in orgnaizations such as Sipah-e-Sahaba, Lashkar-e-Jhangavi, Jamaat-e-Islami, rogue elements of ISI, and Imran Khan's Tehreek-e-Insaf.

This is the third high profile targetted attack on eminent Sunni / Barelvi scholars after the Nishtar Park massacre in Karachi and the martyrdom of Maulana Naeemi in Lahore.

It is high time that all pro-Taliban leaders of the Deobandi-Wahhabi alliance, mullahs and their supports in media and politics, including but not limited to Ansar Abbasi, Dr Shahid Masood, Mullah Munawar Hassan, Hameed Gul, Aslam Beg, Irfan Siddiqi, Imran Khan etc be arrested and charged for treason against the Pakistani nation.

Pakistan's religion minister shot

Local television pictures of the wounded minister in the back of a car Pakistan's Minister for Religious Affairs, Hamid Saeed Kazmi, has been injured in a gun attack on his car in the capital, Islamabad, police say. A man believed to be Mr Kazmi's driver was killed in the attack and another passenger injured, said police. No one has claimed to have carried out the attack. Mr Kazmi has been an outspoken critic of the Taliban. He was behind a conference in May which denounced the Taliban's suicide bombing tactics as un-Islamic. "Gunmen sprayed bullets on the minister's car," a police officer who identified himself as Qasim told Reuters news agency. 'State of shock' Television footage showed Mr Kazmi, with a wounded leg, being taken away in an ambulance. There were blood stains on the car's seats and its windows were shattered. Senior medical official Shaukat Hameed Kiani said Mr Kazmi's leg had been fractured by a bullet. "His condition is stable, but he is in a state of shock," he said. Shazia Nazir, a doctor at the hospital treating Mr Kazmi, told the AFP news agency that the minister's driver had been brought in dead, with a bullet wound to the head, and that a security guard had been seriously wounded. Health Minister Aijaz Jhakrani has denied there had been any lapses in security, saying the incident was "a targeted attack", AFP reported. Mr Kazmi has been a key figure in opposing the Taliban in Pakistan, continuing to carry out reforms of religious schools and working with senior clerics to denounce the militants' tactics.

Khitab of Allama Hamid Saeed Kazmi on Seerat-un-Nabi (pbuh)

Also read:
http://blog.dawn.com:91/dblog/2009/09/02/clear-signals/
Read more...

Qadam barhao Nawaz Sharif: Not only against Musharraf but also against Hamid Gul and Zia

An interesting analysis by Latif Chaudhry. Also watch a video clip of Nawaz Sharif praising General Zia-ul-Haq and contrast that vidoe with his today's stance against Musharraf.

Read more...