Paki Politics

Transporters’ plunder meets an end in Bhara Kahu riots

2010-03-19T02:56:00.001-07:00

By Vidya Rana

* Police violence spills over from Punjab into Capital
* Road links with Murree, Kashmir severed after Murree Road blockade

ISLAMABAD: Following a violent protest, bullet injury to an 18-year-old college student, arrest of three dozen locals, involvement of prime minister and blockade of Murree Road near Bhara Kahu for more than 10 hours, locals have succeeded in pressurizing the district administration to withdraw a 17 percent increase in public transport fares on Thursday.

The saga started in the morning rush hours when local transporters started charging new fare from the commuters for a ride from Bhara Kahu to Aabpara Chowk. Previous fare was Rs 18 while the new fare was Rs 25. Students started the arguments with the transporters, which soon turned into a brawl, ultimately involving local residents and business community of the area.

Local police chipped in the farce and as the mob grew, an outnumbered police resorted to indiscriminate baton charge thus provoking more reaction from locals who started throwing rocks at police. As the protests grew violent and traffic on both sides of the Murree Road started piling up, more police force was called in by the administration along with Assistant Commissioner Aasim Ayub. His alleged abusive remarks, as the locals put it, ignited the whole scene. Finding AC under duress, police resorted to aerial firing resulting in injury to more than a dozen locals while a young college student was shot in the chest by a frenzied policeman.

Mohammad Nafees, 18, a college student was rushed to PIMS, where doctors are confirming his condition as stable. The boy is still in surgical ward after operation, his lung is badly affected, said the doctors at PIMS.

Following the police hit, the area became a battleground and both the protestors and police kept playing cat and mouse game throughout the day. Police remained busy in shelling teargas at them while protestors kept throwing stones and bricks at the police besides setting ablaze tyres on the road, which also resulted in minor injuries to about six policemen.

The area was engulfed with white smoke of teargas and Murree/Kahsmir remained cut off from the rest of the country, as this road remains the artery linking Punjab with the Kashmir. Armoured vehicles also arrived on the scene but of no use as protestors stood their ground.

In the process, protestors got hold of few policemen, roughed them up by tearing their uniforms off. Realizing gravity of the situation, higher authorities called for Rangers deployment in the area, but even Rangers remained silent spectators.

Meanwhile, rounds of negotiations took place between the locals and the city administration to not only get the area cleared and but also redress grievances of the locals with regard to police action and increased fares.

Article Source: http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2010%5C03%5C19%5Cstory_19-3-2010_pg11_1

US should follow up words with actions, says Qureshi

2010-03-19T02:55:00.001-07:00

---
Daily Times

* FM says it's time for Washington to 'walk the talk'
* Upcoming dialogue will provide good opportunity to rebuild confidence, trust

ISLAMABAD: Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi said on Thursday the need to rebuild trust with the US is key to upcoming talks, and called on Washington to follow up words with action.

"My message to the US is that the time has come to walk the talk," Qureshi told press conference in Islamabad. He said Pakistan had delivered "too much", and it was now time for the US to start delivering.

Qureshi and US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton are scheduled to lead talks in Washington next week aimed at boosting the economy and security of Pakistan.

"I believe our forthcoming dialogue will provide a good opportunity to rebuild confidence and trust on both sides," said Qureshi. "We need to build comfort on all sides ... we want these talks to be broad based and that is why I am proposing a completely different format for interaction between the two countries."

Qureshi said the Pakistani foreign minister and US secretary of state should meet annually, while the Pakistani foreign secretary and US special envoy Richard Holbrooke should hold talks twice a year.

Sectoral engagements: "I am also proposing 10 tracks of sectoral engagements," said Qureshi.

He said his engagements in Washington would "contribute to a better understanding of each other's position... we expect the
US to understand our concerns both in the realm of security and economic development".

Qureshi said Pakistan was no longer considered a safe haven for terrorists, as they were now fleeing to other areas.

The minister said there was a link between regional stability and Pakistan's eastern borders. He said Pakistan was not oblivious to what was happening on the eastern border, and "Pakistan cannot close its eyes to India's large-scale weaponisation". He said Pakistan did not want talks for the sake of talks with India, and Islamabad wanted dialogue with New Delhi to be result-oriented. agencies

Article Source : http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2010\03\19\story_19-3-2010_pg1_4

The nuclear threat

2010-03-08T22:06:00.001-08:00

The Nation

WHILE fears of a nuclear holocaust in the subcontinent, occasionally expressed by political observers, could be dismissed as speculative in nature, it would be sheer foolhardiness to treat, with the same indifference, Foreign Secretary Salman Bashir's warning that New Delhi was preparing for an atomic war. His recent visit to India, interacrtion with its leadership and his diplomatic training would have persuaded him to reach such a scary conclusion. Besides, India's military and political high command has not been found wanting in adopting a threatening tone when accusing Pakistan on the flimsiest charges.

Mr Bashir's observation would also immediately call to mind the idea of a limited nuclear war, heard from across the border some time back. However, the Indians would be well advised to ponder over the implications of this thesis. The world has radically changed since the Americans ruthlessly and needlessly bombed Hiroshima and Nagasaki out of existence. Before voicing the 'limited-nuclear-war' concept, had they consulted the US their friend, the world's mightiest nation in terms of military muscle, and indeed nuclear muscle, whether it would at this time of nuclear spread, dare risk using an atomic weapon against a country even suspected of having the bomb and the delivery capability, they might have had sobering second thoughts.

India's aggressive posture has come more in evidence since it gained global recognition for its growing economic strength and, more particularly, since the Americans began to look with favour on it because of economic and commercial advantages and perceived strategic compulsions. The US has already begun to draw the economic dividend out of the rising needs for Western goods of the Indian increasing middle classes, now well over 200 million. The expanding commercial relations in the various fields, particulary through the sale of nuclear equipment and knowhow, hold the prospects of additional benefits. However, the understanding that India could play an important role in helping stave off the Chinese threat to the Americans' unrivalled global dominance would, more likely, turn out to be a pie in the sky than a realistic prospect. It would, undoubtedly, be suicidal for India to incur Beijing's hostility that this posture would provoke. And the recent boast of General Deepak Kumar that India could defeat both China and Pakistan in a matter of hours is no more than a megalomaniac wish that he could have uttered to gladden the hearts of hawks in the US administration. Yet the alarming pugnaciousness that is latent in the General's threat could not be viewed with equanimity, either in Beijing or in Islamabad. After all, one witnesses people able to fulfil their death wish every day. And nations have not been unknown for entertaining suidical tendencies in the annals of history.

Anyway, whatever the real intentions of the Indians about the nuclear threat, there is no room for relaxation. Not only should Pakistan be well prepared for such an eventuality but also take the international community in confidence about its apprehensions.

Article Source : http://www.nation.com.pk/pakistan-news-newspaper-daily-english-online/Opinions/Editorials/07-Mar-2010/The-nuclear-threat/1

Superficial efforts of USA to defuse Indo-Pakistan antagonism

2010-02-04T01:53:00.000-08:00

By Asif Haroon Raja

Indo-Pakistan relations have remained strained since the inception of two states in August 1947. Some of the reasons of undying animosity are the Hindu-British nexus during the British rule in India which persecuted the Indian Muslims and played a perverse role while dividing India. Pakistan was loaded with innumerable complex problems so as to extinguish its life during infancy.

Kashmir was annexed forcibly by Indian forces in 1948 and the dispute has not been resolved to this date. Throughout 62 years of its history, Pakistan has remained the victim of Indian machinations. Even after truncating it in 1971, it continued with its expansionist and hegemonic policies to subdue Pakistan and to extract peace on unequal terms. Indian political leaders have been winning elections by castigating Pakistan and beating war drums. Pakistan being small in size and militarily weak has all along endeavored to normalize relations with India but its efforts were either rudely spurned or subjected to deceit.

Fixated by its ardent desire to be accepted as a regional power, it has been incessantly building up its military muscles and has employed covert means to keep Pakistan politically destabilized and economically weak. Pakistan's refusal to accept its hegemony has kept Indian leaders on a war path. It considers Pakistan to be the sole stumbling block in its path to attain regional ascendancy and big power status. Nuclearisation of Pakistan has frustrated its evil designs since it can no more bully or blackmail Pakistan by threatening to wage a war. It has therefore once again resorted to covert operations coupled with propaganda warfare at a massive scale to achieve its objectives. This time it has aligned itself with USA, Britain, Israel and Afghanistan and is using Afghan soil to launch clandestine operations in Balochistan, FATA and NWFP including Swat. Since India has already made deep inroads in Sindh, it is therefore concentrating on other regions.

In pursuant of their common objectives, foreign powers have been extending a helping hand to India for the last eight years despite the fact that Pakistan has been nominated as front line state to fight US war on terror and has rendered maximum sacrifices. During this testing period in which Pakistan suffered immensely at the hands of so-called friends, the two antagonists came close to war twice.

Having inflamed greater part of Pakistan through sabotage and subversion, India has the brashness to cry out that it is victim of Pakistan sponsored terrorism. Hypocrisy of India can be judged from its habit of blaming Pakistan for the crimes it commits against Pakistan. Any act of terror, real or fabricated, taking place in India is promptly pasted on Pakistan without even carrying out preliminary investigations. It bellows and bawls loudly to gain sympathies of the world and to portray Pakistan as the culprit. It had done so when it cooked up a terrorist attack on Indian Parliament in December 2001 and termed it as another 9/11. Media hype was created and every Indian bayed for blood of Pakistan. Biggest ever troop mobilization was carried out and its forces stood in eye ball to eye ball contact for ten months. Its subsequent in house inquiry could not find any clue to substantiate its allegations blurted out at the spur of the moment but by then the damage had been done.

India behaved in similar audacious and babyish fashion when Mumbai incident occurred. Indian leaders removed the mask of friendship, called off composite dialogue in a huff and reverted to their obdurate and cantankerous posture. They are duplicitous, unprincipled and shameless. While falsely blaming Pakistan of terrorism without evidence, they haven't felt even pinch of embarrassment after Pakistan unearthed heavy involvement of RAW in all its troubled regions. Likewise, India and its partners remain mum on wide scale terrorism going on within India.

Indo-Pakistan antagonism did not cause any anxiety to USA as long as US-Nato forces were keeping Afghan security situation within manageable limits and India was conducting subversion against Pakistan right under its nose. Once security conditions in Afghanistan deteriorated and Afghan Taliban gained an upper edge over occupation forces from 2008 onwards, US leaders started preaching peace between India and Pakistan. They are vainly trying to convince Pakistan that extremist forces and not India pose an existential threat. Pakistan is being continually pressed to shift bulk of its forces from eastern border towards western border to defeat terrorists and to forget about Indian threat. While giving verbal assurances, the US has not taken any practical steps to allay fears of Pakistanis nor has India brought any change in its attitude. US efforts are at best superficial and lack sincerity of purpose.

India at the cost of 70% poverty stricken people is spending large chunk of its budget on its military to enlarge and modernize its forces. Indian Army has 34 combat divisions, three armored divisions, seven independent armored brigades, five RAPID divisions, two airborne brigades, two artillery divisions, independent artillery brigades, over 200 nuclear bombs and wide variety of ballistic missiles. Besides, India has formidable air force and navy. Out of thirteen Corps, seven Indian Corps are poised against Pakistan. India refuses to shift its bias of military force away from its western border on the silly plea that it is vulnerable to terrorist threat from Pakistan. It has now deceptively expressed its readiness to shift some forces from occupied Kashmir under fond hope that it would impel Pakistan Army to shift its centre of attention towards FATA. Gen Deepak Kapoor is eagerly awaiting such a move so that his forces could exploit the imbalance at an opportune time.

India has become largest nest of terrorism where Hindu terrorists and insurgents are on a rampage. In all terrorist acts taking place from 2006 to 2008, in which 40-60% victims were Indian Muslims, Pakistan was blamed but it transpired later that Hindu terrorist groups duly patronized by RAW and Indian Army were responsible. Apart from Hindu terror, dozens of separatist and insurgent movements are raging in various parts of India and shaking the very foundations of Indian Union. All its nuclear and missile sites are located within the Red Corridor in eastern India where uncontrollable Maoist movement is reigning supreme. Indian Army is deeply involved in criminal activities including racism, arms and nuclear fissile material smuggling. These ground realities do not vex US and western leaders. Instead of declaring India as hub centre of terrorism and most dangerous country in the world, biased western leaders have given these titles to Pakistan and are hounding it under the mantra of do more. Pakistan has been taken for granted and made into a sacrificial lamb to cover up Indian subversive activities and to hide failures of US military in Afghanistan.

Successes achieved by Pakistan Army in Waziristan as opposed to dismal performance of US-Nato forces in Afghanistan have flummoxed our detractors. To cloud the spectacular achievements, US leaders have come out with absurd allegations that Osama led Al-Qaeda is based in FATA since 2002 and Mullah Omar led Afghan Shura is in Quetta. To overcome discomfiture of Helmand operation fiasco, frustrated Gordon Brown stated that Pakistan should highlight its military successes modestly. He forgets the exultations and megalomaniac behavior of Bush and Blair after occupation of Afghanistan and Iraq. We have also not forgotten their exclamation 'we've got em' after Saddam was nabbed. Reality is that Pak Army is playing its part commendably without blowing trumpets. It is now the actors on other side of Durand Line who have to do a lot more. If Obama sincerely wants to soothe Indo-Pakistan antagonism and convert Pak-American relations into meaningful friendship, he and his cronies should come out of superficial mode, stop meddling into Pakistan affairs and earnestly work toward finding an amicable solution to Kashmir dispute.

- Asian Tribune -

THE REAL FACE OF INDIA

2010-02-04T01:49:00.001-08:00

The Dawn Media Group

Sparks fly as Bollywood, cricket and politics collide

MUMBAI: India's twin obsessions of cricket and Bollywood are at the heart of a bitter row that has broken out between the country's top film star and a radical right-wing party in the movie capital Mumbai, reports AFP.

Indian policemen try to restrain a Shiv Sena activists protesting outside Bollywood actor Shahrukh Khan's residence, unseen, in Mumbai, India. -AP Photo

The dispute, which has seen the ultra Hindu-nationalist Shiv Sena party threatening to scupper the release of Shah Rukh Khan's latest blockbuster, has its roots in a diplomatic spat over the Indian Premier League (IPL).

No Pakistani player was bought by the eight IPL clubs during an auction last month for this year's edition of the Twenty20 cricket tournament, despite the Pakistan team being the reigning world champions in the format.

The perceived snub triggered widespread protests in Pakistan with effigies of IPL chief Lalit Modi being burnt on the streets of Lahore, condemnation from politicians and threats of boycotts from other Pakistani sports teams.

Khan, whose parents were born in what is now Pakistan and who co-owns one of the IPL franchises, the Kolkata Knight Riders, later said he regretted the controversy and supported the inclusion of Pakistani players.

"Pakistan is a great neighbour to have. We are great neighbours. They are good neighbours. Let us love each other," he said.

The Shiv Sena, a habitual source of anti-Pakistan rhetoric, reacted furiously to the comments.

"Shah Rukh should go to Pakistan if he wants to speak in favour of Pakistani players," said Shiv Sena leader Anil Parab, who led a demonstration outside Khan's Mumbai residence.

Activists in the party's power base of Mumbai tore down posters for the Muslim actor's upcoming film "My Name is Khan" and said they would target any cinema in India showing the movie unless he retracted his remarks.

Given the Shiv Sena's reputation for violence, the threat has been taken seriously by the state government of Maharashtra, of which Mumbai is the capital.

"Action will be taken against those who disrupt the screening of the movie. No one will be allowed to take the law into their own hands," a government statement said.

Multiplex owners said they would review security conditions before deciding on the number of screens to devote to the movie, which will be released on February 12.

"We will go ahead with the screening, but we will look at the situation as it develops. If additional security is required, we will take it," said a spokeswoman for INOX Leisure, which has cinemas in 21 Indian cities.

Devang Sampat, senior vice-president of marketing with Cinemax India, which operates 74 theatres in and around Mumbai, said they had yet to decide on screening the film.

"It is too early," Sampat said.

The Shiv Sena has a history of run-ins with the Bollywood film industry. In 1998, party activists ransacked theatres showing the lesbian-themed film "Fire" by acclaimed director Deepa Mehta, and a year later they launched a campaign against legendary Muslim Bollywood star Dilip Kumar after he was presented with Pakistan's highest civilian award.

Despite the Shiv Sena threats, Shah Rukh Khan has so far resolutely refused to apologise for backing the participation of Pakistani players in the IPL.

"As an Indian I'm not ashamed, guilty or unhappy about what I said, neither am I sorry," he said during a promotional tour in New York on Tuesday.

"You can only say what you believe in and stand by it," he added, while criticising the stance of the Shiv Sena as "unhealthy, undemocratic and insensitive."

In "My Name is Khan," the star actor plays an autistic Muslim man living in San Francisco who falls in love with a Hindu woman. The impact of the September 11, 2001 attacks on the relationship is one of the film's main themes.

Article Source : http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/dawn-content-library/dawn/news/culture/14-sparks-fly-as-bollywood-cricket-and-politics-collide-zj-03

TRIAL OF CONCIENCE OR MOCKERY?

2010-02-04T01:48:00.001-08:00

Dr Aafia: Media miss shock, horror, drama ...

Yvonne Ridley

New York : Dr Aafia Siddiqui is a bright, intelligent woman who has been through hell having being kidnapped, tortured in secret prisons, gunned down by US soldiers and renditioned to America where she is now facing attempted murder charges against those who shot her.

Only in the cock-eyed crosshairs of George W Bush's War on Terror could this happen and I hope to God that the jurors who will go through the evidence during the next few hours, if not days, see through this rotten legacy and recognise the case for what it is ... a tissue of lies enveloped in a web of deceit.

The last seven years of Dr Aafia's life could have been penned by a Hollywood scriptwriter, but instead all the folk from Tinsel Town could come up with was the rather tame blockbuster movie Rendition starring Reese Witherspoon.

But several days ago those of us following the case closely were given a glimpse into the dark, mysterious world in which Dr Aafia has been forced to live since 2003.

And more importantly the details were relayed in a hushed court not by any lawyer, but by the only person qualified to talk with any authority about dark prisons, interrogations and abuse - the account relayed to the courtroom in Manhattan, New York came from the mouth of Dr Aafia herself.

Running for more than two weeks there's been little or no record in the Western media of this shocking case other than some of the most ill-informed, embarrassingly skewed reports which indicate the noble profession of journalism is still in a narcotic malaise in the Big Apple.

That the New York Times had to apologise to its readers on the front page for selling them short on the build up to and the unfolding war in Iraq, one would have thought would have had an impact on the quality of future output.

That the US press corps, with the exception of The Baltimore Sun, had to play catch up after 'missing' the Abu Ghraib scandal speaks volumes.

Sadly it seems that huge swathes of the US media have learned nothing.

Just a few days ago an embarrassing wealth of riches in terms of soundbites which would have had most journalists salivating like a Pavlov Dog came tumbling out in the lower Manhattan court.

But like a gaggle of bald men fighting over a comb, the scribes present in the main courtroom could only focus on one irrelevant detail ... Dr Aafia Siddiqui had fired a pistol at a gun club. Excuse me? This is America ... where half the adult population live in houses where guns are kept. Let's keep it real - America has 80 million gun owners with a total of 258 million guns.

Possibly the most wronged woman in the entire War on Terror had just revealed how she was held in secret prisons, with no legal representation, cut off from the outside world since 2003 where brutal interrogation techniques were used to break her down. And, to make matters even worse when she was kidnapped from her home city in Karachi, Pakistan her three children were also snatched ... the fact two of those children are American citizens held no sway with the majority of the assembled press corps. One wondered if their pants had caught fire if they would have even smelled the smoke.

And so what held the Western media attention? Well, it transpired that Dr Aafia may have taken a pistol shooting course as part of her curriculum in an American university. That's a bit like an American tourist ordering fish and chips and a cup of tea on arrival in Britain. Hold the front page!

So for your benefit, let me tell you about the real "shock, horror, drama" that you won't read in the New York Times or the rest of the corporate media.

After two weeks of being baited and defamed, in a calm, articulate and precise manner Dr Aafia Siddiqui finally had her day - and her say - in court.

It should have been a moment of schadenfreude for the prosecution team as they prepared to sit back and enjoy the spectacle of the defendant rant and rave like a mad woman when she decided on her right to take the stand.

Perhaps Judge Richard Berman, a modest little man with much to be modest about, must have thought his rather unremarkable legal career would finally make more than just the current footnote in Wikipedia.

Most of her own legal team watched mortified in the belief that their reluctant client (she had dismissed them publicly many times to no effect) might destroy the robust defence they had built over two weeks.

Even her brother Muhammad, who has sat in court everyday watching and listening to the proceedings told me he wondered if his little sister was making the right decision.

Given the chance, I think I would have also advised her against speaking.

Well thank goodness Dr Aafia ignored us all - within minutes of giving evidence the prosecution wanted to shut her up, Judge Berman looked like he was sucking on the bitterest of lemons and the rest of the courtroom sat back aghast.

The Pakistan media, despatched into one of the two overspill rooms frantically scribbled down their notes so as not to miss one single word and her supporters sat back aghast watching a breathtaking spectacle.

One of the few community leaders who has been outstandingly vocal in his support, El-Hajj Mauri' Saalakhan, probably expressed himself better than any of the nitwits sleeping on the press benches when he wrote: "She testified that after completing her doctorate studies she taught in a school, and that her interest was in cultivating the capabilities of dyslexic and other special needs children.

"During this line of questioning, the monstrous image that the government had carefully crafted (with considerable support from mainstream media) of this petite young woman, had begun to be deconstructed. The real Dr Aafia Siddiqui - the committed muslimah, the humanity-loving nurturer and educator, the gentle yet resolute mujahid for truth and justice - began to emerge with full force".

As the evidence continued we learned that she didn't know where her three children were - it was sensational content. She talked of her dread and fear of being handed back to the Americans when she was arrested in Ghazni and was held by police.

Terrified that yet another secret prison was waiting for her she revealed how she peaked through the curtain into the part of the room where Afghans and Americans were talking, and how when a startled American soldier noticed her, he jumped up and yelled that the prisoner was loose, and shot her in the stomach. She described how she was also shot in the side by a second person. She also described how after falling back onto the bed in the room, she was violently thrown to the floor and lost consciousness.

This ties in exactly with what I was told by the counter terrorism police chief I interviewed in Afghanistan back in the autumn of 2008 - I remember him laughing as he told me how the US soldiers panicked, shot and most of them ran out of the room in a panic. Hmm, no wonder the prosecution didn't want him giving evidence in court.

Instead they chose to record his interview and voiced it over with a shoddy translator who has a long distance relationship with the Pashtu language ... defence team take note. Demand a real Pashtu translation because what was given out in court was misleading and not the words of the actual words of police chief - don't take my word for it ... speak to someone whose first language is Pashtu. it's hardly rocket science.

Of course there's no way a bunch of soldiers are going to admit they lost it, but according to those I interviewed for my film In search of Prisoner 650 in Afghanistan that's exactly what happened.

But let's return to Aafia and the cross examination which followed. When questioned on whether she had ever done any work with chemicals, her response was, "only when required."

As Mauri remarked: "This opening line of questioning was significant for its prejudice producing potential in the minds of jurors. While Aafia is not being charged with any terrorism conspiracy counts, the threat of terrorism has been the pink elephant in the room throughout this troubling case!"

The prosecutor attempted to draw a sinister correlation between Aafia and her now ex-husband being questioned by the FBI in 2002, and leaving the US a week later. Aafia noted that there wasn't anything sinister about the timing; they had already planned to make that trip home before the FBI visit. To underscore this point, she noted how she later returned to the US to attempt to find work in her field.

Mauri said one of the most heart-wrenching moments in the cross-examination was when Dr Aafia described how she was briefly re-united with a young boy in Ghazni (July 2008) who could have been her oldest son. She spoke of how she was mentally in a daze at that time, and had not seen any of her children in five years. As a result she could not definitively (then or now) determine if that was indeed her son, Ahmed.

When asked whether she had incriminating documents in her possession on the day she was arrested, Aafia testified that the bag in her possession on the day that she was re-detained was given to her. She didn't know what was in the bag, nor could she definitively determine if the handwriting on some of the documents was hers or not. She also mentioned on a number of occasions (to the chagrin of the prosecutor) how she was repeatedly tortured by her captors at Bagram.

But the killer blow was delivered when Dr Aafia mildly challenged the prosecutor in a calm, crystal clear voice that was heard throughout her testimony: "You can't build a case on hate; you should build it on fact!"

There were other sensation moments and revealing testimony and if anyone thought that she hated Americans she removed that idea from their minds when she talked of the "fake Americans, not real Americans" who held and tortured her in the secret prisons. They were fake, she explained because real Americans would not behave in such a way to bring shame on their country.

We also discovered how she was instructed to translate and copy something from a book while she was secretly imprisoned. During the course of this testimony which repeatedly drew the ire of an increasingly frustrated prosecutor, Aafia noted how she can now understand how people can be framed (for crimes they are not guilty of).

It all got too much for Judge Berman who ordered a brief recess.

The plan to goad and incite Dr Aafia to perform some incomprehensible, demonic rant had back-fired.

When testimony resumed, we learned through the star witness how she was often forced-fed information from one group of persons at the secret prison, and then made to regurgitate the same information before a different group of inquisitors. While it was presented to her as a type of "game," she revealed of how she would be "punished" if she got something wrong.

Now, more than ever, this trial should be brought to an end. And if Judge Berman wants to go down in history for punctuating his lack lustre career as a member of the judiciary for standing up in the cause of truth and justice now is the time to do it.

The truth will out and the US Government's case has been exposed for what it is ... a sham.

And it is a fitting tribute to the endurance of Dr Aafia, mother-of-three, that the sham has been exposed by her.

Let's see justice being carried out in 500 Pearl Street in lower Manhattan tomorrow. Over to you, your Honour Judge Berman.

Award-winning investigative Yvonne Ridley and award-winning film-maker Hassan al Banna Ghani produced the documentary In Search of Prisoner 650 about the mysterious Grey Lady of Bagram who they conclude is Dr Aafia Siddiqui. Yvonne Ridley is also a patron of the human rights organisation Cageprisoner which first raised the issue of Dr Aafia Siddiqui shortly after she went missing in March 2003. A full report on the court proceedings can be seen on the website www.cageprisoners.com

Article Source : http://www.opinion-maker.org/navigation.do?mode=showArticles&id=1284

US Jury Finds Dr Aafia Guilty

2010-02-04T01:43:00.001-08:00

A Pakistan News

Dr. Aafia Siddiqui has been proven guilty by American court and all the allegations on Aafia have been proved.

The federal district court in New York under the Judge Richard Berman and 11 other members of the jury conducted the hearing on the case for twelve days;where as eight women were members of the jury.

The biggest allegation against her was attempting to murder US agents with an army rifle and shot at the US agents while she was detained for questioning in Afghanistan. None of the Americans were injured but Aafia, was shot. Nine witnesses were presented to the jury of whom six were present in the room at the time of shooting. American army Captain Schnieder and Afghan national police officer Bahsir were present during the case.

A lawyer fighting her case said that Aafia would appeal for a review of the verdict since the decision was unfair. He also said that there was no allegation on Aafia being linked to any act of terrorism however the jury tried to establish a connection between Aafia and terrorist organization.

Aafia reacted violently to the verdict and said that the American system of justice is not fair. She said that the decision has been taken by Israel.

Emotions will not help the case, says Dr. Aslam

American journalist Dr Aslam Abdullah said that Dr Aafia's supporter should control their emotions. Emotions will not help the case. Pakistan government will not take any action. The government has sold the country and it is due to the criminal negligence of the government that today Pakistan is confronting so many challenges.

Aslam also said that he has expectations from Human right groups. However the human rights groups cannot influence on the decision but can contribute positively towards the review of the case. Support for terrorism by some groups in Pakistan has been a factor that Aafia has been proven guilty.

Aslam aslo pointed that "No one spoke clearly on Aafia and sketchy details were presented regarding her family and her education".

Aslam said the Pakistani government will not do anything to help in the review of the case. He said that he cannot make any comments on how to prove Aafia's innocence since he is not a lawyer or a politician.

We will not ask for mercy from Non Muslims, says Fauzia Siddiqui

Dr Fauzia siddiqui said to the media that "We are agreeing with the will of the Allah". "Allah wanted to show to the world that American justice system is weak and corrupt". She said that "This is the beginning of the end for America". Fauzia said that Government lawyer did not contacted her since the verdict has been announced. She said that "We prayed to Allah and thanked him."

Answering to a question she said that "I would have been satisfied by the government efforts if Aafia would have been here standing next to me since she is not here so I am not satisfied with the government." She also said that we continue our fight. Our morale is high. Dr. Fauzia was refered to several Quran verses.

I am thankful to the media, says Aafia's mother

Aafia mother was smiling. She said that she is very happy and proud on the role of the media, she is also happy that her daughter has been chosen to slap on face of America. She claimed that "Today would mark the beginning of American downfall". Aafia's requested all to stay calm and said not to protest on the roads and appealed not to cause any damage to public or private property. Although the world may assume that we would be in a somber mood but I have attained new strength after this decision.

She repeatedly said that "Write my words that the decline of America starts today". I knew the decision in advance. She also said that "If the government would have acted responsibly then we would have not seen this day."

Aafia's mother also said that "I am thankful to the entire nation." "I have trained Aafia that she would never lose hope or faith". Aafia will never bow to the non Muslim demands. She accused Hussain Hakkani of making fake claims on Aafia's return. She said that Allah would take revenge from Shah Mahmood. She also said that "We would not ask for mercy from non Muslims".

Failure of foreign policy to be blamed, says Talha Mahmood

Senator Talha Mahmood said that only foreign policy is to be blamed. He said that "I do not think its not a good message from America. Demands of justice have not been full filled. Highest form delegations should be sent to USA and present a strict stance to the US government. He said that US and NATO image would not improve. Talha also said that delegations have been formed in the past as well but there were no results. The case has not been politicized entirely but the main flaw was in handling the case. All witnesses have been favoring Aafia but the decision was pre decided. Trial was just a fake show. The world has witnessed the poor American justice. Hakkani did not take up the issue seriously and I cannot comment as to what he did. Pak has made big sacrifices and no one has given these sacrifices. The nation would not accept this gift of the America.

Article Source : http://www.apakistannews.com/us-jury-finds-dr-aafia-guilty-160146

Can India be a great power?

2010-02-03T10:50:00.001-08:00

By Dr Haider Mehdi

It was Mahatma Gandhi who once said: "Anger and intolerance are the enemies of correct understanding." Centuries before Gandhi, the Roman poet Virgil had stated: "Anger carries the mind away." Pietro Aretino, the 15th century Italian author, categorically defined "anger" as an anti-intellect human emotion: "Angry men are blind and foolish…" Aretino declared. Modern social-psychology claims that anger is an emotional risk in communication, both in understanding it and in the process of communicating.

Many many Hindu Indians are angry - very very angry. This happened after this writer's article Is India a Great Power? appeared in The Nation of January 26, when they unleashed a barrage of offensive emails and inconsistent political counter-attacks devoid of logical arguments or reason. And yet, the overall effect of this hostile reaction has provided the opportunity to once again make the point that has been completely lost on Indian observers, foreign policy makers, political gurus, neo-con pundits and some readers of the said article - pure anger has replaced reasonable understanding!

Let us go back to some fundamental ground realities: Yes, India is a massively large country. Yes, it is an enormous economy. Yes, India's foreign exchange reserves are tremendous. Yes, India has a high profile in the eyes of the US and the Western world in the present geopolitical environment.

But the question is, does all that make India capable of being a great world power? More specifically, the question becomes vitally important when India's entire march "forward" is in the context of a socio-economic-geopolitical "status-quo" imposed globally by the US-West's notion of ideological capitalism and hegemonic military-political imperialist doctrine. India is striving to find its place in global leadership "within the box," imaging "great power" status precisely on the US-West's lines. India's fire-power and military ferocity (as claimed in wiping out China and Pakistan in a matter of four hours) is not exactly what will make it a "great power." Thinking so is a paralysis of its political mindset inconsistent with the present day needs of the masses all over the world - and particularly so to the majority of the Indian population living below the poverty line. And that is precisely where the problem lies.

Consider the seductive psychological treatment meted out to India's consciousness in the last decade or so. Supposedly, India is in the forefront of a so-called cultural renaissance, jump-started by the US-West's incessant "hail India" media-propelled intoxication: After Hollywood, Bollywood is the unquestioned entertainment leader of the world (is film entertainment the opium of the starving poverty-stricken masses of India?) Cricket - yes, India is the world leader (it has turned a "gentlemen's" game into money-making scams truly in the precise image of "Mafioso-ism"- hasn't it?) And the list goes on of Western capitalism's unholy encroachments on the moral-social-spiritual fibre of the Indian society. Isn't this entire phenomenon of "India First Now" a part of the manipulative US-West's political strategy? When seductive pleasure is over, India will certainly get a wake-up call to the harsh realities of its sad existence. For India, the cruel truth is that it has a poverty-stricken disfranchised population.

Let us be fair enough in conceding the fact that Pakistan has made a mess of its country in the last six decades and is continuing to do so presently as well. And it is here, in this admission of a factual ground reality, that the crux of my argument lies for India's future politics: a vitally important reason for Pakistan's 60 years of a continued political abyss is in the Pakistani ruling elite's love affair with the US. This alliance with the US-West's global, ideological, military and political objectives and goals has driven Pakistan to its present state. Unfortunately, India is heading in the same direction now with its recently found love affair with the US.

This does not mean that America is an evil nation. But it is quite certainly an evil empire. The problem lies fundamentally with the American ideological foundations: Capitalism thrives on the basis of worldwide military conflicts, political domination and economic exploitation of other nation's resources as well as subtle control of their political leaderships and elite ruling groups. In modern times, media and psychological manipulations have taken a central role in this process of penetrating in the decision-making structures of Third World countries. It empowers the US-West and thereby to intervene and to influence political outcomes in favour of themselves, as well as benefiting a select group of local elites in several of these nations. Pakistan has been a victim of this exploitive process and now India stands at the verge of falling into the same trap.

The angry Indians should understand that once a nation is hooked up to this kind of seductive US-West's strategy and diplomacy, then there is no exit from this route. It slowly and gradually leads to social disharmony widening gaps between the rich and poor. The masses remain deprived, marginalised and helpless - hypnotised by a scandalous view of "greatness" seduced by media blitzes and tall grandiose nationalist claims.

At the present stage of human civilisation, masses all over the world no more aspire to imperial grandeurs, neither do they identify with the glorious empires. They do not want wars, military conflicts, skyscrapers in urban centres, lofty ideals and claims of unprecedented military power capabilities to wipe out other nations and their innocent people in a matter of minutes.

I would assume, and it seems a reasonable supposition, that common Indians, all of them, wish to see an India that would take care of their gloomy and undoubtedly difficult existence, wipe out their deprivations and sufferings of poverty, disease, un-wellness, socio-cultural disorders, sociological disparities and ever-waning hopes of a truly socio-cultural renaissance. I would also assume that the majority of Indians would prefer peace, stability, and prosperity over war, instability and lingering poverty.

The US-West's eduction and ideological romance with India will not deliver any of the above for its masses. Ideological "capitalism" is simply not compatible with the needs of the present day world and is not able to offer resolutions to the suffering masses problematics.

Why doesn't India espouse a visionary dream of a new world order and become an important global player to achieve a political entity for itself as a modern spiritual state that places pre-eminence to the masses welfare above and beyond a notion of a "Great Empire"?

Why doesn't it think of its future as a nation of "saints" and moral spiritual sagas; a nation of peace - and moral high ground - a neighbour worthy of an emulative model of true human emancipation? After all, in spiritualism, that is how "greatness" is defined. Isn't it?

That is the question I wish to pose to these angry Indians!

After all, India has the potentials: Wasn't India the champion of the "Non-Aligned Movement"?

Perhaps, these angry Indians never carefully listened to Mahatma Gandhi! They certainly didn't! It was Mahatma who once said: "Anger and intolerance are the enemies of correct understanding."

The writer is an academic, political analyst and conflict-resolution expert.

Pakistan army has broken the back of TTP

2010-02-01T10:06:00.001-08:00

Pakistan Daily

U.S.Central Command chief Gen David Petraeus lauding the Pakistan Army successes in Malakand and South Waziristan regions said that Pakistani Taliban are no longer in possession of the tools of terror that they once had in their eastern South Waziristan stronghold.

"Well, I don't know that you would characterize it as having defeated the TTP and/or the other elements that are associated with the Pakistani Taliban. But they have certainly set them back very considerably," he answered while speaking at a US Think Tank when asked if Pakistan has completely defeated the militant movement.

Gen. Petraeus told a gathering of experts at the Institute for the Study of War that it is important that Pakistan's vital anti-terror strides are recognized.

The Centcom leader noted with appreciation that the Pakistani army has cleared and held Swat Valley, Swat District, the Malakand Division of Northwest Frontier Province and has conducted important operations in Bajaur, Mohmand, and Khyber in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas.

"And then most recently, of course, about three or four months ago, launched an important operation in eastern South Waziristan, the tribal areas controlled by the extremist element that was led by the former Baitullah Mehsud, who was killed in the Fata last year, a very important action. And that has put considerable pressure on, again, the Pakistani Taliban and some of its affiliates."

In his appraisal, Petraeus noted a strong public backing for Pakistan's anti-militant operations that emerged following the Taliban's challenge to writ of the government in Swat valley.

"It has been, I think, of enormous importance that we recognize this important development because until about ten months ago, I think there was generally an assertion by a number in Pakistan that the Pakistani military was being coerced into fighting the U.S. War on Terror," he said, according to a transcript of the discussion available Tuesday.

He also acknowledged the fact that in dealing with the massive task of clearing and holding an area in the mountainous region and then rebuilding the conflict-hit areas, the available resources remain limited.

"The Pakistani Army and the Frontier Corps have carried out really quite impressive counter-insurgency operations. There are certainly limitations in the resources available to them. There are limitations in the governmental agencies and resources that they can bring to the rebuilding effort because, of course, it's not just clear and leave, it's clear, hold, and build, and even transition. And again, the Pakistani military's approach has been quite impressive.

"So I think all in all, they have shown quite a facility for carrying out these operations, a recognition that you have to hang onto what you fought to clear. You know, the act of taking over that area of eastern South Waziristan, where there was so much infrastructure that contained explosives, IED factories, car bomb factories, and arms and ammunition storage sites, and planning locations, training facilities, all the rest of that-that's not in their hands now, in TTP's hands.'

At the same time, the general remarked that the Pakistani fight against militancy is work in progress and additional pressure on other organizations will be helpful to the overall effort.

"So this has been a very significant development, but again, very much a work in progress, to be sure."

Article Source : http://www.daily.pk/pakistan-army-has-broken-the-back-of-ttp-15345/

India sidelined at London Conference on Afghanistan

2010-02-01T10:03:00.001-08:00

Pakistan Daily

There is only one sentence to describe Bharati (aka Indian) attendance in the London conference on Afghanistan-"Bharat was addded as an afterthought, and after much yelling and screaming by Delhi".

Islamabad believes India is looking to Afghanistan for destabilising Pakistan

Delhi was reluctantly invited to the London conference, but it might as well have not been invited. All its objections have been overruled. Bharat did not want the Taliban to be included in the Kabul government.

It has been.

Pakistan has repeatedly brought the world's attention to Bharati Consulates who have been sponsoring terror in Pakistan. Bharat faces a hostile crowd. Pakistan, Turkey, and Afghanistan have already decided on the agenda, and it has been blessed by the US, the UN, Japan, China and the UK. There are leaked copies of the final resolution already published on various internet sites, including the Iranian Press TV site.

ISLAMABAD: Pakistan has successfully mobilised the defunct six-plus-two talks formula to counter the US pressure regarding giving India a "greater role" in warn-torn Afghanistan's rehabilitation.Pakistan acts to counter Indian influence in Afghanistan By Sajjad Malik

Afghanistan's immediate neighbours - Pakistan, Iran, China, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan, as well as the US, are meeting today (Tuesday) in Turkey to discuss the situation in Afghanistan and to take stock of measures for the restoration of peace in the country.

The original "six-plus-two" also included Russia, but in the new set up Moscow representation has been replaced by the United Kingdom.

The Chinese foreign minister and senior officials from Iran, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Pakistan and Afghanistan will attend the conference, which will also be attended by British Foreign Secretary David Miliband and US Special Envoy Richard Holbrooke's deputy, Paul Jones.

Diplomatic sources said Pakistan has been lobbying for the renewal of talks among Afghanistan's neighbours in order to foil Indian designs of gaining a foothold on Afghan soil.

Pakistan believes India is not an immediate neighbour of Afghanistan and therefore should have limited role in the country.

Turkey has been asked to convene the meeting, as it enjoys the backing and trust of Pakistan and is accepted as a neutral party for promoting a common approach to the conflict. The conference will urge regional players to work together in order to stabilise Afghanistan and the region.

The revival of the talks group has come at a crucial juncture - on Thursday, around 50 nations will be meeting at the London Conference to discuss the Afghan issue and deliberate on measures to help the war-ravaged nation.

The organisers of the London Conference, like the US, are trying to convince Pakistan on accepting the greater Indian role in Afghanistan.

Destabilisation: "It is not possible for us to give India a role in Afghanistan as it is using Afghan soil to destabilise Pakistan. Also, India has been traditionally aligned with Russia and played a part in the destruction of Afghanistan," sources said. They said the last meeting of the six-plus-two group was held before the 9/11 attacks and the Taliban had agreed to give 80 percent of representation in the Afghan government to the Northern Alliance. "Since then, fortunes have reversed and the Taliban have lost the government. Now the six-plus-two group will try to pave the way for the participation of the Taliban in the new government," sources said.

The coalition forces badly need breathing space in Afghanistan following a deadly 2009, in which the force lost at least 504 soldiers, including 305 US and 108 British troops. Sources said US-led forces were giving a thought to Pakistan's viewpoint on the Afghan conflict, an idea substantiated by US Defence Secretary Robert Gates' statement during a recent visit to Pakistan that said that Washington was with Pakistan and supported its efforts for peace in Afghanistan.

The presence of both the UK and the US at the Turkish initiative speaks volumes about their interest in a regional solution.

Bharat will try to brag about the so called $1.3 Billion has has spent/wasted on Afghanistan. Most of the money Delhi spent was actually went into the pockets of Bharati contractors from Bharat.

India will not complicate the US's diplomacy in Islamabad by seeking any role in the build-up of the Afghan armed forces or police… Nor is Delhi inclined to raise dust about US plans regarding the "reintegration and reconciliation" of the Taliban. The Indian position was dogmatic but nuances have crept in. This is partly tactical, as it is clear Indian opposition will not stall the process of integrating the Taliban into Afghan political life. Ambassador Bhadrakumar.

Much to the chagrin of Delhi, the Americans are fully supportive of including the Pakistani brokered peace between the Taliban and the government of Mr. Hamid Karzai. The only silver lining that Bharat can hope to see is possible support from Iran (which also is apprehensive of Taliban government in Kabul). pkkh

Article Source : http://www.daily.pk/india-sidelined-at-london-conference-on-afghanistan-15393/

India’s ‘Secular Terrorism’

2010-01-31T22:22:00.001-08:00

Sajjad Shaukat

Political experts remark, "Terrorism comes in a variety of forms, but these days religious terrorism is the most common and leads to the most destruction. Not all terrorism is equal…there are significant differences between religious and secular terrorism."

Bruce Hoffman, in his book 'Inside Terrorism' writes: "For the religious terrorist, violence is the foremost divine duty executed in direct response to some theological demand or imperative. Terrorism thus assumes a transcendental dimension, and its perpetrators are consequently unconstrained by the political and moral constraints that may affect other terrorists."

On the other hand, Hoffman further explains: "The secular terrorist sense leads to a sanctioning of almost limitless violence against a virtually open-ended category of targets: that is, anyone who is not a member of the terrorists' religion or religious sect. This explains the rhetoric common to 'holy terror' manifestos describing persons outside the terrorists' religious community in dehumanizing terms as, for example, "infidels" or "mud people."

Judging in these terms, since the 9/11 tragedy, irresponsible attitude of Indian, Israeli and some Western politicians have introduced dangerous socio-religious dimension in their societies by equating the "war on terror" with "war on Islam" and acts of Al Qaeda with all the Muslims. Their media have also heightened the currents of world politics on cultural and religious lines with the negative projection of Islam. In this regard, reprinting of the caricatures about Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) and release of a Dutch film against the Holy Quran might be noted as an example.

In this context, on October 19, 2007, the real cause behind was revealed by the the special issue of South Asia Multidisciplinary Academic Journal, under the caption-'Working for India or against Islam? and it wrote: "In the past few years, Indian American community has gained an unprecedented visibility in the international arena and now constitutes influential ethnic lobbies in Washington. Among other factors, Hindu aligned with Jewish pressure groups in relation to the war against terrorism and to further the India-Israel-US strategic partnership play a major role in exaggerating Islamophobic overtones in the Indian American lobbies"

Particularly since 9/11, India which joined the vile propaganda campaign of Western countries in equating Muslims with fundamentalism and in creating Islamic phobia is itself practising terrorism under the shadow of secularism. This could rightly be called secular terrorism.

However, although terrorism has many meanings, but its main aim is to create fear in order to achieve political or social ends, while a terrorist is one who deliberately creates this climate of fear by employing violent means.

So either it is religious terrorism or secular terrorism, India which claims to be a secular state, has broken all the records of violence, genocide and massacre against various ethnic and religious groups, entailing the community of its own lower castes.

Hindu politics and culture, dominated by the fundamentalists parties such as BJP, RSS, VHP, Shiv Sena and other similar groups have been propagating Hindutva (Hindu nationalism). Provocative utterances of their extremist leaders result into more violence against the Christians and the Muslims including other minority groups.

Although violence against the other communities has been used by Hindu terrorists as a normal practice since partition, yet anti-Christian and anti-Muslim bloodshed in the last decade coupled with the dissemination of Hindutva has intensified.

Besides previous massacre of Muslims, more than 2500 Muslims were massacred in 2002 in the BJP-ruled Indian state of Gujarat where horrible scenes of arson, mutation and rape were perpetrated by the Hindu extremists against the unarmed Muslims. Regarding that massive genocide, both Human Rights Watch in 2002 and Amnesty International in 2003 charged the "Gujarat state administration" for involvement in "a massive cover-up of the state's role in that massacres" and pointed out numerous police officials-specifically ministers, high officials and leaders of the VHP, BJP and Bajrang Dal as participants.

Meanwhile, various investigations failed in indicating the real culprits of Hindu terrorism in Gujrat as they were high officials or police officers of the Indian government. Hence, the Supreme Court of India had ordered a fresh probe on March 25, 2008, but the same also remains inconclusive due to concealment of evidence against the culprits who are members of the dominating political parties of the country.

Besides Gujrat, on September 13, 2008, during the communal riots in Uttar Pradesh more than 200 Muslims were murdered. In the most tragic incident in Assam, Hindu terrorists burnt alive six members of a Muslim family.

In Maharashtra, non-Hindu communities have lived in constant fear and awe since the advent of the fundamentalist party, Shiv Sena whose Chief Bal Thackeray has organised army of hoodlums to beat up any religious minority, openly directing the Hindu terrorists to loot and stone any of their shop or house. Silence of the subsequent governments on every challenge of Shiv Sena and lack of serious action against Thackeray's vandalism have clearly defeated the secular echoes of India which is in fact a secular terroist state. More alarming point is that Bajrang Dal has also been imparting arms training to its members near Ayodhya where the fundamentalist Hindus want to build Ram Mandir on the site of Babri Masjid which was demolished deliberately in 1992 with the official backing.

Notably, a few weeks ago, a leakage of the report of the Justice Liberation Commission of India admitted the role BJP's leadership for the destruction of the Babri Masjid, and over other human rights violations in the Indian-held Kashmir including violence against the Muslim and Christian communities.

It is mentionable that after the BJP came to power in February 2006, unlike the previous similar tragic events, Christian persecution rose to new heights in the state of Karnataka. Attacks on Christian holidays became common in the state like other areas. On the Christmas Eve of 2007, Hindu extremists led a series of violent attacks on Christians and their property in the state of Orissa, killing six Christians and razing at least 800 houses and 100 churches.

According to a report of the Global Council of Indian Christians (GCIC), "in one of the events, in March, 2008, more than 150 intolerant nationalist Hindus stormed two Easter Sunday services and beat at least 16 Christians including two pastors in Bangalore and in Shimoga district…before almost every assault, the mob of the Hindu extremist of RSS, VHP and Bajrang Dal, armed with bamboo poles, sticks and rods, while beating drums shout slogans in Hindi-he "who talks in favour of only Hindus will rule the nation."

Nevertheless, assaults on Christians and their property have continued by the Hindu mobs in Orissa, Assam, Kerala and Andhra Pradesh. Even the year of 2009 witnessed a number of incidents of religious intolerance. In this respect, at least 60 Christians have been assassinated in the recent past by Hindu fundamentalists in Orissa.

Recently more than 2,700 unmarked graves of the unidentified bodies were uncovered in villages of Indian-held Kashmir near the Line of Control (LoC). It is not the new event, in the past three years, the International People's Tribunal on Human Rights and Justice (IPT) has discovered unmarked bodies buried at various places. Last year, discovery of nearly 1000 graves of the unmarked Muslims in the Indian held Kashmir was also notable. Sources have suggested that these graves include bodies of extrajudicial executions committed by the Indian military and paramilitary forces.

In fact, the ideology of Hindutva is being encouraged by the government officials. Besides attacks on the other ethnic and religious communities including their establishments, appointment of extremist Hindus in top positions in various institutes, and alteration of courses in accordance with the Hindu ideology have reflected the intentions of the BJB and the Congress rulers.

No doubt, violence against the other communities has been used by Hindu fundamentalists as a normal practice since partition, but intensity of the anti-Muslim and anti-Christian bloodshed in the last decade coupled with the dissemination of Hindutva has displayed India's 'secular terrorism.'

Sajjad Shaukat writes on international affairs and is author of the book: US vs Islamic Militants, Invisible Balance of Power: Dangerous Shift in International Relations.

Article Source : http://www.markthetruth.com/minority-issues-in-india/310-indias-secular-terrorism.html

India and Pakistan are Nuclear States—Let's Make it Official

2010-01-31T22:21:00.001-08:00

>

Luv Puri

In May 1998, surprise nuclear tests by India and Pakistan transformed regional strategic calculations and added a dangerous new dimension to tensions between the two.

According to Taylor Branch, writing in The Clinton Tapes: Wrestling History with the President, Indian officials who spoke with Bill Clinton were fully aware of the potential devastation a clash between the two nations could lead to, calculating that a doomsday nuclear volley would kill 300 to 500 million Indians while annihilating all 120 million Pakistanis (although the Pakistani side insisted its rugged mountain terrain would shield more survivors than the exposed plains of India).

But regardless of the accuracy of these numbers, and although the two countries' military strategies differ, (India's is based on conventional superiority, while Pakistan tends to emphasize nuclear deterrence to cancel out this advantage) one thing is clear-the threat of nuclear terrorism looms large over both.

In December 1998, Osama Bin Laden told Time magazine that acquiring weapons for the defence of Muslims is a religious duty. 'If I have indeed acquired these weapons, then I thank God for enabling me to do so. And if I seek to acquire these weapons, I am carrying out a duty,' he is reported as saying. Even if the statement was merely rhetoric, it demonstrates intent. However, a number of reports suggest that Bin Laden's statement was more than just talk.

In August 2001, two Pakistani scientists, Sultan Bashiruddin Mahmood and Chaudary Abdul Majeed, met Bin Laden and Mullah Omar in Afghanistan. The two scientists were detained on October 23, 2001, 'for questioning.' Majid was a retired nuclear fuel expert from the Pakistan Institute of Nuclear Science and Technology, while Mahmood worked on the secret Pakistani gas centrifuge program that ultimately produced the highly enriched uranium used in Pakistan's nuclear weapons.

But even without acquiring access to weapons, there are other means of groups such as al-Qaeda engaging in nuclear terrorism. Radioactive dispersal devices, for example, are particularly suited to non-state actors as they are portable and can be used to meet one of the common aims of terrorism, which is to cause significant economic damage. Combined with an explosive device, RDDs can be used to create dirty bombs, which can cause both immediate casualties from their explosions and long-term health and psychological damages from radiation.

Many analysts see Pakistan, and specifically Punjab province, as the most likely source of materials for extremists to undertake such attacks, and the precision of the recent terrorist attacks in Punjab on several Pakistani military facilities suggest there has been some inside help for militants.

On October 10, for example, terrorists dressed as Pakistani soldiers entered the Pakistani Army's headquarters at Rawalpindi and killed six soldiers, including a brigadier. Subsequent investigations pointed to Illyas Kashmiri, who once served in the Army, as a potential suspect.

Back in 2003, meanwhile, there was a suicide assassination attempt on then-Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf's convoy, from which he narrowly escaped. The investigation, as recorded in a book authored by Musharraf, led to the arrest of low-level army officers who had conspired with Islamists, and who were angry over his co-operation with the United States in cracking down on extremists in the tribal areas.

In India, though, the threats have been more recent, and point to the bigger danger of the link between nuclear facilities and militants. Earlier this month, it was reported that the Lashkar-e-Taiba, an extremist group, is planning to target nuclear scientists (security has reportedly been tightened around several of the alleged targets) while there have also been reports of plans to strike the country's nuclear infrastructure.

This all comes as India works to expand its nuclear capacity after receiving a waiver from the Nuclear Suppliers Group's rules that allow its civilian nuclear deal with the United States to proceed, following strong US lobbying. India has signed treaties with several countries that will help it expand its nuclear infrastructure, but such an expansion needs to be matched by upgrades in security.

Meanwhile, Bangladesh is also working to establish a civilian nuclear power plant after signing a memorandum of understanding on peaceful use of nuclear energy with Russia. Like India and Pakistan, it also faces the challenge of dealing with radicalized groups.

Bringing India into the non-proliferation regime will be crucial if Pakistan is also to be drawn in, moves that would both help reduce the risk of nuclear conflict as well as the risk of nuclear materials falling into the wrong hands.

India and Pakistan made a good start in the field of nuclear cooperation when they signed an agreement in 1989 not to attack each other's nuclear facilities. And in a more recent positive sign, in November 2008, Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari stated Pakistan was willing to commit to a no first-use policy for its nuclear weapons-a policy he said he could secure backing from parliament for. However, only 4 days after the suggestion terrorists struck Mumbai, killing 176 people and stirring up tensions between the two.

Pakistan's refusal to join the nuclear proliferation regime is also linked to India's rejection of the same system. Both countries are not bound by the conditions reached after the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty was agreed, such as the 1997 Additional Protocol, to strengthen the non-proliferation regime. As a consequence, the continued exclusion of Pakistan and India from the non-proliferation regime is actually intensifying the nuclear arms race in South Asia.

Bringing India into the regime will mean addressing its objections to becoming part of the arrangement-it believes that the non-proliferation regime is discriminatory as it is rooted in the NPT, which only gives nuclear weapons status to five countries.

The United States has already taken a significant step toward accepting India through the Indo-US civilian nuclear agreement, the framework for which was agreed in 2005. Here, the US defended the exception for India because of its impeccable record in non-proliferation. But the move in turn upset Pakistan, which argued the exceptional treatment for India risked triggering an arms race.

It seems clear then that granting both countries official nuclear weapons state status through suitable amendments to the NPT would be the best way of curbing the on-going arms race and reducing the threat of nuclear terrorism by making it easier for the International Atomic Energy Agency to hold the nuclear infrastructures of both countries to the highest scrutiny.

Many nations may balk at such a move. But the stakes are too high to not let pragmatism be the guiding basis for policy.

Luv Puri is a Fulbright Fellow at New York University and has written on South Asian related issues for nearly ten years. A previous version of this essay appeared in The Diplomat.

Article Source : http://www.acus.org/new_atlanticist/india-and-pakistan-are-nuclear-states%E2%80%94lets-make-it-official

Is this The End Of India?

2010-01-30T01:49:00.001-08:00

India with Blind govt, Deaf Army chief, militant groups and hushed masses battling to be a super power……

A.D.Khalid

Khuswant Singh- a renowned journalist world wide & recognized as Nom Chomsky of India, in his book "The End of India" predicted about the total destruction of India into diminutive parts. He cautioned not only govt but all stake holders of Indian so called secular society that they should not only forget the partition of India but also accept presence of Pakistan and all Muslims inside and outside of India with open heart .He further suggested that India must accept equal rights of others, do justice with minorities, discourage extremism grouped with militancy and forget to eliminate the low caste Hindus from the society by degrading and disregarding their presence in millions. But unfortunately, since the publication of his book all these evils have unprecedented increase in Indian society.

It was a few days back when two famous news publishing groups of Pakistan (The Jang) and India (Hindustan Times) hoisted a flag for peace in the subcontinent. It was really very lovely on their part because this is the time when poor masses of the region are looking for respite so that economic activities can burgeon in the area. Probably people are now fed up from wars and arms race. The masses now want that governments must spend money on their welfare, health, education and comforts of life. Each one having little knowledge and vision of future, looks towards European Union countries, how they have resolved their skirmishes and now are focused on scientific advancements and economic growth of their people. But when one of the two countries is India, in a peace dialogue with Pakistan, results are always pitiable as India never responds positively to peace process. The theme "Aman ki Aasha" is a good beginning. Peaceful people of Pakistan responded well and it received warm welcome in Pakistan side of the border but it was not acceptable for the militant minds and extremist groups having deep roots in govt, Indian army and society as well.

It was really interesting to see the influence of politicians getting lead from extremist groups on the sports event IPL, being conducted in India. At this time, Indian media kept quite and never pointed what all was happening. It was really terrifying to engulf that every one in India had gone bonkers. When poor people of the two countries just started dancing under the flag of "Aman ki Aasha", the Indian wise strategy makers same as of their previous record, stabbed the peace process by influencing IPL franchises for snubbing Pakistani players at auction. The mind planning this all, was really cunning and insightful that successfully pierced the hearts of ordinary cricket lovers. Actually, extremist elements of India being supported by Indian army and agencies want to escalate the war between two countries. This time they tried a way which is never used anywhere in the world ever. They polluted the sports which are always above politics and players are ambassadors of peace. But it was a typical Hindu mind who at one end never hesitates to damage Pakistan and on the other sabotaged the peace efforts. This was really a right move to hoist the public sentiments. Time and again, India by its actions has proved its enmity with Pakistan and people of Pakistan and govt must take a serious note of it. India showed its true colors with this one action when Pakistan cricketers were ignored and humiliated by IPL franchises at the player's auction in Mumbai, India on Tuesday. With this snub, no Pakistani cricketer will feature in the third edition of the IPL to be held in India in March 2010. It was not only players who went under the hammer but the hearts of millions of cricket lovers across the region. Let us see how this Aman ki Aasha floats in coming days with the Indian extremist's desperate efforts to interfere with it. As far as cricket is concerned, it is really funny on the cricket management part that no player of the world T20 champion team will be playing. It seems from the sports point of view that India has probably slapped its own secular face by showing this drama to complete world.

New Year is exposing India in front of the world with each passing day. New Year started with millennium statements of the Indian army chief who either talked of nuclear war or attacking two nuclear neighbors simultaneously and was boasting to defeat both. In the same month while visiting the test fire, the chief himself admitted Indian army's armored debacle and expressed concern about the force's night blindness in the area of armored corps and mechanized Infantry. As per Indian Tv, it also revealed during test fire that army chief was deaf from one ear and will be the first army chief to retire on medical grounds. Seeing the health, statements and action of the general, I am afraid that opinion of some other health check specialists may also be solicited. It's really high time for Indian people as their state apparatus is dancing into the hands of extremist groups and international power brokers. With its actions govt seems totally blind and dancing for the goals which are never achievable.

When Indian policy makers and highest officials are talking of wars with nuclear neighbors, humiliating the peace process and battling for becoming a superpower through short cuts; the situation inside country is alarming. India's Maoist rebels are now present in 20 states and have killed more than 900 security officials. People are coming on the roads for price hike and in a recent protest Malaiam Singh Yadev, the leader of Samaj Vadi Party was arrested by the police. Deepening stark inequalities and raucous role of militant elements are harnessing India towards a self triggered tragedy which will not only destroy India but the region also.

At this critical juncture of time, India requires a policy and leadership who can comprehend the future challenges. Other than falling into the hands of international power brokers and extremist groups from inside, India will have to hold firmly its secular image with real implementation. India will have to address the grievances' of people from with in and will have to regard the rights of its neighbors. Extremist militant groups have deepened their roots in Indian society and armed forces as well. India will have to eliminate them by discouraging such thought process. 21st century is an era of peace, prosperity and mutual trust where all nations can live with equal rights and comforts. If India does not regard the will of the people, none in this world be able to safeguard its integrity and she will break from inside. India at the moment is at the cross roads of its existence and any adventure will take it to turmoil.

Article Source : http://www.markthetruth.com/pakistan-a-the-world/301-is-this-the-end-of-india.html

Why Washington fears Islamic Iran?

2010-01-29T10:46:00.001-08:00

General David Petraeus (a Jewish Lobby's choice), Head of US Central Command, during a recently interview with CNN threatened Islamic Iran by saying that in addition to crippling sanctions and international diplomacy, Washington is considering "contingency plans" against Iran's nuclear installations in parallel. Responding to the General's barking, Islamic Iran's Chief of staff of Joint Armed Forces, General Hassan Firouzabadi advised Petraeus to carry out consultations before making such warmongering threats: "The politicians' statement may not cost them dear, but the military men are expected to avoid making crude and emotional remarks".

Professor James Petras writing for the Global Research (May 4, 2008) called General David Petraeus Zionism\'s Military Poodle: "In pointing to Iran, Petraeus played the dangerous game of echoing the Israeli line and providing support for a military attack on Iran promoted by the leadership of major American Jewish organizations. Even while Petraeus was covering up his failure (in Iraq) by blaming Iran, (the US) Iraqi puppet government was praising the Iranian government for helping to stablize the country by using its influence on the Shia militias to hold their fire. Puppet Prime Minister Maliki invited Iranian President (Ahmadinejad) to Baghdad, signed trade agreements and praised their co-operation and efforts to stablize the country".

On January 22, Richard Haass, the Zionist Jewish president of the powerful Zionist think tank, Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) and an adviser to Obama administeration, made the pitch for the Zionist entity by calling for a (pro-Israel) regime change in Tehran. He called for western governments' continue help for the anti-Ahmadinejad movement, more sanctions against Tehran and more international pressure on Islamic regime to stop its nuclear program which could pose a threat to Israel's monopoly in that field (Tel Aviv has 240-400 nuclear warheads).

Last month, another Jewish Lobby puppet, US secretary of states Hillary Clinton, warned Venezuela and Bolivia to "think twice" about the consequences of their ties with the Islamic Republic.

Incidendtly, Israeli MEMRI has not translated any of Ahmadinejad's speeches in which he may have called for "Wipe the US off Map". So why the successive US administrations are so paranoid of the Islamic regime in Tehran? Ramzy Baroud, an author and internationally-syndicated columnist, in his recent essay, titled Iran and Latin America: The Media States Its Case, provides some background to Washington's paranoid behaviour.

Should the United States be concerned about Iran's determined efforts to reach out to Latin America? Or, as was suggestively described in the Economist, by the Ayatollahs' strategy of cozying up to Latin America?

The US continues to see the world as its own business. It gives itself and its allies, most notably Israel, the right to geopolitical maneuverability. Iran, on the other hand, is censured, derided and punished for even its own internal policies, within its own borders. Thus, an Iranian move into Latin America is naturally viewed as unwarranted, uncalled for and most definitely dangerous as far as the US is concerned.

But Iran is not invading America geopolitical space per se. It is neither financing a terrorist group, nor involved in the ongoing narcotic war. More, there is no historical connection between an interventionist Iran and the bloody past of Latin America, including its former dictators and brutal juntas. In fact, Iran's 'cozying up' to Latin American merely began in 2005. Since then, Iran has opened embassies in several Latin American countries and launched important joint projects that provided funds and work opportunities for thousands of ordinary people. There is no Iranian equivalent to the School of the Americas.

So why the alarm?

Paul McLeary of Aviation Week gives us a clue. Iran's move "has set off a proxy conflict between Iran and Israel in South America, with the presidents of both countries logging frequent-flier miles to win friends in the region. One cause for concern among many analysts is the weekly flight between Caracas and Tehran (with a stop in Damascus) that Iran Air has flown for two years."

He quotes Frida Ghitis: "Flight manifests are kept secret, so neither cargo nor passenger information is well known …one Israeli report suggested that Venezuela and Bolivia are supplying uranium to Iran."

Two questions emerge. One, is it required of Caracas and Tehran to provide a detailed report of the cargo and passengers to the US and Israel, and perhaps also cc-ed to a list of their friends and allies?

The second pertains to Israel itself. Why is the media most concerned by Iran's 'suspicious' behavior in Latin America, despite the fact that its presence is welcomed by various countries in the hemisphere, while Israel - whose bloody involvement has wrought much chaos to South America - is simply unquestioned, and even cited as a credible source? There is no evidence to link Iran to death squads, or any Iranian firm with "an archive and computer file on journalists, students, leaders, leftists, politicians and so on" to be hunted down, killed or simply made to 'disappear' under brutal regimes. Israel's own history in Latin America seems to inspire little commentary by the ever-vigilant 'many analysts'. McLeary, Ghitis and others need to do their homework before leveling accusations against others. The book Dangerous Liaison: The Inside Story of the U.S.-Israeli Covert Relationship may be a good place to start.

Back to the lurking Ayatollahs in America's backyard, Susan Kaufman Purcell is also raising questions, this time about Brazil. In Brazil President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva welcomed his Iranian counterpart, president Ahmadinejad late November 2009. In the January 7 Wall Street Journal, Purcell claimed: "Until recently, the Obama administration assumed that Brazil and the United States were natural allies who shared many foreign policy interests, particularly in Latin America. Brazil, after all, is a friendly democracy with a growing market economy and Western cultural values." Purcell suggests that Brazil's various achievements - largely beneficial to the US - qualified the country to become "more like us".

Western media is indeed rife with all sorts of unfounded accusations, baseless speculations and superfluous insinuations. They evoke in the reader and viewer a dread and fear, based in this case on the doomsday scenario whereby fanatical Latin Americans and radical Muslims gang up on America, and ultimately Israel……….."

Article Source : http://rehmat1.wordpress.com/2010/01...-islamic-iran/

Feed War, Starve Democracy

2010-01-29T10:45:00.003-08:00

by Frank Scott

"While our consumer goods producing corporations have been emigrating to cheap labor markets abroad, our military industry has been - literally - booming at home. It's more than 100% greater than it was in 2000, doubling in size while the rest of the manufacturing sector has nearly vanished. We continue exporting jobs to foreign countries while importing cheap labor and increasing unemployment for American workers here in the USA."

The American public is borrowing trillions of dollars to finance private capital and a military industry that president Eisenhower warned about more than fifty years ago. In an historic speech he cautioned that we were in danger of domination by a "military-industrial complex" that could squander our wealth and threaten our democracy. Have we done anything to avoid the problem he identified? Since the 9/11 attack supplied an excuse to expand on the previous myth of a communist menace, the military frenzy of economic waste and bloody slaughter dubbed the "war on terror" makes what Eisenhower feared seem almost benign by comparison.

While our consumer goods producing corporations have been emigrating to cheap labor markets abroad, our military industry has been - literally - booming at home. It's more than 100% greater than it was in 2000, doubling in size while the rest of the manufacturing sector has nearly vanished. We continue exporting jobs to foreign countries while importing cheap labor and increasing unemployment for American workers here in the USA.

The military sector is nearly three times as large as it was at the beginning of the Bush administration and regime change has brought not just continuity but further growth in that malignant trend; with a military budget of more than 700 billion dollars things are getting worse and at a faster pace. Even true believers in total reliance on market forces for survival must acknowledge that war is ultimately bad for business in that it kills potential consumers. And producing bombs, tanks, and other mass murder weapons are not stacking shelves at the mall with goods to be consumed by America's shopping legions. Further, given that the crazed credit delirium propping up this economy for the past generation is at an end, a fundamentalist market minister would have to admit that the death business is draining resources from the sacred global mall where we are supposed to shop until we drop or file for bankruptcy.

While we rob our society of its human and productive wealth with this incredible spending binge for endless war, we also subsidize financial cathedrals and their banking clergy with hundreds of billions for corporate capital's further welfare. Both Bush and Obama say these prophets of profit are too big to fail so millions of citizens are paying for their private survival by taking on a public debt that threatens our future as a functioning society. This makes great sense to the wealthy who dwell at the penthouse levels of America's class structure. They have little concern for those living on the floors beneath them except that the underclass majority shores up the crumbling foundation of that wobbling structure. How does that minority compare to the rest of us in financial status?

As recently as 2006 the top 1% of Americans averaged incomes of more than 400,000 dollars a year. Even if the lower 99% were all watching news analysis on Fox TV and Masterpiece wrestling on PBS they would know they weren't included in that group. But wait. Even if they were, the top .1 of a percent - that's 1/10th of one percent - had more than one and a half million dollars in reported income. If the 99.9% were all stoned, drunk or otherwise sedated while watching TV, they might still know they were a majority that was reduced to a minority in this political economy. In fact that's why so many of them are angry, frustrated and in various ways saying we've had enough and we can't take it anymore. Unfortunately, because they watch too much fictional reality Fox and minority reality PBS, they tend to lash out at one another, foreigners, demon scapegoats and invisible phantoms that are a product of what passes for reality in our corporate dominated mass media culture.

When we lay out hundreds of billions of tax dollars as interest payments on the national debt and realize that this is money we created, loaned to the top of society and on which they are collecting interest from us since they "own" most of that debt, we should be angry. But our anger needs to be informed and focused on the source of the problem and not ignorantly attacking its results.

We are creating new enemies as we mobilize to fight old ones and that mobilization would make an old anti-communist cold warrior of Eisenhower's day drool. The profits pouring into the death machine increase as our society is impoverished, states and municipalities near bankruptcy and millions of our citizens are facing unemployment, un-payable debt and futures that are only seen optimistically by therapists, drug dealers and liquor stores that still take plastic.

We are faced with issues that cannot be dealt with by the political economic system that created them. Flip flopping from corporate republicans to corporate democrats and back again is part of that problem. The demonstrators at the UN conference in Copenhagen were speaking for all of humanity when they chanted that the focus should be "system change, not climate change". The social and environmental crisis faced by all the world's people is not to be blamed on an abstraction called "humanity". But a system by which humanity is dominated by minorities and organized to produce and distribute the means of sustenance and survival for the benefit of a relative few at an ever more deadly cost to everyone else is the problem. That system is capitalism and unless we deal with it, our military, financial and environmental problems will get worse. In order to transform reality for the benefit of all and not just some, we need democracy. Anyone who thinks we already have it is probably part of the .1 percent, or seriously drugged. Or both.

Article Source : http://world.mediamonitors.net/content/view/full/70814

Feed War, Starve Democracy

2010-01-29T10:45:00.001-08:00

India's Vision 2020 and the reality

2010-01-29T10:41:00.001-08:00

by Sultan Ahmed

The government of India has come up with a Vision of what India is likely to look like or confront by the year 2020, particularly in its relations with major neighbors, its military prowess and relative economic strength.

The India Vision: 2020, officially released recently, says the economic and military strength of China may in 17 years from now pose a serious challenge to India's security unless measures are taken to fortify India's strength in these areas. The paper also says the Kashmir dispute may still remain unsettled.

The Vision prepared by the Chief of the Indian Planning Commission K.C. Pant, who is close to the Indian Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee says not only the Kashmir disputes is likely to remain unsettled but also "the territorial disputes with neighbors that have defied solution for 50 years may not lend themselves to easy solutions." And that clearly includes India's territorial dispute with China which covers 40,000 square kilometers.

While the paper expects the Kashmir dispute to remain unsettled by 2020 it does not indicate any new line of action for a way out. Instead it says the conflict between India and Pakistan is unlikely to be resolved "without a major social-political change in Pakistan." To that extent the paper reflects the closed mindset of India which dismisses the wishes and aspirations of the people of Kashmir or their right of self-determination.

What the paper, in effect, means is India's tense or strained relations with its neighbors, big and small, would continue and India will have to learn to live with them. Which can be pretty costly and too distracting for the Indian leaders. At the same time the paper warned "religious extremism and radical politics" may continue to adversely impact on our core values. A reflection of that was visible in the state of Gujarat where about 2,000 Muslims were killed last year, and after that the ruling BJP had an overwhelming electoral victory in the state elections with the rampaging chief minister Patel ruling the roost ecstatically.

The dichotomy in the Indian approach to its neighbors is obvious, and it is a part of its game of strident power politics. Normally if India has fear of China's expanding strength all round it should come closer to Pakistan. It does not want to do that as it is in occupation of the valley of Kashmir and Jammu, and it does not want to surrender those territories to the people of Kashmir. But in the case of China, Beijing is charged by India with being in occupation of 40,000 square km of its territory, and that cannot be liberated militarily, as its failure in 1962 demonstrated. So it wants to be pragmatic in its approach to China and develop economic and cultural relations with it while seeking a settlement of the territorial dispute discreetly or patiently.

And India has also joined hands with the US which fears of the future role of China as its economy becomes the second largest in the world - with the US economy remaining the largest. India is also increasing its military cooperation with the US in addition to expanding its economic collaboration.

By increasing its cooperation with the US in various spheres it also hopes to make Washington less interested in Pakistan eventually and thereby weakening Pakistan's bargaining position. India has been looking for opportunities to weaken the close ties between the US and Pakistan, and it now feels it is gaining more ground now as the US quietly plans to isolate China to the extent possible over the time.

India has not been able to make great economic progress through socialist means earlier under Jawaharlal Nehru and its march forward economically has not been outstanding through the new market economy mode either. It has still 40 per cent of its people living below the poverty line of a dollar a day, if not more. And the poverty profile of India is not improving substantially following its half-hearted attempts, or because of its wrong priorities.

The poor masses are becoming more and more restive, particularly the lower caste orders.

India is trying to make up for its varied weakness by enhancing its military strength, as well by enlarging its range of nuclear armaments. It is obtaining a nuclear powered submarine from Russia as well as the latest bombers at a cost of three billion dollars. It is also signing a two billion deal with France to acquire Mirage fighter planes as well as submarines. And its billion dollars deal to acquire trainer planes has been under negotiations for long. And it has now been offered F-16 aircraft by Lockheed of the US. And it has a deal with Israel for a billion dollars worth of arms.

And its missile technology has been making steady headway with the varied ranges of its Prithvi and Agni missiles. And it is now said to be developing a nuclear-capable Agni-III missile.

Most of these fighter aircraft and submarines will be assembled in India to provide it with the capacity to develop such equipment by itself. Its armament-building capacity, is to be expanded steadily.

India is also becoming more and more of an arms exporter. It wants to follow Israel in this regard which will also enhance its diplomatic strength with the developing countries.

In such an environment it is not interested in talking to Pakistan to settle their disputes, particularly in respect of Kashmir. The fact is not that it is opposed to talking to Pakistan but it does not want to discuss Kashmir with Pakistan, while Pakistan insists that it is the core dispute between the two countries. So on one pretext or another, it wants to put off talking to Pakistan until Pakistan gives up talking of Kashmir in frustration. Hence, it has consistently opposed mediation in the Kashmir dispute by any other country, including the US and Russia.

The 12th SAARC summit scheduled for January last has been put off. And when the 11th SAARC summit took place in Katmandu last year Mr. Vajpayee refused to have a one-to-one meeting with President Pervez Musharraf. And so there is small hope of such a summit at Kuala Lumpur when the Non-Aligned Summit takes place there in May.

Despite the territorial dispute between China and India, New Delhi has been talking to China but the Indian leader refuses to talk to Pakistan arguing they cannot be talking as long as the cross-border infiltration in Kashmir takes place and Pakistan does not take adequate steps to check that. The US and the Western countries admit that the cross-border infiltration has come down to a considerable extent. But India insists on total stoppage which Pakistan may not be able to achieve in view of the difficult mountainous terrain. Pakistan has instead called for more UN observers along the Line of Control, but that is not acceptable to India which by now does not accept a UN role in Kashmir.

India's approach to the whole issue by now is more militaristic than diplomatic or political. India was on the point of going to war with Pakistan on two occasions last year, says the former army chief of staff Gen. Padmanabhan.

And recently the Indian Defence Minister George Fernandes threatened to completely wipe out Pakistan if it ever launched a nuclear attack against India. "We will suffer a little but there will be no Pakistan when we respond," he said. Such extreme language is a mark of the blood thirst of the Indian Defence Minister. What he does not realize is that in his attempt to wipe out Pakistan he would also be wiping out the peoples of Afghanistan, and parts of Iran and Central Asia, if not parts of India too if the fumes go there.

A report from New Delhi said that India intended to spend 95 billion dollars more on the most sophisticated arms in the next 15 years. It would do that following the 28.5 per cent increase in defence outlay it made in 2001.

India argues it could spend far more on defence as its defence spending is only around 3 per cent of its GDP, and it is now trying to be an arms exporter; but the real Indian strategy appears to be to force Pakistan spend more and more of its scarce financial resources on arms, and starve other sectors of the economy in the process. What the US did to the Soviet Union, which was over-armed but under-developed in other ways, India wants to do to Pakistan. Pakistan has to be wary of such a game. It has instead to develop as a wholesome country. And it has to rely more and more on the people of Kashmir to liberate themselves through their valiant freedom struggle. A people who have not given up their struggle for the last 13 years despite the loss of 80,000 lives and enormous loss of homes and hearth will not give that up now, and we have to have faith in them and support them politically and diplomatically.

India will never give up Kashmir, and Pakistan should give up its "futile policy" in respect of the disputed region, says the Indian Prime Minister. He says that India had accepted a long time ago the creation of Pakistan, but Pakistan had not accepted a united and secular India, he says.

He simultaneously called for improved economic and cultural ties to bring about an amicable settlement of the Kashmir dispute.

In such talk of the Indian leaders no thought is given to the aspirations of the people of Kashmir who have suffered for the last 50 years. If Pakistan forgets Kashmir, as the Indian premier counsels, that does not mean the people of Kashmir will forget their homeland and their rights within and let Delhi to rule them directly or through its proxies.

The Vision paper is not doing justice to the sub-continent with its 1.3 billion people when it says that India's 50-year-old disputes with its neighbours are not likely to be settled easily by 2020. Instead it should have suggested the means by which there could be more peaceful and less poor sub-continent. With greater economic cooperation between the states.

If India does not make earnest attempts in that direction more and more of the South Asian states with disputes with India would align themselves with China and seek its assistance, as Pakistan has been doing. And that may not be welcome at all to India.

The whole world wants India and Pakistan to settle their disputes peacefully. The US says the situation between India and Pakistan now is worse than the relations between the US and the Soviet Union in the days of the cold war. The minimum they want India and Pakistan to do is to talk to each other and try to solve their problem one after another or at least call for a freeze to their explosive disputes for a short while and then try to solve them. Several solutions are possible along with several approaches to them. But the first step is that leaders of the two countries meet. It is futile for India to argue the Kargil skirmish had made all talk between the two countries fruitless or dashed all hopes of success of such talks. Neighbouring countries cannot afford such a stance as they cannot cease to be neighbours ever.

P.S. Following President Musharraf's visit to Moscow the Russian President Vladimir Putin has called for talks between India and Pakistan to resolve their disputes, including Kashmir. Moscow realizes the importance of talks as the beginning of any kind of settlement between the two neighbors; but India refuses or wants talks excluding Kashmir which Pakistan rejects as that cannot break the ice between the two countries, when Pakistan holds Kashmir as the core dispute between them. Hence the stalemate continues.

Article Source : http://www.mediamonitors.net/sultanahmed3.html

Most of arms licences go to ministers, MPs

2010-01-29T10:38:00.001-08:00

Wateen

ISLAMABAD: Interior Minister Rehman Malik has refused to disclose the identity of "four unknown persons" who were issued 713 licences of prohibited weapons by his ministry since 2008, while his deputy minister of Interior Tasneem Qureshi broke all previous records by issuing more than 250 such licences in his own name, enough to support a small private army of his own.

Guns on display

A list submitted in the National Assembly showed a total of 29,000 licences of both prohibited and non-prohibited weapons were issued by the interior ministry since 2008 when the PPP had come into power. Information Minister Qamar Zaman Kaira got about 135 arms licences.

Tasneem Qureshi had earlier come under fire in the recent meeting of the Senate body on interior after his involvement in the dubious issuance of licences was questioned by the participant of the meeting.

But, interestingly the government refused to give names of four persons who were issued over 700 licences of prohibited weapons. Under the rules, the government is bound to give details of names of each individual issued a prohibited bore licence but still the government kept mum over the identity of these four individuals. None of the parliamentarians also insisted upon knowing the identities of these individuals.

Following is the list of some of the powerful ministers and the MNAs who got licences of prohibited arms. The names of the minister and MPs will appear at different spaces in the following lines with different numbers of arms licences issued as they were taking licences from time to time.

MNA Saimina Khalid, 9; Rubina Sadaat Qaimkhani, 5; Naseer Bhutta, 20; Afzal Khokhar, 20; Minister of State for Interior Tasneem Qureshi, 70; Riaz Pirzada, 8; Imtiaz Safdar Warraich, 10; Roshan Din Juneo, 28; Bilal Yaseen, 18; Humaira Rokhri, 24; Nawab Ali Wasan, 18; Mir Ali Magsi, 18; Abdul Qadir Khanzada, 23; Water and Power Minister Raja Pervaiz Ashraf, 26; Tourism Minister Attaur Rehman, 12; Anjum Aqeel Khan, 18; Petroleum Minister Naveed Qamar, 15; Senator Maulana Rahat Hussain, 68; Minister for Local Bodies Razzak Thaheem, 36; Environment Minister Hameedullah Afridi, 27; NWFP Chief Minister Amir Haider Hoti, 21; Ramesh Lal, 14; Defence Production Minister Abdul Qayyum Jatoi, 11; Noor Alam Khan, 8; Jam Yousuf, 11; Hina Rabbani Khar, 12; Parliamentary Secretary for Interior Ghulam Mujtaba kharal, 14; Minister of State for Interior Tasneem Qureshi, 42; Imran Hamid Shah, 39; Mian Javed Latif, 18; Senator Nasir Mengal, 33; Minister for Livestock Humayun Kurd, 25; MPA Nadir Magsi, 22; Amir Muqam, 21; Dost Muhammad Mazari, 36; Usman Khan Tarakai, 24; Nazar Gondal, 20; MPA Muhammad Amin Umrani, 50; Minister for Tourism Attaur Rehman, 37; Munir Orakzai, 24; Rana Tanveer Hussain, 59; Water and Power Minister Raja Pervaiz Ashraf, 15; Raza Rabbani, 2; Minister for Overseas Pakistanis Farooq Sattar, 32; Maulana Fazlur Rehman, 10; Rukhsana Bangash, 17; Munir Orakzai, 16; Senator Lashkari Raisani, 24; Hameedullah Afridi, 38; Petroleum Minister Naveed Qamar, 15; Asfandyar Wali, 15; Minister for Local Bodies Razak Thaheem, 45; Malik Azmat, 68; NWFP CM Amir Haider Hoti, 27; Ramesh Lal, 25; Minister Imtiaz Safdar Warraich, 27; Minister of State for Interior Tasneem Qureshi, 42; Sheikh Waqas Akram, 26; Munir Orakzai, 30; Defence Minister Ch Ahmed Mukhtar, 25; Information Minister Qamar Zaman Kaira, 23; NA Standing Committee for Interior Chairman Abdul Qadir Patel, 25; Qamar Zaman Kaira, 40; Minister for Railways Ghulam Ahmed Bilour, 32; Raja Pervaiz Ashraf, 15; Senator Saeed Hashmi, 37; Housing Minister Rehmatullah Kakar, 11; Senator Rahat Hussain, 85; Senator Abdul Ghafoor Haideri, 44; Railways Minister Ghulam Ahmed Bilour, 46; Senator Faisal Raza Abidi, 30; Defence Minister Ahmed Mukhtar 26; Minister of State for Interior Tasneem Qureshi, 46; Minister for Labour Khurshid Shah, 15; Munir Orakzai, 26; Mahreen Bhutto, 24; Qamar Zaman Kaira, 23; Maulana Attaur Rehman, 56; Communication Minister Arbab Alamgir Khan, 40; Amir Muqam, 38; MNA Ayaz Amir, 29; Qamar Zaman Kaira, 48; Minister for Livestock Humayun Kurd, 26; Minister for Investment Waqar Ahmed Khan, 20; Health Minister Makhdoom Shahabuddin, 20; Tasneem Qureshi, 25; Labour Minister Khurshid Shah, 14; Ghulam Ahmed Bilour, 26; Jaffar Zaidi of Inter Risk (Pvt), 88; Maulana Fazlur Rehman, 20; Tasneem Qureshi, 39; Tasneem Qureshi, 33; Ghulam Ahmed Bilour, 39; Aftab Sherpao, 12; Makhdoom Amin Fahim, 16; Balochistan Governor Nawab Magsi, 33; MNA Faryal Talpur, 9; ex-Interior Secretary Syed Kamal Shah, 4; Wapda Chairman Shakeel Durrani, 100; the PPP president, 30; Ch Wajahat Hussain, 20; Raja Pervaiz Ashraf, 28 and others.

Article Source : http://news.wateen.com/modules/news/article.php?storyid=6277

India’s Controversial New War Doctrine

2010-01-29T10:14:00.000-08:00

Indian Army Chief General Deepak Kapoor has attracted much attention with his suggestion at a training command seminar that India is preparing for a 'two-front' war with Pakistan and China, Harsh V Pant comments for ISN Security Watch.

By Harsh V Pant for ISN Security Watch

Made in India sewer cover

General Kapoor underlined that this was being done as part of the larger process whereby the Indian army was revising its old war-fighting doctrine and bringing it in sync with the emerging strategic scenario so as to be able to successfully firm up its 'Cold Start' strategy.

After strengthening its offensive capabilities vis-à-vis Pakistan by creating a new southwestern army command in 2005, India is now concentrating on countering China effectively in the eastern sector. The Indian army chief said that there was now "a proportionate focus towards the western and northeastern fronts."

Pakistan reacted predictably by describing India's move as reflecting a "hegemonistic and jingoistic mindset" as well as accusing India of "betraying hostile intent," and urged the international community to take due notice of developments in India. Pakistani officials emphasized that their nation's "capability and determination to foil any nefarious designs against the security of Pakistan" should not be underestimated. Pakistan's reaction was expected, as the security establishment views this as an opportunity to once again press upon the Americans the need to keep Pakistani forces intact on the India-Pakistan border rather than fighting the Taliban forces on the border with Afghanistan.

China's response, on the other hand, was more measured, and it chose not to address the issue directly. The controversy arose at a time when the two states were beginning a new phase in their defense ties by initiating a dialogue at the level of defense secretaries. But Chinese analysts have expressed concerns in recent years about India's growing military ambitions and a purported shift in Indian defense strategy from a passive to an "active and aggressive" nature.

It was the Kargil conflict of 1999 that exposed Indian vulnerabilities as Pakistan realized that India did not have the capability to impose quick and effective retribution. The then-Indian army chief had famously commented that the forces would fight with whatever they had, underlining the frustration in the armed forces regarding their inability to procure the arms they needed. Only because the conflict remained largely confined to the 150-kilometer front of the Kargil sector did India manage to gain an upper hand by throwing the Pakistanis out of its side of the Line of Control (LoC). Then came the standoff between the Indian and Pakistani armies across the LoC after the Indian Parliament was attacked in 2001, and again India lacked the ability to impose any significant cost on Pakistan quickly and decisively because of the unavailability of suitable weaponry and night vision equipment needed to carry out swift surgical strikes.

The nuclear aspect is important because it is part of the reason that elements within the Pakistani security establishment have become more adventurous. Realizing that India would be reluctant to escalate the conflict because of the threat of it reaching the nuclear level, sections of the Pakistani military and intelligence have pushed the envelope on the sub-conventional front.

For India, this presents a structural conundrum: Nuclear weapons have made a major conventional conflict with Pakistan unrealistic, yet it needs to find a way to launch limited military action against Pakistan without crossing the nuclear threshold. Nuclear weapons have allowed Pakistan to shield itself from full-scale Indian retaliation as well as to attract international attention on the disputes in the sub-continent.

After Operation Parakram of 2001-02, the Indian army did try to evolve a new doctrine. This 'Cold Start' doctrine is basically an attempt to acquire the ability to fight limited wars under the nuclear umbrella. To resolve the dilemma confronting India post-1998, Indian strategists have focused on a military doctrine that might give them the ability to launch quick, decisive limited strikes against Pakistan to seize some territory before the international community could intervene, which can then be used as a post-conflict bargaining chip.

This doctrine is still evolving and its is not clear how effective it would be in making sure that the conflict remains limited as Pakistan might be forced to bring down its nuclear threshold to respond to this challenge. Moreover, the Indian army has found little support for this doctrine from the other two services, and the civilian government has shown no interest in this venture.

As a consequence, the 'Cold Start' doctrine has continued to be in the limelight as India's national security establishment has searched for policy options vis-à-vis Pakistan. Yet this doctrine remains a work in progress. Execution of this doctrine would need the right kind of equipment, something India will have to acquire on a priority basis.

The army will need to upgrade its capabilities significantly if it is to implement this approach. And to do this it will have to surmount a number of entrenched problems in the defense procurement system.

The 1999 and 2001 crises forced the government to react by boosting defense expenditures, but political compulsions re-asserted themselves soon after. When the Congress-led United Progressive Alliance government came to power in 2004, it ordered investigations into several of the arms acquisition deals of the previous government. A series of defense procurement scandals since the late 1980s have made the bureaucracy risk-averse, thereby delaying the acquisition process. The labyrinthine bureaucratic processes involved in military procurement have left the defense forces unable to spend a large proportion of their budgets.

While Pakistan has rapidly acquired US technology over the last several years through involvement in the war on terror and China's military modernization has gathered momentum, the modernization of the Indian army has slipped behind by as much as a decade.

The Indian army chief stated the obvious recently when he talked of India preparing for a "two-front" war. It is the job of the Indian armed forces to prepare for such wars given the security threats that India faces from its neighbors, just as the Pakistani and Chinese military take into account the possibility of a future conflict with India. But it must be kept in perspective that unlike in Pakistan and China, strategic policymaking in India is the sole preserve of the political leadership and Indian policymakers are yet to sign on to this much talked about new doctrine.

Harsh Pant is a lecturer at King's College London. His research interests include WMD proliferation, US foreign policy and Asia-Pacific security issues. He is also presently a Visiting Fellow at CASI, University of Pennsylvania.

Article Source : http://www.isn.ethz.ch/isn/Current-Affairs/Security-Watch/Detail/?lng=en&id=111662

Indian water theft

2010-01-29T10:11:00.001-08:00

The Nation

A recent report, which warns that water theft by India on the river Chenab on a wide scale, involving diversion of thousands of cusecs of water could result in crop failure on 10 million acres of land on Pakistani soil, is alarming. This particular form of water theft is being carried out with the help of powerful pumps installed across the border along the rivers and their tributaries flowing into Pakistan. Basically, it speaks volumes about the cunning ways, which our archenemy can invariably conjure up when it comes to doing us harm. Reportedly, these pumps have cut off 48 thousand cusecs of water flowing into Pakistan and crops, including wheat and sugarcane, are at serious risk of getting spoiled. It goes without saying that if these Indian machinations succeed; we are in for a big trouble. The pity is that the government with its Indus Water Commission appears to be in a state of denial, not taking up the matter with the Indians in the manner it ought to be.

This is hardly the time for dithering. The possibility of destruction of crops on account of water theft on river Chenab means that a food crisis of elephantine proportions is heading our way. The country is still bearing the scars of last year's wheat crisis. Another one should be avoided at all costs as its effects would cripple the economy. What is worse, it is not just Chenab but all the rivers where India has reduced the water flowing into Pakistani territory by diverting and storing them in various dams built in contravention of the Indus Waters Treaty. Currently, it is building 50 more dams in the occupied valley so as to completely turn us into an agricultural wasteland. Already a number of important canals and tributaries acting as a lifeline to the country's agriculture have dried up because of these frequent water thefts. Farmers in the countryside are in a virtual catch-22 situation, unable to water their crops.

It is not just New Delhi whose nefarious designs would have to be foiled but our so-called ally the USA. With the latest US endorsement of its aggressive policies by Defence Secretary Robert Gates, who declared that New Delhi wont stop from attacking Pakistan in case of a Mumbai-like attack in the future, our foe has been further emboldened to weaken us. Given all this trouble brewing up and the conspiracies being hatched, Islamabad must wake up from its slumber. The water crisis is no laughing matter. For the moment, Pakistan must answer New Delhi's dilatory tactics by seeking the arbitration of the World Bank.

Article Source : http://www.nation.com.pk/pakistan-news-newspaper-daily-english-online/Opinions/Editorials/26-Jan-2010/Indian-water-theft/

NATO head says Taliban will not win

2010-01-29T04:24:00.001-08:00

Asia Times Online

In an interview with RFE/RL, North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) secretary general Anders Fogh Rasmussen said that he expected concrete results from this week's London conference on Afghanistan.

Speaking to RFE/RL correspondent Abubakar Siddique, Rasmussen also said that the NATO mission in Afghanistan was not an "occupation force". "We will stay as long as it takes to finish our job, but our ultimate goal is to hand over responsibility to the Afghan people," he said.

RFE/RL: The Afghan government is expected to present a detailed plan for reconciliation with the Taliban in London. Previous plans have failed to win international backing due to a lack of resources and political backing. Is there any reason to believe the situation is any different today?

Anders Fogh Rasmussen: Yes, I think the situation will be very different, firstly, because there is now political support, and secondly, because I would expect the international community to provide funds for a reconciliation-and-reintegration effort. Having said that, I also need to stress that this reconciliation-and-reintegration process must be led by the Afghan government and I take it for granted that the groups involved in that will accept and abide by the Afghan constitution and democracy.

RFE/RL: Is anyone in the Western coalition really talking to authoritative figures among the Taliban in Afghanistan in the run-up to the London conference? What have they indicated?

AFR: No, as I said before, it is crucial that a reconciliation-and-reintegration process is led by the Afghan government. We will and we can, of course, assist if the Afghan government so wishes. But I think it is crucial that there is an Afghan ownership to this process.

RFE/RL: Why would the Taliban buy into reconciliation while they claim to be winning the war?

AFR: Well, they will not win. We will prevail. They will not regain power in Afghanistan, first of all, because the Afghan people want freedom and democracy, they don't want the Taliban back, and secondly, because we have made very important decisions on the way ahead. We have increased the number of troops significantly. We will develop the capacity of the Afghan security forces. We will train Afghan soldiers and Afghan police and, gradually, Afghan soldiers and Afghan police will take over the responsibility for the security. And finally, the international community will provide more funds for development in Afghanistan and, in that respect, the Afghan government has also committed itself to a strengthened fight against corruption and the drug trade and, in general, committed itself to deliver better governance. So, for all these reasons, we will see new momentum and new progress in Afghanistan in 2010.

RFE/RL: Related to this topic, in an interview, General Stanley McChrystal [US military chief in Afghanistan] said that he believed any Afghan could potentially play a role in the future government of their country, if they focused on the future. Do you share his opinion? If leading Taliban are going to be brought into the government, is the definition of victory shifting in Afghanistan? How would you define victory in that country?

AFR: Well, I will speak about success, and success will be to hand over responsibility for security to the Afghan people, to the Afghan security forces. The ultimate goal should be that the Afghan people become masters in their own house and take responsibility for running and securing [their] own country.

We are there right now to protect the Afghan people. We are there to assist [them] in developing a stable society and a stable democracy. And I can assure you that we will stay committed as long as it takes to finish our job. NATO and ISAF [International Security Assistance Force] is not an occupation force. We will stay as long as it takes to finish our job, but our ultimate goal is to hand over responsibility to the Afghan people.

RFE/RL: Mr secretary general, shifting gears to another issue, media reports suggest that NATO is planning to create a top civilian post in Afghanistan. Why do you think it is needed and how will it affect the pace of reconstruction in the country given that NATO has had a senior civil representative in Kabul for years?

AFR: And that is exactly the point. We have already a civilian representative in Kabul. However, we do believe that there is a strong need for better organization and better coordination of the civilian assistance to Afghanistan. We would also like to improve our capability to cooperate with the Afghan government and with other international actors in Kabul. There is also a strong need for better coordination among the so-called provincial reconstruction teams that work locally in Afghanistan. And to that end, we need an enhanced office of our civilian representative. So we will ensure an enhanced office, and I will also, in the near future, appoint a new civilian NATO representative in Kabul.

RFE/RL: On the issue of training Afghan forces, while Western allies are pushing Afghan security forces to rapidly expand in number in order to take over security responsibilities, many Afghans do not feel enough is being done to equip the country with modern weaponry. Assuming NATO troops will, sooner or later, be leaving Afghanistan, what kind of military infrastructure do you envision leaving behind? Will NATO continue to provide air support for the foreseeable future?

AFR: All this will very much depend on the development in Afghanistan. As I said, our goal is to hand over the lead responsibility for security to the Afghan security forces, and therefore we will now train and educate Afghan soldiers and Afghan police. And we appreciate very much that the Afghan government has decided to increase the number of security forces to a level of around 300,000 by 2011. And of course we will ensure that the Afghan security forces are appropriately equipped. How this will take place in details will of course very much depend on the security challenges in the coming years."

RFE/RL: Continuing with the security theme, considering the presence of some questionable characters, including warlords and other powerbrokers, within the government, what challenges does arming Afghans and providing them with military training present?

AFR: Well, we know from experience that the Afghan security forces actually do a great job. The fact is that the Afghan security forces are in the lead of two-thirds of the planned military operations in Afghanistan and this fact testifies to the capacity and determination of the Afghan security forces. Afghan soldiers are good fighters and I don't think there's any reason to believe that they will not support the Afghan government and the Afghan democracy, because at the end of the day, it is also a support of the Afghan people.

RFE/RL: Moving on to a larger strategic question, everybody involved in the Afghan struggle has used President Barack Obama's troop-withdrawal deadline to advance their interests. The Afghan Taliban are clearly holding out. Sensing a loss of foreign forces, the Afghan government is trying to hold onto its power and gains while the Pakistani military is using it as a reason for not going after Afghan Taliban sanctuaries. Given that all this is not conducive to a peaceful resolution in Afghanistan, should Obama rethink his talk about deadlines?

AFR: But, actually, President Obama has not spoken about an exit from Afghanistan. What he has announced is an evaluation of our mission by 2011, which I think is reasonable. I mean, we have just decided to increase the number of troops significantly, and we do hope to see substantial progress in the coming 12 to 18 months. So in my opinion, it makes sense to take stock of the situation by mid-2011.

But President Obama has not spoken about a withdrawal from Afghanistan. As I said before, we will stay as long as it takes to secure the country. I can assure you that the international coalition will not leave Afghanistan until the country is able to stand on its own feet. [They] will not be left behind. So 2011 will be an important year to take stock of the situation, but it will be a condition-based approach. Hopefully the situation will allow us gradually transfer security responsibility to the Afghan security forces. But it will be based on the condition that Afghan soldiers and Afghan police are really capable to take care of their security."

RFE/RL: One brief question at the end, Mr secretary general. What concrete commitments and specific goals are you looking to walk away from London with?

AFR: Well, I would like and I also expect two concrete results from the London conference. Firstly, that we agree on the overall framework for a transition to lead Afghan responsibility for the security. We have to make sure that the transition for responsibility to the Afghan security forces takes place in a coordinated manner. And I think we will take a decision on it at the London conference.

And secondly I would expect that the international community as well as the Afghan government commit themselves to a reinforced civilian reconstruction and development in Afghanistan. So I think, the London conference will further contribute to the new momentum and progress we will see in Afghanistan in 2010.

Copyright (c) 2010, RFE/RL Inc. Reprinted with the permission of Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, 1201 Connecticut Ave NW, Washington DC 20036

Article Source : http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/LA27Df01.html

Al-Qaeda's shadow over Taliban talks

2010-01-29T03:11:00.001-08:00

By Syed Saleem Shahzad

ISLAMABAD - With an international conference starting in London on Thursday expected to lay down a framework for the Afghan government to begin taking charge of its own security, in line with a timetable set by United States President Barack Obama to start drawing down US troops in 2011, efforts for reconciliation with the Taliban are also being stepped up.

However, sources directly involved in backchannel negotiations with the Taliban tell Asia Times Online they are skeptical of the Taliban being reconciled as the militants scent victory in Afghanistan and hence are not prepared to show any flexibility in their demands, the key one of which is that all foreign troops leave Afghanistan.

At the conference in London, Afghan President Hamid Karzai will unveil a British- and United States-backed plan for "reintegration" of segments of the Taliban. He is also expected to seek international funding to offer jobs and inducements to bring insurgents into the mainstream political process - the amount of US$1 billion has been mentioned. To this end, parliamentary elections in Afghanistan have been postponed from May to September, although ostensibly because the Independent Election Commission said it needed more funds.

Karzai is also pushing for Taliban names to be removed from a United Nations blacklist that imposes travel restrictions and asset freezes. "[They should be] welcome to come back to their country, lay down arms and resume life as citizens of Afghanistan, enjoying the privileges and the rights and the guarantees given by the Afghan constitution," Karzai said.

He is also reported as saying that his Western allies fully back his plans for reconciliation with the Taliban - provided they are not "key members" of the movement, that they are not allied with al-Qaeda and that they renounce violence.

"The red line is links to al-Qaeda," British Foreign Secretary David Miliband was quoted in the media this week as saying.

Herein lies the rub.

A December briefing prepared by the top US intelligence official in Afghanistan, Major General Michael Flynn, concludes that "the Taliban insurgency in Afghanistan is increasingly effective". With regard to al-Qaeda, the 23-page briefing quotes Taliban detainees as saying that the Taliban see al-Qaeda as a "handicap"; however, it adds that al-Qaeda "provides facilitation, training and some funding" to the Taliban and predicts that "perceived insurgent success will draw foreign fighters" into Afghanistan.

A former Arab mujahid who fought in Afghanistan and who claims to have been in direct communication with senior al-Qaeda leaders, including Osama bin Laden, has told Asia Times Online that the relationship between al-Qaeda and the Taliban is much deeper.

He said that following the leaking last year of a report by the US's top commander in Afghanistan, General Stanley McChrystal, that tens of thousands more US troops would be sent into Afghanistan, bin Laden met with Taliban leader Mullah Omar in the Afghan province of Helmand in October - apparently their first meeting in a long time.

According to the Arab fighter, the meeting marked a watershed in relations between the Taliban and al-Qaeda as the leaders agreed on closer relations and better coordination in the war against the Western coalition in Afghanistan. Further, they agreed that any invitation for dialogue was a ploy to lure the Taliban into a trap.

While there was apparently some disagreement on the issue of carrying out attacks in Pakistan, the leaders agreed on a joint macro strategy until the "complete defeat" of the foreign forces in Afghanistan. Mullah Omar, the fighter claims, was particularly impressed that bin Laden made the risky journey over the Hindu Kush mountains into southwestern Afghanistan.

Preparing to talk

The Pakistan military is at the forefront of efforts to set up talks with the Taliban, and Peshawar, capital of North-West Frontier Province, Quetta, capital of Balochistan province, and the national capital, Islamabad, have been scheduled as venues.

A next level of dialogue could then take place in the United Arab Emirates, where a former UAE ambassador is attempting to get Taliban representatives to meet with US, British and Saudi Arabian officials.

The Muslim Brotherhood is also expected to be involved in getting people to the dialogue table, as are various individuals. These include Arabs who fought in Afghanistan against the Soviets in the 1980s. One of them is Iraqi Mehmood al-Samarrai, alias Abul Judh, who was previously wanted by the US Federal Bureau of Investigation for supporting the insurgencies in Iraq and Afghanistan. He currently lives in Pakistan and is working to get some Taliban commanders to talk to Saudi officials.

However, a senior Arab diplomat who has been directly involved in some backchannel negotiations with the Taliban told Asia Times Online that one of the problems any talks faced was that neither side had changed its basic position: the Taliban want an unconditional withdrawal of all foreign troops, while Western leaders want the Taliban to immediately stop all hostilities.

The diplomat also said he believed the Barack Obama administration was desperate to slow down the advances of the Taliban, given that the US Democrats had recently suffered a crucial setback in a senate election. Ahead of mid-term elections in the US in November, the party could not afford any more major embarrassments in Afghanistan, such as the suicide attack on a US spy base last year and the recent attacks in the heart of Kabul, the capital.

The dialogue initiative, whether or not motivated in part by the US's desire to buy time, could, however, turn out to be another embarrassment.

If, as the Arab fighter claims, the links between the Taliban and al-Qaeda now run deeper than is generally reported, it would rule out any chance of senior Taliban commanders being reconciled: firstly, they would not want to switch, given their newfound loyalty to Mullah Omar and al-Qaeda. And secondly, if some did conceivably seek reconciliation, they would presumably be "barred" anyway for having links to al-Qaeda.

Lower-level Taliban could well be lured from the movement, but it is doubtful they would leave in sufficient numbers, and the leadership would still be intact to drive the resistance.

Previous reconciliation attempts have also done little to affect the Taliban's leadership.

Within the Taliban, the institution of the ameerul momineen (commander of the faithful) plays a vital role. Any defiance towards ameerul momineen (Mullah Omar) means to become an outcast from the Taliban's ranks and the person immediately loses his following.

An example is former Taliban commander Abdul Salam Rocketi, who was powerful in the southern province of Zabul. Several years ago, he switched sides and he is now a member of parliament. He was quickly replaced by little-known youths, to whom the rank-and file immediately gave their full support. The same would happen now should any commander defy Mullah Omar: he will have to leave his region and move to Kabul.

The dialogue initiative has been started, though, and efforts in this direction can be expected to intensify following this week's meeting in London.

For the Afghan war theater, the claimed new coordination agreement between al-Qaeda and Taliban will see the Taliban stick to their guns, literally.

In the broader context, al-Qaeda says in the coming months it will concentrate on Saudi Arabia to put Riyadh under immense pressure to pull back from its support of the US-led "war on terror".

In Pakistan, meanwhile, the Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (Pakistani Taliban), which has reorganized in Orakzai Agency after the military operations in the Waziristan tribal areas, will re-engage the army in an effort to force the political leadership not to become involved in the reconciliation efforts between Washington and the Afghan Taliban.

Syed Saleem Shahzad is Asia Times Online's Pakistan Bureau Chief. He can be reached at saleem_shahzad2002@yahoo.com

Article Source : http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/LA27Df02.html

India's cricket blunder

2010-01-29T02:58:00.001-08:00

Snubbing Pakistani cricketers to make a point in Islamabad is not a clever deployment of Indian soft power

Kapil Komireddi

Cricket used to be a charmingly lazy sport which gave its players the illusion of activity. But since the advent of the Indian Premier League, cricket has been transmogrified into a vulgar event in which the centerpiece itself is often pushed to the periphery. The IPL's fixtures are sustained by fireworks, film stars, and blonde cheerleaders imported from America; there is even a beauty pageant, "Miss IPL", whose winner is promised a role in a movie opposite one of the owners of the franchises. At best, the IPL is glamorous circus, a kitschified form of cricket, not serious sport.

Last week, the ringmasters of the circus put on a nauseating display of discrimination. At an auction to pick the players for the eight franchises that compete in the IPL, not a single Pakistani player was recruited. Pakistan reacted furiously. Mobs mobilised quickly to burn effigies of Lalit Modi, the head of the IPL; charges were levelled against the Indian government for conspiring to keep Pakistan out; and a parliamentary delegation due to visit India abruptly cancelled its trip.

If Pakistanis are calling the exclusion of their cricketers a conspiracy, it is because it looks very much like one. The IPL initially claimed that a potential problem with visas was the reason why franchise owners did not bid for Pakistani players: as a profit-making business venture, the IPL could not afford to take risks by paying for players whose participation could not be underwritten by the state authorities. If that is the case, why were Pakistani players included in the auction pool in the first place? Besides, losses from the possible denial of visas could easily have been restricted with a clause subjecting the contract's activation to a successful visa application. Instead, 11 Pakistani players were cleared for auction on 6 January - only to be utterly humiliated at the on 19 January. Unknown abecedarians were acquired for hundreds of thousands of dollars, while the reigning world champions of 20-20 cricket were uniformly snubbed. The Indian government's role in this affair is rather murky. First came the official denial: New Delhi had nothing to do with the IPL's decision. This was promptly followed up with a gratuitous piece of advice - telling Pakistan to "introspect on the reasons" for its players' rejection - which seemed to suggest that New Delhi had something to do with it.

To conservative commentators, this development represents a dual triumph: not only was Pakistan tamed - it was tamed by the private sector. Rising to the IPL's defence, the journalist Ashok Malik argued that, given the focus on individual stars, the franchises' reluctance to recruit Pakistani players was reasonable. "If one of these [promotional campaigns] focused on a Pakistani cricketer," he wrote, "and happened to coincide with, say, a terror incident linked to Islamist groups across the border, it may become inconvenient." Malik here is grafting his own bigotry on to his compatriots: surely, Indian audiences can make a distinction between an "Islamist" terrorist and a Pakistani cricketer? And if they cannot, then they deserve to be condemned, not pandered to.

The belief that this boycott is somehow a clever deployment of Indian soft power is similarly misplaced. Far from forcing the Pakistani state into rethinking its policy toward India, it will serve merely to demoralise Pakistan's beleaguered civil society - a constituency whose support and goodwill India desperately needs. Consider the humiliation from ordinary Pakistanis' point of view. There will be over 70 foreign cricketers participating in the IPL - including, oddly, 26 from Australia, where Indian students have been subjected to endless attacks - but not even one from their cricket-mad country. Some of the world's best cricketers are being subjected to a cricketing apartheid for the failures of their state. To its neighbours in South Asia, India, with its newfound prosperity, looks increasingly like an arrogant giant that is keen to starve its opponents to extinction. The IPL has contributed to that image.

Article Source : http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/jan/26/india-pakistan-cricket-auction

Muslim profiling is a recipe for insecurity

2010-01-29T02:57:00.001-08:00

The profiling of ordinary Muslims loses the support of the very people we need to contain al-Qaeda

Ed Husain

Here we go again. Another botched terrorist attack, and a much-needed excuse for some agenda-driven American ideologues to demand opening "new fronts" in the "war on terror", with "profiling" of Muslims at airports expected to be at the core of the airport security review announced yesterday by Gordon Brown. I am sorry, but that thinking is wrong, flawed, and will make matters worse.

Yemen is not a willing home to al-Qaeda - it is victim to an ideology exported from neighbouring Saudi Arabia. In our desire to blame and, eventually, bomb, let us not forget the other Yemen: one of the last bastions of traditional, serene Islam. Yemeni Sufis have been imparting their version of normative Islam for centuries through trade and travel. Hundreds of British Muslims have been studying in Yemen's pristine Islamic institutions. They have returned to Britain connected to an ancient chain of spiritual knowledge and now lead several Muslim communities with the Sufi spirit of love for humans, dedication to worship, and service to Islam.

For me, empowering and supporting this Yemeni Islam against the rigid, literalist, supremacist Wahhabite ideology of our Saudi allies in Riyadh is a sure recipe for eventual victory. But will we dare upset the House of Saud? It seems unlikely. President Obama literally bowed before the Saudi king in London last year.

We are now being told that al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) runs terrorist camps and this justifies "pre-emptive strikes" on Yemen. But what is AQAP except leading Saudi terrorists - Naser al-Wahishi and Said al-Shihri - who have now set up shop in Yemen, with a ragtag army of 200 men? Who is Osama Bin Laden except a Saudi who wanted political reforms in his own country, failed, and then turned his guns on the western backers of the Saudi regime?

Time and again, from September 11 to the attempted Detroit-bound airline attack last week, there are Saudi fingerprints - ideological and practical - on terrorist attacks and yet western powers stab in the dark in Iraq, Afghanistan, and now possibly Iran and Yemen with the unconvincing language of making us safer in our streets here.

In both Britain and America demands for profiling all Muslims at airports are increasing in volume. This mindset not only fails to understand that most Muslims around the world detest al-Qaeda, but this outlook also cannot comprehend how terrorists are always one step ahead of the game. If it is Muslim-sounding names that are to be stopped, would a name like Richard Reid - the infamous shoe bomber - have been detected? If it is Asian men that are to be stopped, then we will see an increase in white men recruited for terror?

After all, al-Qaeda's English spokesperson is Adam Gadahn, a white American. If it is men who are stopped, we will see women terrorists emerge. Let us not forget Palestinian groups' repeated use of single women as suicide bombers. Do not underestimate the power of terrorists to recruit serving airline pilots and other aviation personnel. Where there is a will, there will always be a way.

The profiling of ordinary Muslims not only opens other avenues for al-Qaeda, but results in the harassment and potential loss of support from the very people we need on our side to contain al-Qaeda: ordinary Muslims. Without mainstream Muslims on side, western powers cannot deal al-Qaeda and its associates the blow that it deserves. After all, it was the Muslim father of the Nigerian would-be plane bomber who alerted the US embassy in Lagos six weeks before last week's attempted attack. Muslim families are our first line of defence against terrorism. Can we afford to lose that unseen, unappreciated buffer against extremists?

In the end, this is a battle of ideas. No amount of drone attacks in Pakistan, troops in Afghanistan, occupation of Iraq and air raids in Yemen will stem terrorism. Violence breeds violence.

The strongest weapons available to our enemies are ideas of religious supremacy and perennial confrontation, backed with logistical networks, and repressive political conditions that help strengthen their narrative and network. Unless we in the west can combat their ideas with better ideas, puncture the alluring narrative of victimhood politics, question their self-assured martyrdom, and end perceptions of incessant enmity with non-Muslims then we will be confined to dealing with symptoms of terrorist attacks rather than healing the underlying causes. Nearly a decade after 9/11, when compared with military budgets, where is investment in these soft-power, counter radicalisation projects? The silence says it all.

Article Source : http://warincontext.org/2010/01/02/muslim-profiling-is-a-recipe-for-insecurity/

Afghan president Hamid Karzai urges West to buy off the Taliban

2010-01-29T02:56:00.001-08:00

Christina Lamb in Washington and Miles Amoore in Wardak

After giving up on winning victory in Afghanistan by military means, the international community is resorting to the centuries-old method of buying its way out.

In London this week, Hamid Karzai, the Afghan president, will launch a British and American-backed plan for "reintegration" of the Taliban and call for international funding to offer jobs and bribes to bring insurgents in from the cold.

The conference, which starts on Thursday, will be the first big international gathering on Afghanistan since President Barack Obama announced his military strategy last month, including a surge of 30,000 American troops.

The aim was to accompany the surge with a new political strategy and ways for the Afghans to provide their own security by setting up local militias, which could include former Taliban.

With intelligence reports warning that Taliban influence is spreading, both aims now appear in jeopardy.

Divisions between civilian and military officials have led to a reported suspension of the militia programme, while Karzai's newly appointed cabinet is regarded by many as even more corrupt than his last. Failure to offer effective government is seen as a critical factor in growing Taliban influence.

In Wardak, a province bordering Kabul, the risks of adopting American tactics are clear. Over the past two years, Karzai's government has gradually lost control of the province to the Taliban.

Most local religious leaders are now bankrolled by the insurgents but one, Mullah Azizul Rahman Sediqi, known as "Super Mullah", pledged his full support for a US-sponsored plan to arm militiamen so they could fight back.

He has since lived in constant fear of assassination. First the Taliban planted a bomb inside the mullah's mosque. He removed the crude device and took it to a nearby field to detonate. Days later the Taliban fired mortars at his home, blowing out the windows.

Some believe the creation of militia forces in areas where the Afghan police force, army and Nato troops are too thinly spread - or too unpopular to maintain control - could be a critical part of handing over control of security to Afghans.

The first government-sponsored local militia in Wardak was set up last March in Jalez district and has doubled in size in the past 10 months to a force of more than 350.

Its commander, Mohammed Ali, claims his men, a ragtag bunch of lightly armed villagers aged from 17 to 50, have recaptured most of the villages in the district, pushing the Taliban into the barren mountains that surround it.

But despite repeated assurances of improved security, it was not possible to travel to the district last week without an armed escort.

"The Taliban still use the mountains to fire grenades at our convoys," Ali explained with a toothless grin as he squatted in one of his mud-hut checkpoints on the road into Jalez. "They lay IEDs [improvised explosive devices] on the route into the district and ambush us."

Hopes that Karzai would boost the prospects for security by cleaning up his administration were set back by the announcement of his new cabinet. Ten of his 17 nominees were rejected by parliament this month.

"I don't think it's a weaker government but it's not as strong as it could have been," David Miliband, the foreign secretary, said in Washington last week. However, he insisted: "The alternatives to this very, very difficult project in which we're engaged are worse."

Many people were disappointed with a government they regarded as weaker, according to Barmak Pazhwak, Afghan officer for the US Institute of Peace. "It's more corrupt and more full of local power groups who Karzai did deals with to get elected," he said.

Miliband insists the international community can exert leverage by withholding funds from ministries that don't perform.

But the West's toothlessness was highlighted by Karzai's failure to take any action against his half-brother, Ahmed Wali, widely regarded as one of the biggest drug lords in southern Afghanistan.

In a gloomy prognosis for 2010, Major-General Michael Flynn, the most senior allied intelligence officer in Afghanistan, has warned that the Taliban have tightened their grip on the civilian population and believe they have only to keep on blowing up soldiers to achieve victory.

Last Monday, the Taliban showed their ability to penetrate the capital with a series of attacks that killed 20 and injured 70, leaving a shopping centre in flames.

Western officials tried to put a positive spin on the assault, pointing out that in contrast to the last big attack in October on a UN guest house, Afghan troops arrived on the scene promptly, taking on the insurgents and preventing wider bloodshed.

Given the spread of Taliban influence, however, it is unclear how much support there will be for Karzai's reintegration plan to persuade Taliban militants to switch sides.

Central to the plan will be a grand peace council. This will include representatives from all sectors of Afghan society, including religious leaders, with the aim of giving armed opponents a guarantee that their views will be heard.

"The government will provide the Taliban and other insurgent groups who wish to respect the constitution a dignified way to renounce violence and peacefully reintegrate into their communities," says a draft version of the plan.

The international community has insisted that key Taliban leaders such as Mullah Mohammed Omar would not be part of any such plan. "The red line is links to Al-Qaeda," Miliband said. But the document offers "key leaders of the Taliban movement" an opportunity for amnesty and reintegration.

Aside from differences between nations over who to negotiate with, there is scant evidence that the Taliban wish to come in from the cold.

US officials admit that it was a bad tactical error for President Obama to cite a target date of July 2011 to start withdrawing troops in his speech announcing the surge.

The date, which was inserted by the White House at the last minute to assuage disgruntled Democrats, has led the Taliban and their backers in Pakistan to believe they just have to wait.

"The Taliban are telling the local population the Americans will be gone in 18 months and we'll be in charge so you better not cross us or we'll kill you," said an adviser to General Stanley McChrystal, the US commander in Afghanistan.

McChrystal is circulating among his field commanders a paper written by a special forces major called "one tribe at a time", which backs partnerships with tribal militias.

But reports yesterday claimed that the US had suspended the militias, fearing they could lead to the creation of new warlords. According to The New York Times, Hanif Atmar, the Afghan interior minister, said that while some of the militias had been effective in combating the Taliban, others were out of control.

"In Kunduz, after they defeated the Taliban in their villages, they became the power and they took money and taxes from the people," he said.

Troops target opium town

American patrols were probing Taliban defences this weekend around a town of mud-walled compounds that may become the first big battlefield of the American "surge" in Afghanistan.

Their target is Marjah, a Taliban-controlled farming town in Helmand province that is expected to be the focus of an American-led offensive in coming weeks.

"It's been clear for weeks about the need to clear out Marjah, so that's going to happen," said Admiral Mike Mullen, chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, during a tour of the province.

The Americans plan to field three battalions against fighters in the town, 380 miles southwest of Kabul. They will be joined by units of the Afghan national army. Some of the 9,500 British troops in Helmand are expected to mount a parallel operation.

About 30,000 troops will pour into Afghanistan as President Barack Obama's "surge" intensifies.

Military sources believe the Taliban may fight to hold Marjah, because it lies at the heart of Helmand's opium production.

US marines are gathering intelligence in advance of any battle. On Friday, three squads of the marines' 1st battalion, 6th Regiment, were fired on from nearby houses as they moved into a desiccated poppy field.

Additional reporting: Michael Smith

Article Source : http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/afghanistan/article6999943.ece

India’s Dirty Secret Flushed Out

2010-01-29T02:55:00.001-08:00

India is committing a billion US dollars in Afghanistan. This Indian generosity is not seen anywhere else. Not even inside India itself, where the world's largest poverty and health problems exist. The US is now inviting India to send cheap soldiers to Afghanistan to rescue the Americans where NATO and the British won't help. The argument that US and Indian officials often make is about how humanitarian this Indian aid is. What they forget to mention is that it is purely driven by India's desire to secure Afghan soil for espionage against Pakistan. The Americans know this and it is obvious that want India in Afghanistan in order to maintain this occupied country as a military and intelligence outpost to destabilize the region. [Editor-PakNationalists].

More than half of Indian population defecate in the open. More households have TV than toilets.
Rhys Blakely | Times UK
POSTED BY PKKH

It is possibly the worst job in the world, a task so disgusting, demeaning and dangerous that it has been illegal for 17 years.

However, at least 340,000 Indians (a conservative government estimate - other experts reckon the figure is close to a million) are forced to scrape a living by cleaning up other people's excrement.

In 1993, the practice of employing a "manual scavenger" - a job description that masks the rank grossness of the work with an Orwellian flourish - was outlawed in India. So was the building of "dry latrines" - the kind that have no flush, have to be emptied by hand, and breed diseases.

The dirty truth, however, is that three government deadlines to eradicate manual scavenging, the most recent on March 31 2009, have passed. Dry latrines are still being dug all over the country, in both rural and urban areas.

A shortage of water and space and a lack of reliable sewage systems often make them the easiest, cheapest option.

At issue, however, is more than the woeful state of infrastructure in India, a country where 660 million people still defecate in the open and more households have TV sets than have proper toilets. For the persistence of scavenging speaks to the robustness of the centuries-old caste system as much as to a chronic lack of basic sanitation.

A new report by WaterAid, an NGO, highlights the how almost all manual scavengers are Dalits, the group at the bottom of the caste hierarchy, who were formerly known as Untouchables. About 80 per cent are women.

"They will often have inherited their 'scavenging rights' and been tasked from an early age with removing human waste from public or private toilets, which have no flushing system, to dispose of elsewhere. Men who are scavengers usually have to manually clean out sewers and septic tanks. Scavengers are paid a pittance and treated with disdain and social stigmatism," the study says.

Ninety per cent of scavengers have no protective equipment. Diseases such as dysentery, malaria, typhoid and tuberculosis are common. Men sent down the sewers in T-shirts and loincloths often die from inhaling toxic fumes.

Social taboos complicate the business of rehabilitation. In a small village, it is hard for a former scavenger to shrug off her past. If she tries to start a small business, it is likely to be boycotted by members of higher castes.

Even before she gets that far, however, there is the issue of self worth to overcome. "Imagine how a life spent picking up s*** affects your confidence," says Indira Khurana, the report's co-author and WaterAid's head of policy in India. "For these people to stand up for their rights is a difficult thing."

Some activists suggest that what scavengers really need is relocation programmes, so they can start new lives in places where they are not known and not burdened by the accident of their birth. It sounds like something out of a spy novel, but the stigma that follows these people around is that great, they suggest.

In some areas, imaginative thinking has produced results. The mothers of the northern state of Haryana, for instance, have adopted a simple message for men who call on their daughters: "No toilet; no bride".

The government-initiated slogan - often lengthened in Hindi to something like "if you don't have a proper toilet in your house, don't even think about marrying my daughter" - has been plastered on hoardings across the region's villages as part of a drive to boost the number of proper flush lavatories.

The campaign is one of the most successful efforts to combat India's chronic shortage of proper plumbing, local officials claim - probably because a skewed sex ratio (there are more 8 per cent more men than women) means brides are gaining more leverage in marital bargaining while women have come to resent having to defecate outside under the cover of darkness.

About 1.4 million toilets have been built in the state since it was begun in 2005, many of them with significant government subsidies. "We have more toilets, less shame among women and less disease," said S. K. Monda, the local government official in charge of the programme.

The Haryana project offers a ray of hope that helps explain why Ms Khurana is optimistic. She says that the new India - the India that has a world-class IT industry and a space programme - is ashamed of its caste-defined past. She thinks that political pressure - Dalits constitute a powerful vote bank - is mounting and can force change - and that schemes where community members pitch in to build proper flush lavatories have been proven viable.

She also reckons that an extensive study that will document the number of scavengers in detail will expose false claims by several state governments that they have eradicated the practice and force them to act.

It is to be hoped that she is right. But even if she is, the world's worst job seems certain to exist for some years yet.

Also read: India Drowning In Its Own Excrement

Fewer than 10 percent of Indian cities have a sewage system. Some 665 million Indians practice open defecation, more than half the global total. In China, the world's most populous country, 37 million people defecate in the open, according to Unicef. Incredible indeed.

Article Source : http://www.ahmedquraishi.com/article_detail.php?id=901

Pakistan acts to counter Indian influence in Afghanistan

2010-01-29T02:51:00.001-08:00

* Islamabad believes India is looking to Afghanistan for destabilising Pakistan

By Sajjad Malik

ISLAMABAD: Pakistan has successfully mobilised the defunct six-plus-two talks formula to counter the US pressure regarding giving India a "greater role" in warn-torn Afghanistan's rehabilitation.

Afghanistan's immediate neighbours - Pakistan, Iran, China, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan, as well as the US, are meeting today (Tuesday) in Turkey to discuss the situation in Afghanistan and to take stock of measures for the restoration of peace in the country.

The original "six-plus-two" also included Russia, but in the new set up Moscow representation has been replaced by the United Kingdom.

The Chinese foreign minister and senior officials from Iran, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Pakistan and Afghanistan will attend the conference, which will also be attended by British Foreign Secretary David Miliband and US Special Envoy Richard Holbrooke's deputy, Paul Jones.

Diplomatic sources said Pakistan has been lobbying for the renewal of talks among Afghanistan's neighbours in order to foil Indian designs of gaining a foothold on Afghan soil.

Pakistan believes India is not an immediate neighbour of Afghanistan and therefore should have limited role in the country.

Turkey has been asked to convene the meeting, as it enjoys the backing and trust of Pakistan and is accepted as a neutral party for promoting a common approach to the conflict. The conference will urge regional players to work together in order to stabilise Afghanistan and the region.

The revival of the talks group has come at a crucial juncture - on Thursday, around 50 nations will be meeting at the London Conference to discuss the Afghan issue and deliberate on measures to help the war-ravaged nation.

The organisers of the London Conference, like the US, are trying to convince Pakistan on accepting the greater Indian role in Afghanistan.

Destabilisation: "It is not possible for us to give India a role in Afghanistan as it is using Afghan soil to destabilise Pakistan. Also, India has been traditionally aligned with Russia and played a part in the destruction of Afghanistan," sources said. They said the last meeting of the six-plus-two group was held before the 9/11 attacks and the Taliban had agreed to give 80 percent of representation in the Afghan government to the Northern Alliance. "Since then, fortunes have reversed and the Taliban have lost the government. Now the six-plus-two group will try to pave the way for the participation of the Taliban in the new government," sources said.

The coalition forces badly need breathing space in Afghanistan following a deadly 2009, in which the force lost at least 504 soldiers, including 305 US and 108 British troops. Sources said US-led forces were giving a thought to Pakistan's viewpoint on the Afghan conflict, an idea substantiated by US Defence Secretary Robert Gates' statement during a recent visit to Pakistan that said that Washington was with Pakistan and supported its efforts for peace in Afghanistan.

The presence of both the UK and the US at the Turkish initiative speaks volumes about their interest in a regional solution.

Article Source : http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2010\01\26\story_26-1-2010_pg7_14

Poverty And Wealth

2010-01-29T02:50:00.001-08:00

om>

By A. Srinivas

Among the developing countries, India stands in the second position, since six decades, on which way is this Indian Democracy moving? Answer to this is, on one side increase in poverty and on the other side increase in assets being centralized in the hands of few, this is our democracy. United Nations Organizations (UNO) has long back reported as, "The absence of income is not the only reason for poverty, but non-availability of facilities such as education, health, proper employment, absence of peoples' participation in politics is also poverty." But in India caste is also one of the undeniable reasons for poverty.

United Nations Organizations (UNO) has long back reported as, "The absence of income is not the only reason for poverty, but non-availability of facilities such as education, health, proper employment, absence of peoples' participation in politics is also poverty." But in India caste is also one of the undeniable reasons for poverty.

The World Bank did research in various countries considering the peoples earning of 1.5 dollars per day as norm for the study of poverty, but in the past only 1 dollar was considered as criterion but later it was revised to 1.5 Dollars. The estimation of Indian poverty data is based on this study. There are 140 crores of people world wide, whose daily earnings are less than 1.2 dollars (approximately 55 rupees). Wherein, Indian population is more than 100 crores, 45 crores 60 lakhs of these kinds of people are found in India. According to Arjun Sen Gupta committee, 80% of the people live depending on Rs. 20 per day. Due to the drastic increase in the rates of essential commodities from 2005 onwards, the life has become burden to the lower middle class and middle class people as well. 20 crores of people sleep with empty stomach everyday because they do not have anything to eat. To eradicate hunger, India is in the 94th position, and is backward than the neighboring countries such as China and Pakistan.

In India out of 100 new born infants, 67 of them die within a year, 93 of them die within 5 years. One of the reasons according to 2004 report is, out of Gross national Income, only a small percentage is spent on peoples health.

Another thing is out of 194 countries, only 4 countries are spending less than us on health. We are not even in the position of spending 2% of GDP on health.

One, out of five children dying world wide, within five years of age is from our country. According to UNICEF report, ten lakhs of children die every year. In our country 5 lakhs of infants die within 28 days, 60% of women deliver at homes; 78 thousand of women die during pregnancy and delivery.

India is in top position in the case of child labour. 12.6 million Children's childhood is being destroyed, who are working in various sectors. Poverty is seed bed for child labour. Among them children of rural areas are working as agricultural labour and bonded labour. In urban areas 58% of children are working in hazardous industries. In the education field, among the 100 children admitted in 1st class, only 53% of them reach till 10th class, and 38% reach till degree level. Only 7% of the students are studying higher education (IIM, IIT, MBA).

In fact where did the development and wealth go which was achieved in 60 years? What happened to the efforts, resources and wealth earned by crores of people? A new group of upper middle class emerged in India, which is in 2nd position among the developing countries. Multi storied buildings appeared in big number. Salaries are increasing, therefore consumerism also increased.

IT, BPO sectors created jobs on big scale. The things seen such as resorts, hotels, corporate hospitals, shopping malls, international schools, foreign tours, modern cars, mobiles are only the assets.

The biggest exploitation known in the Human history which got publicity during the time of 2009 elections is of the black money hidden in Swiss bank. 1,50,000 crores dollars i.e. Rs.75,00,000 (seventy five lakhs of crores) of Indian black money is in Swiss bank. This lakhs of crores of money, which is earned in illegal ways by political leaders, corporate, business sectors and corrupted higher officials, is hidden in Swiss bank since many years. Apart from this, still thousands of crores of black money is in our country itself. Our foreign loan is more than 12,50,000 crores, which means the black money in Swiss bank is 5 times more than that of the Indian foreign loan. In this lakhs of crores of money more than 100 crores is of Indians. It was pretended that the efforts are being done to bring back money from Swiss bank. But it seems the UPA government is not interested in doing so.

Our constitution builders clearly stated that the wealth should be decentralized; if wealth is consolidated then the rights provided by the state will be violated. Contrary to this, all the money went into the hands of few people. According to the Forbes Magazine, (Millionaires list) in this list not only Indians names got place but their number as millionaires also increased.

Ours is a starvation country, where more than six lakhs of farmers and weavers attempted suicide and died country wide, who is responsible for these deaths? Who is responsible for this poverty? The statistics clearly visible to us are in the form of declining faith of people on electoral political system. The reason for all this is, if The World Bank, American policies are one aspect; in the matter of destructive development, all the parties possess same type of political acceptance in our country. Party agenda are different, faces are different, but the policies are the same. There is an urgent need to make people aware of their rights and to make people conscious of the importance of the constitutional values and benefits.

A. Srinivas is Human Rights Activist.

Article Source : http://indianmuslims.in/poverty-and-wealth/

The slave

2010-01-28T23:33:00.001-08:00

By Jawed Naqvi

"Democracy in India is only a top dressing on an Indian soil, which is essentially undemocratic." Arundhati Roy? Wrong. It's Dr Bhim Rao Ambedkar, the Dalit leader who wrote India's republican constitution 60 years ago.

Chief Minister of Gujrat, Narendra Modi's administration reinforces an Indian variant of apartheid. –Photo by AFP

Going by Ambedkar's expressed fears, the Indian republic is like Henry Wadsworth Longfellow's Slave's Dream. It was created by a people that were subjugated by colonialism and its republican ideals were shaped by a human rights pioneer who rose from the lowest layers of the country's caste heap, a form of slavery in some ways more degrading than apartheid.

India celebrates its Republic Day each year with an hour-long display of military hardware, which of late has included dummies of nuclear-tipped missiles. The accompanying convoy of floats showcasing the country's cultural variety (and humour) with everything ranging from ayurvedic massages to tribal dances, to harvest festivals is a more realistic sample of the country's anarchy and depth than imported military arsenal, which guzzles depleted resources, annoys neighbours and contributes to keeping millions of Indians in penury and poor health.

Ambedkar's fear of an inhospitable soil that deters rather than nurtures democracy if left to itself has been vindicated by the country's sharp tilt to the right since 1990. His most entrenched detractors belong to the Hindu right, but the exigencies of the country's caste arithmetic, which shores up the parliamentary system, compels them to woo his followers, if not his legacy.

That's why it remained unclear on Tuesday, as to which was a bigger affront to India's democracy — the inability of the state for the first time in 19 years to hoist the Indian flag in the alienated precincts of Srinagar's Lal Chowk or a vaudeville staged by the chief minister of Gujarat who carried a giant replica of the Indian constitution on elephant back to display his sudden fondness for the rule of law.

"This is a historic moment for Gujarat, as the procession of the constitution is being taken out for the first time in Indian history," Chief Minister Narendra Modi proclaimed not without dollops of irony. There was no remorse in his tone over the worst anti-Muslim pogrom his state witnessed, and for which he is being investigated.

Ambedkar had perhaps anticipated Modi's antics, whose administration reinforces an Indian variant of apartheid, in which Muslims and Dalits have been driven to live in hidebound ghettoes. Let's hear what Ambedkar had to say about a Republic Day he had helped create.

"On 26th January 1950, we are going to enter into a life of contradictions. In politics, we will have equality and in social and economic structure, continue to deny the principle of one-man one-value. How long shall we continue to live this life of contradictions? How long shall we continue to deny equality in our social and economic life? If we continue to deny it for long, we will do so only by putting our political democracy in peril. We must remove this contradiction at the earliest possible moment else those who suffer from inequality will blow up the structure of democracy which this Constituent Assembly has so laboriously built up."

"There is no nation of Indians in the real sense of the world. It is yet to be created. In believing we are a nation, we are cherishing a great delusion. How can people divided into thousands of castes be a nation? The sooner we realise that we are not yet a nation, in a social and psychological sense of the world, the better for us."

"… My definition of democracy is — a form and a method of government whereby revolutionary changes in the social life are brought about without bloodshed. That is the real test. It is perhaps the severest test. But when you are judging the quality of the material you must put it to the severest test. Democracy is not merely a form of government. It is primarily a mode of associated living, of conjoint communicated experience. It is essentially an attitude of respect and reverence towards our fellow men…"

"A democratic form of government presupposes a democratic form of a society. The formal framework of democracy is of no value and would indeed be a misfit if there was no social democracy. It may not be necessary for a democratic society to be marked by unity, by community of purpose, by loyalty to public ends and by mutuality of sympathy."

"But it does unmistakably involve two things. The first is an attitude of mind, and attitude of respect and equality towards their fellows. The second is a social organisation free from rigid social barriers. Democracy is incompatible and inconsistent with isolation and exclusiveness resulting in the distinction between the privileged and the unprivileged."

"What we must do is not to content ourselves with mere political democracy. We must make our political democracy a social democracy as well. Political democracy cannot last unless there is at the base of it a social democracy. What does social democracy mean? It means a way of life which recognises liberty, equality and fraternity as the principles of life. These principles of liberty, equality and fraternity are not to be treated as separate items. They form a union in the sense that to divorce one from the other is to defeat the very purpose of democracy. Liberty cannot be divorced from equality, nor can liberty and equality be divorced from fraternity."

"... On 26th January, 1950, India will be an independent country. What would happen to her independence? Will she maintain or will she lose it again? This is the first thought that comes to my mind. It is not that India was never an independent country. The point is that she once lost the independence she had. Will she lose it a second time? It is this thought which makes me most anxious for the future. What perturbs me greatly is the fact that not only has India once before lost her independence, but she lost it by treachery of some of her own people."

"Will history repeat itself? It is this thought which fills me with anxiety. … Will Indians place the country above their creed or creed above their country? I do not know. But this much is certain that if the parties place creed above country, our independence will be put in jeopardy a second time and probably be lost forever. This eventuality we all must resolutely guard against. We must be determined to defend our independence with the last drop of our blood."

The writer is Dawn's correspondent in Delhi.

Article Source: http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/dawn-content-library/dawn/the-newspaper/columnists/14-jawed-naqvi-the-slaves-dream-810-zj-05

NA adopts Anti-Money Laundering Bill 2009

2010-01-28T23:31:00.001-08:00

* Bill suggests one to ten years imprisonment, fine up to Rs 1m for violators
* Fine may extend to Rs 5m in case of a company and any employee found guilty

By Tahir Niaz

ISLAMABAD: The National Assembly adopted the Anti-Money Laundering Bill 2009 on Wednesday proposing one to 10-year imprisonment and a fine of up to Rs 1 million for violation of the law.

The bill was moved by Minister of State for Finance and Revenue Hina Rabbani Khar. Mentioning the objectives of the bill, the minister said the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) and the Asian Pacific Group, which are responsible for monitoring compliance of AML/Combating Financing Terrorism (CFT) regime by member countries, had raised serious reservations on certain provisions of the Anti-Money Laundering Bill 2007. "This required necessary review and changes in the law to bring it in line with international standards," she said, adding that amendments to the bill were also part of conditionalities under Pakistan's Accelerating Economics Transformation Programme of the Asian Development Bank (ADB).

She said in order to meet requirements indicated by internal bodies and lending institutions, the proposed amendments address and broadly provide for the law's applicability in the area of countering financing of terrorism, expansion in the list of predicate offences and modifying the definition of money laundering in line with the internationally accepted standards.

For punishments, the bill provides that whoever commits offences of money laundering will be punishable with rigorous imprisonment for a term which will not be less than one year but may extend to ten years and shall also be liable to fine which may extend to Rs one million and shall also be liable to forfeiture of property involved in the money laundering.

Company: It further provides that the aforesaid fine may extend to Rs five million in case of a company and every director, officer or employee of the company found guilty under this section, shall also be punishable under this section.

Under the bill, the federal government shall constitute a financial monitoring unit that will have independent decision-making authority on day-to-day matters coming within its areas of responsibility.

For the investigating officers, the bill provides that any officer exercising powers under this bill or any rules made under it, who, without prior permission of the court surveys or searches or causes to be surveyed or searched, any building or place; or detains or searches or arrests any person, shall for every such offence be liable, on conviction, for a term which shall may extend to two years or fine which may extend to Rs 50,000 or both.

The House also passed the Pakistan Engineering Council (Amendment) Bill 2009, further to amend the Pakistan Engineering Council Act, 1975. The Bill was presented to the House in pursuance of the Supreme Court orders.

Article Source : http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2010\01\28\story_28-1-2010_pg1_8

President in Punjab

2010-01-28T23:30:00.001-08:00

Dear Sajjad Ahmad
January 23rd, 2010

A controversy is going on in the media about the absence of Sharif brothers from Punjab at the time of President's visit to Lahore. A general perception is that the CM undertook a tour abroad and prolonged it there till the President was back in Islamabad just to avoid subjecting himself to the protocol warranted of him. This perception got further impetus when Mr. Zardari, ostensibly noticing his absence, vengefully told a PPP crowd that he would visit Punjab every month and hold open kechehries where all ministers would be present and personally answerable to their problems. Such a headlong confrontation between a federating unit chief executive and the symbol of federation is highly undesirable, to say the least.

The question arises did the President visit Punjab on an official tour or went there on his own to hold party meetings in his capacity of being its Co-Chairman. If it was an official tour it must have been planned well in advance and the Punjab government must have been involved in arranging the protocol, security, logistics and administration etc. for the visiting President. In such a case the absence of the Chief executive of the province is highly objectionable. But, if the visit was a private jaunt as is Mr. Zardari's wont to visit Shanghai, Dubai and London then Mr. Shahbaz Sharif cannot be much ! blamed f or being away from the province. In any case it is unfortunate and shouldn't have happened.

Truly

Col. Riaz Jafri (Retd)

Altaf Hussain’s Misperception about Balochistan

2010-01-28T23:29:00.001-08:00

Sajjad Shaukat

Every responsible politician of the country knows that Pakistan has been facing multiple crises of grave nature in wake of suicide attacks and target-killings. At this critical juncture, instead of emphasizing national unity, Muttahida Qaumi Movement (MQM) Chief Altaf Hussain said on January 19 that there are "plotters who are bent upon sowing the seeds of hatred between the Baloch and the MQM…these conspirators are trying to pit the Baloch against the MQM." Under this misperception, he further alleged, "Balochistan is a province and should not be treated like a colony." Ignoring ground realities, he also demanded that the military operation should be brought to an immediate end. Especially, it was his is telephonic address to eminent Baloch personalities whose sympathies, Altaf wants to gain at the cost of Pakistan.

Altaf's address evoked an instant reaction a participant who drew his attention to the Gutter Bagheecha dispute between the Baloch of Karachi and the MQM in which noted Baloch persons were shot dead.

At the same time, while urging the government and the rebel Baloch nationalists to resolve differences through dialogue, MQM leader left no stone unturned in manipulating the drastic situation of Balochistan where terrorist events such as attacks on government buildings, kidnappings, blowing the gas pipelines and target-killings have become a routine matter.

In fact, through his duplicity, Altal Hussain has been implementing the shrewd diplomacy of Machiavelli who advises the leaders to have a lion-like image outwardly, and act upon the traits of goat inwardly. In his sense, a good leader should be a good opportunist. Although Machiavelli suggests this cunning diplomacy in order to protect the overall interests of the state, yet Altaf has started applying the same for disintegration of Pakistan's federation.

However, the main of Altaf Hussain's statement was to give an indirect signal to the separatist elements so as to intensify their anti-Pakistan move.

As regards the province of Balochistan, we cannot blame MQM chief without some concrete evidence. In this regard, silence of Altaf over the foreign conspiracy against Balochistan clearly shows that he is encouraging the anti-state elements, and his integrity is doubtful.

It is notable that in 2008, Pakistan's government had launched a successful approach of reconciliation particularly with the Baloch landlords. The level of violence had fallen to the minimum. It was in these circumstances that the then Corps Commander, Lt-Gen Khalid Shamim Wyne had claimed on November 9, 2008, "We have moved from the insurgency phase to the reconciliation phase, however, if foreign elements continue to infiltrate in Balochistan, they could stir trouble and undermine our efforts to restore peace." His observation proved quite true as covert support to the militants by the secret agencies like Indian RAW, Israeli Mossad and Afghanistan's Khad with the tactical aid of American CIA succeeded in sabotaging the peace process in Balochistan.

It is of particular attention that after meeting the Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh on the sidelines of the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) summit at Sharm el-Sheikh, Prime Minister Syed Yousuf Raza Gilani remarked on July 18, 2009 that during the talks, he also raised the issue of Indian interference in Balochistan.

In this context, on April 23 last year, in the in-camera sitting of the Senate, Federal Interior Minister Rehman Malik displayed documentary evidence of Indian use of Afghanistan to create unrest in Balochistan. The main aim of in-camera session was also to show the engagement of CIA against Pakistan.

In the recent past, Pakistan's Prime Minister Gilani and Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi have openly stated that India and some external elements are backing the Baloch separatists. During the ongoing military operations, ISPR spokesman, Maj-Gen. Athar Abbas, while showing to the media larger quantity of arms and ammunition, revealed that foreign hands has been helping the insurgents of the Frontier Province and especially those of Balochistan.

Apart from the above facts, as to why MQM chief is taciturn in relation to the external plot against Balochistan which is part of the conspiracy against Pakistan because the latter is the only Islamic nuclear state-not tolerated by the US, India and Israel. In this respect, by covertly backing the Baloch nationalist leaders, foreign elements have been fulfilling a number of covert designs. While foreign agents kidnap and kill the political leaders in Balochistan and elsewhere, but Baloch people, openly, accuse Pakistan's intelligence agencies in this context. This is what these external plotters intend to achieve. Another purpose is to gain the sympathies of Baloch general masses for Balochistan Liberation Army (BLA) which has been fighting for secession of the province. In this regard, on July 23, 2008, Akber Bugti's grandson, Brahmdagh Bugti told the BBC that they had the right to accept arms from anywhere including India.

There is another CIA and Indian-supported separatist group, Jundollah (God's soldiers) which is also working against the cordial relationship of Pakistan with China and Iran. In the past few years, its militants with the cooperation of foreign agents kidnapped and killed many Chinese and Iranian nationals in Pakistan.

In this regard, question arises as to why MQM leader Altaf did not issue any statement about the involvement of RAW and other foreign agencies which are tying to separate Balochistan in order to fulfill their anti-Pakistan aims.

The unrest actually started in Balochistan when various projects such as construction of Gwadar Deep Sea Port, Mekran Coastal Highway, IPI gas project etc. were undertaken by the previous government to develop the backward regions of the province. The sole aim was to eliminate frustration among the people by providing infrastructure and employment opportunities.

The Baloch Sardars (feudal lords) who are being backed by external powers started opposing all the developmental projects. These Sardars who were running their own private jails and 'farrari camps' resisted the government plans as they did not want to give up the old system of feudal lords, which the world had witnessed during the Middle Ages. However, Baloch Sardars became hostile towards any initiative which could give a greater blow to their so-called prestige entailing brutalities, being perpetrated on the innocent people. These Sardars contacted the foreign elements which were already conspiring against Pakistan.

Meanwhile, MQM chief's opposition to the military operation in Balochistan is quite illogical. It was Pak Army which eliminated the farrari camps and private jail of the Baloch Sardars, and thus set free hundreds of innocent people.

Notably, as to why strategic game, being played by India and America is not known to Altal Hussain who does not take cognizance of the fact that Balochistan with its ideal geo-strategic location with Gwadar seaport could prove to be Pakistan's key junction, connecting rest of the world with Central Asia. It is due to multiple strategic benefits that the US which signed a nuclear deal with India in 2008, intends to control Balochistan as an independent state in counterbalancing China and containing Iran. Owing to these reasons, Washington and New Delhi are creating instability in Pakistan by supporting Baloch separatists to complete their hidden agenda.

In that backdrop, on October 15, 2008 Pakistan and China signed eleven agreements to enhance bilateral cooperation in diverse sectors including energy, trade and space technology. China also agreed to supply two nuclear reactors to Pakistan. From time to time, both Beijing and Islamabad conclude various agreements to further strengthen their mutual cooperation.

Besides silence of Altaf on the kidnappings and killings of Iranians and Chinese engineers in the last three years also displays his double standard which itself indicates that he is only deepening rift between the people of Balochistan and the Centre.

It is noteworthy that on August 8, 2007, Major (Retd) Tanvir Hussain, the parliamentary secretary for defence accused the American CIA of killing Chinese nationals in Pakistan to harm the cordial relations between Islamabad and Beijing.

Despite the recently announced Balochistan package, and the settlement of issues, relating to National Finance Commission in favour of Balochistan by the government, Altaf Hussain's misperception is not without sinister designs. He may criticise the policies of the government to increase his vote bank, but in order to get the sympathies of the Baloch by encouraging them through his own self-assumed perceptions amounts to incitement of the Baloch people for secession which in fact proves his conspiracy against Pakistan.

Why Haiti Has Never Been Allowed To Prosper

2010-01-23T01:47:00.001-08:00

By Sean Fenley

21 January, 2010 Countercurrents.org A side from the racism that the people of European descent and white majority countries have exhibited towards Haiti, Haiti, has not been allowed to prosper, because a country like Haiti (extremely poor, that has 'never really had it together') cannot be seen (by other impoverished nations) to be successful. It's similar to Nicaragua and the revolution led there against the U.S. backed dictator Somoza; Nicaragua is the second poorest country, in the hemisphere. The abominable Ronald Reagan had to kill a socialist country like Nicaragua, because you cannot give any hope to such countries as Haiti and Nicaragua. If you give these nations and peoples 'dignified poverty' as Aristide has called for in Haiti, others like them will get the same idea!

It's the same reason that the United States had to support insurrection against the government of Bolivia, and even support violent neo-fascist marauding gangs in that country. These vigilante groups beat up and even murdered dozens of indigenous Evo Morales supporters. Obama's equivalent in Bolivia, Morales, the first indigenous president of that country; wanted to 'share the wealth' of some of the more resource rich provinces with the rest of the nation. At the time he was the most popular president in the history of the country, but provinces run by the Bolivian white elite, could not stomach the will of the majority indigenous country being asserted there. A right-wing insurrection, in which U.S. ambassador Philip Goldberg was instrumental, was launched against the popular president. Thanks to the backing of leftist and center-left leaders in the region, and Morales expelling the U.S. ambassador and DEA authorities that were ostensibly fighting coca production in the country (but were at least as interested in aiding and abetting anti-Morales efforts); Morales was able to get past the U.S. backed violent insurrection against his hold on power.

Another recent instance of this same sort of practice occurred in the (now formerly) ALBA nation of Honduras. The Honduran president, Manuel Zelaya, had been so bold as to align his nation with Cuba, Venezuela, Bolivia, Ecuador and Nicaragua. The U.S. has an important military base in that country, that it used during Reagan's support of the terrorist Contras, who targeted schools, hospitals and innocent civilians in their efforts at Central American 'democracy promotion'. A key staging ground for U.S. interventionism, could not be 'allowed to fall', concrete connections between the U.S. and the overthrow of Zelaya are still elusive at this stage, to my knowledge; but what is clear, is how jovial the U.S. government was to condone sham elections, to replace the ousted democratically elected leader of Honduras.

Honduras, in addition to Haiti, Bolivia and Nicaragua, lies towards the bottom of the scale of wealthier to poorer countries in the region. The United States, acting as a typical bully, seems to be a little more hesitant with countries (of course the U.S. tries to destabilize somewhat more powerful countries whose leaders/governments that it does not agree with as well, but the U.S. often uses more cloak and dagger type methods in those cases) that could put up a fight, but those that cannot are not allowed to chose a non-U.S. sponsored direction. Autonomy from the blueprints and dictates of what the U.S. has in mind for vassal countries, is not possible for some of the least materially wealthy countries. Of course, nations like Cuba, Venezuela, and Iran have been 'pariahs' in the eyes of the United States government for some time. But countries like Haiti, Nicaragua, and Bolivia, will often be come down upon even harder, than nations who have more means at their disposable to resist U.S. neocolonial efforts.

Pakistan's embattled president

2010-01-05T05:24:00.001-08:00

Dec 30th 2009 | LAHORE
From The Economist print edition

ust because Zardari sounds paranoid does not mean they are not out to get him

EVER since pressure from the public and the army forced President Asif Zardari to reinstate Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry as Pakistan's chief justice in March, he has looked rattled. Now he sounds almost unhinged. On December 27th, the second anniversary of the murder of his wife, Benazir Bhutto, a former prime minister, he accused "non-state actors" of wanting to break up Pakistan by pitting state institutions against each other.

He meant press commentary claiming that he is at odds with the powerful army over foreign policy and that his Pakistan People's Party (PPP) government is tussling with the judiciary. He said the press had been giving "dates" for his downfall, but that he would not flee the country as predicted by his enemies. "I will stay in the presidency or go to jail," he thundered.

The undignified outburst came at Naudero in Sindh province, the burial site of his wife and her similarly "martyred" father Zulfikar Ali Bhutto. Of late Mr Zardari has been playing the "Sindh card" by whipping up sub-nationalist sentiment against the "anti-PPP conspiracies" hatched in the dominant province, Punjab.

Mr Zardari has looked vulnerable since December 16th, when the Supreme Court struck down the National Reconciliation Ordinance (NRO) promulgated by the previous president, Pervez Musharraf, in October 2007. This had afforded Mr Zardari and other PPP leaders amnesty from criminal proceedings in corruption cases.

Overnight, facing a clamour of resignation calls, senior government ministers had to scurry to the courts for bail before they were arrested. Mr Zardari enjoys presidential immunity from criminal, but not civil, action. The court's judgment relies on hitherto unused Islamic provisions of the constitution to declare the NRO "immoral". Similar devices may be used when the court starts hearing civil petitions to unseat Mr Zardari for "moral turpitude".

Earlier, the government's lawyer in the NRO case made the astonishing claim that army headquarters and the CIA were conspiring against the PPP government. Following an uproar, he retracted his comment. But senior army officers do not hide their contempt for Mr Zardari and America doubts the value of lending support to an increasingly isolated president.

Mr Zardari angered the army when, at America's urging, he tried to tame its influential Inter-Services Intelligence agency, or ISI. The army was also infuriated by American legislation passed in October promising $7.5 billion in assistance to Pakistan. This insists on civilian control of the army, a condition the army suspects was inserted at the behest of the Zardari government.

The coming weeks are critical for Mr Zardari. The court will be mulling petitions seeking his removal as president. So he will face pressure to mend fences with the opposition, by repealing the constitutional amendment that strengthens the presidency and empowers him to fire service chiefs and dismiss governments. But even that concession may be too little, too late.

Face Down the Militarists and Get Out of Afghanistan

2009-11-19T01:01:00.001-08:00

Simon Jenkins

Go to Washington any time in the past eight years and ask what influence Britain has over America's Afghan policy. The answer is a thumb and forefinger joined in a simple zero. The same was true in Iraq. Ever since Tony Blair kowtowed to George Bush at Crawford in April 2002, Britain has been the patsy, the poodle, the dumb ally in Washington's wars of ideological empire.

Britain's military failures in Basra and Helmand, rescued in both by the Americans, increased this subservience. While French and German governments assess their nation's interest, Blair and Gordon Brown have been me-too kids on the block, panting after Washington's every wild venture. Despite 412 British soldiers dead, Brown indicated in his speech on Monday night that nothing had changed. The torture continues. London twitches only when Washington kicks.

Almost nothing Brown says on Afghanistan makes sense, and he seems painfully aware of it. He must say that soldiers are dying in Helmand to make Britain's streets safe, even when intelligence reports say the opposite. He must remain obsessed with "training bases", as if the 9/11 plotters had learned to fly in Tora Bora. He must believe that building an Afghan security force and ridding Hamid Karzai's regime of corruption can be achieved, and that they hold the keys to a British withdrawal. Pigs will fly.

Brown must also know that his Foreign Office thinks the Afghan venture mad, and sets up its hapless boss, David Miliband, to repeat that counter-insurgency is counter-terrorism. It is not. It is counter-insurgency. To equate the two is like the Iranian leader, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, blaming foreign states for what is essentially a domestic threat - in Britain's case from a tiny fraction of its Muslim community.

The favored military option said to be emerging from Obama's agonizing review of Afghan policy is to "fall back on the cities". This seems the only way of marrying the military's desperation for ever more troops to the raw, bleeding fact that the Afghan war is hopeless. The killing can go on for ever, but the war is lost.

Falling back on cities was the last gasp of the Russians in Afghanistan and the Americans in Vietnam. It can work if you are a native population ceding countryside to an invader. But in Afghanistan Nato is the invader. Cede the country to the Taliban and you cede every city market place and street corner. It will not work. Nato has hi-tech weapons but it forgot to pack its rucksacks with an old-fashioned, mark one historian.

As for the even more desperate idea of "talking to the local Taliban", what do you say to a tiger in mid-leap? Could you eat just an arm and a leg and leave me the rest? It is on a par with Boris Johnson's brainless argument that to pull out would be to betray those who have given their lives so far. Nobody dares call a spade a spade. Were Osama bin Laden given to laughter, which I understand he is not, he would split his sides.

The suspense of Obama's "decision" on Afghanistan is acquiring epic proportions. It recalls the Delphic oracle's reply when Croesus asked if he should declare war on Persia. If he does, the oracle said, "He will destroy a mighty empire". It turned out to be his own.

We assume Obama favours withdrawal because, if he had thought more troops would defeat the Taliban, it was criminal not to have sent them a year ago. His decision has thus become a trial of strength between his view and the massed ranks of America's military/industrial complex, with its $1bn-a-day interest in the continuance of war.

If militarism wins and Obama commences a 10-year battle over the mountains and plains of Afghanistan, it will spell the end of America's status as cold war victor and putative world policeman. The complex will have him trapped. The Taliban will have him cornered, as will Bin Laden. America's democratic leadership will have been pitted against American militarism - an informal component of the republic since the founding fathers - and will have capitulated. So will Britain's compliant party leaders as they continue to utter weekly banalities over the coffins of Wootton Bassett.

If, on the other hand, Obama takes courage in both hands and announces a withdrawal, by hook or by crook, next year, the impact will be dramatic. Enemies at home will declare that America's first black president has led his country to defeat. But the boil will have been lanced. Afghanistan and its patchwork of tribal chiefs, warlords and Taliban commanders will have to write "the invaders" out of their script. Karzai must cash in the deals of the past seven years. The Taliban, no longer a monolith, would forge pacts and coalitions, as they were doing prior to 2001. Terrible things will happen in many places but, as in Iraq, they were bound to happen from the moment the west intervened.

An American withdrawal would force Pakistan once again to be the power broker and guarantor of regional stability, albeit on new terms. The Pashtun would lose interest in their al-Qaida guests, who in turn would lose their anti-American rallying cry and seek sanctuary elsewhere. The region would regain an equilibrium it can never achieve under western occupation.

Britain and America should demilitarize the war on terror, surely the most counterproductive main-force deployment in recent history. They need no longer rely on grand armies, popinjay generals and crippling budgets; on bringing death, destruction and exile to hundreds of thousands of foreigners in the faint belief that this might stop a few bombs going off back home. They would hand that job to the appropriate authorities; to the police and security services.

The modalities of withdrawal need obvious attention. Only idiots talk of leaving "overnight", but only idiots make departure conditional on some unachievable objective, such as more European troops or an operational Afghan army or honesty in Kabul. Defeat must be spun as victory. Retreat must be covered by the smokescreen of a loya jirga or "surge, bribe and leave". But it cannot be conditional on fantasy.

This war was never to be won, any more than that in Iraq. Both were neocon nation-building stunts that ran amok on too much money. Three million Iraqis, including almost all Iraq's Christians, were driven into exile. The same is starting in Afghanistan and will become a flood as NATO retreats. That nation's agony is not over yet, but the end cannot begin until the invaders depart. That will happen only when the pain outweighs the pride. The question is, how many corpses will that take?

This post originally appeared in the Guardian.

How the U.S.-China Relationship Has Changed

2009-11-19T00:32:00.001-08:00

An undercurrent in commentary about President Obama's three-day trip to China is the anxious, decades-old question: has the Asian giant finally caught up? After debating Obama's town hall speech and negotiations over the trade imbalance, commentators have begun scrutinizing the overall dynamics of the trip. Was Obama as assertive as his predecessors? While there weren't any dramatic face-offs between the American president and his Chinese counterpart, commentators found signs that the U.S.-China relationship has changed. Here's how:

By Heather Horn

'Equals at Last' Academic Willy Lam says this visit "will go down in history as a pivotal event in the relations between the two most powerful countries of the 21st century." Specifically: "For the first time, the leaders of the United States and China talked as equals." But Lam says this equality may disappoint the U.S. China, he says, "will use its cloud to advance its agenda," and any hopes that Washington's "conciliatory stance" will result in Chinese toughness on North Korea and Iran will quickly be dashed.

Not Equals: China Has the Edge The BBC's Matt Frei painted the picture in even starker terms. "Something," he writes, "has changed in the chemistry of the world's most important bilateral relationship. America is now more in awe of China than vice versa." In the past few years, he explains, the impotency of "million-dollar smart bombs" against Iraqi homemade explosives in "drinks cans," the "petty in-fighting on Capitol Hill" showing the "limits of democracy in the world's greatest democracy," and the harsh reality of a Great Recession followed by a "jobless recovery" have brought home the once distant awareness of American vulnerability. Meanwhile, China has enacted a "whopping stimulus package that even dwarfs America's" and "established closer ties with countries like Brazil and Peru in what used to be called America's backyard." China will have to find its way through the tricky issues of authoritarianism, Frei says, but for now, the country is looking pretty good.

U.S. Conciliatory, But Countries Also Closer In the Washington Post, Andrew Higgins and Anne Kornblut argue that the big story of the trip was "Ithe United States' newly conciliatory and sometimes laudatory tone." Obama's approach "stood in stark contrast to the journeys of his predecessors," but not so much as a change in policy as reflecting "a dramatic and much bigger change in the power dynamic." But if China's rise is inevitable, perhaps the trip also provided fuel for optimism: "In many ways, the United States and China have never been closer, as reflected in a raft of joint projects outlined during Obama's visit here."

Chinese Advantage, American Advantage The Guardian's Jonathan Fenby is clear: "The Chinese machine is working, whatever the doubts about its sustainability." Obama, too, appeared to be "on the back foot" in his visit. But Fenby argues forcefully against a premature declaration of American decline:

America is still the richer and more powerful nation. Its military is far ahead of the People's Liberation Army. The administration's international fence-restoration means that it can count on an array of allies, whereas China's are few and far between, and founded mainly on money. For all Beijing's efforts to spread its soft power, it cannot hold a candle to America when it comes to popular culture; how many Chinese film stars can most people outside Asia name--other than perhaps Jet Li or Jackie Chan?

Say what you will about delays in closing Guantánamo, but most people would prefer American values to those of a regime that maintains a big repressive apparatus, locks up lawyers who defend ordinary citizens, puts petitioners in "black jails", imposes crackdowns in Tibet and Xinjiang worthy of British imperialism at its depths and forbids its citizens to watch its national day parade in the streets. Not to mention the control freakery of the system and the restrictions on information.

China Has the Edge in Optimism David Brooks thinks the "manic energy" and "moral materialism" which made America great is now to be found more in China than in the U.S. Americans, he writes, are experiencing a "[crisis] of faith," with far more Chinese optimistic about their country's path than Americans. These more "spiritual" markers of success, he argues, should not be discounted:

It may seem like an ephemeral thing, but this eschatological faith in the future has motivated generations of Americans, just as religious faith motivates a missionary. Pioneers and immigrants endured hardship in the present because of their confidence in future plenty. Entrepreneurs start up companies with an exaggerated sense of their chances of success. The faith is the molten core of the country's dynamism.

Pakistani Nation to Celebrate Eid with their Heroes at the Battlefield

2009-11-18T22:30:00.001-08:00

Our brave soldiers are shedding their blood, fighting fearlessly to
protect our families and homes, leaving behind theirs, crushing our
enemies who are now distraught against our invincible defense. Our
soldiers are not only sacrificing their lives but also their salaries,
and have reduced their rations willingly to send food to our displaced
countrymen.

While they are at the forefront, we the Patriots of Pakistan are
standing right behind them with prayers from our hearts and souls for
their success. We assure unwavering support to our soldiers in this
war against the terrorists, against those who have taken lives
mercilessly and done extreme damage not only to the nation but to the
image of Islam, the religion of peace and harmony.

On this Eid, we want to tell our brave heroes who are fighting for our
honor that while they will be away from their homes, they will be in
our thoughts and our prayers. Their sacrifices will bear fruit in the
form of Pakistan's prosperity and peace Insha'Allah. We stand by you,
honor you, respect you and salute you for your courage and faith to
protect the "Madina-e-Sani" of Muslim Ummah.

PKKH has coordinated with Pakistan Army to send gifts and cards of
support to our troops on ground. Let's join hands and show our
sentiments and pride for them.

We request all Pakistanis to make gift packs (for easy handling) for
soldiers with a note of love and solidarity to boost their morale and
to assure them that they are not alone, we care for them; the nation
is right behind them.

The gift packs can include eatables (factory packed/sealed) like dry
fruits, biscuits, juices, candies, chocolates and items like flowers,
small gifts, support letters, cards for our heroes. Please specify on
your gift packs that these are for troops fighting under Division
Headquarters in Waziristan, Swat, Khawazakhela, D.I. Khan.

Send your gifts via courier or registered post mentioning your name
and address, on the following address:

C/o Col Nadeem,
PRO Headquarters,
11 Corps,
Peshawar, Pakistan.

Lets join the battle!

Pak Army Zindabad, Pakistan Paindabad

JazakAllah Khair,
PKKH

Nawaz

--

Pak Nukes and Obama’s AFNAM

2009-11-16T23:15:00.001-08:00

By Dr Shahid Qureshi

"US troops in Afghanistan would cost over $1 billion per 1000 troops per year. People expect General Kiyani to show courage and overhaul his bunch first from dollar toxic generals in his ranks to save the very institution he is trying to protect? "

Some criminally negligent US policy makers' warmongers and defence contractors are not realising that it's the Russians and Chinese who are having feel days? Though Iran helped US in eliminating its worst enemies Taliban and Saddam but seemingly not willing to help US out of the mess in Afghanistan? Indo-Israel military agreements and Indo - Iran military and nuclear deals are not in the strategic interests of the US? In actual fact they are the players who got US in the mess in Afghanistan in the first place? The Indians have played double bluff with the US by flirting with Russians and Iranians, as US played triple bluff with Pakistan? Indians never stopped conspiring against Pakistan from US controlled Afghanistan? Are they alone in conspiring? There are reports of Indian funding to terrorist groups in Pakistan. What are Pakistanis doing about that?

I asked a defence expert two years ago why China, Russia and Iran not helping USA and NATO from exiting Afghanistan? The response was 'let them spend some more money and men with a cunning smile'. Those who are asking President Obama to send more troops in Afghanistan knows that cost would over $1 billion for 1000 troops per year and US is bankrupt country already. It is robbed by the same people who send it to Afghanistan and Iraq? Afghanistan is magnet for empires to come and die? Is it strange that Russian experts are predicting US collapse like Soviet Union and Chinese strategists are predicting disintegration of India?

"A friend in need is a friend indeed", is a very well known saying. Only friends can stop each other from greater harms and would give an honest advice. Majority in the Muslim World including Pakistan don't have any problems with the people of the US but with current policies. People say that a tiny minority of Washington residents and their policies have hijacked not only 270 million US Citizens, made them a target Worldwide, paranoid, cagey, phobic and fearful at home but also made other people's lives hell abroad. Analysts believe that the American people are being indoctrinated with the false propaganda through controlled media? Many analysts agree that this war on terror is a biggest fraud of this century? One should look who are the beneficiaries of war on terror? Millions have been killed and displaced in Iraq and Afghanistan in the name of what?

What could be the best friendly advice one can offer to the occupiers in Afghanistan and Iraq? (a) The best advice would be cut your losses and move out because people don't want to be occupied (b) don't repeat the same mistake again like leaving Afghanistan in a mess after Soviet withdrawal (c) start reconstruction and rehabilitation process in Afghanistan and Iraq (d) hearts and minds could be won with love not bombs, food not threats (e) fundamental change in the US foreign policy (f) Unnecessary, unfair and too much support of Israel has made lives of US citizens risky and open to hostility? (h) It seems US need to fight and win a war of liberation within from selfish blackmailers, opportunists and hijackers of the very fundamentals of the US society and constitution? (i) Efforts must be made to save innocent lives (j) safe return of more than 2.5 million Afghan refugees from Pakistan, which could be a breading ground of angry men against the US occupation.

People in the know are very well aware with the Indian game in Afghanistan; one cannot be a partner, a friend and an enemy at the same time? Yes it is important that one should have friendly terms with all the neighbours but at what cost? One wonders if friends of Pakistan are part of the problem or part of the solution?

International politics is a game of interests and those who do not understand this basic formula not only suffer themselves but also made other suffer too. As time go by countries do develop friendly relationships based on mutual understanding and respect. Well if one analyse Pakistan's hot and cold bumpy rides with the US one can easily detect that Pakistani elite thinks they are married to Americans but US thinks Pakistan is their mistress? People need to know about dollar account holder pimps, politicians and generals? The irony is the compromised and corrupt elite of Pakistan joined the foreign elements in abusing Pakistan themselves?

There is greater realisation among the people of Pakistan is that United State's enemies have better life then its friends because they live longer! "It is irrelevant if US punishes its enemies or not but it definitely punishes its friends", said a US politician. Well look how US dealt with Saddam Husain, ZiaulHaq, Yasir Arafat, Benazir Bhutto and continuous friendly treatment of Taliban in Afghanistan? So what will happen if Pakistan completely goes in the anti US block?

That would require complete elimination and detoxification of the current toxic ruling elite including politicians, generals, businessmen and technocrats. Well that seems not far? The coward and corrupt ruling elite living in fear sent its kids and families abroad. Men of Steal Sharif brothers have invested millions in London and Goldman Zardari has billions in foreign banks. Will they be shunted around as 'luggage' with US tags on their toes as happened to many US friends or this cancerous curse will stay on? The corrupt & coward Sharifs and Zardari's have never visited Pakistani troops on the front line as President Obama and Prime Minister Gordon Brown frequently do? People think these leaders should send their sons on the front line like Prince Charles who send Prince Harry and Prince William on the front line?

People of Pakistan are very well aware with the faces and the addresses of the collaborators their interests both in and outside, who are destabilising Pakistan. The way others and US are following Indian agenda in the region is concerning and may lead to a situation which could go out of control?

I commented on BBC TV on Tuesday 8th January 2008, "many analysts agree that Pakistan don't need enemy if it has a friend like US keeping in view the policy of betrayal, selfishness and leaving in lurch. "People of Pakistan are asking the way its nuclear program is being targeted in the US and West, one wonders if the friends of Pakistan are part of the problem or solution?"

According to analysts what could and should happen if Pakistan is destabilised or attacked? (a) More than 15 separatist armed militant movements currently going on in India would reach its boiling point and disintegrate India? (b) Certain countries could not afford two destabilised states with the 180 million and over 1 billion population in their neighbourhoods? (c) the whole lot of elite, friends and compromised beneficiaries of certain countries would be eliminated as happened after Iranian Revolution and this region might become out of bound and hell (d) reaction from 2.5 million retired and 600,000 active members of the Pakistani armed forces and public would be unimaginable for the invaders, their supporters and collaborators (e) Pakistan is not Iraq or Lebanon and people should learn from their experiences and come out of denial? (f) those who are providing protection to private mercenaries (black water/Xe) should be name and shame?

The only way forward seems to be is reality check, proper risk assessment without lies and deceptions, improvement of bilateral and multilateral relations to save lives, cut the losses and end this so-called dodgy war on terror? Though it is appalling and disgraceful the way some politicians and establishment officials behave in front of junior foreign officials? They don't represent the Pakistani nation?

People expect General Kiyani to show courage and overhaul his bunch first from dollar toxic generals in his ranks to save the very institution he is trying to protect? Who is sending top secret personal files of the generals to Americans? One need to see how far the cancers of dollars have gone in the command and infiltrated agencies? Who is taking 'goodies' according to a US expert?

President Obama probably understands that a group of his armed forces and some racist rouge elements have not accepted him as Commandant in Chief and that is why they want him to send more troops in Afghanistan so more would be killed. This Policy is bound to fail and ultimately become Obama's AFNAM?

(Dr Shahid Qureshi is award winning journalist and writer on foreign policy & security based in London)

U.S.: Army Sends Infant to Protective Services, Mom to Afghanistan

2009-11-16T22:56:00.001-08:00

By Dahr Jamail

VENTURA, California, Nov 13 (IPS) - U.S. Army Specialist Alexis Hutchinson, a single mother, is being threatened with a military court-martial if she does not agree to deploy to Afghanistan, despite having been told she would be granted extra time to find someone to care for her 11-month-old son while she is overseas.

U.S. Army Specialist Alexis Hutchinson with her son, Kamani.

Hutchinson, of Oakland, California, is currently being confined at Hunter Army Airfield near Savannah, Georgia, after being arrested. Her son was placed into a county foster care system.

Hutchinson has been threatened with a court martial if she does not agree to deploy to Afghanistan on Sunday, Nov. 15. She has been attempting to find someone to take care of her child, Kamani, while she is deployed overseas, but to no avail.

According to the family care plan of the U.S. Army, Hutchinson was allowed to fly to California and leave her son with her mother, Angelique Hughes of Oakland.

However, after a week of caring for the child, Hughes realised she was unable to care for Kamani along with her other duties of caring for a daughter with special needs, her ailing mother, and an ailing sister.

In late October, Angelique Hughes told Hutchinson and her commander that she would be unable to care for Kamani after all. The Army then gave Hutchinson an extension of time to allow her to find someone else to care for Kamani. Meanwhile, Hughes brought Kamani back to Georgia to be with his mother.

However, only a few days before Hutchinson's original deployment date, she was told by the Army she would not get the time extension after all, and would have to deploy, despite not having found anyone to care for her child.

Faced with this choice, Hutchinson chose not to show up for her plane to Afghanistan. The military arrested her and placed her child in the county foster care system.

Currently, Hutchinson is scheduled to fly to Afghanistan on Sunday for a special court martial, where she then faces up to one year in jail.

Hutchinson's civilian lawyer, Rai Sue Sussman, told IPS, "The core issue is that they are asking her to make an inhumane choice. She did not have a complete family care plan, meaning she did not find someone to provide long-term care for her child. She's required to have a complete family care plan, and was told she'd have an extension, but then they changed it on her."

Asked why she believes the military revoked Hutchinson's extension, Sussman responded, "I think they didn't believe her that she was unable to find someone to care for her infant. They think she's just trying to get out of her deployment. But she's just trying to find someone she can trust to take care of her baby."

Hutchinson's mother has flown to Georgia to retrieve the baby, but is overwhelmed and does not feel able to provide long-term care for the child.

According to Sussman, the soldier needs more time to find someone to care for her infant, but does not as yet have friends or family able to do so.

Sussman says Hutchinson told her, "It is outrageous that they would deploy a single mother without a complete and current family care plan. I would like to find someone I trust who can take care of my son, but I cannot force my family to do this. They are dealing with their own health issues."

Sussman told IPS that the Army's JAG attorney, Captain Ed Whitford, "told me they thought her chain of command thought she was trying to get out of her deployment by using her child as an excuse." '

Major Gallagher, of Hutchinson's unit, also told Sussman that he did not believe it was a real family crisis, and that Hutchinson's "mother should have been able to take care of the baby".

In addition, according to Sussman, a First Sergeant Gephart "told me he thought she [Hutchinson] was pulling her family care plan stuff to get out of her deployment".

"To me it sounds completely bogus," Sussman told IPS, "I think what they are actually going to do is have her spend her year deployment in Afghanistan, then court martial her back here upon her return. This would do irreparable harm to her child. I think they are doing this to punish her, because they think she is lying."

Sussman explained that she believes the best possible outcome is for the Army to either give Hutchinson the extension they had said she would receive so that she can find someone to care for her infant, or barring this, to simply discharge her so she can take care of her child.

Nevertheless, Hutchinson is simply asking for the time extension to complete her family care plan, and not to be discharged.

"I'm outraged by this," Sussman told IPS, "I've never gone to the media with a military client, but this situation is just completely over the top."

Invading The Secular Space

2009-11-16T22:51:00.001-08:00

By Ram Puniyani
Countercurrents.org

Satya Sai Baba of Puthaparthi in his recent tour of Mumbai (Nov. 2009) was invited by the Maharashtra Chief Minister designate, Ashok Chavan to his official residence, Varsha, for blessing the house and for the associated puja (invocation). When criticsed for inviting the Holy Guru to his official residence he said that since he is a devotee of the Baba for many decades it is a privilege for him. There are many other news items where state functionaries mark their presence for the programs of Gurus and Babas (God men).

As far as Satya Sai Baba is concerned he is regarded as the living God by his devotees, while he himself claims to be the reincarnation of Sai Baba of Shirdi. This Sai Baba is also a miracle person and a spiritual Guru. His miracles have been exposed by the Rationalist Associations and his trick of producing Gold chain was brought up in the court, as production of gold is illegal. This case was not pursued for various reasons. There are many charges of sexual abuse by Sai baba. Magician of fame P.C. Sarkar also said his miracles have nothing to do with divinity but are mere magical tricks.

Use of official residence for such functions is in total violation of the secular constitution of the country where religion is a private matter of the individual and state functionaries can?t wear their religion on their sleeves in official capacity and in official places. Contrary to that norm, lately this norm is known more for its violation than by adherence to it. Gone are the days of Nehru when he could stand up and snub such actions by whosoever it is in the official capacity. Of course, Gandhi, Father of the nation and Nehru the architect of Indian state were no devotees of any Baba or Guru. Over a period of time such principles have been violated with impunity. Uma Bharati during her brief tenure as the Chief Minister ship of Madhya Pradesh converted her official residence in to a Gaushala (Cow shed) with saffron robed Sadhus forming the main residents of her official residence.

India has quite a broad fare of God men. There are Gurus, Sants, Maharajs, Acharyas and Purohits (clergy) in the main. Their role has been changing over a period of time. Last three decades seem to be the time of their major glory, with their presence in all spheres in a very dominating way. Their number has also proliferated immensely and while some of these are big players, Sri Sri Ravishankar, Baba Ramdeo, Asaram Bapu to name the few. There are hundreds of them scattered in each state. Many of them are working in close tandem with Hindu right, Swami Assmanand, Late Swami Laxmananad Sarswati, Narendra Mahraj etc. These are the one?s who have created their own niche with different techniques, while Shankarachayas, are associated with the Mutts coming from historical times, the Akshrdham chain is also not very old a tradition. The Pramukh swamis (Chief Guru) of these temples wield enormous clout. One recalls Anand Marg came up during the decade of seventies and not much is hearing of that now.

Overall religiosity has been on the upswing and not many are protesting the promotion of blind faith by many such God men. The rational thought and movement is on the back foot and political leadership, social leaders, of many hues are bending over backwards to please these Babas, some of whom are also dispensing health and some of them claim to be looking into the crystal ball of future.

There is an interesting correlation between the coming up of adverse effects of globalization, rise in the anxieties and deprivations and the current dominance of God men. Many an interesting observations about these God men are there, the major one being the rise in alienation in last three decades along with the rising religiosity in the social space. Many a remarkable studies on this phenomenon are coming forth. One such is by a US based Indian scholar of repute, Meera Nanda. In her book, The God Market, she makes very profound observations. She points out that this rising religiosity is manifested in boom in pilgrimages and newer rituals. Some old rituals are becoming more rooted and popular. She sees a nexus between state-temple-corporate complexes also. Secular institutions of Nehru era are being replaced by boosting demand and supply of God market.

A new Hindu religiosity is getting deeply rooted in everyday life, in public and private spheres. The distinction between private and public sphere is getting eroded as the case of Sai Baba in Maharashtra Chief Ministers official bungalow shows. Hindu rituals and symbols are becoming part of state functions; Hinduism de facto is becoming state religion. Hindu religiosity is becoming part of national pride with the aspiration of becoming a superpower. She observes a trend of increased religiosity. In India there are 2.5 million places of worship but only 1.5 million schools and barely 75000 hospitals. Half of 230 million tourist trips every year are for religious pilgrimage. Akshardham temple acquired 100 acres of land at throw away price. Sri Sri Ravishanker?s Art of Living Ashram in banglore has 99 acres of land leased from Karnataka Government. Gujarat Govt. gifted 85 acres of land to establish privately run rishikul in Porbander. Most significantly Nanda argues that the new culture of political Hinduism is triumphalist and intolerant, while asserting to be recognized as a tolerant religion. While claiming to have a higher tolerance, its intolerance is leading to violence against minorities.

It is because of this that even if the BJP may not be the ruling party, the political class and other sections of state apparatus have subtly accepted Hindu religiosity and the consequent politics as the official one, and so the justice for victims of religious violence eludes them. The question is, can the struggle for justice for weaker sections also incorporate a cultural-religious battle against the blind religiosity and proactive efforts initiated to promote rational thought.

Shiv Sena men would have made 'tandoori' of Azmi: Bal Thackeray

2009-11-11T21:45:00.001-08:00

IANS

MUMBAI: Shiv Sena chief Bal Thackeray has held Samajwadi Party leader Abu Asim Azmi "responsible" for Monday's mayhem in the Maharashtra assembly and said his party men would have made a "tandoori" or roast of somebody like Azmi for having hurt Marathi pride.

In an editorial in the party mouthpiece Saamna, Thackeray said that though elected from Maharashtra, Azmi took the oath as legislator in Hindi and not Marathi, and therefore he was beaten by the Maharashtra Navnirman Sena (MNS) lawmakers.

Stressing that the Sena was born on the issue of Marathi pride, Thackeray said in the past the Shiv Sena has carried out many such campaigns against the use of Hindi and English in the state legislature, especially by its senior member Diwakar Raote.

"If somebody like Azmi had come in Raote's hands, he would have made a 'tandoori' out of him, and removed his skin," the editorial declared.

"That (Marathi pride) has been the Shiv Sena's philosophy always and would also remain in the future," he noted.

However, Thackeray lashed out at the MNS for the violent behaviour of its legislators inside the assembly.

He said that nobody can support the violence and pandemonium created by the MNS members in the assembly Monday.

"The proceedings of the assembly or parliament must be carried out as per rules and decorum, it cannot be reduced to an 'akhada' (wrestling pit) or a vegetable market."

Azmi was slapped and pushed by MNS legislators inside the assembly Monday for flouting the party diktat of taking the oath as legislator only in Marathi.

Reacting to Thackeray's views, Samajwadi Party state president Abu Asim Azmi said that Bal Thackeray was "approaching the last stages of his life and has lost his mental balance".

"In fact, despite all his efforts the Shiv Sena could not come to power again and he is feeling very upset, so he talks anything," Azmi said here Tuesday.

The Shiv Sena-Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) combine lost the Maharashtra assembly elections held Oct 13.

INTERVIEW - Muslims watching U.S. with guarded optimism - OIC chief

2009-11-11T21:23:00.000-08:00

By Thomas Grove

ISTANBUL (Reuters) - The Muslim world is watching how the United States will act on the stalled process for Palestinian-Israeli peace and wondering how one of the main sticking points, Israeli settlements, will be resolved, the world's top diplomat for Islam said on Saturday.

Arab discontent over statements from Washington seen as favouring Israel culminated this week when Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas said he did not want to run in an upcoming poll, citing disappointment with U.S. President Barack Obama.

Abbas' frustration with Obama centred on the U.S. administration backing away from support for demands for a "freeze" on Israel settlement building in the occupied West Bank and an endorsement of Israel's view that settlement expansion should not be a bar to resuming peace talks.

"We would like to keep our hopes that President Obama's commitments and good intentions will translate to reality, but of course we've found that the whole negotiation comes back to square one," said Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu, secretary general of the Organisation of the Islamic Conference (OIC).

"The sine qua non for any negotiation is the stopping of the settlements ... We are still hopeful despite the fact that there are more reasons not to be hopeful," he told Reuters.

The 57-nation OIC, based in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, was set up in the early 1970s when Islamic nations were divided along Cold War lines. While the body has no direct political power it represents more than one billion Muslims.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has refused to halt construction in the settlements, many of which the Jewish state plans to annex under any eventual peace accord.

Palestinian elections are scheduled for Jan. 24, though few are anxious to take on Abbas' role, throwing into doubt the reconciliation of fighting Palestinian factions as well as the peace process with Israel.

Ihsanoglu, a Turkish history professor who became OIC secretary general in 2005, spoke ahead of an economic summit that has drawn criticism from human rights organisations for hosting Sudan President Omar Hassan al-Bashir, who is facing an international arrest warrant for war crimes.

Palestinian Prime Minister Salam Fayyad, Syria's President Bashar al-Assad and Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad are also expected to arrive to Istanbul on Sunday for the summit, which is expected to focus on boosting economic alliances among OIC member countries.

The one-day summit's guest list has added to concerns that European Union candidate Turkey, an important regional ally of Washington, is shifting away from its pro-Western foreign policy, while distancing itself from traditional ally Israel.

Ihsanoglu rejected claims predominantly Muslim Turkey with was drifting away from its western allies.

"I don't see Turkey's strengthening its relations with its neighbours or the OIC countries at large as a substitute for its relations with other countries, including European countries, or the West," said Ihsanoglu.

(Editing by Matthew Jones)

Allied forces ‘may abandon most of northern Helmand’

2009-11-10T22:00:00.001-08:00

A new strategy for Afghanistan that could lead to a British troop withdrawal from a former Taleban stronghold in northern Helmand province sparked immediate controversy yesterday.

British military sources said that a withdrawal from Musa Qala would be viewed as a defeat

Tom Coghlan in Kabul and Michael Evans, Defence Editor

According to a senior Nato source, Western military commanders in Afghanistan are considering a radical shift in policy that would see British and US forces conduct a tactical pull-out from most of northern Helmand, including the town of Musa Qala. The source said that the plan to withdraw from northern Helmand would be considered if proposed reinforcements, currently being examined by President Obama, were not approved. General Stanley McChrystal, the US commander in Kabul, has asked for 40,000 more troops but President Obama has yet to make a decision.

British military sources said, however, that a withdrawal from Musa Qala would be viewed as a defeat and could not be countenanced. They said it would also be a betrayal of the governor of the district, who risked his life to take a stand against the insurgents.

Mullah Abdul Salaam, a former Taleban commander, switched sides to become district governor of Musa Qala only hours before British troops from 52 Brigade and Afghan soldiers retook the town from insurgent control in December 2007. British troops had withdrawn from Musa Qala in 2006 after a "deal" with the local tribal elders, but the Taleban seized control until the arrival of 52 Brigade.

The plans now being considered in Kabul would pull British and American troops out of the towns of Musa Qala and Nawzad to focus on stabilising the highly populated central areas of the province. The only remaining Western forces in the north of the province would be those defending the hydro-electric dam at Kajaki.

The plans are the most radical among options being considered by General McChrystal under a broader plan to shift forces towards the defence of more populous areas of the country, ceding outlying and remote areas. The new doctrine is focused on concentration of forces around population centres, main arteries and economic corridors with the ultimate aim of protecting the population and allowing intensive reconstruction.

A senior Nato officer confirmed that proposals existed for a pull-out from Nawzad and Musa Qala, but said: "No decision has been made."

The senior British military sources insisted that total withdrawal from Musa Qala was not an option but acknowledged it was possible that the area in which troops currently operated in the district could be reduced to make available more resources for enhancing security in places such as Kandahar and Lashkar Gah.

Air Chief Marshal Sir Jock Stirrup, the Chief of the Defence Staff, also denied that Britain was planning to pull out of Musa Qala, but he confirmed on the BBC Andrew Marr show that Nato's International Security Assistance Force (Isaf) would be focusing more on Afghanistan's main population centres.

A Ministry of Defence spokesman said: "Focusing on people, not territory, is not a retreat, it is the strategy set out by the Prime Minister in April and by General McChrystal in his recent review of strategy for Isaf. Nevertheless there are currently no plans to withdraw from any area of Helmand."

US forces in eastern Afghanistan have already begun withdrawing from a number of combat outposts, mostly in remote areas close to the porous Pakistan border. Lieutenant-Colonel Todd Vician, US Army spokesman, confirmed that US forces have so far withdrawn from six outposts, four in Nuristan province and two in Paktika province.

Brigadier James Cowan who commands 11 Light Brigade in Helmand, denied that British troops might withdraw from outlying towns in the province. "We are here to protect Helmand, we have no plans whatsoever to withdraw," he said.

Destabilizing Baluchistan, Fracturing Pakistan -- Part I

2009-11-06T01:23:00.001-08:00

Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya

The Triangle of Jundallah, the Taliban, and Sipah-e-Sahaba

"Managed Chaos" is the proper term to describe the tensions in NATO-garrisoned Afghanistan and the border zones of Pakistan. Afghanistan and Pakistan, which are now being described by the Pentagon and NATO as the same front in the very same war, are tied to the Iranian border province of Sistan and Baluchistan or Sistan-Baluchistan. It is with the tenure of George W. Bush Jr. and his administration that Sistan-Baluchistan, with emphases on "Baluchistan" begun getting international attention through the ignition of a series of attacks inside the Iranian border with Pakistan by a group originally calling itself the "Army of God" or Jundallah in Arabic.

One must first take a closer look at Sistan-Baluchistan and the issues being depicted as the source of antagonism there before discussing Jundallah, the nature of its attacks, its source of support, and if the Pakistani government and the Obama Administration have been involved with Jundallah's attacks. So, with a purposeful focus on Baluchistan, what is Sistan-Baluchistan and where is it? The Iranian province of Sistan-Baluchistan, which is located in southeastern Iran, is in fact the blending of two different bodies, one is Sistan and the other is Baluchistan. Both were separate historical entities and Iranian provinces until they were amalgamated into one in 1959 under the reign of Mohammed Reza Pahlavi, the last shah or monarch of Iran.

Sistan according to some local traditions is the legendary home of the Iranian epic hero Rustam. Sistan is also where Iraq's Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani, who is an Iranian, originates from. In ethnic terms the people of Sistan are mostly Persians and Sistani. Sistani is a label that can be used to identify anyone from Sistan, but it also has two other meanings. Sistani in ethnographic terms is used to refer to a sub-population of the Baluch or Baluchi, which are a distinct Iranic ethno-linguistic group. The relationship between the Sistani and the Baluchi almost correlates with the affinities between the Flemish and the Dutch or of those between the Pathans (Pashto of Pakistan) and the Pashto in Afghanistan. What sets the Sistani apart and is a cause for their distinction is geography and, more importantly, the fact that they speak a localized dialect of the Persian language called Sistani.

Moving on, Baluchistan is the other part of the Iranian province of Sistan-Baluchistan. Baluchistan, however, is not limited to Iran and is also a larger region that encompasses southern Afghanistan and a large slice of Pakistani territory. Sistan can also be included or excluded from this broader region of Baluchistan. The coastal region of Makran, which runs through both Iran and Pakistan, is also a sub-region of Baluchistan. Makran is of great geo-strategic importance and is home to the Pakistani port of Gwadar that both the U.S. and China are deeply interested in as an energy terminal and a naval base.

The province of Baluchistan in Pakistan is where the overwhelming majority of the Baluchi live. Pakistani Baluchistan was once mostly populated by Baluch and other relatively indigenous people before British control and later waves of immigration that caused demographic changes. Starting in 1947 the mass immigration of new ethnic groups leaving India for Pakistan because they were Muslims and the conflict in Afghanistan, starting with the 1979 Soviet invasion, also changed Pakistani Baluchistan's ethnic composition. The Baluchi themselves, however, did not always live in Baluchistan. The Baluchi moved eastward to most of present-day Baluchistan from the Iranian province of Kerman or Kermania (Germania) during the period of Seljuk rule in Iran. The ancestors of the Baluchi also themselves had migrated to Kerman in earlier times.

Is Jundallah fighting for Baluch and Sunni Muslim rights against Persians and Shiite Muslims?

The genesis being presented about the Jundallah attacks in Baluchistan is offered as one that is dual-natured. Firstly the Jundallah attacks are being portrayed as being sparked on the basis of sectarianism and secondly on the basis of ethnicity. In this sense the intermittent attacks and explosions in Baluchistan are presented in the framework of a conflict between a confessional minority versus a confessional majority in Iran and to a lesser extent as an ethnic minority versus an ethnic majority.

One is almost tempted to state that the conflict between Tehran and Jundallah has been portrayed by Jundallah as one between Persians and Baluchi, which to some extent was originally how it was portrayed. In many places the media has framed it as such, along with the sectarian dimension of Sunnis versus Shiites. This is grossly inaccurate. Jundallah's later attacks were portrayed differently by the group itself, but it should be noted that the statements of Jundallah on its fight have changed too. Jundallah's attacks became mostly framed as being predominantly against the Iranian central government. The group even changed its name to the "People's Resistance Movement of Iran" to make it appear as an internal Iranian struggle against the government in Tehran.

As an important side note: albeit Persian is the official language of Iran, Persians are merely a plurality in Iran and it is fundamentally wrong to describe the Iranian attribute as Persian. Iran is not a Persian country as so many authors, journalists, and sadly scholars wrongly state; Iran is an Iranian country and the Persian identity, like Azerbaijani (Azeri/Azari) or Baluchi, is a subsidiary to this Iranian identity as an Iranologist would be able to explain. All Persians are Iranian, but all Iranians are not Persians.

Who are the Baluch?

Simply asked, what are the Baluch? Are they Iranian or not? Do the Baluchi as a whole have aspirations to create "Free Baluchistan" or their own state? Do the Baluchi want independence from Iran as is being reported in the U.S., France, Britain, Germany, Saudi Arabia, and several other countries? Once this is answered then Jundallah can be addressed.

Nomenclature is important in regards to understanding not only Baluchistan, but all Eurasia from Lagos to Vladivostok. In categorizing the ethno-linguistic cluster of peoples in the Iranian Plateau, which extends from Iran to Afghanistan and parts of Pakistan, one must grasp the understanding that the term Iranian is charged with multiple meanings. Iranian is a national, a linguistic, and an ethnic tag. These matrices can become very confusing when looking at questions concerning this area from an outside view, but yet are essential to understanding the nature of the subject.

Already as it is, ethnicity is a highly confusing topic with both subjective and objective elements. Imagine the confusion that would arise if the term "German" was being used, as it once frequently was, not only to identify German nationality and to designate German ethnicity (which is used to describe a whole people ranging from Germany to Austria and Switzerland), but to identify members of the Germanic branch of the Indo-European language family. Germanic includes English, Swedish, Norwegian, Danish, and Dutch, amongst other languages. Great confusion would arise from calling these other peoples German on top of their other labels. In regards to Iranian, this is the case. This is also compounded by the careless substitution of Iranian as a designation for Persian or vice-versa, which is similar to the misuse of the terms English and British.

To prevent confusion the term Iranic will be used in preference to the term Iranian in regards to ethno-linguistic designation(s) to help identify the additional attributes of either ethnicity, language, or both. Without turning this discourse into a treatise on language, one may also ask are ethnicity and language linked? Yes and no. Speaking English does not necessarily make one an Anglo-Saxon, just as speaking Spanish or Russian does not make one a member of those ethnic groups either. Ethnicity, however, historically does have a direct correlation with the origins of languages.

Moving forward, the Baluch originate from the area around the Caspian Sea in the Caucasus. Speaking strictly in ethnic terms, the Baluch are an Iranian or Iranic people. They are Iranian or Iranic, regardless of if they live in Iranian Baluchistan or Pakistani Baluchistan or in Afghanistan. Despite their more commonly darker phenotype (appearance) the Baluchi are of the same stock(s) as the Persians and Kurds. They also speak their own language, Baluchi. Baluchi is a Northwestern Iranic language, which is a sub-division of a broader linguistic grouping called Western Iranic. Northwestern Iranic includes Kurdish, the language of the Kurds, and Talysh, a language mostly spoken in the Iranian province of Gilan and in the Republic of Azerbaijan. In turn Western Iranic is part of the larger Iranic branch (or sub-branch, if you consider it one with Indo-Aryan or Indic) of the Indo-European language family, which includes the Slavic, Germanic, Romance, Celtic, Albanian, and Greek languages.

Persian, the official language of Iran, and Tajik are examples of Southwestern Iranic languages, which also belong to the larger Western Iranic group like both Baluchi and Kurdish. In regards to the Western Iranic languages they evolved from the three main Iranian groups of antiquity that moved into the Iranian Plateau from Europe and/or Central Asia. The Northwestern Iranic group developed from the dialects of the Parthians (who lived in Parthia, which excluding Hyrcania was roughly corresponding to the province of Khorasan) and the Medes (who lived in Media, which roughly covered northwestern Iran and parts of Iraqi Kurdistan), while the Southwestern Iranic group developed from the dialect of the ancient Persians (who lived in Persia/Persis or roughly the modern-day province of Pars/Fars in southwestern Iran). Pashto and Ossetian are respective modern examples of the Eastern Iranic group that also included Scythian, which was once spoken from the Ukraine and Russia to what is now Chinese Turkistan.

Like all other people, the Baluchi are also a mixture of new waves and different stocks of people, including the original Dravidian people who thousands of years ago lived in the Iranian Plateau before they were pushed southward or assimilated by the ancient Iranians as they migrated into Anatolia and the Iranian Plateau during a major period of Indo-European migration. The Brahui in Pakistan, which are closely tied to the Baluchi and very often mistaken for Baluchi, are a surviving remnant of this older Dravidian stock. Arabs and other Semitic peoples, as well as various groups from the littoral of the Indian Ocean, have also mixed with the Baluchi gene pool over time, especially in Makran.

Most the Baluch are also Muslims of the Sunni confession. The confessional difference between the Baluchi and the majority of Iranians has not always existed. It began under the Safavid Dynasty of Iran. During the Safavid period, when most other Iranians became Shiite Muslims, the Baluchi like many of the Kurds maintained their Sunnism. Some of the reasons for this had to do with clan autonomy from the central government and with the fact that these groups were on the frontiers of the Safavid Empire where defensive cooperation with their chieftains was important for the Safavid monarchs and thus they were relatively left undisturbed in regards to their confessions.

Difference of confession between the majority of the Baluch and the Iranian state have not been a major problem for the Baluchi. Nor have the Baluchi been barred from practicing their interpretation of Islam in Iran. In general Baluchi complaints resemble the complaints of Shiites or other ethnic groups, including Persians, against the Iranian government. Moreover, regardless of their ethnicity or their views on Islam, the main localized complaint of the residents of Sistan-Baluchistan has been underdevelopment in their province's rural areas. In contrast to the pictures being linked to Jundallah, Sistan-Baluchistan has enjoyed peace and stability, except for the narcotic smuggling that has involved transient elements from Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Baluchi Independence: Iran's Problem or Pakistan's Problem?

Aside from the opium wars between Iranian security forces and a multi-national narcotic smuggling network assisted by vast sections of the security and state apparatus of Pakistan, the greatest source of antagonism in the region of Baluchistan has been specific to the Pakistani side. Although the Baluchi are not a confessional minority in the mostly Sunni Muslim country of Pakistan, the Baluchi have been marginalization in Pakistan. This, however, should not be overstated either, but has resulted in a real and widely supported nationalist and secessionist movement in Pakistani Baluchistan. The Baluchistan Nationalist Party was formed on this basis and has made demands ranging from full independence from Pakistan to more local autonomy.

Baluchi separatism is not a factor in Iran, but it is a real force in Pakistan. The Baluchistan People's Front, which from Britain claims to represent the Baluchi in Iran also has no real popular base and is propped up by British and American support, whereas the Baluchistan Nationalist Party has a popular base of support in Pakistan. The Baluch feel they were forced to join Pakistan under pressure, especially in the case of the of the Khanate of Kalat (Qalat). Starting in 1948, Pakistan has seen five rounds of ethnic-based fighting in Baluchistan. Since the creation of Pakistan, the independence movement in Pakistani Baluchistan has gone so far as to openly wage war against the Pakistani government and military. This war between Baluchi fighters and the Pakistani military has been neglected by the same journalists and mainstream media outlets that report on Jundallah synonymously with the allegations of the systematic mistreatment of the Baluch in Iran. In this context, Jundallah's fighters are mostly imported from Pakistan and the problems of the Baluchi with the Pakistani government have deliberately been imported to Iran.

Misleading the World on Baluchistan

Returning to the question; do the Baluchi as a whole have aspirations to create "Free Baluchistan" or their own state? The answer has been given as no in regards to Iran, but a mixed yes when it comes to Baluchi feelings in Pakistan. Nevertheless, these differences amongst the Baluchi in Iran and Pakistan are generalized as one. This generalization is given so as to vindicate Jundallah as a home-grown Iranian movement that germinated out of the conditions on the ground in Iranian Baluchistan without the involvement of any external powers.

World view is categorically being misled on the Jundallah attacks in Baluchistan. The application of Cartesian Doubt is really needed when a discourse on Baluchistan is presented. Ethnic, religious, and sectarian differences do exist in Iranian Baluchistan as they do everywhere else without exception, but they are not major cleavages or forces of tension in multi-ethnic Iran. Any Iranologist or individual that knows Iran first hand will give this assessment. Tension does exist in Sistan-Baluchistan, but to an equal or far lesser extent than the tensions between the French and the Flemish in Belgium or the Québécois and English-Canadians in Canada.

In the onslaught of the media coverage of the series of attacks in Sistan-Baluchistan against Iranian security targets many journalists have presented the conflict as being one between Shiite Muslims and Sunni Muslims and one for Baluchi rights. For example, in the process Le Figaro, an influential French newspaper, has described the situation as one where a Sunni minority is fighting for their rights in the most generic and non-context specific terms. Not only are these reports being made in Lebanon by individuals with little expertise or knowledge about Iran, but misleadingly the small force that is Jundallah and the Baluchi peoples are systematically being equated as one entity. The heavy influence of the same rhetorical tactics used in favour of the March 14 Alliance in Lebanon and used to describe the so-called Shiite-Sunni tensions (which are really political tensions between the Future Movement and Hezbollah) in Lebanon are evident in the reports that are presented by Le Figaro without any real understanding for Baluchistan.

In Saudi Arabia, where sectarian hate has been heavily enforced by the Saudi media, the attacks in Baluchistan are being presented as Sunni Muslims fighting Shiite repression. Another example of misinformation comes from the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC). The BBC has steadily moved to a position where it has described the attacks in Baluchistan as attacks that have been perpetrated by an ethnic militia fighting for minority rights. Furthermore, while the BBC has generally designated other groups using the same tactics as terrorist organizations it has not done so for Jundallah.

Are the narratives behind the attacks in Baluchistan factual, even in the most subjective of terms? No, nothing can be further from the reality of the situation. It is somewhat of a giveaway that none of these reports even dare to venture into the theme of popular support for the Jundallah attacks by the people of Baluchistan. No exhaustive presentation of the Baluch has even been made. None of these reports even mention that many of the people and targets attacked have included Sunni Muslims. Nor is anything mentioned about the evidence Iran has provided to the United Nations, starting in 2007, validating Tehran's claims of American and British involvement.

Karkare Rewarded For Honesty

2009-11-05T22:41:00.001-08:00

By ALI SUKHANVER

After the Mumbai Blasts, the whole life in India began to revolve around this horrible incident. One can find the after shocks of this quake even after so many months. Certainly it was the worst episode in the Indian history of terrorism. The democratic people of India were of the opinion that the matter would be investigated thoroughly and the culprits would be penalized. In the beginning there was noticed a great hustle and bustle with reference to the investigations but then at once it all stopped after coming to a dead end. The statement of the Indian naval chief, questioning the expertise of the Indian marines put a full stop to the story. He had very boldly stated that the terrorists involved in the Mumbai Blasts could not have entered the Indian soil if the Indian marines were vigilant and alert. His statement was inwardly pointing towards the well wishers of the terrorists who were there to help out the terrorists in the garb of mariners. After this statement the government of India turned all its cannons towards Pakistan blaming that the terrorists belonged to Pakistan. The Pakistan government bore this blame with patience and provided all possible help and support to the Indian government regarding the investigations. Luckily it was found that the terrorists involved in this heinous activity were purely non-state actors and they had nothing to do with Pakistan. The honourable courts of Pakistan also did their best to see the matter in depth and found the alleged ones totally innocent. But all these sincere efforts by Pakistan could not satisfy the Indian government and it tried to copy the style and manner of the US government by saying again and again , Do More , Do More , We are not Satisfied.'

The Mumbai Blasts have been a favourite topic of discussions and analysis throughout the world since after their occurrence. Most of the analysts smell the Hindutva Philosophy behind these blasts. Hindutva is a term coined by Vinayak Damodar Savarkar in his 1923 pamphlet entitled, 'Hindutva: Who is a Hindu?' This philosophy urges the Hindus to get united for crushing the Non-Hindus and the Hindus mean those who are Hindu by belief not by land. It is the Hindutva philosophy which gave birth to the organizations such as the RSS, Bharatiya Janata Party, Bajrang Dal, and the Vishwa Hindu Parishad.

This ideology has existed since the early 20th century, but came to prominence in Indian politics in the late 1980s, when two events attracted a large number of mainstream Hindus to the movement , according to a world renowned encyclopedia. The first of these events was the Rajiv Gandhi government's use of its large Parliamentary Majority to overturn a Supreme Court verdict granting alimony to an old woman that had angered many Muslims. The second was the dispute over the 16th century Mughal Babri Mosque in Ayodhya � built by Babur after his first major victory in India. The Supreme Court of India refused to take up the case in the early 1990s, leading to a huge outcry. Tempers soon flared, and a huge number of nationalist Hindus from all parts of India razed the mosque in late 1992, causing nationwide communal riots. The razing of the mosque and subsequent conflict arguably lifted the BJP and Hindutva to international prominence. Today this Hindutva Philosophy is nurturing so many Hindu extremist organizations which are always busy in conspiring against the Muslims whether they are in India or outside India. To achieve their heinous desires these organizations don't spare even the innocent Hindus who have nothing to do with extremism. The killing of the former Maharashtra ATS chief Hemant Karkare during the Mumbai blasts episode is also one of such activities of the Hindu extremists. Recently a new book came to surface with the title,' Who Killed Karkare?' The writer S.M.Mushrif, a former IG Police of Maharashtra has pointed out the presence of a nationwide network of Hindutva terror which has its roots spread up to Nepal and Israel is out to destroy India and to remold it into same kind of Afghanistan under the Taliban. The writer has reconstructed a fearsome picture out of former Maharashtra ATS chief Hemant Karkare's chargesheet against alleged Hindutva terrorists like Lt. Col. Purohit, Sadhvi Pragyasingh Thakur and others. The chargesheet pointed towards an astonishing nationwide conspiracy with international support to destabilize the constitutional order of the secular democratic Indian state and replace it by a Hindutva state run according to a new Constitution. The conspirators were planning for a massive bloodshed, using bomb attacks on religious places to trigger an anti-Muslim holocaust.

According to the reports, Hemant Karkare, the former ATS chief, was one of the few honest and diligent officers .He was well aware of the forces which were eager to destabilize India. He did a lot of research in this context and exposed a number of retired and serving army and intelligence officers involved in the conspiracy against the democratic secular India. He succeeded in tracing a plan which indicated the possible assassination of 70 Indians who were creating hurdles in the projection of Hindutva philosophy. Most of these 70 targets were the Indians of high profile and in case of their assassination; so many Muslims could have been framed. If Karkare had not exposed the heinous designs of these Hindutva Plans, there would have been an endless blood-shed in India taking lives of thousands of Muslims and surely hundreds of Hindus because without killing of Hindus , the picture would not seem real. Moreover it is a part of the Hindutva philosophy to kill even the Hindus if it is in the greater interest of Hinduism. The unlucky Hemant Karkare is also one of the escape goats in this context

The affairs of the country in India are run by a particular group of extremist Hindus. These extremists are all time supporting and financing the culprit organizations which support the Hindutva philosophy. They are always trying to shelter the Hindutva terrorists. The horrible Samjhota Express incident provides a very strong proof in this regard. On the Basis of the reports provided by the Indian IB The government of India started blaming the Pakistan ISI for carrying out these blasts ; but at a later stage Hemant Karkare disclosed the reality that Lt.Col.Prohat of the Indian army was the person who provided the RDX used in the blasts. Col.Prohat had accepted the allegation during the investigations. The IB was not happy over Karkare's honest investigations so he was removed from the scene. Very soon after his killing, K.P.Raghuvanshi, a police officer with extremely low credibility in the Muslims was brought to the scene to replace Karkare.This K.P.Raghuvanshi has a bad repute for letting off known Hindutva terrorists and framing Muslim youth even in bomb attack cases on mosques. But we cannot condemn the IB or the Hindutva terrorists for awarding the death penalty to Hemant Karkare because all is fair in love and war.

Author is Pakistan based bilingual analyst on national and international strategic and defense affairs.

Operation Rah-e-Nijat (Freedom Path) in South Waziristan

2009-11-04T22:41:00.001-08:00

Brig Asif Haroon Raja

FATA consisting of seven tribal agencies is backward and poverty stricken with little means of employment. The tribesmen are excellent fighters, revengeful, hospitable, fiercely independent, religious and proud of their traditions. They have all along remained loyal to Pakistan and defended western border without any assistance from Pakistan army. After 1947, South Waziristan Agency (SWA) was penetrated for the first time by regular troops in 2002 to flush out foreigners under intense pressure from Bush Administration. It ignited fire of militancy which kept spreading. After fighting the Waziris under Nek Muhammad and signing Shakai peace deal with him, troops entered Mehsud area within SWA in 2004. They could reach up to short of Srarogha after which operation was halted and peace agreement inked with Baitullah Mehsud. Thereon, operation was launched in North Waziristan Agency (NWA) which also culminated in uneasy peace deal with Gul Bahadur led Taliban. During second operation in Mehsud area in 2007 in which major battles took place in Shrawangai-Tiarza-Kunigram areas, 250 soldiers were deceptively taken hostage at Khaisura. To get the hostages released a deal had to be brokered with Baitullah and forward check posts were pulled back.

In November 2007, an inconclusive operation was launched in Swat. In January 2008, Srarogha fort in SWA was captured and inmates taken hostage by Mehsuds. Series of military operations were launched in 2008 which included Khyber Agency in June, Bajaur Agency in July and Swat in August. Another operation was launched in Swat in first week of May 2009 which broke the back of Fazlullah led militants. However, when acts of terror continued and worsened internal security situation, it was concluded that Hakimullah led Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) with its main base of operation in SWA was responsible for terrorism. It was therefore decided to launch a full-fledged operation to dismantle the network of TTP.

SWA stretches from Jandola in the northeast to Wana in southwest and is divided between Mahsud, Wazir and Bhittani tribes. Area stretching from Kot Nawaz-Makeen in the north to Shrawangai-Sarwakai in the south is inhabited by tribes of Mehsuds. Important towns and villages in this area are Makeen, Ladha, Srarogha, Kotkai, Kunigram. Remaining half of SWA from excluding Sarwakai up to Wana and Tanai is the domain of Waziri tribes. Other important towns in Wazir area are Angoor Adda and Shakai. Bhittanis followed by Mehsuds are in majority in Jandola. Tank which is a settled town and connected with Dera Ismail Khan (DIK) also has large concentration of Bhittanis and Mehsuds. While Jandola is the gateway into SWA, Wana is the major bustling city. NWA spreads from Miramshah-Mir Ali-Razmak in the north up to short of Makeen in the south. While Wazir belt is connected with Afghan border, Mehsud belt is not directly connected with Durand Line and for movement across its residents have to traverse through Waziri area or through NWA. Movement by foot or by mules across rugged mountains is however possible.

SWA is served by main artery of Bannu-DIK-Tank-Jandola. From Jandola, one branch moves to Spinkai Roghzai- Kotkai- Srarogha-Makeen; the other along Jandola-Sarwakai-Wana. From Wana, the road traverses further south towards Tanai-Sambaza-Zhob-Mulslimbagh-Quetta. Within Mehsud area, three arteries run from north to south, which are inter-connected. Road Makeen-Ladha enters into NWA at Cheena-Kot Nawaz. From Makeen, one road leads southwards to Tiarza and the other to Ladha. From Ladha, one branch moves towards Kunigram-Chalweshtai-Shrawangai-Torwam Bridge from where it enters Wazir area at Shakai and hits Wana. Khaisura is closer to Shakai. From Torwam, one track moves eastwards towards Gurgara Sar-Shinsar-Barwand. From Barwand, one road leads north-eastwards to Srarogha and the other to Jandola.

Mehsud area has all along remained a no-go area where runaways would seek refuge, or kidnapped persons or hijacked cars taken. Being hot headed and aggressive by nature, they have never been under the effective control of political agent or law enforcing agencies in the form of South Waziristan Scouts and Khasadars. Chechens, Uzbeks, Tajiks, Arabs who had taken part in Afghan jihad in 1980s and in 2001 had taken refuge in SWA, got married and preferred to settle down permanently since they had been refused entry by countries of their origin. They found the environment most suitable to continue with Jihadist activities unobserved and unscathed.

Uzbeks, mostly belonging to Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan are in larger strength and are the most hardy and ruthless fighters. Till June 2009, not a single drone attack came on positions held by Baitullah since he was on the payroll of CIA and RAW. Reportedly, he had over $2 billion in cash and arms worth $1 billion which enabled him to pay handsome salaries to his fighters and heavy compensation to families of suicide bombers. With plenty of resources and no other errand to do, Baitullah established Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) in December 2007 and started dreaming of a caliphate. Assisted by foreigners and his confidantes, he got busy in recruiting, training and stocking armaments provided by foreign sources in Kabul. Commanders for each agency were nominated. Bajaur Agency and Swat were turned into fortresses. In anticipation to a showdown with the army in his home ground, he appointed commanders for each town in Mehsud belt and turned every house into a fortress and caves, mountain hideouts and tunnels into arms storehouses. Peaceful residents were terrorized into silence while over 500 elders and Maliks assassinated. Promise of Islamic laws and portrayal of army as American mercenary army were other factors which helped fake Taliban in gaining sympathy of the locals

To approach Mehsud area, the attacker has to first tackle Ahmadzai Wazir dominated inhabited SWA in the south, or Othmanzai Wazir-Dawar dominated NWA in the north, or Bhittani dominated Jandola in southeast. Mehsud belt tucked deep inside treacherous terrain of SWA is well served with inter-connected roads and tracks, which allows militants to shift or reinforce threatened sectors. High mountains covered with thick vegetation together with dense forests provide excellent hiding places and vantage points. Defiles and valleys canalize intruders and make the area an ideal place for planning and conducting guerrilla operations.

Wazir-Mehsud antagonism is age-old but sometime back Maulvi Nazir heading Ahmadzai Waziris suspecting that the army was directing drone attacks on his positions had distanced himself from the army and had become an ally of Baitullah. Gul Bahadur heading Othmanzais having similar grouses had also joined the alliance and so had Faqir Muhammad in command of Bajaur chapter of Taliban. Sudden death of Baitullah in August 2009 as a result of drone attack coupled with successful military operation in Swat and adjoining areas gave a death blow to the alliance. Both Nazir and Gul Bahadur reluctant to accept leadership of Hakimullah Mehsud have distanced themselves from TTP. More inclined towards Jihad in Afghanistan, they promised to stay neutral in case of an operation against Mehsuds. Both have endured maximum brunt of drone attacks for being allegedly linked with Jalaluddin Haqqani and for maintaining pro-Pakistan stance. Loss of Swat front and neutralization of two flank guards of Mehsud belt made the position of Hakimullah led TTP in SWA exposed and vulnerable. The TTP otherwise is going through a period of turmoil because of war of succession and tightened noose of the army around its domain in SWA since July. Hakimullah has not been able to assert his authority since he took over under extremely turbulent circumstances. His grip over TTP has become fragile which is on the verge of breakup.

Like in Swat, TTP under Hakimullah has no dearth of cash and armaments. Most weapons are of Russian and Indian origin, which have been supplied to this mercenary outfit from Afghanistan, and stored in caves, tunnels and selected houses in each village/town. They have been receiving concerted training in art of guerrilla warfare by Indian commandoes and Afghan instructors who had taken part in 1980s Afghan Jihad. Qari Hussain, an expert in training suicide bombers and some others are feverishly engaged in training boys of tender age. Orphans from Azad Kashmir were whisked away soon after the devastating 2005 earthquake. These and other destitute are their preferred choices since this category can easily be misled and brainwashed. Each house with a high compound wall has an MG in fixed role facing the entrance door, a manned observation post on the roof and a cave towards the rear side. Anyone trying to barge in is automatically engaged by the cleverly concealed MG, allowing reaction time to the inmates to escape through the cave. Nodal points on mountains overlooking valleys and towns/villages duly converted into strong points guard approaches. IEDs innovatively fixed astride roads/tracks are planted extensively to cause heavy damage to intruding troops and vehicles.

The TTP lost public support when Fazlullah led Taliban in Swat drunk with power and affluence instead of letting Nizam-e-Adl get introduced, refused to de-weaponise and abide by Swat agreement signed in February 2009 and occupied Lower Dir and Shangla. Successful Swat operation Rah-e-Rast and return of over 2 million displaced persons to their homes turned the tide and forced the militants to run in panic. Establishment of linkage of militants with foreign powers further brought them in bad books of the people. Spate of acts of terror in September-October made the public averse to Taliban and demand for uprooting their main base in SWA grew louder. The public as well as all political parties less Jamaat-e-Islami, Jamiat Ulema Islam and Tehrik-e-Insaf stood behind the army.

Additional troops had started to move into Waziristan from July onwards in anticipation to a decisive battle in SWA. USA had been exerting extreme pressure on our government to commence operation in Waziristan in conjunction with Swat operation. Army disfavoured opening of two fronts simultaneously particularly when troops were engaged in Swat, Lower and Upper Dir, Buner, Shangla, Bajaur, Mohmand Agency, Khyber Agency and Darra Adam Khel. It would have amounted to dilution and dispersion of resources thereby losing concentration of effort in all sectors. It took its time to allow consolidation of gains made on Swat front. Period from July to mid October was judiciously utilized for gaining intelligence to formulate plans, getting to know strength and weaknesses of militants, acclimatization of troops and familiarization of area of operations, completing its operational deficiencies, tying up nuts and bolts and streamlining drills how to confront challenges of IEDs, militants adept in guerrilla warfare and rugged terrain. For the first time, the army was not launched in haste and given adequate preparation time and moral support. During preparatory manoeuvre, troops continued with their creeping forward policy to isolate and encircle targeted area from multiple sides. This tactic curtailed liberty of action of Hakimullah led militants and gave psychological ascendancy to the military. At the same time, both Maulvi Nazir and Gul Bahadur were kept under tight control and no deal was made to keep them friendly.

Once the go ahead was given by Federal and NWFP governments, operation Rah-e-Nijat was unfolded from three directions on 17 October. One prong moved from north to south along axis Razmak-Makeen, the second from southeast to northwest along axis Jandola-Kotkai-Srarogha, the third from south to north along axis Shakai-Shrawangai-Ladha. Balanced force was employed on each axis of advance and movement made on broad front to overcome opposition with speed and to home on to vital complex of Ladha-Makeen. The three pronged manoeuvre aimed at outmanoeuvring and encircling the adversary and blocking all avenues of escape or reinforcement from elsewhere. Soldiers climbed the rugged mountains like mountain leopards and rolled down to rupture the positions occupied by militants on hilltops.

Within fortnight, considerable progress has been made on all axes causing disarray among militants. Wireless intercepts indicated signs of chaos among them. Many among them have shaved their beards and trimmed their beards and are running for life. Troops on Razmak pincer have secured Kot Azam and Cheena and are fast moving towards critical position of Makeen. On Jandola axis, troops have captured important places of Spinkai Roghzai, Kotkai which is hometown of Hakimullah and Qari Hussain and have now over run the pivotal position of Srarogha and succeeded in occupying important hilltops around the town which is facilitating their mopping up operation. This axis is now poised to move towards Makeen. On Shakai-Shrawangai axis, Shrawangai, Khaisura, Barwand, Torwam Bridge and key town Kunigram have been captured. Troops on this axis are all set to attack vital target of Ladha within next 24 hours, which is 8 km ahead of Kunigram.

Although the militants put up stiff resistance at each point, however the resolve and determination of assaulting troops led by officers was so strong that they had to give in. Rapid successes made by the brave-hearts have shattered centuries-old myth of invincibility of tribesmen of this region. Terrorists are failing and will fail because they are fighting for a wrong cause and at the behest of foreign powers. Huge caches of arms, ammunition, explosives, suicide jackets and material required for suicide jackets have been seized; chemical factories making IEDs taken over. Five truckloads of Indian origin arms, ammunition, medical equipment and literature have been apprehended from Kunigram. One laptop of 1000 GB with external drive containing all sorts of data, training lessons, and videos of criminal activities of so-called Taliban recovered. Tunnels laden with armaments in hundreds have been discovered in captured areas. One of the tunnels in Kotkai is 500 meters long. These tunnels were in use for treating injured, for rest and refitting, for training and hiding suicide bombers and for making escape good. Houses with compounds and high mud walls where suicide bombers were imparted training have also been unearthed. Weapons and equipment seized include heavy MGs, RPGs, 12.7mm and 14.5mm guns, 107mm rockets, AK-47 rifles, SMGs, missile launchers, anti-aircraft guns, grenades, anti-tank mines, chemicals, explosives, wireless sets, jamming equipment.

Phase one of operation has been completed and the decisive battle will be fought in the vital complex of Ladha-Makeen in one week time. It will be the hardest battle since apart from presence of top leadership of TTP; majority of militants uprooted from forward positions would have withdrawn to these towns and would give last ditch battle. Reportedly strength of local militants is around 10000-12000 and that of foreigners 1200-1500. So far about 300-400 have been killed, which implies that bulk is still alive. Either most have withdrawn to Ladha-Makeen area, or to NWA. Reward money of Rs 50 million each for Hakimullah, Qari Hussain, Waliur Rehman and 10-20 million for 24 terrorist commanders has been announced.

Although border security check posts along Afghan-Pakistan border have been deviously vacated by US-NATO troops at a crucial time when operation had just begun, no RAW-RAAM agent would like to jump into boiling cauldron of SWA. If they come they are sure to die a horrible death. Afghan Taliban have categorically stated that they would abide by their policy of not confronting Pak Army. Terrorists from other militant groups linked with TTP outside the battle zone are now in no position to come to the aid of beleaguered Taliban. They would otherwise not like to get sucked into killing area and get killed. Ongoing suicide attacks are being undertaken by those who had been already launched from SWA in September, or by other banned groups linked with TTP, or by RAW-RAAM trained suicide bombers and terrorists. Several RAW agents have been caught in last few days. Possibility of involvement of Blackwater elements in terrorist activities in major cities of Punjab, NWFP and Islamabad cannot be ruled out.

Successful completion of Rah-e-Nijad would certainly help in curbing terrorism to a great extent but as long as six foreign agencies in Kabul busy hatching conspiracies and launching covert operations against Pakistan do not wind up their offices and return to their respective homes, terrorism would not get eliminated. Likewise, as long as our rulers follow US friendly and anti-people policies and do not address root causes, terrorists would keep multiplying. Now that Indian role in destabilizing Pakistan has been thoroughly exposed, it is to be seen whether US Administration would continue to play a double game by defending India and pressing Pakistan to continue doing more and more. New battlegrounds will be created to keep the army bogged down. Going by the logic of Hillary Clinton that it is difficult to believe that Pakistan military leadership didn't know the existence of Al-Qaeda leadership in Pakistan since 2002, how should Pakistanis get convinced that RAW is undertaking covert operations from Afghan soil without the knowledge of USA. How and why should we accept the tainted logic of USA that India is no threat to Pakistan? Time for US military in Afghanistan is running out and it must know that Pakistan and not India or unpopular Karzai regime will help in providing safe and honourable exit to US forces. US leadership must listen to the voice of American people who want US soldiers to return to their homes.

Brig Asif Haroon is Member Board of Advisors, Opinion Maker. He is a defence and security analyst based at Rawalpindi and author of several books. He has been Military Attaché in Egypt.

202 Blackwater Personnel Arrive In Islamabad?

2009-11-04T22:11:00.000-08:00

By NISAR MEHDI
Wednesday, 4 November 2009.
The Nation
WWW.AHMEDQURAISHI.COM

KARACHI, Pakistan-Foreigners affiliated with the notorious private military contractor Blackwater, later renamed as Xe Services LLC, arrived in Islamabad on Tuesday through a PIA flight, sources told TheNation.

"Of the 274 passengers, who boarded Pakistan's national flag carrier-PIA, flight PK-786 from Heathrow Airport UK, 202 were foreigners but they were fluently speaking Urdu language," disclosed the sources.

The officials on duty at Shaheed Benazir International Airport Islamabad said, "We had instructions to allow the foreigners entry without custom procedure."

The sources said that the plane reached Islamabad airport at 4:08am PST, and they had received official instructions from the authorities not to inspect any of them and clear them immediately from the airport.

An official of PIA confirmed that the PIA flight PK-786 from Heathrow reached Islamabad at its destination at 04:08 am and said that the plane had the capacity of 358 passengers but total 274 passengers travelled on the flight.

He declined to comment the presence of large number of foreigners in the flight saying that they had no information in this regard.

Former Chief of Army Staff Mirza Aslam Baig has accused former President Pervez Musharraf of giving Blackwater a green signal to carry out its terrorist operations in the cities of Islamabad, Rawalpindi, Peshawar and Quetta.

According to a August 20, 2009 report in the New York Times by Mark Mazzetti, the Central Intelligence Agency in 2004 hired contractors from the private security contractor Blackwater USA as part of a secret programme to locate and assassinate top operatives of Al-Qaeda.

"Blackwater employees hired to guard American diplomats in Iraq were accused of using excessive force on several occasions, including shootings in Baghdad in 2007 in which 17 civilians were killed. Iraqi officials have since refused to give the company an operating licence," wrote Mazzetti.

"Several current and former government officials interviewed for this article spoke only on the condition of anonymity because they were discussing details of a still classified programme," the NYT reported.

The newspaper report said that despite publicly breaking with it, the State Department continued to award the company, formerly known as Blackwater, more than $400 million in contracts to fly its diplomats around Iraq, guard them in Afghanistan, and train security forces in anti-terrorism tactics at its remote camp in North Carolina.

Every indication suggests that the US Embassy in Islamabad, which is being expanded into the world's largest US embassy, has brought in Blackwater without clearance from Pakistani security authorities and with direct help from the unpopular pro-US government in Islamabad.

Waziristan Operation ?Some Ground Realities

2009-11-04T21:45:00.001-08:00

Iftikhar Momin

South Waziristan, given a combination of forbidding terrain and entrenched presence of the hardcore elements of TTP and al-Qaeda fighters, is a tough military nut to crack. The situation has been building up for a considerable time and as the Pakistan Army moves ahead to eliminate and flush out some of the most feared al-Qaeda fighters along with their TTP henchmen and destroy their infrastructure, the enormity of the challenge is not lost on any one. It is the largest ever anti-terrorist operation that has been mounted on either side of the Pak-Afghan border, in which 30,000 Pakistani troops have been committed. Its outcome is bound to have a deep impact on the war against terror not only in the region but also on security of metropolises around the globe.

The objective of the operation is to break the stranglehold of al-Qaeda, who in close collaboration with TTP, is holding the Mehsud tribesmen to ransom in their own land. It is a measure of the desperate situation that centuries' old traditional hierarchy of tribal authority lies wasted and warlords, in most cases Taliban upstarts, now call the shots and hold sway in the badlands of Waziristan. Such vacuum of authority has thrown up a string of maverick Taliban commanders aligned with al-Qaeda, including Nek Muhammad, Abdullah Mehsud, Baitullah Mehsud and now Hakeemullah Mehsud, who have turned the South Waziristan area into the heart of darkness feeding destructive instability into entire Fata region and beyond.

Terrorists of all hue, involved in acts of terrorism, have sought refuge here. The trails of all major acts of terrorism in and outside Pakistan inevitably lead to this fountainhead of terrorism. Battle hardened foreign fighters; Arabs, Chechen particularly Uzbeks, have thrived here under the umbrella of al-Qaeda. The threat level has made an operation inevitable and costs are estimated to be high.

Even as the operation moves forward in face of tough and determined resistance, some elements in foreign media have raised the issue of Pak Army's 'understanding' with tribal chiefs Maulvi Nazir and Hafiz Gul Bahadar; Taliban commanders in Northern Waziristan, who have agreed not to interfere with operations in Southern Waziristan. This certainly is a pragmatic political move, which not only provides a greater freedom of movement to the Pak Army against TTP and al-Qaeda but also reduces opposition to the conduct of operations in South Waziristan. Taliban movement has many factions and it is important that the campaign against TTP and al-Qaeda in South Waziristan remains proscribed to the intended scope.

It is important for Pakistan to ensure that Taliban resistance in Afghanistan should not combines with TPP and al-Qaeda to join the fight in South Waziristan. Such a contingency may suit other players in the game but this scenario needs to be avoided by Pakistan at all cost. The 'understanding' serves to emphasize the ideological divide in the Taliban movement and should be seriously considered by US and NATO forces that tend to treat the resistance in Afghanistan as monolithic and are routinely tempted to bite more than what can be chewed.

It is good that US for the present have accepted the aims and objectives of Rah-i-Nijat in an understanding spirit. "We have a shared goal here and the shared goal is fighting violent extremism," State Department spokesman said at a briefing.

It is however the Indian response that, coming at a time when Pak Army is seized with the campaign in South Waziristan, should prove instructive in understanding the Pakistani threat perception vis-à-vis India. Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, while making a veiled reference to Pakistan, during his address the top commanders of the three services, said that the situation in India's immediate neighborhood had worsened and expressed deep concern over intelligence reports of "imminent terror attacks" in the country.

To many Pakistani observers what he meant to communicate was that any terrorist incident occurring on Indian soil may see a repetition of the 2001 -2002 confrontation that followed the attack on the Indian Parliament on 13 Dec 2001. Why should he raise the possibility of a terrorist strike in India and by implication hold Pakistan responsible for it should be of interest to US military leadership which tends to scoff at the Pakistani assertions that even in the current state of affairs the major threat to Pakistan's security emanated from India.

The veiled threat may be attributed to the Indian anxiety caused by dismantling of al-Qaeda/TPP terror network in which it has invested heavily. India has not lacked in motivation to build up the menace of TPP in a relentless proxy war. It is also worried that a defeat of her protégés will make its position in Afghanistan difficult to sustain.

For Pakistan severing of the umbilical cord that links TPP with the Indian bases in Afghanistan should remain a top priority. Sealing of border with Afghanistan thus emerges as an imperative of the campaign in which US and NATO forces should play an active part.

Operation Rah-i-Nijat has taken a good start and is well onto its way to success. It should, God willing, come to a completion within the six to eight weeks period before the onset of a freezing winter which will limit the conduct of large scale operations. Its focus must remain on isolating the al-Qaeda, TPP and a clutch of other terror outfits from the local population of Mehsuds, followed by annihilation in detail. While holding onto the cleared land will remain important, to prevent a comeback by terrorists, initiation of political and developmental initiatives to utilize the window of opportunity provided by Operation Rah-i-Nijat is paramount so that the militants' hold over Fata can be effectively broken. A humane and well-organized care of the IDPs should prove a good starting point in launching a campaign for the hearts and minds of the local populace, which remains the ultimate objective of the campaign in South Waziristan.