Muhammad Munir

The recent incidents of extra judicial killings of an Indian prisoner/ convicted terrorist Sarabjit Singh in Pakistani jail and a Pakistani prisoner/convicted spy Mr Sanaullah in Indian jail, have shattered all hopes for peaceful and normal relations between the two important South Asian countries- Pakistan and India. This shows an abnormal state of affairs on both sides. The mindset of hatred dominates without showing any tolerance for each other.

In order to avoid violent incidents at Line of Control (LoC) and extra judicial killing of prisoners, there is an urgent need to evolve a joint mechanism by both countries to safeguard the rights of prisoners. The best option is exchange of such prisoners on reciprocal basis. Track II channel needs to be revitalized. Over a period of time this channel has become dominated by ex-government officials; whereby, Track II effort has not been able to maintain its own stance on contentious issues and proponents of Track II tend to speak the official language.

Although, there is a lot of change in Pakistan regarding improvement of relations with India as almost all the main political parties of Pakistan are supporters of having good relations with India, but on the other hand in India it is on the other way round. Not only the political parties but even the courts in India are influenced by pre-dominant anti-Pakistan opinion prevailing in India. The hasty death sentence given by Indian courts to a Kashmiri youth Muhammad Afzal Guru on February 9, 2013 is an example. His execution sparked mass protests and resentment amongst political circles in Indian Occupied Kashmir for not following proper legal and judicial norms, instead of handing over dead body to his family it was buried inside the jail and Indian Security forces used brutal force against the peaceful Kashmiri protestors.

Among the serious disputes that were the product of hasty, unimaginative and surgical partition of the British India, the water dispute and the ongoing Kashmir dispute were probably most complicated. The water dispute surfaced when the Indian Punjab cut off the flow of waters in April 1948. Given the uncertainty of rains, agriculture was heavily dependent upon the river waters. No dispute generated so much bitterness as did the one over the flow of waters to Pakistan. For Pakistan, Water issue is as important as is the Kashmir issue.

Indian attitude towards its smaller neighbouring state and her dream to see herself beyond the region is considered one of the major challenges to regional security. India is becoming more arrogant towards Pakistan after it has strengthened her strategic ties with USA .Indian influence has been increased globally due to US strategy of making it a leading power Asia Pacific. On the other hand Pakistan has been facing severe security and economic challenges due her involvement in war on terror. India is trying her best to get maximum benefits out of this situation. On one hand India has hardened her stance on various issues such as Kashmir, Siachen, Sir Creek and on water issue.

On the other hand India has been able to get tacit support from international organizations such as International Court of Arbitration (ICA) against violation of the Indus Water Treaty. On May 17, 2010, Pakistan had instituted arbitral proceedings against India under the Indus Waters Treaty 1960 and approached the International Court of Arbitration (ICA) against violation of the treaty. The ICA granted a stay and stopped India from constructing the 330MW Kishanganga hydroelectric project in occupied Kashmir.

Later court’s partial decision is clear in this regard that it permits India to divert water for power generation but will determine limits and parameters of the diversion. The court will define a minimum flow regime and thus India will be unable to divert permanently complete winter flows over a period of six to eight months in a year. The erroneous perception stems from Pakistan’s slip to take timely action against illegalities. India proceeded with the construction of works not permitted under the treaty and kept Pakistan engaged in correspondence and negotiations for years while taking their projects to a stage of a fait accompli.

The waters of the Indus River and tributaries like the Jhelum — and the dams built on them by India — have long been one of the main points of contention between the two countries , along with the disputed region of Kashmir itself and cross-border terrorism. Pakistan, whose agriculture-dominated economy is heavily reliant on the Indus and its tributaries, fears upstream dams allow India to manipulate the flows of water as it sees fit. Many in Pakistan accuse New Delhi of wantonly exacerbating the country’s dire water shortages, choking its agricultural production and ruining livelihoods. Pakistan should continue to pursue the ongoing water related cases at various international forums with vigilance and responsibility.

There is no doubt that today a realization exists in the both countries that their development and progress depend on good relations with each other. The leadership in Pakistan and India are trying to sort out their differences for the sake of human progress and regional cooperation. The first step in this regard is to shed away the past prejudices and create an environment of mutual trust. At the same time some scholars in India are trying to propagate that in Pakistan, political parties and military are not on the same page regarding relations with India. “Pakistan seemed to be balancing the interests of the political parties with the interest of the Army.

There appears to be a broad understanding among the political parties in Pakistan to stay engaged with India with the objective of reducing bilateral tensions. Second, there is a conscious effort not to over-emphasise India as an enemy. On the other hand a majority in the Army do strongly believe that India is an existential threat along with the internal security threats”( Smruti S. Pattanaik ,IDSA Comment, January 18,2013). Keeping in view this kind of Indian propaganda it is hoped that newly elected government of Mian Muhammad Nawaz Sharif , while announcing national agenda, should convey to the world that the political and military leadership in Pakistan are on the same page as for as Pakistan’s national interests are concerned.

—The writer is working as Research Fellow at IPRI.

 Although elections 2013 were free and fair, yet isolated incidents of rigging which are very common in South Asia are creating uncertainty in Pakistan where terrorists continue their subversive activities to further destabilise the country by blocking the way of democracy. Even, observers of the EU remarked that only 10 percent rigging occurred, while on the whole, elections were fair. However, democracy, terrorism and uncertainty are inter-related, which need appropriate analysis.

 Taking serious notice of the rigging reports, Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) which agreed for pre-elections in some constituencies and polling stations said on May 17, this year that the presiding officers would be held accountable for every single ballot paper, emphasising that the system put in place would not spare any faker.

While taking cognisance of the multi-faceted crises including terrorism, Chief of Awami National Party (ANP) Asfandyar Wali Khan accepted defeat in elections and congratulated President of PML-N, Mian Nawaz Sharif whose party got majority of seats in the National Assembly and Punjab Assembly. He elaborated that pre-poll rigging was recorded in shape of terror-attacks on ANP and from March 30, 2013 to May 11, 31; these attacks killed 61 leaders and workers of his party. But, for the national interest of the country, he even welcomed the prospective government of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province. Earlier, Pakistan Peoples Party also congratulated, Nawaz Sharif and recognised his majority-mandate.

Regrettable, on May 15, Chief of Muttahida Qaumi Movement (MQM), Altaf Hussain in a telephonic address to activists—staging a sit-in before the Election Office in Karach asked the establishment to separate Karachi from the rest of Pakistan, if they did not like the public mandate of his party. Main aim of such derogatory remarks is to incite the general masses of Karachi against the federation of Pakistan. On May 14, PTI staged a sit-in against rigging of elections in NA-250, and Altaf Hussain stated that he would unleash his party workers on the protesters who would cut them to pieces. Meanwhile, on May 17, MQM rejected the decision of ECP and boycotted re-elections in 43 polling stations of the constituency. Separately, Jamaat-e-Islami (JI) and some other religious parties also held a protest and boycotted the re-elections, demanding re-polls in Karachi and Hyderabad. Now PTI candidates won the seats from NA-250, PS-112 and PS-113 in Karachi. But, both MQM and PTI are observing strike on May 20 against each other, which could further deteriorate the situation of Karachi.

Besides, Sindh Vice President Zarah Shahid Hussain of PTI was murdered on May 18 in Karachi and Imran Khan directly held Altaf Hussain responsible for his assassination, saying that the MQM chief had openly threatened the PTI leaders and workers.

However, at this critical juncture, Pakistan is facing worst crises like unemployment, poverty, corruption, ill-planned policies and energy problem in wake of perennial wave of terror-assaults—internal and external threats. In this respect, the militants of the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) and its affiliated groups who had accelerated their terror-activities to sabotage the elections failed in their nefarious designs as they did not want to see democracy to be flourished in the country. Despite their subversive activities and threats, a majority of people cast their vote, and turn over was more than 60 percent.

While accepting responsibility, TTP had not only felt pride for latest terror-activities which killed several innocent people and candidates, but had also threatened to continue such attacks in future. For the aims, in the recent past, the TTP militants had distributed pamphlets in Buner, Peshawar and different areas of Karachi, warning citizens against attending political rallies and casting their votes at polling stations. While rejecting the elections, TTP spokesperson Ehsanullah Ehsan said that democracy was un-Islamic and western system of government.

It is mentionable that addressing the Constituent Assembly on August, 11 1947, Quaid-i-Azam who wanted Pakistan as a democratic state, said that he did not want Pakistan to be a theocratic state. He wanted Pakistan to be a liberal, secular and progressive state.

Notably, even the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) in his sermon at Hajjatul Wida issued directions for protection of life, property and dignity of the whole mankind. The sermon became a charter of democracy which was included in the constitutions of the western elected governments in one way or the other.

Pakistan has to move along with the demands of modern time. Therefore, periodic reinterpretation of Islamic teachings is essential. Such movement is called Ijtihad, which could provide new perceptions to Islam in accordance with the changed world vision.

Besides, Islamic laws can be implemented through a system of governance, hence, elections are essential for placing the elected representatives to make rules and govern in any part of the country. Laws of Sharia (Islamic Jurisprudence) can best be put to practice through democratic system which does not make us un-Islamic or anti-Sharia. In fact, it is a representative system which is based upon equality of all the people, ensuring enforcement of rule of law through an independent justice. Nothing is forcibly imposed on the political will of the people who fully enjoy the freedom of thought and action.

In this regard, by condemning the TTP insurgents’ inhuman activities, more than 60 Islamic scholars recently clarified in their joint fatwa (edict) that “killing of innocent people, target killings and suicide bombings including sectarianism are nor Jihad”, and “are against the spirit of Islam…the terrorists’ self-adopted interpretation of Islam was nothing but ignorance and digression from the actual teachings of the religion.” Unlike the Taliban, they elaborated; “Islam does not forbid women’s education.” No doubt, these Taliban and their linked groups are defaming Islam and are weakening Pakistan.

While, based in Afghanistan, secret agencies like American CIA, Indian RAW and Israeli Mossad which have already been arranging acts of sabotage on the places of worships, security forces, sectarian violence etc. through TTP, Balochistan Liberation Army (BLA) and other similar militant groups have left no stone unturned to thwart the democratic system and to create chaotic situation in Pakistan so as to complete the secret strategic designs of their countries. Especially, RAW has hired the services of Indian Muslims who have well-penetrated in the BLA, TTP, Jundollah, (God’s soldiers) and Lashkar-e-Jhangvi which have been conducting subversive acts in various regions of the country.

In this context, Pakistan’s civil and military leadership has repeatedly disclosed that militants along with huge cache of arms are being sent to Pakistan from Afghanistan.

It is notable that a terror-attempt was also made on Ansar   Burney, Pakistan’s former Federal Minister for Human Rights, an eminent human rights activist, founder and chairman of the Ansar Burney Trust International. For this purpose, on January 18, 2013, two unknown persons came on their motor bike and tried to attach a time bomb device under Ansar Burney’s car parked outside his office in Karachi. It shows that those foreign-backed internal elements who are not well-wishers of human rights in Pakistan are involved in such criminal acts. Their ulterior motives seem to cause terror and panic in the country, and thus to tarnish Pakistan’s image abroad.

Now, question does not arise that Mian Muhammad Nawaz Sharif is going to be the prime minister of Pakistan, as the real question is that both the newly elected governments at centre and provinces must cooperate to pull the country out of multiple crises. While survival of country is at stake, PTI, JI, MQM and other political and religious parties should display a strong sense of unity with PML-N.

Particularly, Chief of Army Staff Gen. Ashfaq Pervez Kayani met Nawaz Sharif on May 18 and assured Army’s cooperation in resolving various issues, especially terrorism. According to media reports Nawaz and Gen. Kayani talked about democracy’s success in the country, as the first time, a government completed its five-year tenure.
The meeting ended up with a positive note, as they hoped that the democratic process should continue in the same manner which would help strengthening the institutions in the country. Earlier, Gen. Kayani had also talked to Imran Khan through telephone, congratulating him and his party over the victory in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa.

As regards the recent elections, participation of the people in elections from all segments of life and politicians has proved that a handful of terrorist elements must not be allowed to dictate their agenda and to impose their self-perceived ideology on the majority of Pakistanis through their undemocratic and un-Islamic practices.

The right hour has come that by castigating the conspiracy against Pakistan and democracy, our media, politicians and leaders of religious parties including security forces must fully cooperate with each other to cope with terrorists who intended to accomplish their self-motivated designs at the cost of Pakistan.

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

Email: sajjad_logic@yahoo.com

Asif Haroon Raja

The people have lost trust in their leaders because they have repeatedly betrayed them in the name of democracy. While democracy was sold as the remedy for all their ailments, democracy made the lives of the lower class of society miserable. The elites enriched themselves by using state resources and looting the national wealth but did little to allay the sufferings of the under privileged. Widening gap between the rich and the poor and vast difference in lifestyle of the two distinct classes have created a gulf between the two. Justice system is pro-rich and anti-poor which adds to the wretchedness of the poor. Deprived of justice, they take law in their own hands to kill their tormentors. The police instead of helping the needy fleece them and collude with the criminals. While the rich do not care about the underprivileged, the latter hate the privileged class and have become lawless. To give vent to their frustration and anger, the rebellious youth within the poor class living below poverty easily get easily induced by criminal and terror networks and give in to robberies, criminal acts and terrorism. These adventures are also proving too costly for them. Rudderless and bereft of hope, they have reached the breaking point.

The people of FATA who have blood relations with Afghan Pashtuns joined their war whenever Afghanistan was invaded by foreign forces. They strongly believe that unlike Gen Ziaul Haq who stood up to the Soviet challenge and provided full support to the Mujahideen and won the war, Gen Musharraf buckled under US pressure and betrayed the Muslim neighbor by granting airbases, supply routes and intelligence to US-NATO forces in return for $10 billion and US patronage. They do not forgive him for arresting hundreds of Mujahideen and handing them over to USA to earn head money. They say that the security forces are fighting America’s war and killing their own people in FATA to earn dollars and goodwill of USA.

The banned religious extremist groups who have blood relations with Kashmiris in Indian occupied Kashmir (IOK) and others having religious and cultural ties felt aggrieved when they were prevented from undertaking Jihad in Kashmir since they consider it their religious obligation to help their relatives in distress. For too long the Muslim Kashmiris in IOK have suffered at the hands of Indian security forces. Their life, belongings and honor are unsafe and are leading a wretched life. The Jihadists feel that had they not been reined in from helping the Kashmiri Mujahideen in their just struggle against the Indian occupation forces, by now Kashmir could have been freed. They say that Musharraf stopped them to please India and USA but at the cost of Kashmir cause and aspirations of people of Pakistan.

They nostalgically recall Gen Ziaul Haq’s efforts to link Khalistan movement in India with Kashmiri movement. Thousands of Kashmiris had participated in the Afghan Jihad against Soviet forces and had learned the art of fighting guerrilla war. Afghan, FATA and Kashmiri Mujahideen as well as Mujahideen from other Muslim countries developed deep camaraderie and respect for each other. Mullah Omar wanting to repay the sacrifices rendered by Kashmiris in Afghan war offered to Gen Zia any number of Afghan Mujahideen to help them gain freedom from India.

The grand plan died its death with the death of Gen Zia in a plane crash under mysterious circumstances. Afghans who loved him felt orphaned. Benazir regime not only stepped back from Kashmir and Afghanistan but also provided list of Sikh leaders involved in Khalistan movement to India which helped the latter in crushing the most dangerous movement that had the potential to cut India to size. Nawaz Sharif regime also paid lip service to the Kashmir struggle and got involved in meaningless composite dialogue and then in futile track-2 diplomacy to solve the tangle. These maneuvers helped India in gaining time and in keeping the core issue on the backburner.

Islamic revolution in Iran and successful Afghan Jihad against the Soviets inspired the Kashmiri youth to pick up arms and seek independence from India which had refused to honor Nehru’s pledges and UN resolutions and Pakistan’s overtures for a peaceful settlement of Kashmir dispute. They picked up arms in 1989 as a last option. The armed movement unnerved India and in panic it started to pump in huge numbers of security forces into the small valley of Kashmir. When India’s 700,000 security forces failed to quell the movement and it reached a critical stage, the movement was given a severe blow by Gen Musharraf by changing the Kashmir policy and suggesting out of box solution.

Azad Kashmir that acted as the operational base for the continuation of struggle for right of self-determination of Kashmiris was winded up and Jihadi groups providing assistance to the freedom fighters were banned and their accounts ceased. India was allowed to fence the Line of Control  and guns deployed along the LoC were silenced. These steps left the Kashmiri Mujahideen in IOK high and dry with no moral or physical support from any quarters. It enabled India to split All Parties Hurriyat Conference thereby weakening the struggle. Geelani group not agreeing to change the original stance based on UN resolutions was dubbed as an extremist and flexible Mirwaiz group as moderate and reconcilable. Indian military started to crow that because of its sustained efforts and stoppage of cross border infiltration insurgency had died down.

Unable to enter IOK because of sealing of all exit points by Pak security forces and fully manned electronic fence by Indian forces, the Jihadi forces in Pakistan felt highly pained over the sufferings of Kashmiris in open prison and blamed Gen Musharraf and Pak Army. In retaliation they decided to join al-Qaeda and TTP with whom they had old connections and to fight Pak security forces to give vent to their Jihadi vehemence. As a consequence, all the forces that were focused towards Afghanistan and IOK got on one page and turned their guns inwards. Collectivization of so many well trained and motivated groups has given added muscle to the TTP which acts as the mother hen and made the task of our security forces that much difficult.

Patronization of western liberal secularism by Gen Musharraf regime and then by PPP regime and promotion of obscenity through liberal media was viewed by Islamists as an attempt to undermine Islamic values. Islamists complain that the liberals projecting themselves as progressive, enlightened and moderate are in reality liberal fascists and want to push out Islamists and make Pakistan secular. To give weight to their argument they cite the fascism of liberal parties in Karachi where 8000 innocent people were killed by their target killers in five years. Rasping attitude of the liberals against Islam and Islamists and their love for Indian and western cultures also resulted in intensification of religious extremism and antagonism against the government perceived as secular, tied to the aprons of USA.

Liberals say that religious extremists and not India pose an existential threat to Pakistan and hence must be fought tooth and nail to the very end. Full support given by liberal political parties and liberal media to the war on terror against TTP and its affiliates has given reason to the militant forces to brand them as American touts. Islamists say that the war had been imposed by USA with a view to pitch Muslims against Muslims to weaken their physical and moral strength and then enslave them. These conflicting perceptions failed to develop a consensus on war, one side saying it is US imposed war and the other saying it is our war. This incongruity in approaches came in the way of formulating a national counter terrorism policy, which impacted security forces the most. This issue will have to be taken up on priority by the new government.

The writer is a retired Brig and a defence analyst. Email:asifharoonraja@gmail.com

During the election campaign, the militants of the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) and its affiliated groups who had accelerated their terror-activities to sabotage the elections 2013 in Pakistan failed in their nefarious designs as they did not want to see democracy to be flourished in the country. TTP which had accepted responsibly for terror-assaults on the election-sites, especially of ANP and MQM including some other political entities and office of the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) through terror-devices had pledged to continue such attacks in future.

Despite the subversive activities and threats of these militants, a majority of people cast their vote, and turn over was more than 60 percent which shows that the general masses and politicians want that a handful of terrorist elements must not be allowed to impose their self-perceived ideology on the majority of Pakistanis through their undemocratic and Un-Islamic means.

However, as part of their previous subversive activities like suicide attacks, target killings, bomb blasts, assaults on civil and military installations, forced abductions and sectarian violence, these heartless insurgents have again started similar criminal acts. In this regard, on May 17, this year, these miscreants killed 20 worshippers in bomb explosions inside two mosques in Malakand. On the same day, they killed two soldiers of the security forces in the northwestern city of Peshawar. It clearly displays that the militants would not end terror-attacks in various places of Pakistan.

Question arises as to why terrorism continues in our country. In fact, there are various causes behind the phenomenon. The real cause is that TTP and its affiliated outfits have been recruiting children and very young boys, and after their brainwashing through indoctrination, they train them for suicide bombings or to commit any terror-attack. By misconception of Islam, terrorist groups manipulate the feelings of innocent Muslim men and women who are naturally prone to favor the cause of Muslims. Hence, they become targets of terrorists’ propaganda who project their unfair designs in the name of Jihad, and undertake criminal activities of terrorism, inflicting serious loss of innocent lives and damaging property. The planners misguide these Muslims by convincing that they will have a noble place in the Heavens in exchange of suicide attacks.

Notably, on 19th November 2012, the TTP sent a woman suicide bomber to kill the former chief of Jamaat-e-Islamic (JI), Qazi Hussain Ahmed, in Mohmand Agency. Blowing herself up, she hesitated until his convoy had passed. A would-be suicide bomber was killed in Dera Ismail Khan on November 23 before a Muharram procession.

During Swat and Malakand military operations, Pak Army captured a number of children and teenagers who were being trained by the insurgents. And 11 children were arrested in Quetta, who were lured by United Baloch Army to plant bombs and trigger blasts against Security Forces and innocent civilians.  Another reason of terrorism is that with the tactical assistance of American CIA and Israeli Mossad, Indian RAW has set up its espionage network in Afghanistan, which is in contact with its spy-network in Pakistan. Particularly, India’s several secret training camps are present in Afghanistan from where highly-trained militants, equipped with sophisticated weapons are being dispatched to destabilise Pakistan so as to fulfill the secret strategic designs of US, India and Israel. The recent statements of RAW officials and admission of the Indian released spy-prisoners in Pakistan clearly prove anti-Pakistan conspiracy.

Some Indian Muslims and foreign insurgents who are especially backed by RAW have joined the ranks and files of the Tehreek-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), Sipah-e-Sahaba, Balochistan Liberation Army (BLA) and other religious sects. They have also got the membership of MQM, ANP and PPP. Besides killing the leaders and persons of the rival political and religious parties, these miscreants also target the Pushtuns, Urdu-speaking people and even the people, belonging to the interior Sindh in order to fuel ethnic violence to weaken Pakistan. Particularly, unrest in Karachi might be cited as example.

It is mentionable that while, stressing a greater political consensus to tackle extremism and terrorism, Chief of Army Staff Gen. Ashfaq Parvez Kayani said on April 30, this year, “A small faction wants to enforce its distorted ideology over the entire nation by taking up arms…defies the democratic process and considers all forms of bloodshed justified.”

Despite the fact that Pakistan’s law-enforcing agencies and intelligence outfits have thwarted many terror attempts of the militants through pre-arrests, discovery of weapons and huge explosive material, suicide jackets etc., but terrorists have kept on conducting terror-attacks.

So far, these terrorists have killed more than 5000 personnel of the security forces and 40000 innocent people including huge collateral damage. They have also destroyed thousands of schools.

In fact, it is war of entire nation against terrorism. But such a war needs better intelligence-gathering which is possible, if people provide information to the law-enforcing and secret agencies about the presence and covert activities of the Taliban and other militants. People must also point out foreign agents who have joined the ranks and files of these terrorists or are backing the latter.

Nevertheless, Pakistan’s security agencies are fighting a ‘different war’ with the invisible enemy.  It is a war in which offence knows its target, but defence does not know. Army and security agencies cannot wage this war alone, as it is everyone’s war.

Although our rulers, leaders of political and religious parties have repeatedly condemned the terror attacks of the Taliban and other extremist groups, yet instead of verbal statements, they must show practical unity against these elements which seek to create anarchic situation in the country to accomplish their self-motivated power designs. Recently, condemning the TTP’s inhuman activities, Islamic scholars clarified in their joint fatwa (edict) that killing of innocent people through terrorism and sectarianism was not Jihad, and was against the spirit of Islam. Ulemas must intermittently issue fatwas in this respect.

Nonetheless, this new style war demands strong cooperation of the media, political and religious leaders including general masses with the security forces and intelligence agencies.

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

Email: sajjad_logic@yahoo.com

]]> http://zameer36.com/why-terrorism-continues/feed/ 0 http://zameer36.com/tackling-terrorism/ http://zameer36.com/tackling-terrorism/#comments Mon, 20 May 2013 10:48:26 +0000 zaheer http://zameer36.com/?p=7350 By Imran Malik

Indeed, the tide is turning. In one multidimensional election season, the Pakistani nation has matured beyond belief. Undeterred by the threats spewed forth by the Taliban, it voted in droves as never before. And in doing so, it crossed a very important psychological Rubicon.

It looked the Taliban threat in the eye and stared it down. It courageously prevailed over the militants, who threatened to defeat and discredit, nay destroy, this electoral exercise and prove the superiority of the system of governance that they espouse, over it. A myth was clearly busted here.

This is a priceless moral victory over the Taliban with far-reaching strategic ramifications. Most importantly, it demonstrates to us and the world the limits of their power and strategic reach. They are clearly not invincible.

It should mark the beginning of the end of the scourge of terrorism. It could also be the starting point for the next Government of Pakistan’s efforts to tackle terrorism.
Pakistan’s terrorism problem has very strong regional linkages. It is also related to the safe egress of the US/Nato/Isaf from the region and the resultant power vacuum in Afghanistan. It gains even further importance when seen in the light of its spread astride the Durand Line and mischief mongering by a regional troublemaker like India. Thus, any national security policy that Pakistan makes will not only have to cater for the domestic imperatives, but also consider the regional linkages.

In a comprehensive manner, the issue of terrorism must be dealt with concurrently at the domestic levels by Afghanistan and Pakistan individually and at the sub-regional (AfPak) level collectively; with its concomitant ripple effects being felt at the regional (South Central Asian Region – SCAR) and the global levels.

At all levels, of necessity, the US will have to be intimately involved and play the roles of a “real and honest” broker, the lead partner and a facilitator. Iran and the SCO (China, Russia) will have to be brought in at some stage to consummate a comprehensive regional solution that not only circumscribes the activities of the terrorists, but also helps pacify them and the region.

While staying within the regional context Pakistan has two basic options. It could opt for a counter-terrorism (CT) strategy and base it heavily on destructive military operations. The aim would be to achieve a decisive military victory and moral superiority over the Taliban.

Alternatively, it could opt for counter-insurgency (COIN) operations. These operations would essentially be area and people based, predicated on social development and overall improvement in the quality of life of the people, while engaging the Taliban in negotiations under a controlled strategic environment.
Pakistan will have to formulate a clear policy. It will need to enunciate its desired end state, determine the ways to achieve it (CT or COIN) and provide the means to the armed forces and the LEAs to achieve the given policy objectives.

It will require very courageous national leadership and farsighted, dynamic decision making.If it adopts the CT strategy, then it will have a number of options. It could seek a comprehensive military victory over the Taliban, disperse and dissipate them in the frontier badlands astride the Durand Line, and then seek to destroy them piecemeal in a regional or local military effort.

Further, it could literally dictate terms to them from an unassailable position of strength. Or it could carry out military (combined – ?) operations against them, weaken them sufficiently and then negotiate with them from a position of relative strength. Or it could seek negotiations, as it is doing at the moment. However, there will be scant chances of success when neither antagonist has a clear-cut imposing leverage or advantage over the other.

Finally, a weak and indecisive new Pakistani government could opt for the status quo. That would be patently self-destructive.If it opts for the COIN strategy, then it would entail military operations against the Taliban concurrently with efforts to wean the population away from their influence. It would entail solving the basic problems of the people (in Fata, in particular).

They need to be given self-governance, (Elections 2013 -?). Special efforts and funds need to be made available for rapid and focused development of the affected regions. Schools, colleges, hospitals, roads, water supply and sewerage schemes, employment opportunities, et al have to be provided to the local people, who must be encouraged to have irrevocable stakes in the revived economies too.

The people must be reassured and given solid leadership, hope, peace, law and order, social justice, equal opportunities, et al. The Frontier Crimes Regulation (FCR) must be scratched post-haste.

Of the two options, the COIN strategy appears to have the better chances of success. It not only allows negotiations with the militants under controlled strategic environments, but also brings relief to the locals.Under a comprehensive approach, the international community led by the US, EU, China, Russia, Japan, Australia, South Korea, the Arab States, etc could help launch massive development programmes astride the Durand Line.

Not only should the infrastructure be developed, but employment opportunities must also be created for the locals. Education, health, water supply and sewerage, agriculture, and small and medium enterprises (ROZs – ?) must be given the priorities they deserve.

Necessary funds should be made available to the youth to start off their own businesses and not fall victim to the guiles of the terrorists. Of paramount importance would be the immediate cessation of further drone attacks.
That would stop the biggest recruitment drive for the Taliban and dry up volunteers for their cause. And most importantly, the Afghan elections must throw up a true and just democratic dispensation with the majority Pashtuns getting their due share of power.

A wider regional approach predicated on negotiations from a position of actual rather than contrived strength can bring peace to this region. It is up to the three protagonists to achieve that with the latent support of other regional players like Iran, China and Russia.

The loop, as one has been constantly asserting, must be conclusively and responsibly closed much before December 2014.

The writer is a retired brigadier and a former defence attaché to Australia and New Zealand. Currently, he is on the faculty of NUST (NIPCONS).

Posted By I.B.M Balti

KARACHI: 22 years old Samina Baig has become the first Pakistani woman to reach on the summit of the Mount Everest, Geo News reported Sunday.Mirza Ali, a brother of Samina Baig, told in a message that he along with his sister reached the world’s highest mountain with a peak at 8,848 metres.

According to reports, Baig completed the climb to the summit at around 7:30am local time with her brother Mirza Ali, who becomes the third and youngest Pakistani male to scale the mountain.

The reports said Ali and Baigh are natives of Shimshal village in Hunza valley.

In view of the checkered civil-military relationship history and especially the widespread impression of suspicions between PML-N and the Establishment, Nawaz-Kayani meeting was epoch-making and sent right and positive signals for not only direction of the relations between the new Government and the Army but also for the overall good of the country.

Some forces have been conjecturing that Imran Khan was the favourite of the Establishment and that Mian Nawaz Sharif would not enjoy smooth and harmonious relationship with the Army. One must appreciate the initiative and goodwill gesture of General Kayani as it would become a trendsetter and provide basis for smooth and harmonious relationship between civilian and military leadership.

Though in other democracies it is normal for heads of state institutions to brief the incoming elected leadership about different aspects of policies and governance but in view of peculiar nature of situation in Pakistan, Nawaz-Kayani meeting assumes special significance. Kayani has dispelled the impression of creating any hurdles in the working of the new Government and assured the Army’s continued support to the democratic process.

Pakistan’s enormous challenges require complete understanding among all institutions and organs of the state to tackle them and hopefully the Model Town meeting would have laid strong foundations for the purpose. There are already indications that both sides are on the same wavelength as far as addressing crucial issues of extremism and terrorism are concerned.

Apart from this, General Kayani has tried to convey the impression that Army has no qualms against PML-N or its leadership and we hope that Mian Nawaz Sharif, who has started treading the new path cautiously, would see to it that the gains achieved in Lahore are carried forward for the sake of the country and strenghening of the democracy.(Courtesy: Pak Observer)

Though the nation is very much delighted over the continuity of democratic process in Pakistan but this feeling of joy and happiness won’t last longer if the tree of democracy does not bear the desired fruit. The list of the problems which this nation has been facing since long is not endless but it requires a lot of hard work, determination and above all a sincere will to resolve these problems. Unfortunately in the previous five years, the elected government wasted a lot of time in strengthening itself in the name of stabilizing democracy and nothing could be done for the betterment of common people and prosperity of the country. The PPP government could have delivered a lot to the people if the democratically elected representatives had behaved in a sensible manner. The situation today is the same as it was five years back. Ever increasing energy crisis, unemployment, scarcity of opportunities, a feeling of disappointment and depression and above all the uncontrollable wave of terrorism; in short nothing could be changed. The way the whole nation reacted to the inability of the previous government is very much obvious from the results of the recent elections. Same would be the fate of the newly elected public representatives if they did not learn a lesson from the past. The people of Pakistan demand nothing but peace and prosperity and both these desires are unachievable unless the menace of terrorism is crushed with iron hands.

It is very much true that the issue of terrorism is not a new-born issue; this nation has been facing the evil of terrorism since long but the situation aggravated a lot soon after the Lal Masjid operation in 2007. A recent report on terrorism in Pakistan says, “Soon after the Lal Masjid operation in 2007, the situation abruptly changed and terrorists started targeting government installations and security forces.  In the last five years, only in   KPK and FATA the terrorist attacks took lives of more than 12,456 innocent citizens and security personnel. At the same time moreover 10,000 militants were also killed by the security forces.” In short the wave of terrorism deprived almost 230000 people of their lives during the last five years only in KPK and FATA and unfortunately all of them were the Muslims. More unfortunate is the fact that Pakistani leadership totally failed in preparing any strategy which could help and support in elimination of the menace of terrorism. The nation had been looking towards the authorities concerned for the solution of this problem but nothing could be done though the intelligence agencies had been issuing all necessary warnings in this context.

More painful is the fact that when the whole nation was fully involved in the process of electioneering, the terrorists were spending all their strength and force to blight the atmosphere and disrupt the process of electioneering. Their sole aim was to frighten the people and prevent the voters from active participation in elections. Some of the terrorist groups even warned the masses in FATA and KPK to refrain from casting their votes because democracy is absolutely an un-Islamic practice in their opinion. Thank God; the nation realized that free and fair elections are the only option for the Pakistanis who desire for a peacefully prosperous country. Fortunately this desire of the nation got full support from the Armed Forces of Pakistan. Just twelve days before the general elections, addressing the grand celebrations of Yaum-e-Shuhada in Islamabad the Chief of the Army Staff General Kiyani ensured the nation that the Armed Forcers would extend all possible support to hold fair, free and transparent elections because these elections would provide the base for finding solutions to many questions including the question of War on Terror. Now the formation of the newly elected democratic government is in process. Still there are a few constituencies where the Election Commission of Pakistan has ordered for re-polling. Soon the situation will be very much clear and the ball shall be in the court of newly formed government. People are looking towards Miyan Nawaz Shareef and Imran Khan with confident eyes. They are sure that these two party-heads have all ability, determination and the sincere will to give a new life to Pakistan.

The newly elected government shall have to concentrate seriously upon the issue of terrorism because no efforts for peace and prosperity could be fruitful unless this issue is resolved. The democratic representatives have full support of the nation and of the security forces of Pakistan. So they must take advantage of this trustful support and take stern action against the menace of terrorism. Here this thing must also be kept in mind that terrorism does not mean only the militant activities of the religious extremists; terrorism has so many other forms and shapes. All those who try to air and exploit the ethnic, racial or sectarian differences through their speeches, writings or actions are also terrorists. They are the people who want to see the nation in a continuous state of war for their trivial interests. The newly elected government shall have to be very much prejudiced and rigid against all those who talk against the ideology and unity of Pakistan whether they are in Quetta or Karachi. Such people must also be dealt as terrorists.

By Zaheerul Hassan

On 18 May 2013, the Army Chief called on PML (N) head and designate Prime Minister-Nawaz Sharif met in Lahore and discussed the prevailing security situation of the country. Notably just a day before terrorists carried out suicidal attack in mosques of Malakand Agency in which 20 individuals killed and more than 50 injured. Gen. Kayani, who sought the meeting, called on Mr. Sharif at his Brother Shahbaz Sharif’s residence at Model Town in Lahore this afternoon.

This was the first meeting between Gen. Kayani and Mr. Sharif since the PML-N emerged victorious in the May 11 general election. The meeting lasted over three hours wherein the leaders had lunch together. No other PML-N leaders were present during the meeting.

They have also discussed the most serious issue of ongoing terrorism. We all know that thousands of Pakistani soldiers and civilian scarified their lives to defeat foreign sponsored terrorism. Let hope that newly elected government should stand with shoulder to shoulder to eliminate militancy.  During the current meeting, the army chief probably has briefed the PML-(N) chief on the security situation across the country.
 
At this occasion General has also congratulated Sharif on his splendid victory in the polls 2013. According to reliable sources both the leaders agreed to work together to confront challenges facing Pakistan, including terrorism. Moreover, Mr. Sharif acknowledged and appreciated the security establishment’s role in strengthening the democracy and allowing the previous civilian government to complete its five-year tenure, the channel reported.

 In fact, regional security dynamic has to take turn particular after departure of US led forces in 2014. During and before polls, the terrorists  have posed serious threat to Pakistan. But fortunately Pakistani government and armed forces stood fast and defeated militants and successful conducted the general elections 2013  . Now newly elected Pakistani leadership to prepare strategy and undertake pragmatic steps to eliminate the menace of terrorism. The nation looks towards the authorities concerned as and when the terrorist hit at unexpected places, explode bombs and kidnap political leaders at gun point, but the state mechanism appears to have gone insensitive despite clear warnings given by the intelligence agencies. Unfortunately terrorists are at liberty to roam about in the streets, bazaars and public places. Media has been pointing out that terrorists are facilitated by some of the political leaders who provide patronage to these criminals. The situation certainly demands serious and unified crake down to root out the terrorists and their God-Fathers so that innocent lives of Pakistani citizens are saved and peace and harmony is restored in the country. 

 The nation must remain united against terrorist threat and show solidarity and devotion to the country. A unified and collective front will not only frustrate the anti-Pakistan forces but will also reduce the threat of terrorism. The aim is to create peaceful atmosphere, remain calm and participate in elections without any fear and join hands with those who are ready to bring terror free atmosphere in Pakistan.   Few days earlier terrorists has also threatened    Ansar Burney  who is an eminent human rights activist with international fame and has been successfully participating in some of the most difficult operations to help facilitate efforts to rescue and release people of different nationalities abroad, trapped in a web of terminal providence, with no hope for any external influence except the divine intervention.

He also raised his voice for clemency for late Sarabjit Singh (the convicted terrorist in Pakistani jail), to convert his death sentence into life imprisonment only and purely on humanitarian grounds as he was awaiting to be hanged since last two decades, having completed life sentence. Sarabjit Singh was murdered by a jail inmate in Pakistan and his body shifted to India. His sister Dalbir Kaur was allowed to visit Pakistan to see her brother who was still hospitalized but on arrival at India she uncovered her typical Indian face by urging the Indians to take revenge of Sarabjit Singh’s death and blamed President of Pakistan for his murder. She also fired a salvo at Ansar Burney alleging that he demanded Rupee 25 Crore to save the life of his brother. Such shameless allegations are not only baseless but deserve out right condemnation through media.

 Unfortunately similar other anti-Pakistan elements are making attempts to cause hurt to the chairman of Ansar Burney Trust International. On 18th of January 2013 at about 7:00 to 7;30 pm two unknown persons came on their motor bike and tried to attach some device (probably a time bomb) under Ansar Burney’s car parked outside his office at Ansar Burney Trust International (6 Hassan Manzil, Arambagh Road Karachi). As one of the staff employees of Ansar Burney’s Trust spotted them and shouted at them, they escape from the scene. This leads to conclude that those elements who are not well-wishers of human rights in Pakistan, M,r Ansar Burney and Ansar Burney Trust International, may be involved in such criminal acts. Their ulterior motives seem to cause terror and panic in the country, and bring disgrace to name and dignity of Pakistan.

Anyhow, the purpose of revealing of episode of treat to Burney here is that there are some local traitors who are providing shelters to the anti-state elements.  Nation, political leadership and armed forces has to be on page to eliminate terrorism from their mother land.

The writer can be approached through zameer36@gmail.com
   
 
 
 

Pakistani lawyers who had filed a petition in the judges’ detention case has withdrawn their complaint against former Pakistan president Pervez Musharraf. It was decided by  Advocate Chaudhry Mohammad Aslam Ghumman a day before the hearing of the case on Saturday by the Islamabad Anti-Terrorism Court.
According to Dawn News, the case was to be heard at General Musharraf’s Chak Shahzad farmhouse, which has been declared a sub-jail.

 The judges’ detention case was registered by the Secretariat Police Station on August 11, 2009 on the complaint of Advocate Ghumman.
Ghumman had sought legal proceedings against Musharraf for confining 60 judges of the superior courts for over five months at their homes and restraining them from administering justice. Ghumman said he had withdrawn the complaint in the larger national interest.

Advocate Ghumman said he would neither appear before the court nor press for the prosecution of Musharraf, adding that it was up to the court to decide the fate of the case against him.
 He rejected reports that he had withdrawn the complaint under any pressure or fear and said he had never been threatened by any quarter.

 The complaint against Gen Musharraf was registered under section 344 of the Pakistan Panel Code. The offence is a bailable and entails a maximum imprisonment of three years.
 Musharraf may get life imprisonment if he is convicted by the court under this section, the report added.

By Phil Greaves 

A recent interview given by, yes, you guessed it: an ‘anonymous’ Qatari security official, has shed further light on CIA-led covert arms shipments to militants fighting in Syria. In this Reuters article, the security official and several ‘anonymous’ rebel Commanders confirm that Qatar has “tightened coordination of arms flows [plural] to Syria,” under alleged concern of weapons ending up in the hands of Al Qaeda linked Islamic extremist militants; the very militants as noted previously, that have continually formed the spearhead of the insurgency against the Syrian Government: (my emphasis)

“Rebel fighters in Syria say that in recent months the system for distributing arms has become more centralized, with arms being delivered through opposition National Coalition’s General Command, led by Selim Idriss, a general who defected to the opposition and is a favorite of Washington.”

What has been long confirmed by ‘official sources’ in the mainstream press, is that these arms shipments commenced in at least “early 2012″. We can be sure, as with the majority of the official timeline, that leeway has been given in these statements: its highly likely smaller arms shipments/smuggling into Syria started much earlier. Statements from eyewitnesses in Libya confirm that arms shipments from the port of Libyan Islamic Fighting Group stronghold Misrata, commenced rapidly after the fall of Gaddafi. Sibel Edmonds also reported in November 2011, long before any corporate media revealed, that the CIA, along with its Turkish and NATO counterparts had been working from the “nerve centre” at the joint US-Turkish air-base in Incerlik, Turkey, since April/May of 2011, coordinating ‘rebel’ elements and ‘activist’s’. Edmonds posits the likely theory that this was one of the initial staging grounds used by the CIA and its regional partners, to smuggle weapons, fighters and materiel into Syria as the insurgency took hold.

Enough of this background information, ‘official sources’ and timeline discrepancies gives the impression that the ‘news’ media is not releasing information when it receives it, and is holding back crucial pieces of the timeline, to fit into the desired narrative of “Assad forces killing peaceful protesters”.

What we learn from the Reuters report is that until Qatar (acting directly under CIA auspices) chose to “tighten” the coordination of their arms supplies into Syria, there was no coherent or structured way of the arms being distributed once they reached the Syrian border:

“The Qataris are now [May 2013] going through the Coalition for aid and humanitarian issues and for military issues they are going through the military command,” a commander in northern Syria interviewed from Beirut said.

This raises the immediate question: who were Qatar (under CIA auspices) distributing thousands of tonnes of arms to before April 2013?  The report goes on to state: (my emphasis)

“Before the Coalition was formed they were going through liaison offices and other military and civil formations. That was at the beginning. Now it is different – it is all going through the Coalition and the military command.”

“There’s a lot of consultation with the CIA, and they help Qatar with buying and moving the weapons into Syria, but just as consultants,” he said. The CIA declined to comment.

At least a pinch of salt needs to be taken with this piece of misinformation. What exactly are “liaison offices, military and civil formations?” The ‘opposition’ has never had anything resembling a military formation. Regardless, this raises several important questions and draws several distinctions into the timeline of the Syrian conflict.

We have long known, the main supplier of arms to ‘rebels’ was and still is Qatar, acting directly under the CIA’s “consultation”. We also know that these arms shipments became a considerable amount in “early 2012″ and continued to rise in both quantity and frequency. A New York Times investigation confirmed this to be the case, reporting that eighty-five military cargo planes flew from Qatar to Turkey carrying arms bound for Syria between January 2012 and March 2013. (the maximum load of an average military cargo plane is around 50-60 tonnes.)  What other synonymous distinctions in the conflict do we know about, that commenced and progressed from “early 2012″?

The clearest and most glaring dynamic that occurred along this timeframe, and also continued to rise and greatly increase, is both the death toll, and displacement within Syria. As covered extensively before, the monthly death toll in Syria almost doubled in “early 2012″, and continued to rapidly increase. All available resources and ‘activist’ or opposition groups death toll figures roughly confirm this, as can be seen in this graph compiled by Reuters:

One other critical factor is directly synonymous with both the arms flow increase, (under CIA/Qatari auspices) and the huge rise in death toll. That being: the success, proliferation and bolstering of Jabhat al Nusra and similar Salafi/Jihaddi militant groups. Jabhat al Nusra, or, as they are now known: the Islamic State of Iraq and Al Sham, (ISIS) were active in Syria under their ‘parent’ group the Islamic State of Iraq’s (Al Qaeda in Iraq – AQI) auspices for years prior to the Syrian uprising. Indeed, ever since the formation of AQI following the US invasion of Iraq in 2003; the eastern regions of Syria bordering the west of Iraq, and the notorious Anbar province have been a hotbed for Al Qaeda activity.

It is beyond doubt that Jabhat al Nusra and other Salafi/Jihaddi groups working alongside them have been the driving force of the armed insurgency. Throughout the majority of the armed conflict, it has been Jabhat al Nusra that has led insurgent attacks on key Syrian military installations; air-defense bases; coastal and major highway routes in attempts to block SAA supply lines; the vast majority of suicide attacks in civilian areas; and assassinations on key Government security officials. These extremist groups have become the best equipped, most organised, consistently well-funded and importantly, the most successful on the ground. While the US and its Gulf allies claim to have only armed, trained and supported ‘vetted’ and ‘moderate’ rebels, the reality inside Syria bears absolutely no resemblance to these claims.

We are now left with some theoretical options, first: the CIA will claim, as the US administration has been claiming, that they only ‘coordinated’ arms to, and supported moderate groups; how they found their way to extremists is beyond the CIA remit. Thus passing sole culpability to Qatar or the smugglers in Turkey that transported the arms into Syria. Again, the Qatari intelligence service can also claim plausible deniability, passing the buck to smugglers and rebels controlling the flow on the Turkish border. Do the ramifications of this policy, even if it were true, absolve the sheer recklessness of it? The evident destruction it has caused? And bolstering of extremists it has permitted?

Another probable outcome, or denial of association with these groups, will be that the Syrian Arab Army and the Syrian Government, down to its alleged majority Alawhite leadership; made a conscious decision to instill sectarianism into the conflict in order to quell the protest movement. When one takes a close look at the Syrian Governments overtures toward the peaceful protest movement, and concessions the Assad government made during the early stages of protests, it is again, hard to see any reality to confirm it was Assad’s intention to divide Syria and start a full-scale sectarian war. Indeed, many concessions were made, including; mass political prisoner releases; a new constitution promising political plurality and maximum presidential terms; the dismissal of several regional governors and the complete dismissal of the Syrian Cabinet. These concessions do not bear the hallmark of a leader looking to marginalize his countries largest demographic. In which the Sunni population was, and still is heavily represented in both the Government and the army.

What is most probable, is that the CIA, along with its Qatari partners, knew full well of the ideologues they were arming and bolstering and chose to pursue this policy; simply because it was the most effective at weakening the Syrian Army and dividing the peaceful, multi-ethnic fabric of Syrian society. As stated above, it is Jabhat al Nusra leading the fight in Syria, it is they that have taken out Syria’s air defense bases, on many an occasion. What threat anti-aircraft missiles and defense radar’s pose to small, lightly armed insurgent groups is hard to fathom, suggesting these groups were acting on outside orders, or state supplied intelligence provided to them with the desired outcome of weakening Syria’s strategic defense capabilities.

For those that study the US governments unrelenting attempts of subversion and destabilization, this tactic of fomenting and supporting Islamic extremist militants will come as no surprise. It is not just Jabhat al Nusra’s (AQI) tactical capability and battle experience that has pushed them into the leadership role, without money, weapons, and indeed, psychological appeal to win recruits, experience means nothing.

These groups, supposedly of “Al Qaeda” origin, which represents a loose and malleable ideology, far more than a coherent functioning group of militants capable of international war; form the sectarian “shock troops” the US and their allies long ago agreed upon to foment and support in their attempts to block the “resistance” within the “Shiite crescent,” and have quite literally, grown beyond all means of control. Qatar (under CIA “consultation”) has tacitly encouraged, sponsored and armed the very same groups that are prominent now: those of an extremist Salafi/Jihaddi ideology that espouse sectarian hatred against Shia and minority groups to promote division and social chaos. This supposedly happened directly under the CIA’s nose, with their tacit “consultation” and they failed to notice this extremist dynamic developing and rapidly expanding? Another possible added bonus for the US and its allies was recently pointed out by Lebanese political commentator Dr. Asad Abu Khalil who noted:

by listing Nusrah Front as a terrorist organization, the US government has basically licensed all other Syrian armed groups to engage in all sorts of war crimes.  So all an armed group has to do to get away with war crimes, is merely to fly the flag of Nusrah.  That is all what it takes.  So an armed group belonging to the Free Syrian Army umbrella, for example, can engage in a war crime, and then the next day issue a condemnation.  It is an unlimited license for war crimes.

A fully fledged and totally malleable proxy fighting force, promoting subversion, sectarian division, and outright chaos to gain the desired US objective of the destruction of the Syrian state, ergo: removing a key ally of Iran, and the resistance to western hegemony in the Middle East. When the extremism and brutality become too exposed to allow overt western support, the US designate them “terrorists”, and within a change of clothes, they become the falsehood that is the “FSA”.

On the international front, a change for the good is discernible. Afghanistan is giving added headache by creating avoidable tensions on western border and issuing aggressive statements. Grating Hamid Karzai has sent a message of goodwill to Nawaz and has hoped for friendly neighborly relations between the two countries. Sarabjit-Sanaullah episode has further strained Indo-Pak relations. But Manmohan Singh’s invitation to Nawaz to visit India at the earliest has given hopes of improvement in relations between two arch rivals. Barack Obama has sent a positive message to prime minister designate Nawaz saying he is eagerly looking forward to meet him. Britain has sent message of goodwill. China, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Turkey and other Muslim countries have also greeted him.
 
Nawaz needs cooperation of all political and religious forces as well as foreign countries to be able to tackle complex problems of energy, economy, law and order and terrorism. If Nawaz and his team put national interests before self interest, it will be for the first time in Pakistan’s political history after Quaid-e-Azam’s one-year stint. 
 
The writer is a retired Brig, columnist and book writer. Email:asifharoonraja@gmail.com   

“One of the cricketers, Ankeet Chavan, has accepted that he made a mistake,” a Delhi police official told IANS.

Chavan’s other two Rajasthan Royals teammates Sreesanth and Ajit Chandila, however, have not yet accepted the charges. The three were sent in five-day police custody Thursday after they were brought to Delhi from Mumbai, where they were arrested.

The three cricketers were questioned Friday by a high ranking official of the Delhi Police special cell.

“More teams have been sent to other states, we will be conducting more raids to catch hold of more bookies,” the official added.

Besides the three cricketers, Delhi Police have also arrested 11 bookies for alleged spot-fixing.

The verdict of 11th May 2013, by the Pakistani voters, has demolished several myths, establishing new realities which promise a brighter future for Pakistan, emerging from the depths of sorrow and sacrifices of decades and the sufferings at the hands of a corrupt and incompetent government, which almost shook the very foundation of the country. The myth that the Pakistani nation, with forty-five percent illiterates cannot nurture democracy, has been shattered, by our voters, who in a matter of ten hours of day light, have rejected most of the corrupt and the incompetent, thus correcting the course of democracy.

The 11th May 2013 verdict, in fact is the affirmation of the 1947 declaration of the Pakistan Movement, that: “Pakistan will be a democratic state, with a just social order based on the principles of Islam”. The nation has rejected secularism, religious extremism and ‘isms’ of all kind. It has voted for Moderation as in 1947, expressing the ‘true will’ of the Pakistani nation. It is a matter of record, that whenever the Pakistani nation has been afforded fair and free elections, it has voted only for the moderates, which is the fundamental truth, lying at the heart of its democratic ethos.

Our national institutions, namely the Army and the Judiciary have mainly been responsible for the derailment of democracy in the past. Now they stood wholeheartedly to determine the right course for the democratic order and have defeated all machinations and manipulations to sabotage the election process, thus safeguarding the nation from the catastrophe which struck Indonesia, some half a century back, where a bloody revolution took place, resulting into more than a million dead, and the Islamic order was ultimately established over the alien ideology. This happened because the elections could not be held in Indonesia for a peaceful transition, whereas elections have helped Egypt, Turkey and Pakistan, to find peace and stability.

The new set-up will soon take-up the reigns of the government, to face the challenges, with the support of the broad masses who inherit the “democratic consciousness and true vision of Pakistan”. And I may not be wrong in saying that the new leadership also has the ‘fear of God’ in their hearts which makes them taller than those who came before them.

It is rather pathetic to see PPP and ANP rejected by the voters. ANP melted away conceding space to PTI which has emerged as the majority in KPK. The PPP, battered and bruised, has receded to its base in interior Sindh, while MQM, as usual rules urban Sindh, forcing a coalition government for the sake of political harmony. Surprisingly Imran Khan targeted Punjab, but hit the ‘bull’ in KPK province. (A bad shot indeed). It is hoped he will now be allowed to form the government in KPK so that his leadership is tested in dealing with the problems of this most turbulent region of Pakistan.

Our border areas with Afghanistan are the hub of the Islamic Resistance, which has defeated the Soviets and the Americans and their allies. From here also rises the resistance against Pakistan. Such is the muddle Imran Khan has to wade through. Sagacity demands that Nawaz Sharif should help him to deal with such daunting problems, to bring peace in Pakistan. The PPP and ANP have learned the bitter lesson that while in power they could not take the masses for granted, who have taken the revenge for the betrayal. The PPP and ANP must therefore suffer this verdict of history, rightly called the ‘Revenge of Democracy’.

The economy of the country is in serious jeopardy, yet one must have confidence in the resilience of the nation to fight back, the way our agriculturists and the industrialists have fought the curse of energy crisis maintaining the export level of about US$ 30 million. Our overseas Pakistanis now remit over 15 billion US$ a year, lessening the debt burden liabilities. And amazingly our Stock Exchange has been buoyant for several months, with index crossing the figure of 20,000, despite all the bad news.

It appears that our businessmen and the investors perhaps knew about the new face of politics to emerge in Pakistan. The curse of terrorism will gradually fade away with the withdrawal of the occupation forces in Afghanistan, who also have a stake in Pakistan. We have to be careful in being part of the “strategic cooperation to defeat terrorism in Pakistan and Afghanistan” Mr. Nawaz Sharif, Imran Khan and Maulana Fazlur Rahman are on the same page on the issue of dealing with the threat of terrorism, as declared by the All Parties Conference on 28th February 2013 and subsequently endorsed by Parliament.

Nawaz Sharif seems to be in great hurry to improve relation with India and find solution to the Kashmir problem. No doubt this is an important matter, but must be seen in the context of changed geo-political realities of the 21st century — particularly the ‘Shift of the Strategic Pivot’ to Asia Pacific; withdrawal of occupation forces from Afghanistan; merging Russo-Chinese interests in the region; Indian hegemonic ambitions of regional primacy and the surge of Muslim Consciousness’ and its impact on Pakistan.

The important issues of rivers water, Gwadar and Iran-Pakistan Gas Pipeline, demand a very careful approach. The new regime under Nawaz Sharif, no doubt would face many challenges, but the ideal conditions provided by the verdict of 11th May 2013 provides opportunities, to rise to the occasion, to justify the trust reposed in them by the nation.

—The writer is former Chief of Army Staff.

Presider: Anya Schmemann, Director for Editorial Strategy, Studies Program and Director, Task Force Program, Council on Foreign Relations

OPERATOR: I would now like to turn today’s conference over to Ms. Anya Schmemann. Ms. Schmemann, please begin.

ANYA SCHMEMANN: Thank you. And hello, everyone, and thank you for joining us this morning. I’m Anya Schmemann. I’m director of editorial strategy at the Council on Foreign Relations. And I’m pleased that you’re joining us for this on-the-record media conference call on the Pakistani elections.

As we know, Pakistan held nationwide elections over the weekend. The vote count indicates a big win for Nawaz Sharif’s party, meaning that Sharif will be prime minister for a third time. And the vote marks the first time the civilian government completed a full five-year term and transferred power in a democratic election.

With me to discuss these historic elections and the implications for U.S.-Pakistan elections is my colleague, Daniel Markey, who is senior fellow for India, Pakistan and South Asia at the Council on Foreign Relations. He has a forthcoming book on the future of the U.S.-Pakistan relationship called, “No Exit From Pakistan,” which will be out at the end of the summer.

We’re also joined by a special guest today, Cameron Munter, who served as U.S. ambassador to Pakistan from October 2010 until July 2012. He served as a diplomat also in Iraq, Serbia, the Czech Republic and Poland and other high-level posts in the government and is currently a visiting professor at Pomona College. We’re glad to have you with us, Ambassador, and thank you for joining us, Dan.

DANIEL MARKEY: Happy to be here.

SCHMEMANN: Dan, let me start with you. You wrote a recent CFR policy innovation memo calling — called “Support Process over Personalities in Pakistan” — where you called on the United States to encourage a rules-based process for a leadership transition in Pakistan. So looking at these elections, was that rules-based process followed? Were these elections free and fair? The White House recently called the election a significant milestone. Was it that?

MR. MARKEY: Yeah, thanks, Anya. I think that it basically was. That is, the elections were marked by very high voter turn out, about 60 percent nationally, and by a campaign that was quite active and by a very spirited back and forth between the two major contenders in the Punjab — this PTI party led by the former cricket player Imran Khan and the PMLN, Nawaz Sharif.

That said, there were problems, pretty significant problems, during the campaign season — very high violence directly primarily at the — at the political parties that had been in the ruling coalition over the past five years, the Pakistan People’s Party of President Zardari; the ANP, a party that’s got its main base up in Pakistan’s northwest, bordering Afghanistan; and the MQM, a party based primarily in urban Sindh and the city of Karachi. These parties bore the brunt of the violence, and they did — except for the MQM, which is widely believed to have a capacity to rig elections in Karachi — aside from the MQM, the others did very poorly in the actual voting.

So there were problems, but I think that the fact is that these parties that had been in power were also relatively unpopular at this point. They probably would have done poorly. They were in somewhat disarray. Certainly the PPP is experiencing some major problems in terms of its leadership. And so it’s not surprising that they did poorly, but the violence really is a problem there. And the rigging — the allegations of rigging are also problematic because they do raise questions about the overall legitimacy of the process.

I think, having said all of that, though, that most Pakistanis would agree with the Obama administration’s assessment: this was a milestone, having a democratic election after five years of a democratic civilian government in power. This is a step largely in the right direction.

Just a couple of other points. The two major contenders, Sharif and Imran Khan, went at it pretty hard in the elections. Imran Khan was disappointed, I think. His party was disappointed. He had been calling for a tsunami of young and other disaffected voters to come to his side and it didn’t happen that way. Nawaz Sharif really did sweep. And so the issue there or the question there is why Imran was unable to translate what appears to be a personal popularity and a genuine desire, widespread desire for change, why he couldn’t turn that into votes. And I think a lot of people will be debating that.

And the last point would be that, while Nawaz Sharif did win the Punjab convincingly, this reinforced his reputation as a Punjab-centric politician. And the issue there is he didn’t win the other provinces. Smaller regional parties and the PPP won Sindh. MQM won Karachi. The PTI did well and will form a government in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. And in Balochistan, you saw nationalist parties do better than the PML-N. So the ethnic fragmentation, the provincial divisions within Pakistan, were in fact highlighted by this election, and so there will be some questions about whether Nawaz Sharif can be more than a Punjab politician — whether he can bring about greater national unity going forward.

SCHMEMANN: Thank you, Dan. Say a quick word for us about the man Sharif. This is an extraordinary comeback for Nawaz Sharif. He was ousted in a coup in 1999, was jailed and exiled, and really clawed his way back to this quite astonishing triumph. To what can we attribute that success?

MARKEY: Single-minded determination on the part of a political leader who by all accounts keeps score, probably remembers everyone who’s done him well and everyone who’s done him poorly, and intends in one way or another to set the record straight. So unbelievable focus and drive. And, over the past five years, a certain degree of patience — a sense, probably, on his part that if he waited, power would fall back into his hands. And so he didn’t bring down the last government or seriously attempt to, although there were moments there where it looked like he might.

And now his plan, if it was a plan, has worked. Looks like all of his constituents who had been loyal supporters rallied back to his side. He won over a number of new voters. I mean, with voter turnout being this high, it didn’t all go to the new party; it went back to the PML-N.

And so now the question is how he’s likely to manage what had been a pretty troubled relationship with the military. As you said, he was ousted by Musharraf. How will he deal with Musharraf himself? Musharraf’s now under house arrest outside of Islamabad. The question there is whether Sharif will be somewhat magnanimous in his victory, let Musharraf off the hook, or if he’s going to go for blood.

We don’t know, but the consequence of those decisions and whether Sharif has learned some lessons from his time in office in the ’90s, will determine whether he can kind of stabilize the country, continue to focus on the economy — which is what he says he wants to do — and kind of right the ship of state in very important ways that I think would be really cheered here in the United States and elsewhere as well.

SCHMEMANN: Interesting, thank you. So Ambassador Munter, as Nawaz Sharif prepares to take office, he said this week on Monday that he wants good relations with the United States, but he also criticized the drone strike program in the tribal regions and said it was a challenge to national sovereignty. He also said that he hopes to improve relations with India.

But what can we realistically expect from him? Will his third turn in office be different? Will relations with the United States be more difficult or is there — are there signs of hope?

CAMERON MUNTER: Well, thank you very much. And I’m actually quite optimistic that Nawaz Sharif is sincere in trying to turn over a new leaf and to make things move forward. I think what Dan said is very, very important, that his main issue and the main thing that will decide his success in foreign policy is not so much a quick start in foreign policy but a quick start on domestic issues like the economy.

Much of what I think got him this rather surprisingly large and sweeping victory was that he — that many of the people there look to him to try to do a better job in managing the economy and managing kind of the social strife that exists in Pakistan.

So if he is able to start out with such moves as, an excellent choice — a well-respected choice for his finance minister, Senator Dar, or a small Cabinet that would be seen as not being just nepotism and patronage — those kind of steps could help him get the credibility that he needs to do stronger things in foreign policy.

Similarly that very important point that he not just see himself as a Punjabi and be perceived as a Punjabi politician, but that he’ll be a representative of all Pakistanis. That will take some work domestically, but ultimately that’ll be the basis from which he’ll carry out foreign policy.

As far as it goes with the United States, I think that he is straight up about this. I think he does want to have good relations with us. Throughout my time and ambassador and I think, when I talk to some of my predecessors, he made every effort to try to stay in close contact. I think he’s going to be very careful with us.

I think he’s going to try to see that we have a balanced — by his definition — a balanced policy — a policy that has not only the very real concerns on the common efforts we have against terrorism, but also the concerns we have to build relationships in the region, like what he’s done in the opening to India and what we all can plan on in the post-2014 period in Afghanistan.

So I would say marked by caution, but by openness to us. And especially these comments that he said about we have to talk about how we’re going to work on counterterrorism together.

I think this is precisely consistent with the way that the — you know, that the U.S. government wants to work with the Pakistani leadership, that is to find where we have common ground, to find those places in the, say, the fight against the militants and in the way that we deal with the end of the current phase of what’s happening in Afghanistan, that we find common ground, rather than focusing on what divides us.

And much of what’s been written in recent years, thanks to the difficulties of the last couple of years in the relationship, is a focus on what divides us. And I think Nawaz is going to look at — if he can — at what unites us. And I think we’d be wise to take his lead.

SCHMEMANN: Could you say a word as well about Pakistan-India relations? He made some positive comments there. Is it likely that those relations will be improved?

MUNTER: I think so. Every time I talked with Nawaz, and with Shahbaz his brother — who I guess we assume will stay on as the chief minister in Punjab — there was a smart focus on the economic impact of the measures that are being discussed between these two countries to improve visa processes, to improve the ability to get goods across the border — which is called negative lists, et cetera.

And not only that, kind of a long list of issues that can be dealt with piece by piece so that the countries can move slowly closer together, in the interest of both countries. I think Nawaz has been a big supporter of that. And, to his credit, so has Imran Khan. And I think that one of the questions that Dan talked about, which is the relation that Nawaz needs to develop with military at this point, will be key here.

I think many Indians, because of historical reasons, seem to have a suspicion of the Pakistani military. And the Pakistan military, working with Nawaz, in a kind of positive way, could go a great — could go a distance to alleviate those fears.

But I think that unless they’re able to come up with a comprehensive or a coherent approach to India that involves not only the power players among the civilians, but among the military, there may be limits to what they can do.

SCHMEMANN: OK, thank you. So overall, some positive signs, but still a lot of uncertainty. I think we will take questions now, so Operator, if you can give those instructions.

Ambassador, our line with you is a little fuzzy, so I would just ask that if you answer questions, that you speak loudly and clearly as possible.

Operator, we’ll take some questions.

OPERATOR: Thank you. (Gives queuing instructions.)

Our first question comes from Ashish Sen with the Washington Times.

QUESTIONER: Hi, thank you so much for doing this call.

I’d like to ask you a bit about voter turnout. Dan touched on this in his opening remarks. Turnout in Punjab Province is as high as 80 percent, while in Balochistan, it was around 20 percent and some say it was even lower.

What do you both see is the significance of this lopsided turnout for Pakistan in the long term?

Thank you.

SCHMEMANN: Dan?

MARKEY: Yeah, the caller’s exactly right. Balochistan was both a difficult place to campaign, an almost impossible place for journalists and reporters to get stories out of and apparently, a very difficult place to vote from. And this will only reinforce the notion and, I think, the correct notion, the Balochistan is a deeply troubled province in Pakistan, where the military continues to hold sway to the extent that anyone does, militancy and violence are likely to remain high and a sense of provincial alienation is quite real.

And Nawaz Sharif will have his work cut out for him to try to remedy that, just as the last government did. This is nothing new. And here too, he will be working or have to work with the Pakistani military to find a way forward that brings back on board some of — at least some segment of the Baloch nationalists in a way that doesn’t encourage secessionism, but also suggests that Balochistan has a real place within Pakistan as a whole.

As for the very high turnout in Punjab, I mean, this is a very encouraging sign. We’ve heard a lot of polls or surveys suggesting that Pakistanis really don’t believe in democracy, that they tend to favor military rule and so on and so forth.

You know, I don’t want to put too much stock in one or the other. But I think that if anything, we should see the high voter turn out as a sign that Pakistanis really do want to have a say in who runs the country and that they’re willing to come out in droves to make that clear. And that doesn’t just mean that they want change because this time they voted for an old and familiar face primarily in Punjab and didn’t all line up behind the newer face in Imran Kahn.

MUNTER: Yeah, I think from my perspective, I think that the point about Balochistan is absolutely right. And let me comment on the point about Punjab. One of the things that I think brought people to the elections was the kind, not just the numbers, of people that even Nawaz or Imran might have brought to the game, but the messages that they were following. And I give Imran a great deal of credit for this, being able to bring issues to the fore about corruption, to talk about accountability, to talk about governance.

These were things which in the past, hadn’t been emphasized as much. And many of the people who were angry or at least frustrated with the performance of the government between 2008 and 2013, were looking for people to talk about those kinds of issues. And to his credit, Imran, I think, forced Nawaz also to address those questions so that that 80 percent, whether they voted for Nawaz or for Imran, I think they all voted for a clean government. They all voted for pushing ahead and not doing things as they’ve always done.

And there’s kind of an ambiguity to the question of whether Nawaz is just, you know, putting someone back into power who was the old guy. I think Nawaz was pressed by Imran to say that he too stood for something new, for tendencies that will be different and that this is something that we should — all the friends of Pakistan, foreign countries, should be cheerful about.

SCHMEMANN: Thank you. We’ll take the next question.

OPERATOR: Thank you.

Our next question comes from Khalid Khattak with Wall Street Journal.

QUESTIONER: Yes, my question is for the panelists is about U.S.-Pakistan future relationship under the PLM-N leadership, Nawaz Sharif. Basically, my question is, like, Pakistan conducted its first-ever nuclear test in 1998 under the premiership of Nawaz Sharif. And his party, during the last five years, ruled Punjab province, and there were reports that his party has (soft collar ?) for Jemaat-u-Dawa, which is alleged for his involvement in 2008 Mumbai attacks. So if any one of you could please comment on these two aspects, like how do you see future of Nawaz Sharif vis-a-vis these incidents or — thank you.

SCHMEMANN: Ambassador, let’s start with you. So the nuclear question and the counterterrorism.

MUNTER: Well, let me start with the counterterrorism question first.

This is — this is a key issue that I think Nawaz understands. I certainly hope he does, and I hope we understand that this is a topic that we have to discuss not just civilian to civilian, not just military to military, but you know, in a comprehensive way we have to talk about the common ground we have in the stability of Pakistan, what we can contribute to the future of working together. We’ve had some bad years in that cooperation, but Nawaz I think has made it clear that he wants to talk about what is it that needs to be done, what is it that America can do in concert with Pakistani authorities to fight terrorism. And the moving target here is what is it that’s going to happen in 2014 that’s going to change the way that America deals with Pakistan and the way America deals with the region.

I can only say that I found that his comments were fairly open-minded and that I think what he’s trying to do — what I hope he’s trying to do is to leave the door open for not grandstanding or broadcasting ideas in advance, but for sitting down for very meaningful discussions with our military authorities and with our civilian authorities to talk about the future. And I hope that when he does so on this counterterrorism future he doesn’t limit it simply to the internal question of Pakistan, but how things in the region are going to have an impact.

I think on the question of nuclear issues, this is something that we want to make sure that we’re not prisoners of the past. I mean, it’s — there’s a lot of back and forth that took place in the 1990s from the (press room ?) and then onward that while it is very important, it is not something — let’s make sure that we don’t refight the battles of the 1990s. I think that coming to this question also with open minds, looking how things have changed in the last 10 years — for example, the American relationship with India — and being realistic about how our cooperation should work should be a hallmark for the way America approaches Pakistan and I hope the way that Nawaz approaches the United States.

SCHMEMANN: Dan, anything to add?

MARKEY: Yeah. Just a quick observation that Nawaz Sharif and his ruling coalition and his party, in fact, are kind of pulled in two distinct directions. On the one hand, they’re a party, a pro-business party — yes, Punjab-centric — but they want to see national economic growth, and they’ve made that very clear. And in addition to that, they recognize that improved relations with India, stability with India, and even trade openings with India all serve those purposes. So those are the — that’s sort of the positive face of the party and of Nawaz Sharif.

But as the caller noted, he’s also been associated with, affiliated with in some instances, more extreme organizations in Punjab, and the question is whether he will actually try to forthrightly tackle the problem of Jemaat-u-Dawa, Lashkar e-Taiba, and whether he will pull away from the face of being kind of a hard-line nuclear hawk — which, frankly, is what he was in the 1990s. And how can he manage both of these things at once? It’s going to be a very difficult balancing act for him.

My own sense is that the best way forward is for him to move very quickly on the economic front, make — try to notch up some quick victories there to show that he has the economic story a bit under control. And that will give him more power, more legitimacy to tackle some of these harder issues, which may be difficult within his — within his own party and his own coalition.

SCHMEMANN: Thank you.

Operator, we’ll take another question.

OPERATOR: Thank you. Next question comes from Shaun Tandon with AFPP (sic/AFP).

QUESTIONER: Yeah, with AFP. Thanks for doing this call.

This question was answered a little bit before by Ambassador Munter, but just from your — from your previous experience, I wanted to see how you saw Sharif on these issues on which you sometimes criticized the idea that perhaps he’s been a bit soft on extremists in the past. From your interaction with him, how did you see him? Where do you see him standing? Is that somebody who generally shares the same views of the United States about the need to crack down on extremists, or is it a different equation then from the PPP?

MUNTER: Yeah, you know, it’s much as Dan said. This is not simply a clear question, I think, of how did you feel about this group or how did you feel about tactics that are being dealt with in the counterterrorism fight?

I think that what he primarily wants to be able to do — I would hope that this is the approach he is taking — is to establish himself as someone who has credibility and legitimacy with the Pakistani population, once again not just a Punjabi politician but someone who speaks to the needs of all Pakistanis to have a clean and open government, a government that they feel they can believe in.

Turning from that, once he has established that — and I would imagine that’s what we should look for in the first hundred days — he can then say to two different groups: Look, I have this kind of power, and it’s then possible for me to work as a broker between those people who feel — and let’s put it in certain ways — either humiliated or frustrated by the way that the war on terror has gone, and those people who feel very much that Pakistan has to do more in the fight against terror, but that he can be an arbiter of this kind of debate within the country and with the Americans and other interested countries only after he has established himself as a credible, clean, powerful and understanding leader in the country.

So what I would expect us to do is to see him probably not really tackle those kinds of questions, the counterterrorism questions, until he has really nailed down his economic policy and his policy of governance.

QUESTIONER: Thank you.

SCHMEMANN: Operator, let’s take another question.

OPERATOR:Our next question comes from Azim Mayin (ph) with GoTV.

QUESTIONER: Hi, Ambassador Munter. Hi again. My question is about these irregularities which have caused a lot of commotion and confrontation in Karachi and some parts of Lahore.

Do you regard it as only procedural irregularities, or these are the serious rigging of, you know, issues to be tackled by Nawaz Sharif and Imran Khan, and how this will pave the way for the future conciliation or confrontation?

And my other question is, how about this Washington Post report that Americans preferred more Nawaz Sharif than Imran Khan, and they tried to pave the way for Nawaz Sharif?

SCHMEMANN: Dan, why don’t you take on the irregularities first?

MARKEY: Yeah, these are not just procedural irregularities as far as anyone can tell. The numbers are kind of astounding. You just can’t get the numbers of people voting that go well beyond the number of registered without some serious problems.

The challenge for Nawaz Sharif, particularly, say, in Karachi, is how far does he want to pursue this problem? You know, the main perpetrator, as far as I can tell, is said to be the MQM. The MQM does have a very strong hold in Karachi City, and also will stand very firm if challenged on these issues.

So there will be a revote. I don’t anticipate the MQM is going to lose any seats that it won before. How far is this new government going to push it? I don’t anticipate all that far. They just don’t want to pick a fight with the MQM right off the bat, and that’s exactly what they’d be doing.

So, you know, procedural irregularities go well beyond that, but now it’s a political question. What fights do you want to pick? And this goes back to something Ambassador Munter said, that Nawaz Sharif is going to have to pick and choose his battles upfront, and this is probably one that he’d want to steer clear of.

And even Imran Khan, while he’s made some points about rigging in Punjab, I don’t think that he wants to push this too much further. They need to move forward. I think everybody agrees with that, and they’re going to probably let basically the outcome stand.

The one other point I would make has to do with right out of the gate Nawaz Sharif really needs to be careful on his appointments, because everybody in Pakistan will be watching to see who he picks for cabinet positions, and who his party picks for positions in Punjab.

And here, if he basically pays off some of the more extreme members of his political coalition and gives them jobs, everybody else will notice very clearly. That will send a message. So if he’s looking to avoid fights from the outset, how he picks his appointees will matter a great deal.

SCHMEMANN: Let me go to the ambassador on the second part of the question about America playing favorites. Is there any evidence that Washington did that?

MUNTER: I see no evidence of that.

SCHMEMANN: OK, thank you.

Next question, please.

OPERATOR: The next question comes from Aarti Ramachandran with Foreign Policy Administration.

SCHMEMANN: Yes, hello. We’re ready for your question.

QUESTIONER: Hi. Thanks for taking my question. I — this is sort of the same theme as some of the other questions, but Sharif’s party has a pretty conservative Islamic base, and given all the news about, you know, the blasphemy laws, and, you know, the persecution of the Ahmadi community and so forth, I was wondering what you thought about what his win means for, you know, the future of any secular movement or secularism in Pakistan very broadly.

SCHMEMANN: Thank you. So, Dan, what are we to make of the conservative elements?

MARKEY: Well, I would step back just a bit and say to look at the performance of the last five years of the Pakistan Peoples Party government and to say that many of Pakistan’s minorities, despite the fact that the government was seen as more progressive, center-left, pro — in some ways secular and pro-human rights, women’s rights, minority rights — as far as it goes in Pakistan, they were all of those things, and yet, many of those groups suffered gravely from violence, from attacks. And when push came to shove, unfortunately, the Pakistan People’s Party leaders really weren’t able to stand up and be counted and to push their agenda firmly. They themselves felt threatened, under attack, and some of them were literally killed.

So I think now we have to look at this new government. And we see no greater interest in pursuing these interests — in fact, far less than the previous government. So it will not be high on their agenda. And all of the limitations on the pursuit — the political limitations on pushing these kinds of lines will still be there. So frankly, I’m not optimistic about the direction the country will be taking on these issues. I don’t think it’s necessarily going to be a calamity, but this will not be a time for a focus by Pakistan’s, government, by the ruling party on minority rights and so on, and that’s unfortunate.

And I think that the other, bigger question is whether this election will be, in the — in the sweep of history, seen as the end of a left-right and progressive versus conservative politics in Pakistan, whether we’ve seen a fundamental realignment here, whether the PPP will have to retreat into being almost a Sindhi regional party and less of a national progressive party in the face of its serious beating throughout the rest of the country, or whether, as a party, it can reassert itself and take back that ground. That remains to be seen, but as you can probably tell from what I’ve said so far, I’m worried.

SCHMEMANN: Ambassador, how about these social and civil issues? What is your sense?

MUNTER: Well, just two brief comments on that. You know, we’ve known Nawaz Sharif for a long time. You know the famous story that Bill Clinton was instrumental in intervening at the time of the coup to make sure that he was able to go into exile and not end up in jail for a long period of time. And there are — there are personal ties that go back a long time. And we talked with Nawaz Sharif and his people, and they know very well where the West — and the United States in particular, but the West in general feels about human rights issues, about civil rights issues, about social justice and those kinds of questions, as seen in a broad sense.

And so, adding on to what Dan said about whether this will be seen as a watershed election, whether it’s going to be end of the left-right politics, it might also be the question that Nawaz gets to decide, is Pakistan going to continue on the path that some people have seen as being somewhat limited in its outlook — in its horizons?

Is it going to be inward-looking, or is Nawaz, as part of, for example, the opening to India, not only going to let in goods, but also going to let in the idea that the success that many other countries have had in the region, that Pakistan — that has eluded Pakistan is because they’ve opened up to the world — to the world economy and to the world practices — the kind of governance practices that are not just about honesty, et cetera, but also about tolerance and about the different kind of rules that people play by if they want to be taken seriously on the world stage.

I think this is something where friends of Pakistan should stand firm with Nawaz, as we have in the past, and say, look, you’ve known us for a long time. You’ve known what it takes to take part and be serious — seen as serious in the future. The choice of being inward-looking and not taking these things into account — the fear that Dan, I think, rightly raised, is — could be offset by open-minded, new thinking that brings Pakistan into the 21st century, and we all hope that will happen.

SCHMEMANN: Thank you. We’ll take another question.

OPERATOR: Next question comes from Lee Cullum with North Texas Media.

QUESTIONER: Thank you very much. This has been a fascinating session. I want to ask you first about the fate of Musharraf. Is he going to be allowed to go back into exile? And if the Pakistan People’s Party is going to retreat into a regional stand, then what becomes of the Bhutto family? What about the son of Benazir Bhutto? Is there any future for him?

SCHMEMANN: Dan.

MARKEY: Yeah, I think that it would be very smart for Nawaz Sharif to tread lightly on the Musharraf issue and to leave an exit option open for Musharraf, in spite of their personal animosity and, you might say, vendetta. I don’t know whether Nawaz Sharif will be able to bring himself to that. And I frankly don’t know whether Musharraf will push at the line in ways that both endanger his own life and also court a political crisis in Pakistan.

I don’t really understand fully what Musharraf’s agenda is and whether he might, as he has in the past, push beyond the point where many other would have called it a day and stepped out. He always struck me as a commando mentality. He said as much in the past. He’s really stepped into some trouble here and I don’t know how he’s going to extricate himself with honor, which is something that he seeks. And Nawaz Sharif can help let him do that, but I’m not — I’m not certain that he will.

As for the future of the PPP, I think that Asif Zardari has not acquitted himself well as president, has not managed his party well as head of the PPP. This has come about in terms of the moves by PPP stalwarts away from the party, some of them. Many others have been basically pushed out or pushed to the side. It’s basically become a vehicle for Zardari. And many of the ideals of his predecessors have been jettisoned in the service of pragmatic, and many would say corrupt, politics.

Bilawal is still very young, showed no evidence that he’s capable of running a national party of this scale, did everything — almost everything from afar. The party is feeling like it needs a full rethink. And it’s feeling very much a victim of the violence inside of Pakistan. Under those circumstances, I think the future of the party would be best managed by some of the prior bigger names inside the party, but they are not Bhuttos. And that’s a problem for a dynastic party that never really established a great institutional base. So again, I’m worried and right now they really do seem in retreat.

QUESTIONER: Thank you.

SCHMEMANN: Ambassador, any comments on this revolving cast of characters?

MUNTER: Yeah, I really think that Dan covered it all and, you know, that these are — it’s hard for me to believe that the PPP, with its, you know, long history will simply agree to be a regional party. But they’re going to have to find different approaches and they’re going to have to go back to some of the ideals that they seem to have lost, at least in the public eyes, in recent years.

SCHMEMANN: Thank you. We’re coming to the end of our time, but let’s take another question here.

OPERATOR: Yes. Our final question comes from Ayesha Tanzeem with Voice of America.

QUESTIONER: Yes, thank you. My question is that in KPK, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, seems like Imran Kahn is going to make a government with Jamaat-e-Islami. And both of those parties have made anti-war on terror, anti-drone noises in the last few years. I’m wondering if that complicates the kind of cooperation the U.S. is looking for in the next few years, vis-a-vis the withdrawal from Afghanistan and the drone strikes. What do you think about that?

SCHMEMANN: Dan.

MARKEY: Sure. I think this is actually a really fascinating question because now that the PTI has actually won something, which is — which is new — they’ve won control basically over the ability to run a coalition government Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province. Now the question is, do they actually run it effectively? Can they take the energy and enthusiasm and translate it into a more effective, cleaner government in a place that hasn’t known that for — certainly for the past decade, and in many ways much, much longer than that?

But will they also become a party — working with JI in coalition — a party that’s primarily an oppositional party on these issues of drone strikes and cooperation with the United States, sort of shouting out against what Nawaz Sharif is doing in Islamabad? In fact — in other words, will they position themselves as a right of the right party and use that opposition to try to win over even greater support among their constituents in Pakistan’s northwest, or will they take a somewhat more responsible approach, try to find — try to focus on governance issues, which was their — was in fact why many people voted for them in the first place — to focus on corruption issues and better management.

That remains to be seen. One other little piece here, though, is that their coalition also, as far as I can tell, is likely to include or does include this smaller party, the Qaumi Watan Party of Aftab Sherpao, who is a — sort of a traditional, provincial politician and who worked within the Musharraf government and may be a voice of some greater sort of traditional stability and conciliation and may push them a little bit more toward the center and away from an active, oppositional role.

But if they take a very active oppositional role, they could cause some trouble for the Pakistani military operations and for what remains of the U.S. presence in the consulate in Peshawar and otherwise. So they could be quite an irritant, if they — if they choose to be so.

SCHMEMANN: Ambassador, any final words, and then we’ll wrap up the call.

MUNTER: Yeah. On that, I think that Dan nailed it. I think that the main thing — we may notice that there was a sort of lot of rhetoric about drones and these kinds of issues, but I think — I think it’s fair to say that the reason that you had the support for people like the PTI in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa is the issue of governance. And that’s who they’re going to really get down and deal with.

Whether the choose to be kind of the right wing — right wing opposition to the right wing, as Dan kind of posited was one of their options, I think much of that will depend on the ability of the central government, which after all has the — (inaudible) — for national security, to maintain its links to the military, that is to build a relationship with the military that’s fruitful and constructive, and to maintain its links to the United States, to talk about where the commonality lies.

I think that needs to happen before — I would be surprised if PTI and its allies in KPK were to make an oppositional statement before the central government kind of came up with its game plan. So I think the key thing for us in looking at this as policy question is making sure that we deal with Nawaz and his new team, which has gotten a fairly strong mandate, which is not hostage to a lot of small groups, we hope, but is able to make its own decisions about what it thinks the proper security for Pakistan should be. And only then will the questions, intriguing as they might be, be relevant about what the PTI might do.

SCHMEMANN: OK. Thank you. And with that, we will have to wrap up this call. We do want to thank everyone for those good questions, and our panelists for a very interesting discussion.

Once again, this was an on-the-record media call on Pakistan’s elections with Daniel Markey, senior fellow for India, Pakistan and South Asia at the Council on Foreign Relations, and Cameron Munter, former U.S. ambassador to Pakistan. The transcript of this call will be posted on CFR.org. As well you can find Daniel’s recent policy innovation memorandum and some other pieces and resources on Pakistan. So I invite you to visit the website to find more.

And with that, I thank you all and have a good day.

MARKEY: Thanks, Anya.

OPERATOR: Ladies and gentlemen, this concludes today’s teleconference. You may now disconnect.

Tennis ace Andy Murray has said that it is ‘unlikely’ that he will play in the French Open starting Sunday, following a chronic back injury. The world no. 2 champion informed the umpire during the Rome Open against Marcel Granollers that he will not be able to continue as he rushed for a treatment, after leveling the match in the second round, the Guardian reports.

According to the report, the despondent Murray had reached close to the second grand slam of the season and said that he had planned to quit as he was unsure that he would make through the game even if he were selected for the French Open, adding that he will make a decision in Paris after the next five days as his pain is still sore.

Murray further said that it is frustrating to play with pain even though the injections ease out the pain and reduce some inflammation, but will not make him feel 100 percent fine.

Murray has suffered through the injury since 2011 and is uncertain whether to consider surgery as an option, the report added.

Keralan paceman S. Sreesanth and two of his Rajasthan Royals team mates, Ajit Chandila and Ankeet Chavan, were arrested by Delhi police in Mumbai on Wednesday night after the team lost by 14 runs to the Mumbai Indians at Wankhede Stadium.

The three players are understood to have been under investigation for a week, after Delhi police received a tip-off about spot-fixing in earlier matches of cricket’s richest Twenty-20 tournament.

Police have also arrested seven bookmakers in Mumbai and three in Delhi in connection with the case and have issued alerts for two more bookies in Delhi.

A BCCI official confirmed to The Australian that the Indian cricket authority had been informed only this morning of the arrests and were awaiting further details.

All three players had been suspended pending investigations, he added.

BCCI chairman Rajiv Shukla was expected to hold a press conference today, when he was expected to draw heavy criticism for failing to pick up on the latest scandal.

But the BCCI official, who declined to be named, said it was the International Cricket Council which had failed to detect evidence of fixing during the six-week tournament.

“The BCCI engages the services of the ICC’s anti-corruption department and pays them a huge sum of money for that,” he told The Australian.

“That system is in place but nothing came from them.”

Television footage showed a sombre Rajasthan Royals team, which also includes Australian players Shane Watson, Brad Hodge, Shaun Tait, Brad Hogg and James Faulkner, arriving in the southern Indian city of Hyderabad this morning.

None of the players would comment on the arrests.

But Rajasthan Royals CEO Raghu Iyer confirmed the three players were picked up by Delhi police last night and the team management was co-operating with the investigation.

A statement issued by the team management said it had “zero tolerance for corruption” and would take action if the charges were proven, though it gave no further details.

“We have been informed that three of our players have been called in for investigation on spot fixing in matches. We are completely taken by surprise. We do not have the full facts at this point and are unable to confirm anything,” the statement said.

“We are in touch with the BCCI on this matter. We will fully cooperate with the authorities to ensure a thorough investigation. The management at Rajasthan Royals has a zero-tolerance approach to anything that is against the spirit of the game.”

The latest scandal comes a year after the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) was forced to suspend five IPL players, Shalabh Srivastava, Mohnish Mishra, T.P. Sudhindra, Amit Yadav and Abhinav Bali, for spot-fixing in last year’s competition uncovered in a sting by an Indian news channel.

But the tournament has been plagued with controversy since its launch in 2008.

By Zaheerul Hassan

 Bollywood actor Sanjay Dutt reached the TADA court to surrender in connection with the 1993 Mumbai Blasts case. While leaving the house  Sanjay Dutt accompanied by his sisters Priya and Narmata Dutt along with wife Maanyata to surrender in the court to serve the remaining jail term.  He will be  first sent to Arthur Road Jail in Mumbai and then is likely to be moved to Pune’s Yerawada jail to complete his remaining prison term.

Sanjay Dutt, 53 was convicted in the 1993 Mumbai serial blasts case and has been sentenced to five-year rigorous imprisonment for possessing an automatic rifle.

On 18 April 2013 , He was convicted by the apex court had granted four-week extension for surrender so that he could fulfill his “professional commitments”

 Sanjay Dutt, who was convicted for the offence punishable under Sections 3 and 7 read with Sections 25(1-A), (1-B)(a) of the Arms Act, has spent 18 months in jail. After the trial court’s judgment on July 31, 2007, Dutt was immediately taken into custody and sent to Arthur Road Jail in Mumbai. He was shifted to Yerwada jail in Pune on August 2, 2007.

Top Bollywood top Muslim star has recently thrashed out by extremists Hindu dominate media once while giving an interview to In the Outlook Turning Points magazine, Shahrukh said “I sometimes become the inadvertent object of political leaders who choose to make me a symbol of all that they think is wrong and unpatriotic about Muslims in India.”

 Salman Khan has also been convicted for 1 year and 5 years for poaching of two Chinkaras at Bhawad and one Black Buck at Ghoda Farm (Mathania) in the intervening nigh of 26-27 September, 1998 and 28-29 September, 1998 respectively.

 In 2008 prominent Indian actress, Member of Parliament and renowned social activist Shabana Azmi in an interview with local TV, Azmi said with a tinge of bitterness: ‘I cannot get a house in Mumbai. I wanted to buy a flat in Mumbai and it wasn’t given to me because I was a Muslim and I read the same about Saif Ali Khan.’

 Notably, Sanajay Dutt is a son of film actors Sunil Dutt and Nargis Dutt, made his acting debut in 1981. In fact extremists Hindu did not believe that Sanajy is from their community being a son of Nargis Dutt. Thus discriminatory actions against Muslim in all the revealed court trials became inbuilt phenomena of major pillars of India. RAW is a manipulating agency in all the cases against Muslims.

On the other side, Indian court failed to take actions against a Hindu Col Prohit, former RAW’s agency agent who has blasted Samjhauta Express through bombings in 2007. What a true face of secular Indian.

]]> http://zameer36.com/indian-super-star-sanjay-dutt-surrenders-another-victim-of-hindutva-mindset/feed/ 0 http://zameer36.com/how-to-get-back-yours-stolen-car/ http://zameer36.com/how-to-get-back-yours-stolen-car/#comments Wed, 15 May 2013 16:08:14 +0000 zaheer http://zameer36.com/?p=7278  By Rida Zaheer  

It takes only 2 minutes for a car thief to runaway with your car. No matter you have a trekker and auto-alarming devices fitted in your car.   The best safety for your car is a live and active Mobile Phone hidden in a sage place in your car:

1.      Buy any low price mobile phone with longer standby time (Qmobile has one model which run for 10 days on standby and cost around Rs.2,200/-).

2.      Install a mobile connection which has best network in the country.

3.      Turn this mobile on complete SILENT mode (double check it should not vibrate while you turn it on SILENT mode).

4.      Wrap it up slightly in a plastic sheet so that it should not get dirty and dusty during its hidden use.

5.      Make sure it is perfectly responding by calling its number from another mobile phone.

6.      Hide this mobile in a safe place in your car. And that’s it…!!!   If by any chance your car is found stolen, immediately inform your local Police / 115 in Pakistan. Give them phone number of the mobile hidden in your car. Police / 115 can easily track the location by calling that number.

Chances are that you may get back your car within the shortest possible time.   Share this message with all your friends.   And finally do not forget to charge this mobile at least twice a week and hide it back in your car in active position.

Good luck.  If you get back your car this way, do remember me in your prayers!!!

Posted By Zaheerul Hassan

NEW DELHI: The Navy has been hit by yet another alleged sex scandal as the wife of a senior officer has charged her husband with forcing her to get “sexually involved” with his colleagues, prompting defence minister A K Antony to order a probe.

The case has come up on a day when the defence minister asked the top brass of the Navy in its Commanders’ conference to take sternest possible action against officers involved in such deeds.

“The defence minister was very helpful and has told us that he has ordered a departmental inquiry into the charges made by me and my parents against my husband,” the woman complainant said here after meeting Antony.

She alleged that her husband, who is a Lieutenant Commander (equivalent to a Major in Army) posted at the Naval Ship Repair Yard (NSRY) in Karwar, “forced me to get sexually involved with his colleagues and consume alcohol.”

The woman, who says she has shifted to her maternal home after this episode, has accused her husband of physical and mental torture.

An MBA, she got married in February last year to the officer.

The woman alleged that her husband had threatened that if she disclosed about his deeds to anyone, “he would put up my nude pictures on internet to spoil my image socially”.

She said her husband is working on an important assignment related to Navy’s Admiral Gorshkov aircraft carrier under construction at a shipyard in Russia and is about to be posted there soon.

In a complaint sent to the defence minister on April 30, she had demanded departmental disciplinary action against him.

The officer could not be reached for his comments.

In the recent past, several cases of sexual misconduct have come up against Navy officers including one where the wife of another Lieutenant Commander in Kochi filed an FIR against her husband and colleagues alleging that she was being forced into wife swapping by her husband.

In that case also, the Navy officials in headquarters here had attempted to dismiss the case as that of marital discord but defence minister Antony took steps to ensure an inquiry into the matter which is underway.

A couple of other officers were also dismissed recently for sending lewd messages to several women using multiple SIM cards and mobiles numbers and having illicit affairs with the wife of a brother officer.

The Navy was left red-faced when pictures of one of its very senior officers of the rank of Commodore (equivalent to Brigadier in Army) surfaced in a compromising position with a Russian woman.

The defence minister ordered sacking of the officer, who was overseeing the construction of INS Vikramaditya in Russia at a time when India and Russia were discussing the demands by the latter for an increased price of the warship.

Courtesy: The Times of India

Posted by Faheem Belharvi

Wednesday, May 15, 2013 – The fact that the political leadership of both Russia and Pakistan seems determined enough to add new life to their mutual relationship and widen up their circle of cooperation and interdependence, the over-all situation, realistically-speaking, remains in the doldrums. This entails a dire need of revamping and accelerating track two diplomacy between the two countries so as to probe into the grey areas that are the potent cause of friction between the two, and hence need to be deliberated upon by both the sides if they are to refurbish their relations making them “productive” in the truest sense of the word.

“Track II diplomacy”, simply put, means an informal or unofficial diplomacy whose predominant aim is to supplement “track one diplomacy” (official, state-sponsored diplomacy) by playing its part in rendering the prevalent scheme of things more conducive to the success of formal talks between the countries.

As far as the modus operandi of track two dialogues is concerned, there is no distinctly defined procedure. Activities, that range from one-step action to long-term endeavors, which can safely be enumerated among the ways in which track two diplomacy takes place are: workshops conducted by regional research centers or some non-governmental organizations, cultural activities which serve to highlight a softer image of the countries involved , joint re-examination of historical events, informal meetings of the political and military intelligentsia of the countries concerned.

Pakistan-Russia relations albeit apparently normal since the independence of Pakistan have never been truly cordial as such because of the former’s alignment with the US, as against the Soviet Union (USSR) in the then-existing bipolar structure of international power, right from its maiden years as a newly-emerged state, and ever since it is considered an American proxy in the region. Hence, traditionally, Pakistan used to view Soviet Union from the lens of the US. There did prevail, in Pakistan, a sense of apprehension as well regarding Soviet Union’s expansionist tendency so much so that Pakistan felt its very existence under an imminent threat, more so because of its defiant and aggressive eastern neighbor (India) which, at that time, seemed ready to take benefit out of the power disparity existing between the two.

Another factor that divested Pakistan-Russia relations of warmth from the very inception of their relationship was the factor that Pakistan had won independence mainly in the name of Islam and with the avowed objective of making the country an Islamic welfare state, and there certainly was a general ideological antagonism of Muslims toward the very phenomena of Communism often considered to be, conceptually, an antithesis to what Islam stands for. In case of Russia and Pakistan, the respective political leadership has full support of most of the progressive-minded, moderate people of their country who are also well-versed with the changing dynamics of the post-modern world whose subsistence and progress is largely dependent upon the extent of inter-state cooperation and conciliation.

Therefore, in particular context of Russia and Pakistan, all the various activities of track two diplomacy are likely to bear the fruit of bringing about a substantial change in mindset of the ruling elite, facilitating them in the process of identification their previous errors of judgment and sensitizing them to the urgent need of re-orienting their relationship so as to diversify and multiply, and to make the most of the available options of mutual cooperation and interdependence.

(Mehreen Baloch—Masters in English Literature from University of the Punjab, Lahore).

Posted by Javed Iqbal   

As much as I would have liked Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf to win, that was not to be, well, well, it is still not too bad. At least we are seeing the back of the People’s Party at the centre, which is no mean achievement and I must offer my congratulations, though admittedly not exactly from the bottom of my heart, as they say it, to Mian Mohammed Nawaz Sharif and his team for making an achievement that seemed unlikely.
On second thoughts, I see at least one advantage in that. Well, having had experience of running both the federal and provincial governments, PML-N won’t waste much time, and resources, in trial-and-error and will get down to the serious business of forming and running the government, hopefully for the benefit of the people who, getting raw deal from the rulers all this time, are now at the end of their tether, and definitely desire and deserve a lot better.

Having attained its objective, I hope PML-N will act in a gracious manner and will also accept and respect the mandate of other parties, and deal with them in a peaceful and reconciliatory manner, and not that of revenge and score-settling. I am confident of this because PML-N has shown fair degree of maturity, one reason for which is its having the same old leadership for a long span, as against Peoples Party which had ‘accidental’ leaders who rose to fame over-night and yet others who had to go through a name-change process to establish their credentials.

For the fact that it participated in the elections for the first time, Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf did not do too bad either. In a decent move, it has conceded its defeat at the national level and has congratulated Mian Mohammed Nawaz Sharif on his spectacular success. PTI has expressed a desire to form government in Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa, where it has secured majority votes. In a way, it landed the most important job, and if it can establish law and order in the most volatile province, it would be a great service to the whole of Pakistan, and a big relief to all of us.

Let us hope other parties also demonstrate the sporting spirit which PTI has displayed and accept the election results, even if these did not turn out in their favor. It is definitely time to be positive and move on in a spirit of reconciliation instead of being mean and vindictive, which has been our tradition in the past.Nawaz Sharif expressed a wish on the election night for his party to attain overall majority in the National Assembly so that his party does not have to take in coalition partners which would have diluted its power, slowing down and adversely affecting its decision-making process.

Looks like his wish has been granted so he would now have no excuse in not moving fast enough on various fronts where lot of developmental work has to be done. We are in an absolute mess from which we need to get out, and soon. Let us hope Nawaz Sharif and his team stop the rot, and move on from there Being an optimist, I see a better Pakistan emerging. I hope our leaders will spare the suffering masses the misery which had been their fate during the last five years, and even before.

At some stage, our leaders have got to develop a quality to lead, instead of spending their time, and country’s resources, purely on pursuing their personal interests and rivalries. Just remember, Dr. Tahir-ul-Qadri is around and not too happy with the situation. If the situation gets any worse, it would provide an enabling atmosphere for Dr. Qadri to arrange mass protests which could develop in to a movement that could smash every thing coming in its way. We have seen the trailer. Let us hope the need does not arise to play the full film.(S.R.H. Hashmi)

The heavy mandate Nawaz Sharif’s rule came to an abrupt end after two years eight months as a result of military coup by Gen Musharraf on October 12, 1999. He was later on exiled for ten years. After 9/11, Musharraf was coerced and induced by the US and led to believe that partnership with USA would uplift Pakistan’s depressed fortunes and pave the way for prosperity. He was assured that unlike the past, this time Pak-US alliance will be long lasting, mutually beneficial and based on mutual respect. American officials admitted that the US had wrongly left Pakistan in a lurch on several occasions and promised that it will not be abandoned again. Lure of advancement of his selfish interests and material benefits as well as patronage of sole super power numbed his rational thinking.

Feeling thrilled at the prospects of earning legitimacy and staying in power for a long time and making Pakistan modern and prosperous, Musharraf forgot the dark history of USA how it had ditched Pakistan repeatedly at critical stages and that too at a time when India was in Soviet camp and an opponent of US policies. He forgot that India had become a strategic partner of USA and both had consistently maintained a hostile posture against Pakistan. He also lost sight of the fact that all the governments in Kabul had remained friendly with India and had pursued unfriendly policies against Pakistan and that it was only under the Taliban that Pakistan’s western border had become safe for the first time.

It didn’t occur to him that by taking a u-turn on Afghanistan and joining hands with USA to destroy Afghanistan, the people of FATA in particular and of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa in general as well as the religious right will get antagonized. He believed whatever Colin Powel told him on phone and readily agreed to all his seven demands.  He did so since he at his own concluded that there was no other way out. The explanation he later gave in defence of his hasty and unilateral decision to grant so many concessions was that in case of his refusal, the US would have solicited Indian support and destroyed both Afghanistan and Pakistan. He also presumed that the US was genuinely hurt on account of 9/11 attacks and was sincere in its resolve to eliminate terrorism from the face of earth.

No sooner he threw Pakistan in the tight embrace of USA in September 2001; he got the first rude shock three months later when India stage managed the drama of terrorist attack on Indian Parliament. In that timeframe although the US and its allies had succeeded in toppling Taliban regime and capturing Afghanistan, the situation was still hazy since none of the wanted al-Qaeda and Taliban leaders could be captured. Pakistan had deployed 70,000 troops along its western border on the request of USA to nab the fleeing militants from Afghanistan.

Pakistan’s equally aggressive response took the heat out of India’s bellicosity and it decided to back off. However, the prolonged confrontation had a telling effect on Gen Musharraf. Under US pressure he agreed to soften up Pakistan’s stance on Kashmir and to get detached from Kashmiri freedom movement. He banned Kashmir focused six Jihadi groups.

The people were misled into believing that peace treaty with India and CBMs would help in solving all the disputes including Kashmir issue. He further damaged the cause of Kashmir when he downplayed UN resolutions and suggested out of box solution. Whatever gains made by Kashmiri Mujahideen through armed resistance from 1989 onwards at an extremely heavy price were wasted away by Musharraf. He obsequiously bowed to each and every command given by Washington. Battle with tribal militants resulted in loss of considerable space in FATA. Flames of low intensity war spread out from FATA to settled areas including Peshawar and creation of TTP and tied down over 100,000 troops. Marrying up of resentful Jihadi groups with Al-Qaeda and TTP brought the war into urban centres.

The PPP led coalition regime of liberal parties installed by USA in March 2008 pursued Musharraf’s US centric policies and made no effort to ameliorate the living conditions of the have-nots who had attached high hopes in the democratically elected government. But for the poor governance, massive corruption, insensitivity of ruling regime and its subservience to Washington, neither the US could have spread its perverse influence in Pakistan, nor could the anti-state extremist groups play havoc. War on terror coupled with breakdown of law and order in FATA, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Balochistan and Karachi, which made the state fragile, facilitated easy entry to foreign agents to fish in troubled waters and deepen the chaos.

At the sunset of the year 2012, our fashion loving former Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar  was upbeat on account of self-perceived assessment that Indo-Pak relations had come out of the bad patch and were steadily improving. Composite dialogue that had been suspended in the wake of 26/11 had recommenced after a break of almost two years. She strongly felt that CBMs would help in resolving core disputes of Kashmir, Siachen, Sir Creek and Wullar Barrage. Liberalization of visa regime, grant of MFN status and grant of land route via Wagah to Afghanistan and beyond in the backdrop of Indo-Pak trade talks in her view would give a quantum jump to bilateral trade between the two countries and would help in removing distrust and antagonism.

She was equally optimistic about Afghanistan asserting that there was significant improvement in bilateral relations as a consequence to Pakistan readily agreeing to all the four demands put forward by Salahuddin Rabbani, Chairman Afghan High Peace Council. These included release of 16 Taliban prisoners from detention. This conciliatory gesture in her view greatly helped in lessening bitterness and distrust and paved the way for closer cooperation between the two neighbors.

She was particularly over excited over fast improving Pak-US relations that had hit rock bottom after series of offensive acts by USA in 2011 and its continued haughtiness and application of coercive tactics till reopening of NATO supply routes in July 2012. Her optimism concerning steady improvement in Pak-US relations is proving correct because of diametrically changed security situation in Afghanistan. Change of security team in Washington bringing friendly faces like John Kerry and Chuck Hegel raised Pakistan’s hopes of betterment of relations.

Hina’s buoyant assessment about improvement in Indo-Pak relations however proved short-lived. 2013 saw steady deterioration in Indo-Pak relations because India purposely heated up the LoC over an engineered incident of beheading of an Indian soldier. Tit for tat crude response by India over death of convicted Indian spy and terrorist Sarabjit Singh in the form of clubbing to death Pakistani prisoner Sanaullah Ranjay have once again tensed relations. Likewise, despite Pakistan going out of the way to keep Kabul friendly, its relations with Afghanistan dipped because of eccentric behavior of Hamid Karzai.

The power that was illegally snatched from Nawaz Sharif has once again fallen in his lap after 14 years. The one who ousted him is under house arrest and charged with murder and treason charges. Although Nawaz went through lots of trials and tribulations which reformed and matured him, after bouncing back at the centre stage on May 11, 2013, he seems to be in a forgiving mood. Political analysts are of the view that he and his team would not adopt the lifestyle of his predecessors and would make genuine efforts to take the country out of the woods.

Indo-Pak relations currently at a low key would improve. PM Manmohan Singh has already extended an invitation to Nawaz. Imran Khan’s PTI has emerged as the second strongest party in May 11 elections. Notwithstanding Nawaz-Imran tiff, both are likely to work towards ending the war on terror. The US is not likely to interfere since it is in its interest to have stable Pakistan during the crucial transition phase of US-NATO forces from Afghanistan. I see the dark clouds over Pakistan dispersing and a new dawn promising better days emerging.

The writer is a retired Brig and a defence analyst. Email:asifharoonraja@gmail.com

By Sajjad Shaukat

Diplomacy which is defined as an art of negotiations to resolve an issue has many meanings, if a single word is added with it. For example, shrewd diplomacy, sham diplomacy, power diplomacy, peace diplomacy etc. might be cited as example. In this regard, a Pakistani prisoner, Sanaullah Haq who received serious injuries, and died on May 9, this year because he was badly beaten by an ex-Indian army man who was supported by the Indian concerned officials. It was open retaliation of New Delhi for an assault on Indian prisoner Sarabjit Singh who died in a Pakistani jail in Lahore due to an attack by his fellow prisoner.

As the assault on Sanaullah Haq came a day after the death of Sarabjit Singh, which clearly shows that it was conducted deliberately as part of Indian killing diplomacy.

In this context, Hindustan Times revealed on May 5, 2013 that Sarabjit Singh, an Indian spy had gone to Pakistan for an operation managed by a Research and Analysis Wing (RAW) official who later became the intelligence agency’s chief. It further pointed out, “A former intelligence official disclosed, “Sarabjit managed to accomplish the task given to him…still the agency [RAW] had executed many such missions in Pakistan in the early and mid1990s…Sarabjit had been awarded because his case was highlighted due to his sister. His family is also being compensated. But there are many cases in which the spies came back from Pakistan knocked the doors of courts to get their dues.”

On the other hand, India’s External Affairs Minister Salman Khurshid stated that Sarabjit Singh’s death would cause a setback to the efforts to build relations with Pakistan and that there would be a pause in the engagement with it. In fact, by showing lethargy approach towards Sanaullah Haq, Indian government is making Sarabjit episode as another pretext to put the Pak-Indian peace process on the back-burner. In the past too, New Delhi has always used some unjustified occasions to delay the solution of various issues, especially the Kashmir dispute. Notably, on the one side, India has been emphasising to strengthen the Confidence Building Measures (CBMs) with Pakistan to normalise relations, but on the other, it has been giving a greater blow to the CBMs.

While, in his lecture on terrorism, delivered at the International Centre in Panaji, Indian former special secretary of RAW Amber Sen said, “The Indian state appeared to have over-reacted over the death of Indian prisoner Sarabjit Singh in Pakistan.”

However, Sarabjit Singh was sentenced to death by the Supreme Court of Pakistan for spying and deadly bombings which killed 14 innocent people in Pakistan’s cities of Faisalabad, Multan and Lahore in 1990. But Pakistan’s President Asif Ali Zardari commuted his death sentence into life imprisonment on June 26, 2012.

It is mentionable that Pakistan’s top officials and members of the civil society strongly condemned attack on Indian prisoner, Sarabjit and expressed sorrow on his death. But, Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh condemned Sarabjit incident, calling it ‘barbaric and murderous attack, but remained silence over Sanaullah. It is another display of New Delhi’s selective morality which Indian rulers employ, while dealing with Islamabad.

Last year, Pakistani government released Indian spy, Surjeet Singh who was handed over to the Indian authorities. He was given death sentence in 1991. But President Asif Ali Zardari commuted his death sentence into life imprisonment.

Surjeet openly admitted that he was in Pakistan to spy when he was arrested in 1982. In this regard, he disclosed before Indian reporters that he was sent to Pakistan by Indian secret agency RAW for espionage purposes.

Quite opposite to the admission of Surjeet, on June 29, 2012, Indian Home Secretary RK Singh told a news conference in New Delhi, saying, “We do not accept this that Singh was Indian spy…it is completely wrong.” However, it shows Indian illogical approach as New Delhi denies facts in order to conceal the presence of other Indian spies in Pakistan.

Surjeet Singh also revealed, “Sarabjit Singh is a terrorist and terrorists are not released.” On the other side, Indian External Affairs Minister SM Krishna stated on June 25, 2012 that it was now “time for Sarabjit Singh to be freed.” Like Indian home secretary, even external affairs minister defended the Indian agent. It indicates that Indian high officials are deliberately and officially supporting RAW agents to destabilise Pakistan which is the only nuclear country in the Islamic World.

Besides, Indian spy also pointed out, “All Indian prisoners are treated well in Pakistani jails. Sarabjit Singh is also doing well there…I was treated well by prison officials and I am thankful to them.”

Despite the fact that Sarabjit was Indian spy, but He was given a state funeral in the Indian Punjab.

It is notable that India has arrested hundreds of Pakistan’s citizens, often accusing them of being spies after they have strayed across the land or maritime border due to unconscious mistake. It also includes some tourists who went to India. Quite contrary to the well-treatment of Indian spies in Pakistani jails, RAW and other security agencies employ various techniques of torture on the so-called Pakistan’s suspected persons. Most of the Pakistani nationals have also been killed in Indian jails, while a majority of them have been killed by Indian security agencies in fake encounters.

Nonetheless, both Surjeet Singh and Sarabjit Singh were responsible for the string of blasts in various cities of Pakistan in which several innocent persons were killed. They were also behind other terror-activities in Pakistan.

On June 28, 2012, BBC reported, “in recent years, several Indians returning from Pakistani jails have admitted to spying for Indian intelligence agency RAW” and some have criticised India’s government for abandoning them.”

It is mentionable that in April 2011, Gopal Das, one of Pakistan’s longest-serving Indian prisoners, was released after President Asif Ali Zardari intervened in his case.

Upon his release, Das also acknowledged that he was an Indian spy. Similarly, Kashmir Singh, sentenced to death in Pakistan in 1973 for spying, was released in March 2008. Afterwards, he also confessed that he was spying for RAW.

As a matter of fact, the recent statements of RAW officials and admission of the Indian spy-prisoners clearly prove that with the tactical assistance of American CIA and Israeli Mossad, RAW has set up its espionage network in Afghanistan, which is in contact with its spy-network in Pakistan.

Apart from it, India’s several secret training camps are present in Afghanistan from where highly-trained militants, equipped with sophisticated weapons are being sent to Pakistan’s various places to conduct suicide attacks, target killings, bomb blasts, assaults on civil and military installations, forced abductions and sectarian violence regularly.

Indian RAW, CIA and Mossad have also been supporting the Balochistan Liberation Army (BLA) and another separatist group, Jundollah (God’s soldiers) including other militant groups which have been committing various subversive acts in the province of Balochistan. The main aim behind to fulfill secret strategic designs of US, India and Israel. On a number of occasions, BLA and Jundollah claimed responsibility for terror-attacks which killed a number of innocent people.

Some Indian Muslims and foreign insurgents who are particularly backed by RAW have joined the ranks and files of the Tehreek-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), Sipah-e-Sahaba, BLA and other religious sects. They have also got the membership of MQM, ANP and PPP. Besides killing the leaders and persons of the rival religious parties, and attacking the offices of the political parties so as to sabotage the elections which were held in time— these miscreants also target the Pushtuns, Urdu-speaking people and even the people, belonging to the interior Sindh in order to fuel ethnic violence so as to weaken Pakistan.

Meanwhile, some reliable sources suggest that India has planned judicial murders of almost all Pakistani prisoners who are in Indian jails. While indicating New Delhi’s designs, Pakistani Government, media and politicians must denounce Indian Government and media for celebrating death of a convicted terrorist Sarabjit Singh as their national hero.

No doubt, new revelations of RAW officials and Indian released prisoners in wake of continued acts of sabotage in Pakistan have exposed Indian killing diplomacy.

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

Email: sajjad_logic@yahoo.com

]]> http://zameer36.com/indian-killing-diplomacy/feed/ 0 http://zameer36.com/upshot-of-may-11-elections/ http://zameer36.com/upshot-of-may-11-elections/#comments Tue, 14 May 2013 04:47:50 +0000 zaheer http://zameer36.com/?p=7250  

Asif Haroon Raja

Election fever which gripped the nation from April 21 subsided on May 11 after results were announced. Election results generated mixed feelings of joys and sorrows. The outright victors were overjoyed and celebrated their victory with heartiness. The losers mourned their loss and tried to lessen their grief by saying that elections were rigged and results manipulated. Partial victors remained in two minds whether to celebrate or mourn over the non-fulfillment of their dream of standing alone on the victory stand.

Elections took place on May 11 after a bloody election campaign in which the militants of Tehrik-e-Taliban -Pakistan (TTP) targeted the liberal parties in particular but didn’t spare rightist parties. Awami-National-Party (ANP) suffered the most. Even on Election Day, several incidents of terrorism took place. By and large polling process got completed in 91% polling stations fairly and peacefully. Irregularities took place only in 9% polling stations. Maximum complaints of irregularities were received from Karachi. The caretakers, Election Commission Pakistan (ECP) and security forces did their jobs satisfactorily, although some deficiencies were in plain sight. EU has expressed satisfaction with electoral process.

Most encouraging and noticeable aspect of the polling was the voters’ turnout which touched 60%. The youth and women galvanized by Imran Khan as well as by Sharif brothers were instrumental in increasing the turnout. Their enthusiasm to cast votes irrespective of insecurity was unprecedented and helped a great deal in defeating the sordid plans of anti-democratic forces to scare away the voters and fail the electoral process. Even in highly turbulent areas of FATA and Balochistan, voters came out in big numbers to cast their votes. In Balochistan, voter turnout was 40-45%.

Pessimists making authoritative predictions that elections will either be postponed or not held had to chew their words. All opinion polls and surveys had assessed that Pakistan-Muslim-League (Nawaz) (PML-N) would win the race. However, political wizards were on one page asserting that it will not be able to achieve even simple majority because of a close fight by Pakistan-Tehrik-Insaf (PTI) in Punjab and it will be a hung parliament. Another myth that had gained currency was that turnout higher than 55% would benefit PTI. Both the predictions proved false. PML-N not only emerged as the single largest party in the country by achieving near simple majority in the centre with 126 seats, but also is the only party which secured seats in all the provinces. PML-N swept the polls in Punjab by bagging 204 seats, won 8 seats in Balochistan, 13 in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KPK) and 2 in Sindh. It is in a position to form governments in the centre, Punjab and Balochistan (Bln). It can also form a coalition government KP as a junior partner by allying itself with Jamiat-Ulema-Islam-(Fazlur Rahman) (JUI-F), Jamaat-e-Islam (JI), PPP-(Sherpao) and independents.

As predicted PTI has emerged as the second largest party but it couldn’t gain any seat in Bln and Sindh. It had high hopes that it will clinch the trophy in the centre but could gather only 32 seats. In Punjab too its tally was second best with 32 seats. In KPK it is the single largest party with 34 seats and is in a good position to form a government provided it can muster support of other parties to complete the number of 70. PTI is alleging that on several seats in Punjab, blatant rigging took place. Its workers staged a dharna (sit-in) in Lahore which has so far not dispersed.

PPP was laying high hopes on PTI that it would benefit PPP by cutting votes of PML-N in Punjab, but the reverse happened. PPP stood third in the federal race with 31 seats as against its expectation of winning 45-50 seats. Most of its leading lights lost. It fared poorly in Punjab bagging only 6 seats. It couldn’t win a single seat in KPK and Bln where it had coalition governments after 2008 elections. Only in Sindh it managed to thwart the threat posed by 10-Party alliance led by PML-F and emerged as the largest party securing 69 seats from rural Sindh. PML-F could acquire only 7 seats. PPP is in a comfortable position to form a government in Sindh in coalition with MQM. Having strong roots in all provinces, PPP has got confined to rural Sindh only. It is being said that it has reaped what it sowed. PPP’s poor showing has almost smashed the chances of re-election of Zardari for second term in August. The PPP however enjoying majority in Senate can create problems for the new government by blocking legislations.

The JUI-F succeeded in securing 10 seats in the centre, 15 in KPK, 6 in Bln but none in Punjab and Sindh. Crafty Maulana Fazlur Rahman has thrown bait to Nawaz to form a government in KPK minus PTI by inviting 13 independents and others.

The JI could collect only 4 seats in national assembly, 7 in KPK, and one in Punjab. Like ANP and PPP, Pervez Ellahi led PML-Q is another party which stands demolished. Its scorecard is one seat in the centre, 7 in Punjab and 2 in Bln.

In Balochistan results were a mixed bag; none emerged as a clear victor but Mahmood Achakzai’s PKMAP won 11 provincial and 3 national assembly seats, followed by PML-N. Bizenjo’s Nationalist-Party (NP) also fared well. Talal Bugti led Jamhuri-Watan-Party (JWP) boycotted elections complaining its voters were harassed and prevented from casting votes. Akhtar Mengal led Baloch-Nationalist-Party (BNP) rejected polling results and demanded fresh elections. Mengal’s protest rally in Quetta was struck by six rockets on 12 May. IG Police Sukhera had a narrow escape. Bln will have a multi-party coalition government.

The MQM claiming to further increase its seats in Sindh and national assembles and expecting to win seats from other provinces to emerge as a national party received a setback because of its politics of violence. It is chiefly responsible for bloodbath in Karachi during its last five years tenure. It has been able to retain its monopoly over Karachi as well as Hyderabad because of its power of bullet and not vote alone. After successfully thwarting ECP’s plan to carryout delimitation of Karachi constituencies and updating voters list through door-to-door verification, the MQM repeated its old tactics of rigging in elections in Karachi on May 11 with the help of its appointed caretakers and election staff. It was particularly worried about PTI which has become very popular among Urdu speaking community and has nibbled sizeable chunk of MQM vote bank. It also couldn’t ignore Pathan/Punjabi enlarged vote bank.

To its utter surprise, MQM’s high-handedness was challenged by other parties. While JI, JUP, Sunni-Tehriq and MQM (Haqiqui) boycotted elections, PTI youngsters, mostly belonging to Defence area staged a sit-in in Clifton to protest against MQM’s vandalism and unhindered rigging. Live footages how ballot papers were stamped and stuffed in ballot boxes, while presiding, returning and polling officers watched the show helplessly were shown on TV channels and social media. No security man was seen near the problematic polling stations. Neither any presiding officer considered it feasible to seek Army’s help despite mounting complaints of the voters.

People wondered as to why Sindh Rangers or 5 Corps troops didn’t reach when Gen Kayani had clearly spelled out his policy of providing full protection to ensure free and fair elections. People are asking that well-knowing the sensitivity of certain polling stations, why those were left unattended. They are asking why the election staff, ballot papers and ballot boxes didn’t reach the designated places in time and why polling couldn’t start at the scheduled time in some polling stations and started as late as 1230 pm. They are demanded re-polling in 18 constituencies under full protection of Army and soldiers deployed inside and outside polling stations. Anger has welled up against the Army and social media is blaming the Army for failing to prevent rigging in Karachi. Many are saying the goodwill achieved by Gen Kayani has been washed away. Reportedly bangles were presented by women to Rangers in Karachi.

To top it all, Altaf Hussain added fuel to rising tempers when he thundered during his telephonic address to his captive audience sitting in nine-zero that if MQM mandate was not acceptable, the Establishment should separate Karachi from Pakistan. He has repeated his inner wish quite often whenever MQM’s unreasonable demands were not accepted or things were not going in its favor. He was critical of the protesting crowd assembled at Clifton and warned that he will not be able to restrain his activists for long. He threatened that his men are ready to fire at the protestors and warned that if they didn’t stop playing with fire, whole of Pakistan will be burnt and reduced to ashes. His audience listened to him with pin drop silence and lustily cheered his emotional outbursts. I wondered why PEMRA kept snoozing all this time.

As against the poor conduct of MQM leaders, ANP leadership demonstrated greater sense of maturity despite being completely routed in its home province. It could win only one seat in the centre and 4 in KPK which it had ruled for five years. PTI drove the nail in its coffin since it had opposed ANP’s anti-Taliban policy and advocated dialogue with TTP to end the war on terror and also opposed drone war. Even the top ANP leaders like Asfand Wali, Ghulam Bilour and Hoti lost their seats but accepted defeat gracefully.

PML-N will form a government by co-opting independents, JUI-F, JI, PML-F, PKMAP and Baloch nationalist parties. With 198 seats in its kitty in Punjab, PML-N doesn’t require the support of any other political party particularly after over 40 independents join up. PTI should form a government in KPK and focus fully on it rather than chasing rainbows. What is required now is that losers should stop brooding over spilt milk, and show greater maturity by respecting the people’s mandate. ECP should take stock of irregularities in elections and correct them wherever feasible. Army should play its role in Karachi to remove the genuine grievances. Process of forming federal and provincial governments should get completed smoothly, and the new teams should put in their heart and soul to tackle the myriad of problems left behind by the last government. We can’t afford to waste any time.

The writer is a retired Brig and a freelance columnist. Email: asifaroonraja@gmail.com

]]> http://zameer36.com/upshot-of-may-11-elections/feed/ 0 http://zameer36.com/need-for-a-grand-national-dialogue-and-a-comprehensive-anti-terrorism-act/ http://zameer36.com/need-for-a-grand-national-dialogue-and-a-comprehensive-anti-terrorism-act/#comments Tue, 14 May 2013 04:18:46 +0000 zaheer http://zameer36.com/?p=7246 Posted by Javed Iqbal

While international agencies were calculating the Global Terrorism Index, based on number of incidents, fatalities, injuries and damage to property, they were not concerned with the root causes of these factors and nor were they taking into account the sacrifices an state and its people have rendered for the global peace. Hence Pakistan was placed second on the list only behind Iraq but ahead of Afghanistan, India, Yemen and Somalia etc.

There is no denying that successive Pakistani governments have not been able to put a lid on this menace of terrorism and with every passing day it is becoming unmanageable at certain places. Careful analysis of the overall situation reveals that serious deficiencies exist in our judicial systems to deal with the apprehended alleged terrorists and therefore, there is need to formulate a comprehensive Anti-terrorism policy leading to enactments of relevant Acts to sharpen the teeth of our Law Enforcing Agencies (LEAs).

Pakistan was never so and one is forced to think that Pakistan may never be same again. Our society was always religious but very tolerant and accommodative for all the castes, sects and ethnicities. However, ever since the Soviets’ invasion of Afghanistan in the late 1970s and throughout the 1980s, Pakistani society has undergone a sea change in its construct and revised face is extremely dangerous for the peaceful, progressive and tolerant majority population, which is confused and uncertain about Pakistan’s future as an acceptable nation amongst the international community.

Only in over last ten years, more than 40,000 Pakistani’s have lost their lives to terror attacks and over 3,500 military personnel have been killed through targeted attacks and sporadic attacks. Police and FC have suffered the most in KP, FATA and Balochistan. Sectarian violence have caused over 300 lives in Balochistan alone during 2012 with 116 killed in one day on 10 January this year, which led to the fall of Balochistan government in just four days.

Coming back to judicial impediments, and governments’ inaction in legislating the relevant laws to sharpen the teeth of our LEAs, no coherent, comprehensive counterterrorism policy exists in the country. The draft Bill of NACTA though passed by the Cabinet is yet to be passed by the Parliament. Fair Trial Bill passed by the National Assembly is yet to get the nod of the senate. Non-availability of a coherent and comprehensive counterterrorism policy and lack of relevant laws lead to release of apprehended alleged terrorists. Only Rawalpindi ATC courts have acquitted over 50 accused in less than 100 cases in the recent past. Prosecution lacks support and protection to gather credible evidence witnesses remain subject to threats of being targeted even before they record their statements.

Our LEAs need to be supported with a unified and comprehensive counterterrorism policy which is owned by the state and its people. However, to support this policy, incumbent government would need to make relevant policies and legislate laws to give teeth to our LEAs for the effective implementation of these policies. While policies and laws are formulated, governments would have to build the capacities of our LEAs to fight against the much more organised and well trained terrorist organisations.

Without a coherent and comprehensive counterterrorism policy and relevant laws, the menace of terrorism and sectarianism cannot be tackled successfully. In fact, the use of force alone would be counterproductive and therefore the respective governments would have to continue their efforts to isolate the terrorists from the local populace, and block their support base; both financially and logistically. Otherwise, our Armed forces and LEAs would continue to lay their lives with no substantial gains toward rooting out the cause of this menace. Therefore, there is a need to pass relevant Acts by the Parliament and then proceed with actions alongside dialogue and reconciliation with all the stakeholders, to effectively deal with the grave situation that the state and its people are faced with.

Last but not the least; Federal Government must form a Task Force to bring all stakeholders on the same page. We must understand that our society is diverse and has been polarized in the last few decades in all spheres of political, social, religious, ethnic, and sectarian domain. Therefore, it is extremely important that a ‘Grand National Dialogue’ (GND) takes place where respected scholars from all walks of lives are represented and an open debate is conducted to eliminate the ills that are creating polarisation in the society. Until then, no policy or laws could effectively deal with the situation that we have now reached.(Zia Siddiqui)

Posted by Javed Iqbal

Political analysts and national security management experts are concerned at the evolving trend to influence the general elections by foreign countries and organizations.

These analysts are taking into account several surveys and articles recently published in the foreign media that either highlighted support for one party or the other based on unfamiliar analysis and research and alleged voting trends of the general population among other inclinations.

Similarly, as the election date in the country approaches closer, a tremendous increase in diplomatic maneuvering, social activity and interaction is being seen. It also includes renewal of social contacts and socio-political interactive sessions, mainly focused on key political figures and insiders of different political parties, by diplomats.

The analysts said that to make elections totally impartial and fair, it was imperative that no kind of foreign interference takes place in the process.They said the Election Commission and the judiciary were working to make the election process unbiased and objective and no foreign interference in one shape or the other was required.

They added that all stakeholders, including the judiciary, armed forces, politicians, media and civil society, were keen to see democracy flourishing in the country.

Posted by Javed Iqbal

As per the schedule, the Gen eral Elections-2013 will be held on May 11, 2013. A lot of international observers are reaching Pakistan to monitor the election process in Pakistan. According to Mr Aizaz Ahmed Chaudhary, the spokesman of Foreign Office, “A group of European officials have arrived in Pakistan to observe the May 11 parliamentary elections.” European Union has confirmed that a total of 110 members’ team will visit Pakistan including a core team of 11 experts. Besides, there are expectations of many more observers from all over the world to oversee the election process in Pakistan.

The elections 2013 have some significant challenges to face. The first and foremost being, to conduct a fair and neutral elections. Apparently, the Chief Election Commissioner is trying to make these elections as fair as possible. The criterion laid down by the Election Commission of Pakistan in this regards apparently seems a fair play. The main worries about the fair conduct of the elections are; the feudal mindset in the country, which may bar the people in most parts of the country to cast vote freely in accordance with their will.

Then the environment at polling stations, which is generally dominated by a certain political group or tribe and clan dominated. Secondly, eligibility of the candidates to contest election. In this regards, a detail scrutiny of the nomination paper has been done and many candidates, who have an indecent track record or fake degrees were barred from taking part in the elections.

However, this has not been done across the board. Some of the prominent politicians, whose cases are still pending in the courts or in the NAB, have been cleared to participate in the elections. Statement of the Chairman NAB, Admiral Bukhari that, let them take part in the election, we will see their eligibility or otherwise later, shows either helplessness or some accommodation for a few. This aspect need serious consideration.

Thirdly, the element of foreign involvement; during or prior to the conduct of elections and manipulation of a few at the hands of these powerful foreigners. While the preparation for the elections are at their full swing, many foreign diplomats and officials are busy in meeting with the important politicians of Pakistan. These politicians are from all the major political parties. Just to name a few, US officials of political section, US consulate Lahore including Mr. Michael Gray Political Consular, Zahir Shah Durrani Political Advisor and Consulate General (CG) herself have increased interaction with political figures of different political parties. Mostly meetings are held at Consul General’s residence, politician’s residences and even at different restaurants of the city.

Frequent meetings between Ms Nina Maria (CG) and different politicians have taken place while Michael Gray, Political Consular Us Consulate and Mr. Rick Political Consular US Embassy, Islamabad have been discussing political situation in the country with different political figures. On 23rd February 2013, a delegation from British High Commission Islamabad, visited Lahore and held meetings with Syed Ihsan Ullah Waqas, Liaqat Baloch and Farid paracha, (JI), Mian Manzoor Ahmed Watto (PPP), Ms Asma Jahangir (Former President SCBA/President HRCP), Mian Imran Maqsood (PML-Q), Najam Sethi (Journalist), Ishaq Dar (PML-N) and Senator Jhangir Badar (PPP).

A high profile delegation headed by US Ambassador Richard Olson and Robert Menandez Chairman Senate Committee for Foreign Affairs visited Lahore twice and met politicians including Mian Nawaz Sharif. Former Punjab Chief Minister has been otherwise offering exceptional protocol to US Consulate Lahore. Foreign Services Nationals (FSN) of US Consulate have been frequently interacting with the Lahore based politicians and their bureaucracy.

Indeed, the foreign interference has been the most significant aspect of Pakistani politics. This trend has badly damaged the political system. In the past, there have been some political elites, who used to get consent of the external powers, after giving them assurances that, in the event of their coming to power, they are going to protect the interest of their overseas masters. This aspect created a competition among various political parties for the foreign sponsorship and backings. This foreign backing keeps them less worried about the real issues of the people of Pakistan and more concern about being favorite of others. In the post election scenario, these politicians have been pleasing their sponsors, rather their voters. The People of Pakistan, thus remain neglected and suffers.

The opportunities connected with Elections-2013 are even wider and larger in scope. A fair play of the election would provide equal opportunities to all for the election of most deserving candidates. An unbiased and fair election would bring a people’s mandated leadership as true representatives to legislate at the national level. They would be bound not to misuse the people’s mandate. Then, the grievances of the people of some parts of the country like Balochistan would also reduce greatly after the fair conduct of the elections without any manipulated results, as some sub-nationalists have been accusing in the past.

Rather projecting the negative aspects of the elections, Pakistani domestic media need to highlights the reformative and most needed aspects of the elections 2013. As a campaign, it should highlight the foreign connections of some the politicians and political parties. The media should also indicate the source of funding of the politicians.

A nationalistic and positive media campaigning for the betterment of the country would enhance the credibility of the media besides improvement in the system of election and positive thinking process of those elected. Media must highlight the track records of the politicians and their contributions towards the people and the country. This wholesome exercise would give lot of awareness to the people and create a sense of ownership among the future representatives of the country for a better Pakistan.(Dr Raja Muhammad Khan)

Posted by Javed Iqbal

The commitment made by all political parties of Balochistan to participate in the upcoming elections is quite refreshing. More so, the Chief Election Commissioner’s visit to Quetta is encouraging, since he has taken various steps to address some of the issues facing prospective candidates. The caretaker Chief Minister of Balochistan has also vowed to make an all-out effort to ensure peaceful environment for the elections.

Pakistan currently faces extraordinary challenges of law and order. Despite this, the decision to proceed with the elections is a bold one. Therefore, the federal and provincial governments need to ensure that all political parties and their voters feel safe enough to participate in them.

With a caretaker Prime Minister from Balochistan overseeing the political transition at the national level, and Baloch political leaders gearing up to take part in the polls, one can safely assume that the restive province is on its way to join the national mainstream.

In 2008, major political parties in the province had decided to boycott the elections. However, the nationalist parties have finally realised that it has done no good to the Baloch people. Now they have made a prudent choice to do the politics of inclusiveness. Nevertheless, the subversive efforts by the marginalised separatist entities are likely to continue.

On March 12, 2013, for instance, the armed activists of the Baloch Liberation Army (BLA) gunned down Mohammad Ziaullah, the District Election Commissioner of Quetta; reportedly, BLA claimed the responsibility for it. “We will not let Pakistan hold elections in Balochistan,” warned its spokesperson. Two other militant entities, Baloch Liberation Front (BLF) and Baloch Republican Army (BRA), have also threatened to disrupt the political process. Keeping this in view, the political parties fear deadly attacks on their election rallies, candidates and voters. This is why Balochistan specifically remains an area of primary interest for local and international observers of the 2013 elections.

Having said that, the Supreme Court, as well as the federal and provincial governments, have taken serious note of the aggravated law and order situation in Balochistan, with special reference to the missing persons. The Judicial Commission, constituted last week for their recovery, has submitted its report in the apex court.
The Commission claims that it has traced 378 missing persons’ cases, while 633 are still pending. In Balochistan, 59 cases were concluded, while 48 are in process. It has, indeed, done a commendable job by demystifying the missing persons’ issue, especially in the context of Balochistan. It will be in the fitness of things if it handles all Balochistan related cases on priority basis and tries to finalise them well before the election.

Additionally, Sardar Akhtar Mengal, President of Balochistan National Party (BNP), has recently opined that discontent among the Baloch populace was caused due to the illegal arrest, torture and murder of political leaders for which Pakistan’s security forces are to be blamed. “If these extra-judicial killings do not stop,” he warned, “elections would be too difficult to hold.”

Mengal is rightly concerned that there has been no improvement in the Balochistan situation as bloodshed continues. Yet, he has reaffirmed that his party believes in democracy. Mengal’s return from self-exile and participation in the elections is certainly of much significance with regard to jumpstarting the political process in Balochistan. However, reasons for the prevailing situation go far beyond his perspective.

Balochistan has been the hub of multidimensional, ethno-sectarian strife for the last one decade or so. The vacuum created by the government’s poor capability to manage the prevailing unrest in the province has facilitated the undemocractic forces to gain a reasonable regulatory control over the dynamics of the ongoing socio-political divergence.

Chilling waves of violence unleashed by sectarian groups, ethnic nationalists, armed wings of political parties and death squads believed to be funded by the foreign state and non-state actors are just some of the reasons, which have plunged Balochistan to its current sorry state of affairs.

Further, it is a multiethnic province with almost equal Baloch and Pashtun population, in addition to other minority groups. Its population is eight million, out of which the Baloch and Brahvis constitution four million, the Pathans 3.5 million and the settlers 0.5 million. Within the Baloch dominated areas, the Sindhi-Baloch community residing in Sibi and Jacobabad areas are peaceful. Likewise, Pashtuns do not harbour separatist tendencies; the Hazara Shias are strong proponents of Pakistan’s territorial integrity; and a majority that lives along the Makran Coast are friendly people. Meanwhile, the separatist elements are weak, divided and marred by inter- and intra-tribe rivalries that has led to severe differences between BLA and UBA, which is likely to grow in the days to come.

Add to this, Balochistan does not belong to the Baloch population alone. Baloch being more volatile and outspoken have been able to project their victimhood and attract foreign sponsors. The runaway scions of three tribal chieftains are trying to stir up separatist tendencies. This misguided youth hardly has any standing among the majority of Baloch, who are loyal to Pakistan. The residents of other ethnic origins are playing an important role towards the restoration of stability in the province; however, they need to assert themselves politically so that its true demographic face is duly represented and acknowledged.

After ending the military operation in 2008, the provincial government failed to fill the void; unfortunately, they chose not to take a decisive stance against the troublemakers, rather preferred a strategy of appeasement. Under these circumstances, the credit goes to the national tier of political and military leadership for adopting a appropriate strategy to control the situation and, indeed, reversing it.
The successful conduct of elections in Balochistan will be a watershed.

However, the political gains emanating from a credible electoral process need to be handled carefully. The first priority should be to take visible steps and launch a protracted campaign to dispel the widespread perception of deprivation and exploitation.

The Baloch people, for example, believe that they do not benefit from their natural resources such as gas, gold and copper, nor are they given any representation in the country’s civil, armed and foreign services. A comprehensive compensatory and rehabilitation package should follow, focused at making the citizens of Balochistan feel at home. This would need concerted plan of action to bridge the gap between perceptions and reality.(Iqbal Khan)

Posted by Khurrum Shehzad

With approximately 3.2 per cent of the total world area and 28 per cent of world population the geostrategic architecture of South Asia has always attracted the great global players including the U.S. Pakistan and India – two core regional actors – have historically been vital to Washington in meeting its strategic objectives. Ever since demise of former Soviet Union in 1991, the U.S regional policies have, however, been varying but generally remained Indian centric.

Contrarily, the history of Pak-US relations has seen many ups and downs. Pakistan’s geostrategic location – where the interests of the great global players coincide – makes it a key factor in the regional and international politics. But despite its tremendous sacrifices Islamabad could not bridge the trust deficit gap with White House. The account of Pak-US relations provokes an important question in the mind of every Pakistani: ‘Is Pakistan an all time strategic partner of the U.S. or just a friend in (their) need?’

Weighing significance of both the states in meeting the U.S. long term strategic interests in South Asia, one can clearly observe a visible tilt in Washington’s policies towards India. In order to establish its root-cause, it’s rather imperative to conduct a philosophical debate of Pak-US relations in comparison with Indo-US bilateral ties in a realist paradigm.

With the end of Cold War in 1991 the U.S. suddenly disengaged itself – to a larger extent – from the politics of South Asia. Later various regional and international dynamics drove Washington’s policymakers back to this region. During Cold War the only hitch in Indo-US relation was Indian relations with the Soviet Union which automatically got removed with the fall of communist empire. Contrarily, the vital role of Pakistan in beating Soviet armed forces in Afghanistan and its importance for the US. towards containment of USSR suddenly vanished.

Though the U.S. administration remained aloof from South Asia after the fall of Kremlin Empire but the dramatic developments of May 1998 – Indo-Pak nuclear explosions – and the Kargil-1999 conflict suddenly transformed the low profile of South Asian region as the focus of the world attention especially the U.S. Due to personal intervention of President Clinton the danger of war was, though, averted but from Pakistan’s perspective the Kargil war was a complete failure. The conflict diplomatically isolated Pakistan as the world community believed that Pakistani forces were on the “wrong side of LoC” and made the U.S. to play its role in the regional politics. This changed scenario went in Indian favour.

In May 2000, President Clinton paid a historic visit to the sub-continent. The visit was a formal U.S. strategic signal of its policy on South Asia. It was also the Washington’s proclamation of “discovery of India” as its long term strategic partner. Four points would reinforce these arguments: Firstly, he was the first American president to visit India and Pakistan in 22 and 30 years respectively; Secondly, he visited India for five days whereas had a just five hours stop-over in Pakistan; Thirdly, there was also a mark difference in his body language both toward India and Pakistan.

With Vajpayee smiles, warmth and cordiality were visible symbols which ware replaced with grimace, cold and official posture in Pakistan; and, finally, the Washington agenda in India was vast ranging from transformation of bilateral socio-political and economic ties to cooperation regionally and internationally. In Pakistan, however, President Clinton just urged Musharraf to chalk out a roadmap for restoring democracy.

Later, the event of 9/11 proved to be the most influential as regard to the US policy shift to whole of the world in general and South Asia in particular. Before September 11, 2011, Pakistan was a marginalized country having low priority on U.S. agenda whereas India was centre of its policy in South Asia. In the words of Stephen P Cohen, “The Bush administration built upon Clinton’s “discovery of India” and set out to create a comprehensive and positive relationship with New Delhi.” But the 9/11 brought dramatic change in the whole scenario.

As stated by President Bush, “9/11 changed America”, the situation brought Pakistan back to centre stage – putting parts of the US-India agenda on hold – nevertheless only temporarily!Pakistan today is a frontline ally of the U.S. but both the states have several conflicting interests. Following the events of Raymond Davis, 2nd May 2011 and Salala attack, misperceptions between the two have tapped the extreme ends. The fiasco of Pak-US relations encompasses two key questions: how does the U.S. views his interests in Pakistan and what are the major challenges in the relationship of both the countries?

Stephen P. Cohen during a seminar in Islamabad in 2003 identifies some U.S. areas of concern which include terrorism / extremism, nuclear programme, democratization and relations with India. As regard to the challenges: the broad nature of them include the prevalence of trust deficit, the U.S. perception considering Pakistan as part of problem rather than the solution, the tangent approaches which both the allies have adopted in the WOT, and the US-Indian friendly policy on Kashmir.

Finally, with 2014 knocking at the door, the White House policy indicators – emerged from the declarations of Bonn Conference, launching of New Silk Initiative and the U.S. urge to talk to Taliban – suggest that the Obama administration is following the strategy of initially minimizing and ultimately edging out Pakistan’s role in Afghanistan. As regards to post – 2014 scenario, the U.S. proclaims to focus on economic uplift of the country through New Silk Initiative which is not only an effort of keeping China, Russia and Iran out of the game but also draw a dividing line in the time-tested Pak-China friendship.

As regards to Indo-U.S. relations; Henry Kissinger had observed a decade ago that the United States and India have “no conflicting interest in the traditional and fundamental sense.” For last ten years the Indo-US relations have transformed from bilateral to multilateral dimension.

The Indian bustling democracy and growing economy are the main converging points in their bilateral ties. India is the world largest democracy and has grown economically at an average of 7.7 percent in real terms over the last decade. It is not only the largest market for the U.S. but also possesses the potentials of becoming the global economic powerhouse in the next two decades.

The salient contours of New Delhi and Washington areas of cooperation were spelled out by Robert O. Blake, the U.S. Assistant Secretary on South and Central Asian Affairs during a press briefing on the U.S. Policy Priorities in South and Central Asia on 23 September, 2011. He said, “President Obama has called (Indo-U.S. relations as) one of our defining partnerships for the 21st century.” The areas of cooperation between two embrace counter terrorism, trade and investment, economic partnership, job opportunities, infrastructure development, energy, clean water, and cold chain systems. Furthermore, they are also working on establishing Investment Forum, Foreign Direct Investment and state-to-state and city-to-city relationships through their respective Chambers of Commerce. With Pakistan there are no such arrangements.

Furthermore, India has transformed from “estranged democracy” during Cold War to “engaged democracy” in the post-Cold War eras and with its record economic growth of 7.7 per cent over the last decade is an attractive market and investment partner for the U.S. That is why, on regional power political canvas, the U.S. views India as a potential counterweight to balance a rising China. Contrarily, Pakistan possesses a weak economy which survives on foreign aid and is conceived by New York as almost a failed state with unstable and corrupt democratic structure.
Above all, the increasing strategic importance of the Indian Ocean, – connecting the oil-rich Persian Gulf with growing energy markets in East Asia – grants a clear edge to India over Pakistan in Washington’s Asia-Pacific strategy.

In way forward to decide future relationship with the U.S. it’s imperative for Pakistan to ensure safeguarding its national interests. The neo-realists and neo-liberalists in this regard have conflicting views. Waltz argue that states pursue for ‘relative gains’- in comparison with their adversaries, whereas, the neo-liberals believe that nations are concerned for maximizing their ‘absolute gains’ – independent of their rivals. Moreover, in international arena states’ relations are not a zero-sum game and mutual benefits through cooperation are possible.

The nature of future Pak-U.S relationship is suggested to be on neo-liberalist philosophy of “absolute gains” – focusing on own interests and not what India gains from the U.S. Last but not the least, both must work together in bridging the trust deficit, image building and identifying commonality of interests.(Arshad Mahmood)

By Asif Haroon Raja

The heavy mandate Nawaz Sharif’s rule came to an abrupt end after two years eight months as a result of military coup by Gen Musharraf on October 12, 1999. He was later on exiled for ten years. After 9/11, Musharraf was coerced and induced by the US and led to believe that partnership with USA would uplift Pakistan’s depressed fortunes and pave the way for prosperity. He was assured that unlike the past, this time Pak-US alliance will be long lasting, mutually beneficial and based on mutual respect. American officials admitted that the US had wrongly left Pakistan in a lurch on several occasions and promised that it will not be abandoned again. Lure of advancement of his selfish interests and material benefits as well as patronage of sole super power numbed his rational thinking.

Feeling thrilled at the prospects of earning legitimacy and staying in power for a long time and making Pakistan modern and prosperous, Musharraf forgot the dark history of USA how it had ditched Pakistan repeatedly at critical stages and that too at a time when India was in Soviet camp and an opponent of US policies. He forgot that India had become a strategic partner of USA and both had consistently maintained a hostile posture against Pakistan. He also lost sight of the fact that all the governments in Kabul had remained friendly with India and had pursued unfriendly policies against Pakistan and that it was only under the Taliban that Pakistan’s western border had become safe for the first time.

It didn’t occur to him that by taking a u-turn on Afghanistan and joining hands with USA to destroy Afghanistan, the people of FATA in particular and of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa in general as well as the religious right will get antagonized. He believed whatever Colin Powel told him on phone and readily agreed to all his seven demands.  He did so since he at his own concluded that there was no other way out. The explanation he later gave in defence of his hasty and unilateral decision to grant so many concessions was that in case of his refusal, the US would have solicited Indian support and destroyed both Afghanistan and Pakistan. He also presumed that the US was genuinely hurt on account of 9/11 attacks and was sincere in its resolve to eliminate terrorism from the face of earth.

No sooner he threw Pakistan in the tight embrace of USA in September 2001; he got the first rude shock three months later when India stage managed the drama of terrorist attack on Indian Parliament. In that timeframe although the US and its allies had succeeded in toppling Taliban regime and capturing Afghanistan, the situation was still hazy since none of the wanted al-Qaeda and Taliban leaders could be captured. Pakistan had deployed 70,000 troops along its western border on the request of USA to nab the fleeing militants from Afghanistan.

Pakistani origin US national David Headley who is a CIA agent and had got himself enrolled in Lashkar-e-Taiba was used by RAW with the connivance of CIA to execute a fake terrorist attack on Indian Parliament on December 13, 2001 to give an excuse to India to exert maximum politico-military-media pressure on Pakistan and force it to yield to Indian demands the way it had succumbed to US pressure. India’s major concern was to make Pakistan change its policy on Kashmir. For ten months India’s full military might remained deployed along our border in a threatening posture.

Our equally aggressive response took the heat out of India’s bellicosity and it decided to back off. However, the prolonged confrontation had a telling effect on Gen Musharraf. Under US pressure he agreed to soften up Pakistan’s stance on Kashmir and to get detached from Kashmiri freedom movement. He banned Kashmir focused six Jihadi groups. While signing peace treaty with India on the insistence of USA in January 2004, he agreed that cross border terrorism was taking place in occupied Kashmir and gave his assurance that he would not allow any Jihadi group to misuse Pakistan soil.

The people were misled into believing that peace treaty with India and CBMs would help in solving all the disputes including Kashmir issue. He further damaged the cause of Kashmir when he downplayed UN resolutions and suggested out of box solution. Whatever gains made by Kashmiri Mujahideen through armed resistance from 1989 onwards at an extremely heavy price were wasted away by Musharraf. He obsequiously bowed to each and every command given by Washington. Battle with tribal militants resulted in loss of considerable space in FATA. Flames of low intensity war spread out from FATA to settled areas including Peshawar and creation of TTP and tied down over 100,000 troops. Marrying up of resentful Jihadi groups with Al-Qaeda and TTP brought the war into urban centres.

In order to ensure continuation of war that both the militants and Pak security forces got bled, the US started to level unsubstantiated accusations against Pakistan. Most spiteful allegation was that either Pakistan was complicit with the militants or was incompetent. Such an aspersion was cast on an ally that had staked its security and economy in fighting the US war and suffered the most and is paying the highest price. While the US officials and media made malicious allegations against Pakistan, no evidence to support their contention were ever produced, which clearly indicated its mala fide intentions?

The PPP led coalition regime of liberal parties installed by USA in March 2008 pursued Musharraf’s US centric policies and made no effort to ameliorate the living conditions of the have-nots who had attached high hopes in the democratically elected government. But for the poor governance, massive corruption, insensitivity of ruling regime and its subservience to Washington, neither the US could have spread its perverse influence in Pakistan, nor could the anti-state extremist groups play havoc. War on terror coupled with breakdown of law and order in FATA, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Balochistan and Karachi, which made the state fragile, facilitated easy entry to foreign agents to fish in troubled waters and deepen the chaos.

At the sunset of the year 2012, our fashion loving former Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar  was upbeat on account of self-perceived assessment that Indo-Pak relations had come out of the bad patch and were steadily improving. Composite dialogue that had been suspended in the wake of 26/11 had recommenced after a break of almost two years. She strongly felt that CBMs would help in resolving core disputes of Kashmir, Siachen, Sir Creek and Wullar Barrage. Liberalization of visa regime, grant of MFN status and grant of land route via Wagah to Afghanistan and beyond in the backdrop of Indo-Pak trade talks in her view would give a quantum jump to bilateral trade between the two countries and would help in removing distrust and antagonism.

She was equally optimistic about Afghanistan asserting that there was significant improvement in bilateral relations as a consequence to Pakistan readily agreeing to all the four demands put forward by Salahuddin Rabbani, Chairman Afghan High Peace Council. These included release of 16 Taliban prisoners from detention. This conciliatory gesture in her view greatly helped in lessening bitterness and distrust and has paved the way for closer cooperation between the two neighbors.

She was particularly over excited over fast improving Pak-US relations that had hit rock bottom after series of offensive acts by USA in 2011 and its continued haughtiness and application of coercive tactics till reopening of NATO supply routes in July 2012. Her optimism concerning steady improvement in Pak-US relations is proving correct because of diametrically changed security situation in Afghanistan. Change of security team in Washington bringing friendly faces like John Kerry and Chuck Hegel raised Pakistan’s hopes of betterment of relations.

Hina’s buoyant assessment about improvement in Indo-Pak relations however proved short-lived. 2013 saw steady deterioration in Indo-Pak relations because India purposely heated up the LoC over an engineered incident of beheading of an Indian soldier. Tit for tat crude response by India over death of convicted Indian spy and terrorist Sarabjit Singh in the form of clubbing to death Pakistani prisoner Sanaullah Ranjay have once again tensed relations. Likewise, despite Pakistan going out of the way to keep Kabul friendly, its relations with Afghanistan dipped because of eccentric behavior of Hamid Karzai.

The power that was illegally snatched from Nawaz Sharif has once again fallen in his lap after 14 years. The one who ousted him is under house arrest and charged with murder and treason charges. Although Nawaz went through lots of trials and tribulations which reformed and matured him, after bouncing back at the centre stage on May 11, 2013, he seems to be in a forgiving mood. Political analysts are of the view that he and his team would not adopt the lifestyle of his predecessors and would make genuine efforts to take the country out of the woods.

Indo-Pak relations currently at a low key would improve. PM Manmohan Singh has already extended an invitation to Nawaz. Imran Khan’s PTI has emerged as the second strongest party in May 11 elections. Notwithstanding Nawaz-Imran tiff, both are likely to work towards ending the war on terror. The US is not likely to interfere since it is in its interest to have stable Pakistan during the crucial transition phase of US-NATO forces from Afghanistan. I see the dark clouds over Pakistan dispersing and a new dawn promising better days emerging.

The writer is a retired Brig and a defence analyst. Email:asifharoonraja@gmail.com

In this respect, Chief of Army Staff Gen. Ashfaq Parvez Kayani who let the coalition government complete its tenure of five years, said on April 30, this year, “A small faction wants to enforce its distorted ideology over the entire nation by taking up arms…the anti-democratic forces will never be acceptable.” Gen. Kayani explained, “I assure you that we stand committed to assist and support the free, fair and peaceful elections…aimed at strengthening democracy and rule of law…linked to prosperity of the nation.”  He also stressed a greater political consensus to tackle extremism and terrorism.
It is notable that President Asif Ali Zardari had declared that polls would be held on time, but his reference to ‘conspiracies’ made it abundantly clear that attempts were  being made to derail the process of elections. The conspiracy theory was also strengthened as Information Minister Arif Nizami too had repeatedly been talking about attempts to disrupt the election process or its postponement.
In fact, based in Afghanistan, secret agencies like American CIA, Indian RAW and Israeli Mossad which have already been arranging terror-attacks on the places of worships, security forces, sectarian violence etc. through TTP, Balochistan Liberation Army (BLA) and other similar militant groups left no stone unturned to thwart the process of elections and to create chaotic situation in Pakistan in order to complete their secret strategic designs. Especially, RAW has hired the services of Indian Muslims who have well-penetrated in the BLA, TTP, Jundollah, (God’s soldiers) and Lashkar-e-Jhangvi which have been conducting subversive acts in various regions of the country.
Pakistan’s civil and military leadership has repeatedly disclosed that militants along with huge cache of arms are being sent to Pakistan from Afghanistan.
Recently, PPP, ANP and President of Balochistan National Party (BNP) Sardar Akhtar Mengal had requested the Chief Election Commissioner and the caretaker government to provide security for their candidates by Pak Army. Nevertheless, Gen. Kayani who had approved the plan for army deployment to provide security during polls; himself visited Balochistan and Karachi in this respect.
Nonetheless by castigating the conspiracy, Pakistan’s media, politicians and leaders of religious parties including security forces got victory over these militants who intended to accomplish their self-motivated designs by sabotaging the elections.
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

Email: sajjad_logic@yahoo.com

By Zaheerul Hasaan

According to the latest unofficial results, so far Nawaz Sharif led party ML (N) won 125 National Assembly seats; PPP party went from first to second position and won 32 seats. Whereas, PTI under the chairmanship of old cricket team captain Imran Khan emerged as third largest party after wining 31 National Assembly seats. To win a simple majority, a party or coalition would have to bag 137 of the 272 National Assembly seats for which polls were held.

Another 70 seats, reserved for women and non-Muslims, will be allocated to parties according to their performance in polls. Anyhow, to have a majority 342-member National Assembly, a party or coalition would need 172. PML (N), PPP and PTI have also proved the leading parties of Punjab, Sindh and KPK. However, PML (N) dominated both in federal and Punjab and also able to change her status from regional to national party.

In fact, the elections 2013 have been contested on the slogans like; corruption, governance, economy, ownership of war on terror, energy crises and change (New Pakistan). During the last five years Pakistani media and courts remained very hyper and vibrant over the stated issues and victimized the ruling elite of Islamabad, Sindh and KPP. Rumors of postponing the elections and derailing of democratic system and introducing number of governing models were normally used to be the favourite topics of all the talk shows of the electronic media. Here, I would like to say that credit goes to the losing parties, courts, Election Commission and Pakistan Army for continuation of political process, ensuring the conduct of the election and smooth transaction of power.

The fair election results also demonstrate that nation is against the corruption and has the desire to see Pakistan moving upward under the peaceful environment.  Therefore , winning parties as promised have to delink Pakistan from the American’s war and  carryout the negotiations with the locals Taliban those believes  in democratic processes, abiding by the law and ready to stop  fighting against Pakistani Armed forces. The wining parties should also be ready to fight back the foreign sponsored terrorism. Moreover, they also need to own the war against militancy.

It would be injustice here, if we do not acknowledge ANP, PPP and Armed forces’ sacrifices against terrorists. The losing parties have suffered a lot being target of TTP. These parties were not able to run their elections campaign due to Taliban blasts and threat. I would like to reveal here that   in case of showing any laxity against terrorism or compromise with militants for the sake of will push the country into disaster. The parties have to remain on one page to fight back the terrorism.

In last week, of the elections the COAS General Kayani has also cautioned against disowning the ongoing military operations in the troubled areas. He urged and advised the politicians not to leave space for dictatorship, etc.; yet the focus remained on the military’s assistance and assurance for holding of fair and free elections.  He very   boldly given a clearly asked the militants to rejoin the national mainstream but only after they “unconditionally submit to the state, its Constitution and the rule of law”.

Thereby, the Elections 2013 have left a message to the upcoming ruling parties in KPK, Punjab and Sindh to root out terrorism and conspiracies from the land and provide justice to massive Army and Civilians bloodshed. Results of Elections 2013 have also provided us a chance with a help of newly elected leaders to defeat ongoing foreign sponsored militancy. Apart from resolving issues like economic, energy and sectarianism, the new government should give priority to settle the conflicts like Kashmir, water and Siachen with the traditional rival while framing foreign policy.

The writer can be approached through zameer36@gmail.com

VIDEO: Baz Luhrmann Wonders If F. Scott Fitzgerald Would Be Upset With ‘Gatsby’ Score 

Gatsby, which is attracting lots of female moviegoers, got off to a quick start on Thursday night by collecting $3.25 million from about 2,000 theaters around the country. Friday, the movie moved into 3,525 locations. Overall, moviegoers awarded it a B CinemaScore.

The movie’s Thursday night run beat the midnight performance of previous female-fueled films, including fellow Warner Bros. film Sex and the City 2 ($3 million). Comparisons are complicated, however, since Hollywood studios are now opening their films before midnight. Gatsby did race past the $2 million earned on its opening Thursday night by Disney’s Oz the Great and Powerful.

Gatsby, which will open the Cannes Film Festival on May 15, cost about $105 million after $85 million in hefty Australian locations subsidies.

Still, the jazz-age love story will settle into second place at the weekend box office, with Disney/Marvel’s Iron Man 3 hanging on to the top slot. The superhero sequel took in about $19.8 million of its own on Friday and is eying a weekend that could hit the $70 million mark. As of Thursday, the latest Iron Man had taken in $212.4 million at the domestic box office and nearly $776 million worldwide.

STORY:’ Great Gatsby’ Soundtrack Selling Big, Headed for No. 2 on Billboard 200 

Meanwhile, Lionsgate’s Tyler Perry Presents Peebles, a PG-13 comedy written and directed by Tina Gordon Chism and the weekend’s only other new wide release, barely moved the needle. While ranking fourth for the dy, the Perry-produced movie, which stars Craig Robinson as a blue-collar guy trying to impress his girlfriend’s family, attracted just $1.2 million from 2,041 theaters and is headed for a $3.5-4 million opening weekend. It earned a B- CinemaScore.

Back-to-back film shoots have turned Sonam Kapoor into a workaholic. The 27-year-old actor, who is currently tied up with the shoot of Yash Raj Films’ untitled project, says, “After Bhaag Milkha Bhaag, I did Raanjhnaa. Now, I’m juggling between dubbing for Raanjhnaa and shooting for YRF. I’m working 12-14 hours a day. My life is interesting but nothing spectacular is happening. It’s just work in my life right now.”

Taking a break is out of the question for the actor. The next project in her kitty is the Khubsoorat remake. “Khubsoorat will start in August. We are not remaking it story wise. It’s just an inspiration. We are taking forward the spirit of the girl from the original film,” says the actor.

Sonam had asked her dad Anil Kapoor to buy the film rights of Anuja Chauhan’s second book, Battle for Bittora. Not revealing much about the project, she says, “Anuja is a friend. She’s a brilliant writer. I would love to play the characters that she has written.”

The fashionista, who was in Delhi recently for India International Jewellery Week 2013, says she has no time to watch T-20 league this year. “I enjoy watching it but this year I don’t have the time. If I have to support a team, it will be Mumbai Indians,” she says.

Renowned Bollywood  Actress  Preity Zinta, thanks to her status as co-owner of a T20 team since 2008, says that she likes to take risks, and that not many female actors in Bollywood would dare to chuck a career in films for cricket. “I moved to cricket at a time when I was at the peak of my career, and I can guarantee you that no one else from Bollywood would have done that,” says Preity. In fact, she does not even want to be compared to any of her contemporaries such as Rani Mukerji and Kareena Kapoor. “If some actress thinks she is sexy and she can dance, it’s her choice. I do what I want to do and I set my own benchmark. I will never compare myself with anyone,” she says.

Preity, 38, who did her last full-fledged Hindi film in 2008 (Heroes), has now turned producer with her film Ishkq in Paris, in which she also plays the lead. After rumours of the film not finding takers, the film is now due to release on May 24.

Did Preity walk out on Ness Wadia? In an interview to a film glossy, Preity Zinta has said, “I walked out of my relationship with Ness Wadia.” The actor co-owns the T-20 team, Kings X1 Punjab with Wadia. The two had a five-year relationship, and they broke up in 2011. Neither Preity nor Ness cited any specific reason for the breakup at that time, even as the entire world speculated about what could have gone wrong. Wadia did not respond to requests for comments.

The US sole worry is to ensure safe and smooth withdrawal of US-NATO troops. At the same time it wishes to ensure peaceful transition of power in Afghanistan and to leave behind stable Afghanistan under a US friendly regime. Another aspect which is yet to be decided is the size of residuary force that will be left behind after 2014. Kabul government has yet not given blanket diplomatic immunity to the residuary force. Karzai’s growing disenchantment against his patron and the Taliban not wanting presence of foreign troops after 2014 are the two reasons behind this indecision. For peaceful transition, one of the foremost requirements for the US, Afghanistan and Pakistan is to sink all their differences and get on one page. The other is that the Taliban agree to open political office in Doha. Third is ceasefire and renewal of process of dialogue disrupted in March 2012 so that mutually acceptable settlement can be reached.

The ground situation is that the Taliban have still not given any indication to resume talks. None of the stakeholders and voluntary peacemakers has been able to convince the Taliban to open a political office in Doha. Taliban are continuing to attack foreign troops and Afghan national security forces (ANSF) and striking sensitive targets all over the country. Karzai is not happy with USA since it suspects that he is being ignored and Pakistan is trusted. Northern Alliance leaders see him with suspicion after he started making frantic efforts to woo Mullah Omar and his Shura members. The people of Afghanistan and Taliban rightly see him as an American tout.

The US too is not pleased with Karzai since he could neither bring any improvement in governance, nor in controlling corruption or in cultivating Taliban. Continuing civilian casualties as a result of drone and air attacks and night raids by NATO troops makes him more unpopular. In his futile bid to become popular, he often loses temper and in frustration directs US military commander to speed up handing over of security duties and the charge of Bagram prison to ANA. In return he earns the displeasure of Washington.

The ISAF has become nervous and self-protective after growing incidents of green-over-blue attacks by ANSF. Karzai lays the blame on Pakistan for all his woes. The wisest of all India finds itself utterly out of job in the endgame and can do little to lessen the pains of USA. While Pak-US relations that had hit rock bottom are gradually improving, Pak-Afghan and Pak-India relations are getting strained. Much that it wanted to, the US is no more in a position to negotiate from position of strength.

Since all the stakeholders are unable to help the US, Pakistan’s assistance has become imperative. The US no more relies on Kabul or New Delhi’s counsels but has started to lean heavily on Pakistan military to show a way out. The bottom line is that it is only Pakistan which is capable of rendering help to facilitate the movement of the Taliban representatives to meet the Afghan government officials in Saudi Arabia and to sit down with the American diplomats in Qatar in the coming weeks and months. Pakistan is judged as the only country that can help in brokering a peace deal and in ensuring safe exit of ISAF troops and heavy baggage. The US knows that the ISI has established good contacts with both Pashtun and non-Pashtun Afghan camps and hence has an edge over others.

Brussels meeting attended by President Karzai, Gen Kayani and Pakistan’s Secretary Jalil Abbas was organized by US Secretary of State John Kerry last month to remove lingering misgivings between Afghanistan and Pakistan. The meeting however couldn’t produce anything fruitful because of non-cooperative attitude of Karzai. Although Karzai is no more in good books of Washington, it cannot find his suitable replacement in this critical timeframe wherein nothing is going in favor of USA and has therefore to reluctantly carry this baggage for some more time.

The peace process roadmap proposed a “five phased process”. The first phase which started in March 2012 and ended in September last focused on securing partnership of Pakistan and forming a core team of Pakistan, Turkey, Saudi Arabia and UK to woo Taliban and bring them to the negotiating table. Not much has been achieved. The second phase from September to March 2013 was to be utilized on CBMs to offer incentives to Taliban and induce them to hold formal negotiations with Karzai government in Riyadh. No progress could be made. The third phase during second half of 2013 is aimed at securing ceasefire. Fourth phase in the first half of 2014 envisage consolidation of agreements reached, whereupon Pakistan is to “monitor and prevent” any breach of the agreements. Phase five visualizes participation of regional and international community to endow with “long-term security” of Afghanistan. The underlying idea of the plan seems to be to sanctify the long-term US military presence in Afghanistan.

While the Taliban may agree to break off ties with al-Qaeda and not allow foreign non-state actors to misuse Afghan soil against others, they will neither agree to accept US formulated constitution nor prolonged stay of residuary force. They would prefer to negotiate with USA than with Afghan regime principally responsible for the bloodbath of Pashtuns and destruction of Afghanistan. The US may agree to move out lock stock and barrel if a face saving settlement is reached, otherwise it will be forced by circumstances to leave behind 10,000 to 12000 residual forces till Afghanistan becomes stable.

Finding that the course of events have started to favor Pakistan, India governed by its Kautiliyan instincts gave few lessons to Kabul to put Pakistan on the defensive and that too at a time when it was fully engrossed in general elections. On 31 April 2013, Afghan policemen trashed and manhandled Pak Khassadar persons on duty at Torkham border and in protest Pakistan closed the border. After receiving apology from Kabul, the border was reopened on 01 May. On May 2, two Pak soldiers were injured when their Gursal post located in Mehmand Agency came under unprovoked fire from across the border. When protest was launched, Kabul countered by laying the blame on Pakistan. Afghan troops once again started firing on Gursal post on May 6 in which six Frontier Constabulary soldiers got injured. Kabul justified the act by claiming that the post constructed by Pak military in 2002 was theirs. Border was purposefully heated up to tense the atmosphere. Instead of steadying relations, Kabul further strained Afghan-Pakistan relations by making false allegations that Pak troops had crossed into Afghan territory and established a post at Ghoshta district in Nangahar area.

Karzai upped the ante by touching upon the settled and dead issue by stating that Durand Line needed to be redrawn. He spoke the Indian language of expansionism. He then urged the Taliban to stop attacking Afghan targets and to turn their weapons against Pakistan. He also stated that Pakistan is the root cause of instability in Afghanistan. These hostile acts and irresponsible statements occurred at this delicate stage when all out combined efforts should have been focused on working together in a spirit of cooperation to culminate the 13 year war and to make the region peaceful. It gives an insight to what is cooking in Kabul against Pakistan and who is tutoring Karzai. Karzai’s acknowledged that he has been receiving secret funds from CIA. It is quite understood that these funds were used and are still being used to pay terrorists and to employ them for covert war against Pakistan. Fazlullah group based in safe haven of Kunar is funded to carryout terrorism in Pakistan. Intelligence reports had indicated arrival of TTP Commanders Maulvi Tayyab and Mauvi Tariq along with 30-40 suicide bombers at Khara near Kunar with the intention of attacking security forces deployed in Upper and Lower Dir to sabotage elections scheduled on May 11.

The writer is a retired Brig and a defence and security analyst. Email:asifharoonraja@gmail.com

 by Mordechai Kedar

To the Honorable Leaders of the Arab States,

We in Israel received with great pleasure your agreement to normalize relations with Israel  on condition that we agree to the establishment of a Palestinian state and exchanges of territories between that state and Israel. The Palestinian state that you propose to establish in Judea and Samaria would be the second Palestinian state, since the first Palestinian state was established six years ago in the Gaza Strip, and you clearly recognize it as such in practice. How else can the state visits of the Emir of Qatar and the secretary of the Arab League in Gaza be understood? Now you propose the establishment of a second Palestinian state? Perhaps a third!! Because Jordan is also a state with a Palestinian majority. And all of these states were established – as you know – on land that the League of Nations had designated for a Jewish state at the San Remo Conference, in April of 1920. So why should we agree to exchange territories with any state or states that have been established or will be established on our land?

And if indeed a second Palestinian state will arise in Judea and Samaria (that which you call “the West Bank”) can you promise us that this state will not at some time in the future become another Hamas state? Do you not recall that Hamas won a clear majority of the seats in the Palestinian Legislative Council in January 2006? Did you not see how Hamas took control of the Gaza Strip with bombs, fire and Kalashnikovs in June of 2007? Will you send a military force to get rid of Hamas after this terror organization also takes over – by means of elections or revolution – the new Palestinian state as well? Or perhaps you will leave us bleeding as a result of the problem that you have created?

We in Israel are very touched by the fact that you, as an Arab collective, not as individual states that have made a peace agreement with us, finally agree to accept us as an existing state in the Middle East. Indeed, it has taken you 65 years to understand that we are here, on the land of our fathers, that we have come back to stay in our land forever and ever until eternity. But why do you call to displant Jerusalem, the historical capital of the Jewish people, from the Jewish state? Was Jerusalem ever a capital of something connected to the Arab world or Islam? Throughout all of history, did an Emir, Sultan Caliph or Arab or Islamic King rule in it even for one day? Do you not remember that since the Islamic conquest in 637, the capital of “Jund Filastin” (the region of Palestine) was called Ramallah? Then why has Jerusalem suddenly emerged as a candidate for capital of the second Palestinian state? Just because it is our capital?

Just to remind you: Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria were under Jordanian occupation for 7000 days, from May of 1948 until June of 1967. You had 7000 golden opportunities to establish a Palestinian state on this territory with Jerusalem as its capital. Why didn’t you do it? Why did you think of it only after the Jewish people liberated the territory from the Jorda-nian occupation whose legality even you, the Arab League, never recognized? What did you know all those years about “the rights of the Palestinian people” that you don’t know today? And why is Israeli “occupation” worse than Jordanian occupation?

Just imagine that we had made a peace agreement with Asad’s Syria. Would the Saudi Arabian jihadists, followers of al-Qaida who want to eliminate Asad, honor the peace agreement that he signed with the Zionists? And what about the Palestinians in Jordan -  if they will also rise up and overthrow the royal house that the British imported from Saudi Arabia, are you sure that they would honor the agreement that that royal house signed with us over the Palestinians’ objections? Are you willing to assure us that the Muslim Brotherhood, which has taken over Egypt, will always honor the peace agreement with Israel after all the years that they said that they would cancel it when they could? Just to remind you, Israel has had agreements of mutual recognition on different levels with Qatar, the United Emirates and Tunisia. Why did they cancel these agreements and close the Israeli diplomatic missions? Is this what your signature is worth?

And in general, why should we, the citizens of Israel, believe you? Is your promise worth anything? Does the Arab League indeed function as a relevant and effective body? In the covenant of the Arab League, which all of the Arab states have signed, there are articles that state principles of behavior among yourselves, but you behave in the totally opposite way!! Article 5 prohibits your states from using force against each other. Were there not wars between Egypt and Libya? Between Egypt and Sudan? Between Saudi Arabia and Yemen? Between Iraq and Kuwait? Between Syria and Iraq? And while we’re on the subject of Syria and Iraq, Article 6 of the League’s covenant states that if a foreign state attacks an Arab state, the League must take measures against this attacker. What did you do when your brother, Saddam Hussein, was attacked in 2003 by foreign states? Not only did you not help him but you joined the attackers!!! So can anyone trust you?

And when Syria occupied Lebanon what did you do? And in August 1976, when Syria slaughtered Palestinians in the Tel al-Za’atar refugee camp in Lebanon, what did you do? and when Kuwait eliminated many thousands of Palestinians after it was liberated from Iraqi occupation, what did you do to your Palestinian brothers? And what did you do in order to solve – not perpetuate – the problem of your brothers,  the “Palestinian refugees” since 1948? Why have you not allowed those “refugees”, who originally came to Israel from your countries before 1948, to return to their homes in your countries after they fled the wars that you started? And when Qadhaffi slaughtered 50,000 of his citizens, what did you do as an Arab collective besides calling on Europe to do your work for you, to rescue Arabs from the knife of the Arab butcher!!! When ‘Ali abdAlla Salah, the former dictator of Yemen, slaughtered his citizens what did you do? And during the past two years, while your brother Bashar Asad, has been slaughtering 80,000 of his citizens until today, where have you been? If this is the way you behave, allowing so very many thousands of Arabs, your brothers, to suffer and be killed in vain, only because they want to live the normative lifestyle of a human being, then why should we, citizens of Israel, think that you would care at all about us? Would you come to our aid if one of your countries decided to attack us?

The way you relate to one another is so terrible that we are not sure that we want anything to do with you. Can an Arab travel to another Arab state without a visa? How does any Arab state treat foreign workers who come from other Arab states? And why do the Egyptians kill Sudanese living in Egypt when they demonstrate against the humiliating way they are treated by their Egyptian brothers? And what did the Iraqis do to the Palestinians who were in Iraq until 2003? Did they not persecute them and chase them with knives into refugee camps of Rawishad on the Iraqi-Jordanian border and al-Kaaam on the border of Iraq and Syria? And why have Arab citizens of Lebanon been slaughtering Arab citizens of Syria for the past year? Only because the killers are Shi’ites and the victims are Sunnis? And why does Saudi Arabia send criminals to Syria in order to slaughter Asad’s soldiers, who only wanted to slaughter Syrian citizens? And why does the Sudanese government slaughter its citizens in Darfur? Is this any way for a nation that proposes peace to the citizens of Israel to behave? And what has the Arab League ever done in order to bring a little calm to the Arab nation? Why do people say that the Arab League is like a frozen body in a morgue, that no one has the courage to declare as dead?

And even if we assume that there will be peace between us and all of the Arab states, what will that give us? Will you be able to buy our products? Do you think that we will allow tourists from your countries to visit us freely? We tried this in the nineties, when hordes of tourists came from Jordan, and more than a hundred thousand of them “disappeared” into Israel. We have learned the lesson, and many years will pass until we’ll want to see your tourists in Israel again.

But the most important thing is the fact that despite the terrible holocaust, in which the Palestinian Mufti – your brother, Hajj Amin al-Husseini – took an active part, and despite the wars and the terror between the wars that you have imposed upon us, we have established a democratic and developed country, and we have proven to the whole world that we need you, our dear neighbors, about as much as we need a headache. We have managed very well without you, and according to all the signs, we will continue to manage not at all poorly without you. You have nothing to offer us besides the poverty, unemployment, corruption, backwardness, violence and neglect that characterizes your societies and countries. Believe us, nothing, absolutely nothing, makes us want to connect ourselves with you. Do you want peace with us? We’re willing – but what do you offer us in return? What will you give to us in exchange for our agreement to get into the same picture frame with you and to sit around the same table with you?

Peace with you will come only after we see that you really want peace. As long as you encourage and arm terror organi-zations who act against us, incite against us in your media, erase the state of Israel from the geography books in your schools and act against us in international arenas, why should we believe that you indeed want peace? A peace agreement should be recognition of actual peace in the field, for one important reason: when we see how you behave with yourselves, no one in Israel believes even one word of yours, because you have no idea what peace is. If you want peace with us, show us please that you have some concept of the term “peace”. Begin with making peace within your countries, continue with peace between your countries and then perhaps we will believe that you know what peace is.

And if anyone thinks that our requirement is absurd, because there will never be peace in the Arab world, this is the proof that we are right. There is a saying in Arabic “Faqd a-Shay la y’atiha” – “He who has nothing, cannot give to someone else.” How can a nation that has no notion of peace, give peace to others?

In conclusion, dear neighbors, we – citizens of Israel – want very much to live in Peace, in a region of peace where you and we enjoy it together. But we do not think that there is any point in signing an agreement with someone who today is here and tomorrow is in a grave, and his successors won’t honor his signature. When the Middle East becomes a region of peace, give us a call, perhaps we will join the peace that you will begin in the Middle East. Until then please leave us alone.

Signed: Mordechai Kedar, and many, many more citizens of Israel.

==============

Dr. Mordechai Kedar (Mordechai.Kedar@biu.ac.il) is an Israeli scholar of Arabic and Islam, a lecturer at Bar-Ilan University and the director of the Center for the Study of the Middle East and Islam (under formation), Bar Ilan University, Israel. He specializes in Islamic ideology and movements, the political discourse of Arab countries, the Arabic mass media, and the Syrian domestic arena.

Evidence of the growing strength of al-Nusra, gathered from Guardian interviews with FSA commanders across Syria, underlines the dilemma for the US, Britain and other governments as they ponder the question of arming anti-Assad rebels.

John Kerry, the US secretary of state, said that if negotiations went ahead between the Syrian government and the opposition – as the US and Russia proposed on Tuesday – “then hopefully [arming the Syrian rebels] would not be necessary”.

The agreement between Washington and Moscow creates a problem for the UK and France, which have proposed lifting or amending the EU arms embargo on Syria to help anti-Assad forces. The Foreign Office welcomed the agreement as a “potential step forward” but insisted: “Assad and his close associates have lost all legitimacy. They have no place in the future of Syria.”  Opposition leaders were sceptical about prospects for talks if Assad remained in power.

Illustrating their plight, FSA commanders say that entire units have gone over to al-Nusra while others have lost a quarter or more of their strength to them recently.

“Fighters feel proud to join al-Nusra because that means power and influence,” said Abu Ahmed, a former teacher from Deir Hafer who now commands an FSA brigade in the countryside near Aleppo. “Al-Nusra fighters rarely withdraw for shortage of ammunition or fighters and they leave their target only after liberating it,” he added. “They compete to carry out martyrdom [suicide] operations.”

Abu Ahmed and others say the FSA has lost fighters to al-Nusra in Aleppo, Hama, Idlib and Deir al-Zor and the Damascus region. Ala’a al-Basha, commander of the Sayyida Aisha brigade, warned the FSA chief of staff, General Salim Idriss, about the issue last month. Basha said 3,000 FSA men have joined al-Nusra in the last few months, mainly because of a lack of weapons and ammunition. FSA fighters in the Banias area were threatening to leave because they did not have the firepower to stop the massacre in Bayda, he said.

The FSA’s Ahrar al-Shimal brigade joined al-Nusra en masse while the Sufiyan al-Thawri brigade in Idlib lost 65 of its fighters to al-Nusra a few months ago for lack of weapons. According to one estimate the FSA has lost a quarter of all its fighters.

Al-Nusra has members serving undercover with FSA units so they can spot potential recruits, according to Abu Hassan of the FSA’s al-Tawhid Lions brigade.

Ideology is another powerful factor. “Fighters are heading to al-Nusra because of its Islamic doctrine, sincerity, good funding and advanced weapons,” said Abu  Islam of the FSA’s al-Tawhid brigade in Aleppo. “My colleague who was fighting with the FSA’s Ahrar Suriya asked me: ‘I’m fighting with Ahrar Suriya brigade, but I want to know if I get killed in a battle, am I going to be considered as a martyr or not?’ It did not take him long to quit FSA and join al-Nusra. He asked for a sniper rifle and got one immediately.”

FSA commanders say they have suffered from the sporadic nature of arms supplies. FSA fighter Adham al-Bazi told the Guardian from Hama: “Our main problem is that what we get from abroad is like a tap. Sometimes it’s turned on, which means weapons are coming and we are advancing, then, all of a sudden, the tap dries up, and we stop fighting or even pull out of our positions.”

The US, which has outlawed al-Nusra as a terrorist group, has hesitated to arm the FSA, while the western and Gulf-backed Syrian Opposition Coalition has tried to assuage concerns by promising strict control over weapons. “We are ready to make lists of the weapons and write down the serial numbers,” Idriss told NPR at the weekend. “The FSA is very well organised and when we distribute weapons and ammunition we know exactly to which hands they are going.”

Syria’s government has capitalised successfully on US and European divisions over the weapons embargo by emphasising the “jihadi narrative” – as it has since the start of largely peaceful protests in March 2011. Assad himself claimed in a recent interview: “There is no FSA, only al-Qaida.” Syrian state media has played up the recent pledge of loyalty by Jabhat al-Nusra to al-Qaida in Iraq.

Western governments say they are aware of the al-Nusra problem, which is being monitored by intelligence agencies, but they are uncertain about its extent.

“It is clear that fighters are moving from one group to another as one becomes more successful,” said a diplomat who follows Syria closely. “But it’s very area-specific. You can’t talk about a general trend in which [Jabhat al-Nusra] has more momentum than others. It is true that some say JAN is cleaner and better than other groups, but there are as many stories about it being bad.” Critics point to punishments meted out by Sharia courts and its use of suicide bombings.

The FSA’s shortage of weapons and other resources compared with Jabhat al-Nusra is a recurrent theme. The loss of Khirbet Ghazaleh, a key junction near Dera’a in southern Syria, was blamed on Wednesday on a lack of weapons its defenders had hoped would be delivered from Jordan.

“If you join al-Nusra, there is always a gun for you but many of the FSA brigades can’t even provide bullets for their fighters,” complained Abu Tamim, an FSA man who joined Jabhat al-Nusra in Idlib province. “My nephew is in Egypt, he wants to come to Syria to fight but he doesn’t have enough money. Al-Nusra told him: ‘Come and we will even pay your flight tickets.’ He is coming to fight with al-Nusra because he does not have any other way.”

Jabhat al-Nusra is winning support in Deir al-Zor, according to Abu Hudaifa, another FSA defector. “They are protecting people and helping them financially. Al-Nusra is in control of most of the oil wells in the city.” The Jabhat al-Nusra media, with songs about jihad and martyrdom, is extremely influential.

Abu Zeid used to command the FSA’s Syria Mujahideen brigade in the Damascus region and led all its 420 fighters to al-Nusra. “Since we joined I and my men are getting everything we need to keep us fighting to liberate Syria and to cover our families’ expenses, though fighting with al-Nusra is governed by very strict rules issued by the operations command or foreign fighters,” he said. “There is no freedom at all but you do get everything you want.

“No one should blame us for joining al-Nusra. Blame the west if Syria is going to become a haven for al-Qaida and extremists. The west left Assad’s gangs to slaughter us. They never bothered to support the FSA. They disappointed ordinary Syrian protesters who just wanted their freedom and to have Syria for all Syrians.”

Coutesy: The Guardian

had been planted by RAW and sent to Pakistan to spy and carryout acts of terrorism.  He had killed many innocent Pakistanis by planting bombs. He was arrested on April 28, 1990 near Kasur by border guard while he was trying to escape to India via Ganda Singhwala. He was tried in Anti-Terrorist Court on charges of planting and exploding five bombs in Lahore and Faisalabad and killing 14 people and injuring many. He confessed to his crimes and stated that he worked for RAW. He was awarded death sentence in 1991 and was waiting for his turn to be hanged after his four petitions had been rejected by the Supreme Court. His hanging was repeatedly postponed. He then moved a mercy petition to President Zardari. Latter was inclined to set aside his death sentence but emotional protests launched by families of 14 victims of Sarabjit demanding his immediate hanging restrained him. Had he been hanged in time, the ugly situation could have been avoided.

India exerted pressure for the release of Sarabjit Singh as well as another death row prisoner Surjeet Singh involved in espionage. Human Rights Chairman Ansar Burney campaigned hard for the release of Surjeet. PPP government buckled under Indian pressure and released Surjeet in May 2012. He was given a warm send off by our officials led by Ansar Burney. In India he was given a rousing welcome. Throughout his 30 years long imprisonment, Surjeet had pleaded that he was not guilty, but on his arrival in India while talking to media he proudly admitted that he was an Indian spy sent by RAW to Pakistan for espionage.

Like Surjeet Singh, Sarabjit also kept pleading not guilty. On April 27, 2013, convicted Sarabjit Singh was critically injured by his two prison companions who were also on death row. They probably apprehended that like Surjeet, he too might not be released. Another possible reason for the attack on Sarabjit could be in reaction to hanging of Afzal Guru, a Kashmiri, who had been wrongfully implicated in terrorist attack on Indian Parliament in December 2001. Sarabjit was promptly shifted to Jinnah Hospital Lahore and given full medical attention. Pak government facilitated arrival of his kin the very next day of the incident. Despite best medical care, the doctors could not bring him out of coma. Our media gave full coverage to the incident till he succumbed to injuries on the night of 1/2 May and his body shifted to India on 2 May in a special plane sent by India.

Indian officials expressed their usual angst and Indian media hyped the issue out of context and Indian public bayed for blood of Pakistan. Pakistan bound Pak-India Dosti bus was mobbed by the angry crowd in Amritsar. This has been the standard pattern of India. Convicted Sarabjit was declared a national hero and buried with honor. It was announced that his next of kin will be given award money. The incident added strains to the already tense Indo-Pak relations.

No sooner his last rites were completed on 2 May, a similar incident occurred in Kot Bhalwal jail in Jammu where an ex Indian Army soldier Vinod Kumar undergoing life imprisonment on account of murdering his colleague hit 54 years old Pakistani prisoner Sanaullah Ranjay on 3 May. It was obviously a tit-for-tat response. Vinod hit him on his head repeatedly exactly the way Sarabjit Singh had been hit by his prison mates in Kot Lakhpat jail to ensure he doesn’t recover from his injuries. Vinod has been remanded for seven days in police custody for further investigations but this ritual is for the consumption of the world. I am sure he must be receiving heaps of praises for his heroics and feasted.

Sanaullah after being savagely assaulted with brick and metal rod on his head was shifted to Chandigarh hospital with multiple injuries where he was put on life-support in intensive care. He had been arrested on charges of terror acts in 1999 and awarded life sentence. He had completed his jail sentence in Kot Bhalwal jail in 2006 but was held back. On May 5, Indian doctors pronounced Sanaullah brain dead. His relatives were allowed to meet him in the hospital on 8 May. They were aghast to see him in near dead condition after 18 years of separation. Sanaullah stared at them with blank looks but couldn’t move or utter a word.

Requests made by Pakistan and pleadings of his visiting relatives for his evacuation on humanitarian grounds fell on deaf ears on the plea that his fragile condition prohibited movement. He eventually breathed his last on May 9, and his body was flown to Sialkot from Chandigarh by PIA thus ending the hate-filled reactive episode. The saddest part was that Sanaullah had not been released after completing his jail term in 2006.  Pakistan conveyed its deep concern over the unfortunate incident and demanded full-fledged inquiry and punishment to the murderer.

India has as a policy has treated Pakistani prisoners very cruelly. It prefers to clandestinely murder prisoners suspected of involved in spying or terrorism. Those who are hanged to death after the ruling of kangaroo courts or die under mysterious circumstances, their bodies are not returned. 27 years old terror suspect Qateel Siddique from Pakistan was found murdered inside Yerawada jail in Pune on June 8, 2012. He was allegedly strangled by two of his inmates. Instead of handing over his body to Pakistan, he was secretly buried in the middle of the night inside the jail compound as in the case of two Kashmiri leaders Afzal Guru and Maqbool Butt. Ajmal Kasab implicated in Mumbai attacks in November 2008 was awarded death sentence by a kangaroo court in Mumbai without conclusive evidence. It was a one-sided trial since Pakistani lawyers were not allowed to meet him. He too was secretly hanged on November 26, 2012 within the premises of the jail and buried.

It was strange that Indian media and officials declared RAW agent and convicted Sarabjit Singh involved in spying and in several acts of terror a hero and gave him state burial. This was done to give heart to other spies who had got scared after finding that Indian authorities had failed to get him released and died a horrible death. One may ask India’s saner elements as to how they differentiate between a terrorist and a hero? Hasn’t India made a mockery of the much publicized and dramatized terrorism? If Sarabjit is a hero, how come Hafiz Saeed allegedly involved in Mumbai attacks is declared as a terrorist by India?

Sarabjit went through the whole length of judicial process and was given ample chance to prove his innocence. After establishing that he was an Indian agent and involved in acts of terror about which he confessed, only then he was convicted and awarded death sentence. In case of Hafiz Saeed, the law courts exonerated him for want of evidence and India failed to provide requisite evidence since Mumbai drama had been cooked up with devious intentions. More so, Sarabjit could not be equated with Sanaullah, who had completed his jail term.

India media helped by Pakistani media manages to portray itself as a victim and Pakistan as the aggressor. Since 2005, Indian TV channel ‘Star TV’ ran a focused campaign to get Sarabjit released. His family members were repeatedly brought on the TV and they all portrayed him as innocent and made passionate appeals to release him on humanitarian grounds. Sarabjit having confessed his crime also started parroting the same that he was not guilty. Our media remained shy of calling him a terrorist and instead called him a spy. Our media joined Indian media in criticizing Pak government for not providing adequate security to him and for not sending him to India after he was injured. The two are now tightlipped when India failed in providing security to Sanaullah particularly after the tempers in India had gone high and for not shifting him to Pakistan.

As against cruel treatment of India against Pakistani prisoners, Indian prisoners held in Pakistan jails have been by and large treated humanely. The last government released over 100 Indian prisoners during its five-year tenure and all the released prisoners went happy loaded with gifts. India on the other hand reciprocated by sending dead bodies of Pakistani prisoners. Those who came back alive were not in normal condition. Some had lost their memory; some their speaking power, while others had been crippled for life. Out of 270 Pakistani prisoners, 47 have completed their sentences but are still languishing in Indian jails under horrid conditions. Seeing the ugly mood of Indian public and premeditated fatal assault on Sanaullah, lives of other prisoners are in great danger. Pakistan has demanded immediate release of 47 prisoners and full protection to all Pakistani visitors to India.

The writer is a retired Brig and a defence analyst. Email:asifharoonraja@gmail.com

By Balbir Singh Sooch-Sikh Vichar Manch

Are ISI ( Inter Services Intelligence. Intelligence agency of Pakistan) & RAW ( Research and Analysis Wing (Intelligence wing of Indian army)) Must Be Having Knowledge As To Who Is Journalist Manjit Singh Rattu?

For Example A Sikh Tragedy : Respected Kiranjot Kaur ji is a granddaughter of Master Tara Singh, who was born on 24 June 1885, Rawalpindi, Punjab and expired on 22 November 1967, Chandigarh, was a prominent Sikh political and religious leader in the first half of the 20th century. Master Tara Singh was instrumental in organising the Shiromani Gurdwara Prabhandak Committee, in organising Sikhs politically, and guided the Sikhs during the Partition of India, and later led their demand for a Sikh-majority state in Punjab, India. Master Tara Singh was also among the founders of the Vishwa Hindu Parishad as given in Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

To my mind, there is no match or commonness between the Shiromani Gurdwara Prabhandak Committee and the Vishwa Hindu Parishad. That is a big question mark on the life of Master Tara Singh in the Sikh history. A news item published in Hindustan times, Punjab under the head, ‘Kiranjot  flays remarks against Master Tara Singh’ speaks more on this issue, the Sikh Vichar Manch feels and may conclude as where lies tragedy with Sikhs in India.

Kiranjot Kaur ji asks a short, but multi-edged question politely always difficult to comment or answer as is about Sarabjit Singh, “Who was Sarabjit? A spy, a smuggler or an innocent, who strayed over to Pakistan?? If he was a spy where does that leave the poor lawyer Awais Sheikh who was fighting for his release saying Sarabjit was a case of mistaken identity?” Kiranjot Kaur ji requires more to be introduced as On her future plans, she said she would like to focus on carrying forward the interfaith dialogue, besides grooming Sikh scholars for propagation of Sikhism in pace with the changing times. Though, the Sikh Vichar Manch admires her on the issue, but it reflects her background and  the more danger to Sikhs.

Once said about Kiranjot Kaur with the SAD candidates getting elected unopposed from five SGPC seats in Amritsar district, all eyes are now on Amritsar (West) constituency from where granddaughter of Master Tara Singh and former SGPC general secretary Bibi Kiranjot Kaur is contesting her third election.Let us come to the point, leaving the destiny of Sikhs at the mercy Indian Leaders.But, according to prominent and leading journalist Satinder Bains in his comments said as under:

“To my knowledge he (Sarabjit Singh) was a spy of RAW. But definitely he was case of mistaken identity. He accompanied a Journalist Manjit Singh, also RAW agent, for bomb blasts in Karachi. Manjit Singh was key accused and he fled after the blasts. Sarabjeet Singh was arrested. even the FIR was registered in the name of Manjit Singh. Sarabjit was probably accompanied as a guide. Interestingly Manjit Singh is also spying for ISI. He is now living in Jalandhar and is under safe protection of Punjab Police or you can say Indian intelligence agencies.”

The journalist Satinder Bains also said: Extra ordinary honour given to Sarabjit has nothing to do with his spy status. Media created an unnecessary hype about it and he became the liability for government. He belonged to SC community and the exposure given to his sister Dalbir Kaur made her an icon. From that angle he became politically important for SAD and Congress. Now both parties are in race to give Dalbir Kaur party ticket for MP from Khadoor Sahib constituency. Badal gave Rs.one crore with this consideration in mind.According to the author, Balbir Singh Sooch-Sikh Vichar Manch of this note: Who is Manjit Singh Rattu?

I as the Chief and Spokesperson of the Sikh Vichar Manch never had any hostile counter or faced any threat from such elements (To whom, the Indian agencies concerned, controlling and operating the state terrorism in India by misusing the so-called militants from the minorities and or out of majority of India, known as hardcore Hindutava, hiding his head especially in SHIV SENA, RSS, BJP & CONGRESS.) as to my mind, they were never instructed to harm me by the Indian agencies concerned, controlling and operating the state terrorism in India.

Except on Wednesday, April 24, 2013 at 11:29 PM after much delay, said to be one “manjeet singh nri-<nrinews24@gmail.com>” and he may also be earlier known as journalist Manjit Singh Rattu, sent an email on my email address without mentioning my identity, name etc (Email can be bogus as a part of an exercise of the Indian agencies to snub me) and directed me to remove the particular link of articles under the head, ‘The Manipulation of Assassination of then Punjab Chief Minister Beant Singh and the Justice System in India ‘ from your website i.e. from ‘Sikhvicharmanch’ website, and also warned, otherwise, You (I) have to face legal consequences after three days along with others did act to his mind against him (Manjit Singh Rattu). “manjeet singh nri” can say so to snub me, the Chief and Spokesperson of the Sikh Vichar Manch, but only legally, may also be by other means tactically.

The contents of Email received from manjeet singh nri-nrinews24@gmail.com were being reproduced as under:

“On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 11:29 PM, NRI LINK Pardesi <nrinews24@gmail.com> wrote:

http://www.sikhvicharmanch.com/Religiou%20Politics-The%20Manipulation%20of%20Assassination%20of%20then%20Punjab%20CM.htm

I am manjeet singh nri about whom many sites just because of their TRP and spicy news ruined my life.When I thought of coming india and begin my media here all my opposition put fake complaints with my close friends to end my life and family,they did all this but due to God’s grace, I am clear in all of that nonsense but I promised myself not to spare anyone who participated in ending my life,my family and friends.

I have sent you the link to delete my fake and nonsense information otherwise I will drag everyone in court as Rajee shinde of punjabnewsline is dragged in court.

I will wait for 3 days for your positive response otherwise,I am sending summons of court to you people.
For any clarification, you can contact me on 7696982626 or write me at nrinews24@gmail.com

Thanks,
manjeet singh”

There is no progress or action by manjeet singh nri: nrinews24@gmail.com so far against Balbir Singh Sooch-Sikh Vichar Manch in this matter despite the link is intact and shall remain so during my life as already said and replied.

Now question arises as to who is Journalist Manjit Singh Rattu said to be operating at the same time for ISI & RAW agencies of Pakistan and India respectively?

Are  ISI ( Inter Services Intelligence. Intelligence agency of Pakistan) & RAW ( Research and Analysis Wing (Intelligence wing of Indian army)) working conspiringly and in connivance with each other in order to control crowd of both the countries i.e. Pakistan and India by terrorizing the crowd physically and politically as were visible from the past actions and the statements of the rulers of both countries, who matter that there won’t be any adverse effect between our alleged vital relations or on talks going on since long in the name of settling our outstanding issues and misunderstandings?

The questions have been rightly asked and published in articles titled as ‘Are ISI & RAW Responsible of Attacking Prisoners?’ And ‘Whether Sarabjit Singh Is A Martyr?’

ARE ISI & RAW HEADS ONE IN CONTROLLING CROWD OF PAKISTAN AND INDIA IN CONNIVANCE WITH THE RULERS MATTER?

None can deny that the US and its allies apparently mandated to eliminate terrorism in Afghanistan had a different agenda. Under the garb of fighting terrorism, Pakistan was to be systematically destabilized, weakened, de-nuked, secularized and turned into a compliant state. The six intelligence units led by CIA based in Kabul since end 2001 were instrumental in diverting flames of terrorism into Pakistan and then further fuelling them. In this unholy game, RAW was influential in organizing a comprehensive terror structure in Afghanistan. Pakistan has collected ample proofs of involvement of RAW and other intelligence agencies in Balochistan, FATA and Swat. Events in 2011 unearthed existence of CIA network in Pakistan. It is also a well known fact that some political parties and section of media are aligned with USA and working on its agenda.

The liberals in Pakistan were given full chance and ideal conditions to promote the virtues of Western democracy and to prove that Westminster model and British judicial system in practice are better than dictatorship and Islamic system. The coalition government of PPP-MQM-ANP installed by USA in 2008 utterly failed because it made no efforts to strengthen democratic norms. All their efforts were focused on enriching their personal coffers. They were repeatedly advised and criticized to mend their ways which were causing irreparable harm to the democracy but they paid no heed since power and wealth had intoxicated them. They kept their patron in good humor by continuing to fight the US imposed war on terror and in the process bleeding the economy as well as suffering enormous human losses.

While the US never got satisfied with the sacrifices rendered and kept pressing it to do more against the militants, the ruling regime paid no heed to the sufferings of the people. Undue interference of the US in Pakistan’s internal affairs gave currency to an impression that Washington was micro-managing internal and external affairs of Pakistan at the cost of its people and national interests. Musharraf’s recent admission that he had authorized use of drones at a limited scale confirmed the widely held perception that drones were fired by CIA with the understanding of our government. As a consequence, the people lost faith in their leaders and in democracy. They said that they were wrong in saying that ‘even worst form of democracy is better than good dictatorship’.

These and several other factors helped the extremist forces to build perceptions and play upon the religious sensitivities of the youth among the deprived class that see no future for themselves under prevalent corrupt system. Drone war has further helped TTP leaders to earn the sympathies and goodwill of the people, poison the ears of their followers against the Army and the government and recruit larger numbers of fighters. Without the support of the people no terror network can survive for long. All banned groups have roots in the society and are revered by their followers. Some have re-emerged under different names and some are participating in elections to lend strength to the right wing. Ahl-e-Sunnat Wal Jamaat is one example.

The case in Balochistan is different where several Baloch nationalist groups under the patronage of foreign powers are pursuing secessionist agenda. BLA and BRA whose leaders are in exile and BLF are sabotaging election campaign of all political parties since elections go against their agenda. Only Akhtar Mengal has returned from exile and is taking part in elections but is threatened by Baloch terrorist groups.

Under the gloomy circumstances, political parties led by Nawaz Sharif, Imran Khan, Syed Munawar Hussain and Maulana Fazlur Rahman have opened a window of opportunity and given a ray of light.  They want to end the futile war and have offered dialogue to the TTP. Imran Khan is in the lead and has shown a way out. He says that if brought to power, he will pullback the Army deployed in FATA, shoot down drones, put an end to war on terror and stop the degrading practice of US slavery. He said that he would prefer death over seeking alms from other countries. His popularity can be judged from the spontaneous outpouring of anxiety after his fall from a lifter at Lahore causing him slight injury and feelings of joy when they learnt that he was well. He may benefit from the sympathy wave.

Nawaz Sharif has once again emphasized the need to reconsider Pakistan’s support to the US war on terror and has favored negotiations with Taliban. JUI-F chief Fazl has repeatedly censured US interference and suggested termination of war by talking to Taliban. JI chief Syed Munawar Hasan lashed out at the liberal parties that they are reaping what they had sowed and suggested that liberals siding with USA should get themselves registered as minorities. He terms MQM as a terrorist party responsible for the destruction of peace in Karachi. These and suchlike statements touched the right chords of the militants and not only they accepted the offer of dialogue but also decided not to target right wing parties during ongoing election campaign. Dialogue will help in allaying misperceptions and until misgivings are removed the Taliban will not agree to surrender arms.

Although PML-N and PTI being conservative secular parties but leaning towards the right do not fit into strategic framework of TTP, the duo has been spared hoping that Nawaz or Imran would be able to checkmate ultra liberal trends and promote Islamic trends which would pave the way for introducing SHARIAH. The softness however seems temporary; sooner than latter a clash will occur since both Nawaz and Imran firmly believe in constitution and democracy and do not subscribe to extremism and violence.

Apparently two opposing camps have emerged, one led by liberals and other by rightists. The three liberal parties, PPP, MQM and ANP that were spitting venom against each other till the onset of election campaign have got together because of TTP threat out of expediency. Their truce will last up to 11 May only. Centre-right and right wing political and religious parties have failed to forge an alliance and all are contesting elections independently. Likewise, the religious parties like Jamaat-e-Islami, JUI (F), JUI (S) and religious groups are also not on one page. Maulana Fazlur Rahman is not in good books of TTP because of his duplicity.

Other than Shia-Sunni conflict, Deobandis, Barelvis and Ahl-e-Hadith remain within their own orbits. The TTP too has cracked up and several of its leaders have taken refuge in Kunar and Nuristan. Armed forces and higher judiciary are the only two institutions that stands united and committed to the national cause. However, Army-judiciary relationship is not free of strains because of latter’s activism.

War on terror and socio-economic development repel each other. The war must therefore cease to allow the future government to translate its promises of ameliorating the sufferings of the neglected segment of society into actions. Only peaceful environment will attract investments and enable the future reformers to make Pakistan an Islamic welfare state promising peace, harmony, equitable distribution of wealth, equal opportunities for social upward growth and speedy justice to all.

Dialogue with militants will help in listening to each other’s point of views, removing misperceptions and grievances, offering incentive packages and convincing them to spurn violence and come into the mainstream and become useful members of the society by taking up their traditional job of defending the western border.  Dialogue will also help in segregating irreconcilable from reconcilable and eventually identifying and isolating those toeing foreign agenda. If we can offer amnesty to the separatists in Balochistan, why can’t we hold talks with misled tribesmen of FATA?

The writer is a retired Brig, defence analyst and a columnist. Email:asifharoonraja@gmail.com

None can deny that the US and its allies apparently mandated to eliminate terrorism in Afghanistan had a different agenda. Under the garb of fighting terrorism, Pakistan was to be systematically destabilized, weakened, de-nuked, secularized and turned into a compliant state. The six intelligence units led by CIA based in Kabul since end 2001 were instrumental in diverting flames of terrorism into Pakistan and then further fuelling them. In this unholy game, RAW was influential in organizing a comprehensive terror structure in Afghanistan. Pakistan has collected ample proofs of involvement of RAW and other intelligence agencies in Balochistan, FATA and Swat. Events in 2011 unearthed existence of CIA network in Pakistan. It is also a well known fact that some political parties and section of media are aligned with USA and working on its agenda.

The liberals in Pakistan were given full chance and ideal conditions to promote the virtues of Western democracy and to prove that Westminster model and British judicial system in practice are better than dictatorship and Islamic system. The coalition government of PPP-MQM-ANP installed by USA in 2008 utterly failed because it made no efforts to strengthen democratic norms. All their efforts were focused on enriching their personal coffers. They were repeatedly advised and criticized to mend their ways which were causing irreparable harm to the democracy but they paid no heed since power and wealth had intoxicated them. They kept their patron in good humor by continuing to fight the US imposed war on terror and in the process bleeding the economy as well as suffering enormous human losses.

While the US never got satisfied with the sacrifices rendered and kept pressing it to do more against the militants, the ruling regime paid no heed to the sufferings of the people. Undue interference of the US in Pakistan’s internal affairs gave currency to an impression that Washington was micro-managing internal and external affairs of Pakistan at the cost of its people and national interests. Musharraf’s recent admission that he had authorized use of drones at a limited scale confirmed the widely held perception that drones were fired by CIA with the understanding of our government. As a consequence, the people lost faith in their leaders and in democracy. They said that they were wrong in saying that ‘even worst form of democracy is better than good dictatorship’.

These and several other factors helped the extremist forces to build perceptions and play upon the religious sensitivities of the youth among the deprived class that see no future for themselves under prevalent corrupt system. Drone war has further helped TTP leaders to earn the sympathies and goodwill of the people, poison the ears of their followers against the Army and the government and recruit larger numbers of fighters. Without the support of the people no terror network can survive for long. All banned groups have roots in the society and are revered by their followers. Some have re-emerged under different names and some are participating in elections to lend strength to the right wing. Ahl-e-Sunnat Wal Jamaat is one example.

The case in Balochistan is different where several Baloch nationalist groups under the patronage of foreign powers are pursuing secessionist agenda. BLA and BRA whose leaders are in exile and BLF are sabotaging election campaign of all political parties since elections go against their agenda. Only Akhtar Mengal has returned from exile and is taking part in elections but is threatened by Baloch terrorist groups.

Under the gloomy circumstances, political parties led by Nawaz Sharif, Imran Khan, Syed Munawar Hussain and Maulana Fazlur Rahman have opened a window of opportunity and given a ray of light.  They want to end the futile war and have offered dialogue to the TTP. Imran Khan is in the lead and has shown a way out. He says that if brought to power, he will pullback the Army deployed in FATA, shoot down drones, put an end to war on terror and stop the degrading practice of US slavery. He said that he would prefer death over seeking alms from other countries. His popularity can be judged from the spontaneous outpouring of anxiety after his fall from a lifter at Lahore causing him slight injury and feelings of joy when they learnt that he was well. He may benefit from the sympathy wave.

Nawaz Sharif has once again emphasized the need to reconsider Pakistan’s support to the US war on terror and has favored negotiations with Taliban. JUI-F chief Fazl has repeatedly censured US interference and suggested termination of war by talking to Taliban. JI chief Syed Munawar Hasan lashed out at the liberal parties that they are reaping what they had sowed and suggested that liberals siding with USA should get themselves registered as minorities. He terms MQM as a terrorist party responsible for the destruction of peace in Karachi. These and suchlike statements touched the right chords of the militants and not only they accepted the offer of dialogue but also decided not to target right wing parties during ongoing election campaign. Dialogue will help in allaying misperceptions and until misgivings are removed the Taliban will not agree to surrender arms.

Although PML-N and PTI being conservative secular parties but leaning towards the right do not fit into strategic framework of TTP, the duo has been spared hoping that Nawaz or Imran would be able to checkmate ultra liberal trends and promote Islamic trends which would pave the way for introducing SHARIAH. The softness however seems temporary; sooner than latter a clash will occur since both Nawaz and Imran firmly believe in constitution and democracy and do not subscribe to extremism and violence.

Apparently two opposing camps have emerged, one led by liberals and other by rightists. The three liberal parties, PPP, MQM and ANP that were spitting venom against each other till the onset of election campaign have got together because of TTP threat out of expediency. Their truce will last up to 11 May only. Centre-right and right wing political and religious parties have failed to forge an alliance and all are contesting elections independently. Likewise, the religious parties like Jamaat-e-Islami, JUI (F), JUI (S) and religious groups are also not on one page. Maulana Fazlur Rahman is not in good books of TTP because of his duplicity.

Other than Shia-Sunni conflict, Deobandis, Barelvis and Ahl-e-Hadith remain within their own orbits. The TTP too has cracked up and several of its leaders have taken refuge in Kunar and Nuristan. Armed forces and higher judiciary are the only two institutions that stands united and committed to the national cause. However, Army-judiciary relationship is not free of strains because of latter’s activism.

War on terror and socio-economic development repel each other. The war must therefore cease to allow the future government to translate its promises of ameliorating the sufferings of the neglected segment of society into actions. Only peaceful environment will attract investments and enable the future reformers to make Pakistan an Islamic welfare state promising peace, harmony, equitable distribution of wealth, equal opportunities for social upward growth and speedy justice to all.

Dialogue with militants will help in listening to each other’s point of views, removing misperceptions and grievances, offering incentive packages and convincing them to spurn violence and come into the mainstream and become useful members of the society by taking up their traditional job of defending the western border.  Dialogue will also help in segregating irreconcilable from reconcilable and eventually identifying and isolating those toeing foreign agenda. If we can offer amnesty to the separatists in Balochistan, why can’t we hold talks with misled tribesmen of FATA?

The writer is a retired Brig, defence analyst and a columnist. Email:asifharoonraja@gmail.com

By Zaheerul Hassan

Sanaullah Ranjay, a Pakistani prisoner dies at Chandigarh hospital at 7:15 on May 9 ,2013.  He slipped in Coma when, was beaten by Vinod Kumar, a court-martialed Indian soldier who is also serving a life term for murder. Ranjay, has also been earlier declared clinically dead by the medical board.  He was from the border village of Sialkot. According to his family Sanaullah by mistake crossed the LOC IN 199. Family and locals of Indian occupied Kashmir protested over ruthless and inhuman act of Indian inmate. Pakistani authorities appealed that Sanaullah be released for further treatment to Pakistan.

In fact, brutal action against Sanaullah is linked with the death of convicted Indian terrorist Sarabjeet Singh who expired when his fellow inmates had stricken him with a brick at Lahore jail. Pakistan’s Foreign Ministry called the Kashmir jail attack an “obvious retaliation” for the killing of the Indian prisoner. Indian officials stated they would investigate the attack and had issued an advisory to strengthen security for Pakistani prisoners in Indian jails. Notably, Pakistan has already ordered and started the investigations in the case of Sarabjeet Singh’s death.

Unfortunately, as usual Indian Foreign Office and media without having any solid evidence have alleged Pakistani Prime Intelligence agency for the death of Indian terrorist. Similarly, some of Pakistani analysts have also responded that RAW is involved in thrashing out prisoner Sanaullah who by mistake crossed the LOC in 1999.
Attacking of prisoners by their inmates no doubt are inhuman acts, which need to be out rightly condemned. But before alleging the state or involvement of intelligence outfits of both the countries in these cases one has to analyze the circumstances under which incidents occurred. Let’s assess one by one both the prisoners.

Sarabjeet Singh was a regular spy of RAW who was launched after giving proper training with a view to spread terrorism in Pakistan. In 1990 he crossed the international border and completed entrusted tasks of carrying out serial bomb blasts in Lahore and Faisalabad in 1990, He was convicted basing on his confessional statement in the courts, he was awarded death sentence in 1991 by the Supreme Court. In these bomb blasts 14 innocent individuals were killed and several injured. He has also confessed of carrying out the bomb blasts as directed by RAW. Now, some words about the occurrence of his beating by his jail intimates. Reportedly, he was habitual of drugs and used to agitate others prisoners on death row, while saying that he would soon be free and you people would be hanged.

Moreover, he was in the habit of using abusive language even against Indian government and launchers that his masters are not taking care of his family. On May 2, 2013 he stirred up fellow intimates Rizwan and Amir while abusing in the same old fashion. Therefore, resultantly Rizwan and Amir got furious and scuffle took placed between them. His fellow Pakistani prisoners suddenly picked a brick and hit Singh’ head. He was timely evacuated to the hospital but died due to cardiac arrest. Thus, entire episode did not prove the involvement of any Pakistani intelligence hand. Since there was no need to eliminate an individual has already been awarded death sentence. Moreover, according to the media reports an Intelligence officer of RAW has also confirmed that Singh has been pushed to Pakistani territory for carrying out multiply terrorists and sabotage activities. Sikh community must be mindful now that Indian intelligence agency is pitching Sikh against Muslims.

Now some words about Pakistani prisoner Sanaullha Ranjay who was imprisoned in 1999 and was sentenced to life imprisonment in 2009 for being a Kashmiri freedom fighter operating in Indian held Kashmir. The charges against him included murder and waging war against India. He crossed LOC by mistake but given life imprisonment without listening him properly by the court. Apart from discussing the legality of punishment of Sannulalha, it is one of the fact that Pakistani prisoner was hit by designed, and deliberately as tasked by RAW. A day before this incident, meeting between RAW and Vinod was carried out in the office of Jail Superintendent. On the promise of anonymity a prisoner from Jail uncovered the truth of Sannuallah beating episode, Indian jail staff deliberately did not took any measures after the episode of killing of terrorist Sarabjeet Singh. He also exposed that Vinod Kumar who was a court-martialed Indian soldier as reward would be soon released. Nevertheless, Indian occupied Kashmir’s Home Secretary Suresh Kumar said Ranjay got into an argument with an Indian prisoner as the two smoked in the jail compound.

The facts narrated above are enough to say where Pakistani Jail staff failed to take care of foreign prisoner Sarabjeet Singh. At the same time it is also proved that Vinod Kumar deliberately hit Pakistani prisoner on the direction of Indian authorities (RAW). Indian agency has also made an attempt to further spoil the already deteriorated Indo-Pak relations.

According to reports, there are 272 Pakistani prisoners in Indian jails. Pakistani authorities should take up case to return or exchange the prisoners. According to Pakistan Foreign Officer many Pakistani prisoners have completed their punishment tenure, but despite reminding time and again India has not yet released them.

At the end, leaving behind a   question for the readers to decide that which intelligence agency is busy in fomenting terrorism or involved in inhuman act of targeting innocent prisoners?

The writer can be approached through zameer36@gmail.com

He expressed the confidence that the provincial government would take extra security measures on elections’ day.

The Prime Minister lauded the political parties for taking part in the elections despite challenges from anti-state and anti-social elements.

The Chief Minister informed the Prime Minister the various measures were being taken by the provincial government for maintenance of law and order, security of candidates and holding of free, fair and transparent elections in the province. 

Left with only a few days of freedom, Sanjay Dutt reportedly feels “betrayed” by his co-stars. The Arnold Schwarzenegger of India has apparently vented his anger that Bollywood has let him down.

The actor, who has been convicted for the illegal purchase of firearms from the culprits behind the 1993 Mumbai blasts, is going through a tough ordeal. He is reportedly busy these days wrapping up work before handing himself in to begin his sentence. It is reported that Munna Bhai has a bone to pick with his co-stars who have allegedly been spreading rumors about him sitting at home, ‘cooling his heels’. However, the reported truth is that the Nayak of Hindi Cinema is working round-the-clock to complete shoots in order to save the filmmakers from financial crisis.

It is also reported that the actor has not even charged the filmmakers for a month’s work and is left with little time to spend with his family. Some big names including veteran star Nana Patekar have criticized him severely.

He has managed to complete shooting for Karan Johar’s “Unglee” directed by Rensil D’Silva but has yet to finish work on Apoorva Lakhia’s “Zanjeer”. Rajkumar Hirani’s “Peekay” and TP Agarwal’s “Policegiri”. It is reported that Dutt is also doing a cameo in his home production, “Hasmukh Fisal Gaya”.

It is hoped that the misunderstanding between Sanju Baba and his co-stars get cleared before he leaves to serve his jail term on May 18^th, 2013

By JD Rucker

As tensions continue to rise in the Middle East and particularly at the Syrian/Israeli border, the Iron Dome is back in the news. Israel has moved more batteries to the northern border in case Syria launches a counter-attack for recent attacks made on weapons intended for use by Hezbollah. How does this amazing technology work?

The concept had been floated around since the 1990s and gained steam in 2004 with the installation of Brigadier General Daniel Gold as the head of the IDF’s research and development bureau. It was initiated by Israel in 2007 and funded by the United States. With the threat of rockets and high-yield artillery shells being fired from multiple directions towards populated areas in Israel, it seemed that counter-strike deterrence was no longer going to be an option. It wasn’t always the governments themselves that Israel had to worry about when it came to attack threats and small groups of armed militants can easily launch rockets without risk of direct retaliation against their unit.

The contract to build Iron Dome was given to Rafael Advanced Defense Systems. They promised that it would be fully operational by 2009. They were first deployed in the spring of 2011 to protect Beersheba and Ashkelon.  While it was in use on a few isolated occasions, it was put to its first real test last November when hundreds of rockets were fired by Hamas from Gaza. As many as 90% of the inbound projectiles that would have hit populated areas were shot down by Iron Dome technology.

How it works

The idea is simple but the actual implementation of the technology is unique. The detection and tracking radar system scans for launches from 4-70km away. Once a launch is detected,the data is sent to the battle management and control unit to track the inbound rockets and calculate the trajectory to determine if it’s going to hit a populated area. If not, the Iron Dome ignores it. This is important for conservation of resources on two fronts. First, the system is best used to focus on the highest risk inbound threats as large salvos mean a higher chance of rockets making it through. Second, it’s a financial decision. The system isn’t cheap and each individual rocket represents a large investment.

If the Iron Dome determines that an incoming rocket or artillery shell is a threat to a populated area, the missile firing unit launches an interceptor. Not much is known about the warhead itself other than that it’s designed to stop nearly any conventional projectile and that it uses a proximity fuse to detonate at the last possible moment. This allows for reduced damage to those below due to debris.

The interceptor is a Tamir missile. It is equipped with electro-optic sensors and steering fins to allow for extremely precise maneuverability. Each unit is equipped with 20 interceptors. They operate in all weather conditions and can operate continuously for extended periods of time without maintenance. They have a life cycle of around 15 years.
Rafael and Technion

One of the most intriguing aspects about the continued development of the Iron Dome is the relationship between Rafael and Technion, the Israel Institute of Technology. It isn’t the first time that a school had such a strong connection with a private company, but it is proving to be the type of relationship that can keep the Iron Dome and other defense technologies moving forward with a concentrated focus towards a goal.

This year alone, they company has hired 150 Technion students, Israelis who are concerned about the defense of their country and who have the skills required to keep the technology at a cutting edge level. Here are two videos pertaining to the technology, but the relationship between the two organizations is clear:

Longer ranges needed

There are skeptics. There are those (as seen in the video below) who doubt that the Iron Dome actually works. Even if it does work, there’s another issue. It must acquire the targets at launch, which means that medium- and long-range missiles are still a major concern.

Israel’s enemies in the Middle East are developing better weapons technologies that can someday make the current Iron Dome worthless. More concerning is the threat from outside of the Middle East. Russia in particular has always maintained a strong relationship with its Middle East allies, including Iran. If they were to engage Israel, their weapons would be able to breach the Iron Dome easily. For it to be truly effective against stronger threats, it must be able to operate against projectiles from any range.

This is the biggest threat facing Israel today. They have the backing, the determination, and the technology to keep them mostly safe from their local enemies, but they’ll need more to survive against global threats. As the technology continues to advance, the ranges are expected to increase. Will they be able to protect themselves in time before an attack from more sophisticated foes?

Contributed by David Yarkony

By Balbir Singh

“Mani Grewal May 5, 2013 at 8:12 pm
There are a few issues here:
1. No doubt, Sarabjit was charged in Pakistan for his actions in Pakistan. Certainly, India can not confess that he (Sarabjit Singh) was India’s agent. So he (Sarabjit Singh) died for India.

2. He falls short of “Shaheed”. Let us look at this way that is he in the same category as Kartar Singh Sarabha, Bhagat Singh and Udham Singh? No. Period (The period is not matching).

3. Badals and gang went to Pakistan but failed to ask the government there for mercy. Now that he has dies, they simply want to count on the vote bank because of sympathy.

4. The package they offered is clearly out of context to any previous Shaheed’s family.

5. The controversy surrounding the family is also boiling. Who is his wife, what did she do? Who are his daughters? There are some lies and scandals involved here.”

Some imminent scholars rightly heard saying that first of all, it is not legally and internationally recognized practice to use someone as a terrorist by  one sovereign country against the another, the way Sarabjit Singh was used and made to suffer till his very painful death rather murder, the end.

Again, Mani Grewal rightly opinioned that the way the package offered by the governments is clearly out of context to any previous Shaheed’s family or similarly must be suffering in foreign Jails.

Moreover, certainly, India can not confess that he was India’s agent. So he died for India. But, the awards offered and praise done to Sarabjit Singh and his family members itself speaks more than confession on the part of India about his planned crime in Pakistan.

Again, Mani Grewal has rightly drawn the inference in the context that Sarabjit Singh would never be equated with Kartar Singh Sarabha, Bhagat Singh and Udham Singh and or to my mind, also with those Sikhs who gave un-precedent fight to the Indian Military and other forces in defending the Sikhs glory so far.

The Sikh Vichar Manch may be wrong to say so that in making Sarabjit Singh sufferer and awarding him including his family members in the manner, India stands badly exposed internationally, though, to the knowledge of the government of India, ISI of Pakistan may be silently and quietly doing the similar crime in India also.

In retaliation, the attack on Pakistan’s prisoner, Sanaullah Ranjay, who is extremely critical now, has also further exposed India. Was it a fight between ISI and RAW, India and Pakistan must answer to international community, so that peace should prevail in the world?

In retaliation, the attack on Pakistan’s prisoner, Sanaullah Ranjay, who is extremely critical now, has also further exposed India. Was it a fight between ISI and RAW, India and Pakistan must answer to international community, so that peace should prevail in the world?

As already said, the role of politicians of India is deplorable in the matter and from this act, India’s claim being a soft State shall always be doubted in eyes of the world.

An observation by

Balbir Singh Sooch-Sikh Vichar Manch