Education Suffers in Pakistan's FATA: Who is Responsible ?

Education in crisis: No respite for Mohmand Agency students
By Mureeb Mohmand, Express Tribune, May 23, 2013

SHABQADAR: Pakistan spends seven times more on military expenditure than on education, according to a 2012 Unesco report. It ranks 113 out of 120 countries in the Education Development Index.

It then comes as no surprise rural areas get the short end of the stick. Basic provisions such as rooms to sit in, clean water to drink and running water in toilets are not a given; students do not expect these luxuries.

An official in the education department in Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa estimates around 15% of the population of the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (Fata) is literate. Possibly, less than 5% of females in the tribal belt are educated.

The situation in Fata is further compounded by militancy – schools in Fata remain under constant threat. According to a news report, over 100 schools have been destroyed by militants in Mohmand Agency.

Mohmand Agency is administratively divided into eight subdivisions.

Three of these subdivisions namely, Khwaizai, Baizai and Abmar have no middle or high school for both male and female students. The bleak outcome of having few or no secondary institutions is summed up by an Annual Status of Education Report (Aser) 2012 finding – ‘For every twenty children in class one, only three are in class ten’ in Fata.

The subdivisions which do have schools suffer from a lack of basic facilities.

Around 60 educational institutes have been destroyed in Safi subdivision during militant insurgencies. Over half of the schools in Safi have been closed since June 2008. In 2011, the education department announced these schools had been reopened; however, it was only on paper.

Requesting anonymity, a high school teacher from Safi told The Express Tribune he had been receiving his salary regularly since the school ‘reopened.’

Schools in Qandhari and Gurbaz (areas in Safi) are not functioning, even if they are open, he shares. Teachers from Qandhari have been reposted to other schools but in Gurbaz, schools remain closed and teaching staff remain absent out of fear – Gurbaz is an area with the highest number of schools destroyed.

For complete article, click here

Relevant:

New America Foundation Survey on Education Trends in FATA - Click Here  

For Data, see FATA Education Department: click Here 

Pakistan's Fata area reports significant increase in school enrollment: Guardian

Zardari signs regulation for establishment of FATA University: Pakistan Today

Projections: Pakistan Election Outcome

Expert: Pakistan Election Outcome Hinges on Voter Turnout, Safety
Asia Society, May 10th, 2013 by Alex Ortolani

This weekend Pakistan is slated to have its first transition of power between civilian governments in its 66-year history, but the lead-up has not been smooth. Violence, a kidnapping, and an accidental fall by one of the frontrunners for prime minister have all added to the already inherent drama of a major election.

Asia Society Senior Advisor Hassan Abbas, who served in the administrations of Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto and President Pervez Musharraf has been following the election closely and offered his insights into this weekend's voting.

What is the major takeaway you’ll be looking for from these elections?

I think there are four major things that we are looking at. First and foremost is voter turnout, which has been threatened by the Taliban and some other extremist groups by using force to harass people. The important indicator of success of democracy will be whether people come out to vote. I think about 45 to 50 percent voter turnout is expected. If there’s higher turnout, the new political parties, especially Imran Khan’s party, will have a good chance.

Second, I think the important thing is whether these elections will bring new leadership for Pakistan. And by that I mean whether the old elite, which is feudal and linked to corruption, incompetence, and poor governance, is voted out of power. If those elements get back into the game then that will be a bad sign.

The third issue to look for is whether people are voting for personalities or agenda. By agenda I mean that some political parties have come out very clearly with new ideas — ideas not new in the sense of history but in their focus and emphasis. For instance, some parties are calling for change in areas such as education and law enforcement. Imran Khan and what is called the Movement for Justice party, the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI), is talking about these issues.

All three of these are linked to the fourth and very important point, which is whether the Pakistan security forces including military and law enforcement will be out on the streets and at the polling booths providing a sense of security so that people will feel that they are secure, that there will be no blasts and no violence. Their success and failure will define the future of democracy in Pakistan in so many ways.

In the 2008 election your prediction on some of the winners was quite accurate. What are your picks for this election?

I think clearly there’s no chance that any single party will get simple majority, which means there will be a coalition government.

Second point is I think it will be a competition between Imran Khan or Nawaz Sharif. One of these two parties — PTI or Pakistan Muslim League (PML-N) — will win 90 to 100 seats and that will be the leading party. It can be either of the two; it depends on voter turnout. If there is higher turnout then PTI or Imran Khan will have 90 to 100 seats, otherwise I think it will be Nawaz Sharif’s party.

Third, I think left of center ideological, which are Pakistan People's Party (PPP), Muttahida Quami Movement (MQM), and the Awami National Party (ANP), will largely defend their base and will get their traditional strongholds. The only exception might be the ANP, which could lose to Imran Khan.

The fourth projection is that the religious political parties will be wiped out. It's possible Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam (JUI) might get some seats in Balochistan and a few in the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province, but generally smaller political parties I think may not be able to win any seats.

Last but not least I think Balochistan National Party will be able to form a government in Balochistan and that will be a good thing, and I think will provide some new hope. Sindh is expected to remain in the control of a coalition of PPP and MQM. The future of Punjab and Khyber Pukhtunkhwa (KPP) will be decided by the PML-N vs PTI battle. In Punjab, however, PML-N is likely to form a government but KPP is wide open (with PTI holding a slight advantage).

Many in and outside of Pakistan have called this a potentially watershed election for the future of the country. Do you think this weekend bring in major changes for the country?

I think this is a major moment because Pakistan has gone through such serious troubles, whether it is economic growth or debt or electricity shortages. If there is no one at this point to set things right then Pakistan’s future will be in serious jeopardy, and there will be very serious challenges for Pakistan, which will be beyond any parties control or it will be out of their hands.

I was reading today that about 40 million voters have accessed their voting list through text messages in Pakistan, and they’re also checking in on Facebook and Twitter. So there’s a lot of vibrancy and enthusiasm, which I think was not there in the last two or three elections. In that sense this is a transformative moment. I hope that this new energy will translate into more voter turnout and a clearer mandate for new political forces, or a combination of new and old, which will push leaders to sit down together and think about how to rescue Pakistan.

Hassan Abbas is the author of a forthcoming Asia Society report looking at the implications of the May 2013 elections for the future of U.S.-Pakistan relations as well as U.S. policy options.

Related Links

Hassan Abbas on CNN International

Hassan Abbas commenting in Los Angeles Times

Pakistan Elections 2013: Trends and Prospects

Herald Exclusive: PML-N PTI are Neck to Neck
However, expert survey indicates that PML-N and PPP are ahead of PTI in the election race
Saba Fatima Mirza and Faiza Shah
May 8, 2013

The May 11 election appears too close to call, with two main contenders enjoying almost the same voter approval ratings and the third one being not very far behind, the results of an exclusive public opinion poll conducted by the Herald magazine show.

A very high 95.1 per cent of the 1285 poll respondents say they are registered to vote and 25.68 per cent of these registered respondents say they intend to vote for Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PMLN), 24.98 per cent of them say their vote will go to Pakistan Tehrik-i-Insaf (PTI) and another 17.74 per cent want to vote for Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP).

In Punjab, where more than half of all National Assembly contests will take place, PMLN seems to be the party of choice, with 38.66 per cent of the respondents indicating support for it, followed by PTI at 30.46 per cent. The outgoing ruling party in Islamabad, PPP, is trailing way behind at 14.33 per cent.

In Sindh, PPP still enjoys the biggest share of support with 35.21 per cent respondents indicating it as their party of preference, followed by Muttahida Qaumi Movement (MQM) with 19.37 per cent support, PTI with 8.45 per cent support and PML-N with 8.1 per cent among the survey respondents.

For complete article, click here


On Eve of Elections, a Dismal Public Mood in Pakistan
Rising Concerns about the Taliban
Pew Research Global Attitudes Project, May 7, 2013

Overview:

As Pakistan prepares for national elections, the country’s public mood is exceedingly grim. Roughly nine-in-ten Pakistanis believe the country is on the wrong track, and about eight-in-ten say the economy is in poor shape.

Meanwhile, concerns about extremist groups have increased markedly. More than nine-in-ten Pakistanis describe terrorism as a very big problem, and about half now say the Taliban is a very serious threat to their country. For the first time since the Pew Research Center began polling on these issues, the Taliban is essentially considered as big a threat to Pakistan as longtime rival India.

While worries about the Taliban are growing, there is almost no desire to see the United States extend its fight against the Taliban in neighboring Afghanistan. Two-in-three Pakistanis say it is a good thing that the U.S. plans to remove most of its troops from Afghanistan by 2014. At the same time, Washington’s use of drones to target extremists in Pakistan is widely unpopular.

For complete survey, click here

Other Election Polls and Surveys - 2013

Generation Next Goes to the Polls: Dawn - April 2013
Views are divided on whether vote should be for the person (48%) or the party - Gallup Pakistan - May 2013
Record 60pc turnout in polls predicted - Nation
Polls suggest record turnout in Pakistan election despite campaign bombings  - RFI

Trends:

Pakistan Elections: What you Need to Know - eNCA
Killings fail to halt Pakistan election - By Asad Hashim, Al Jazeera - May 4, 2012
Liberal parties under siege: With their targeting by terrorists, Pakistan's elections are being held in a climate of fear - The Times of India
Pakistan election: 'Where is Bilawal Bhutto'? - Telegraph
Pakistan's ANP leader on Taliban election threats - BBC
Imran Khan fall sympathies could boost prospects in Pakistan election - Guardian

Picture source

Prospects of Stability and Progress in Afghanistan - In the light of latest disclosures

Departing French Envoy Has Frank Words on Afghanistan
By ALISSA J. RUBIN, New York Times, April 27, 2013

KABUL, Afghanistan — It is always hard to gauge what diplomats really think unless one of their cables ends up on WikiLeaks, but every once in a while, the barriers fall and a bit of truth slips into public view.
      

That is especially true in Afghanistan, where diplomats painstakingly weigh every word against political goals back home.

      

The positive spin from the Americans has been running especially hard the last few weeks, as Congressional committees in Washington focus on spending bills and the Obama administration, trying to secure money for a few more years here, talks up the country’s progress. The same is going on at the European Union, where the tone has been sterner than in the past, but still glosses predictions of Afghanistan’s future with upbeat words like “promise” and “potential.”

      

Despite that, one of those rare truth-telling moments came at a farewell cocktail party last week hosted by the departing French ambassador to Kabul: Bernard Bajolet, who is leaving to head France’s Direction Génerale de la Sécurité Extérieure, its foreign intelligence service.

      

After the white-coated staff passed the third round of hors d’oeuvres, Mr. Bajolet took the lectern and laid out a picture of how France — a country plagued by a slow economy, waning public support for the Afghan endeavor and demands from other foreign conflicts, including Syria and North Africa — looked at Afghanistan.

      

While it is certainly easier for France to be a critic from the sidelines than countries whose troops are still fighting in Afghanistan, the country can claim to have done its part. It lost more troops than all but three other countries before withdrawing its last combat forces in the fall.

      

The room, filled with diplomats, some senior soldiers and a number of Afghan dignitaries, went deadly quiet. When Mr. Bajolet finished, there was restrained applause — and sober expressions. One diplomat raised his eyebrows and nodded slightly; another said, “No holding back there.”

So what did he say?

      

That the Afghan project is on thin ice and that, collectively, the West was responsible for a chunk of what went wrong, though much of the rest the Afghans were responsible for. That the West had done a good job of fighting terrorism, but that most of that was done on Pakistani soil, not on the Afghan side of the border. And that without fundamental changes in how Afghanistan did business, the Afghan government, and by extension the West’s investment in it, would come to little.

His tone was neither shrill nor reproachful. It was matter-of-fact.

      

“I still cannot understand how we, the international community, and the Afghan government have managed to arrive at a situation in which everything is coming together in 2014 — elections, new president, economic transition, military transition and all this — whereas the negotiations for the peace process have not really started,” Mr. Bajolet said in his opening comments.

      

He was echoing a point shared privately by other diplomats, that 2014 was likely to be “a perfect storm” of political and military upheaval coinciding with the formal close of the NATO combat mission in Afghanistan.

      

As for the success of the fight on the ground, which American leaders routinely describe now as being “Afghan-led,” Mr. Bajolet sounded dubious. “We do not have enough distance to make an objective assessment,” he said, “but in any case, I think it crucial that the Afghan highest leadership take more visible and obvious ownership for their army.”

      

His tone — the sober, troubled observations of a diplomat closing a chapter — could hardly have been more different from that taken by the new shift of American officials charged with making it work in Afghanistan: in particular, with that of Gen. Joseph F. Dunford Jr., the new American commanding general here. This week, General Dunford sent out a news release cheering on Afghanistan’s progress, noting some positive-leaning statistics and praising the Afghan Army’s abilities.

      

“Very soon, the A.N.S.F. will be responsible for security nationwide” General Dunford said, referring to the Afghan National Security Forces. “They are steadily gaining in confidence, competence, and commitment.”

      

At his farewell party, Mr. Bajolet wound up his realpolitik with a brisk analysis of what Afghanistan’s government needed to do: cut corruption, which discourages investment, deal with drugs and become fiscally self-reliant. It must increase its revenues instead of letting politicians divert them, he said.

      

Several diplomats in the room could be seen nodding as he said that drugs caused “more casualties than terrorism” in Russia, Europe and the Balkans and that Western governments would be hard-put to make the case for continued spending on Afghanistan if it remains the world’s largest heroin supplier.

 

For completre article, click here

 

Relevant:

Afghan troops hold their ground at high cost - Yahoo News

Maj. Gen. Abrams on 'Homegrown' Rejection of Taliban in Afghanistan - ABC

CIA and MI6 ghost money may fuel Afghan corruption, say diplomats - Guardian

The Future of Arab Spring ?

The Seven Pillars of the Arab Future
The United States cannot make a success of the Arab Spring. Only the region’s nations can. Here are the ways they need to mature.
Michael Wahid Hanna
Democracy: A Journal of Ideas, Issue # 28, Spring 2013

The early days of the Arab uprisings were uncomplicated and inspiring, as they reaffirmed many Westerners’ long-held beliefs regarding universal values, human rights, and democratization. With the fall of long-standing dictators and the spread of unrest and protest, historical parallels were quickly drawn to the transformative events of 1989, which witnessed the fall of the Communist dictatorships of Eastern Europe and the acceleration of events that soon thereafter led to the dissolution of the Soviet Union.

But as violence assumed a more prominent role in Libya, Syria, and elsewhere, the straightforward and attractive image of organic protest against authoritarian rule became muddied. The uprisings and their consequences—the murders in Libya of U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three others, the democratic enfranchisement of illiberal factions, the Mali unrest, the ongoing crises in Egypt—have forced Western liberals to grapple with their fears regarding both regional instability and Islamists and their attempts to insert religion more prominently into governance and the public square.

So what does the future hold? As we watch these riveting, often exhilarating, and sometimes horrifying events, the bottom-line questions in all our minds are simple. Can democracy take root in the Arab world? How long will it take? Ten years, 20…50? We all hope for a great transformation, in which Egypt, Syria, Yemen, and their neighbors embrace democracy and pluralism and cast off autocracy and extremism. But is there reason to be optimistic?

While we cannot make specific predictions, we can say broadly that the ultimate success of the Arab uprisings will depend heavily on the development of seven core areas. They are: economic growth and equality; education policy; security-sector reform; transitional justice; decentralization; the development of regional norms on democratization; and—in many ways, the linchpin for everything—the flourishing of a more pluralistic politics. These are the seven pillars of the Arab Future. They are the yardsticks by which we can measure progress in the region in the coming years.

For Complete article, click here

Boston Bombings: Living Through Terror, in Rawalpindi and Boston

Living Through Terror, in Rawalpindi and Boston
By HAIDER JAVED WARRAICH, New York Times, April 17, 2013

BOSTON

I WAS in the middle of having Chinese food with my wife and friends yesterday afternoon when we heard the dull and deathly reverb. The water in our plastic cups rippled. We looked at one another, and someone made a joke about that famous scene in “Jurassic Park.” We tried to drown the moment in humor. But then a rush of humanity descended upon us in the Prudential Center on Boylston Street, right across from where the second bomb blast had just occurred, near the marathon’s finish line.
      

People gushed across the hallway like fish in white water rapids. It was a blur of bright clothes and shiny sneakers, everyone dressed up for Patriot’s Day weekend on what was moments ago a beautiful spring day. Instantly, images of the shootings in Aurora, Colo., Newtown, Conn., and Tucson came to mind. I felt my thoughts reduced to singular flashes. My life, all of it, was the first. My wife, sitting across me, was the second. I yelled out to her to run, and we did, not knowing what had happened, only that it had to be something terrible.
      

We ran out of the food court and onto the terrace overlooking Boylston Street. We could see people fleeing from the finish line even as, in the distance, other weary marathoners kept running unknowingly toward the devastation. What was left of the food court was a land frozen in an innocent time, forks still stuck in half-eaten pieces of steak, belongings littered unattended. I felt fear beyond words.
      

This was not my first experience with terror, having grown up in Pakistan. But for some reason, I didn’t think back to those experiences. Looking onto to the smoked, chaotic Boylston Street, I forgot about cowering in my childhood bedroom as bombs and gunfire rained over the army headquarters in Rawalpindi, close to our house. My mind did not go back to when I stood on the roof of my dormitory in Karachi as the streets were overrun with burning buses and angry protesters after the assassination of Benazir Bhutto. None of the unfortunate experiences of growing up in the midst of thousands of victims of terror, personally knowing some of them, helped me in that moment. Nothing made it any easier.
      

Perhaps, if I had been thinking more clearly and hadn’t had my wife with me, I might have gone down to try to help the wounded. But at that moment all I could think about was getting us out of there. We lost our friends, then found them again. Our cellphones weren’t working. And then, as we worked our way through the dazed throngs in Back Bay, I realized that not only was I a victim of terror, but I was also a potential suspect.
      

As a 20-something Pakistani male with dark stubble (an ode more to my hectic schedule as a resident in the intensive-care unit than to any aesthetic or ideology), would I not fit the bill? I know I look like Hollywood’s favorite post-cold-war movie villain. I’ve had plenty of experience getting intimately frisked at airports. Was it advisable to go back to pick up my friend’s camera that he had forgotten in his child’s stroller in the mall? I remember feeling grateful that I wasn’t wearing a backpack, which I imagined might look suspicious. My mind wandered to when I would be working in the intensive care unit the next day, possibly taking care of victims of the blast. What would I tell them when they asked where I was from (a question I am often posed)? Wouldn’t it be easier to just tell people I was from India or Bangladesh?
      

As I walked down Commonwealth Avenue, I started receiving calls from family back home. They informed me about what was unfolding on television screens across the world. I was acutely conscious of what I spoke over the phone, feeling that someone was breathing over my shoulder, listening to every word I said. Careful to avoid Urdu, speaking exclusively in English, I relayed that I was safe, and all that I had seen. I continued to naïvely cling to the hope that it was a gas explosion, a subway accident, anything other than what it increasingly seemed to be: an act of brutality targeted at the highest density of both people and cameras.
      

The next step was to hope that the perpetrator was not a lunatic who would become the new face of a billion people. Not a murderer who would further fan the flames of Islamophobia. Not an animal who would obstruct the ability of thousands of students to complete their educations in the United States. Not an extremist who would maim and hurt the very people who were still recovering from the pain of Sept. 11. President Obama and Gov. Deval L. Patrick have shown great restraint in their words and have been careful not to accuse an entire people for what one madman may have done. But others might not be so kind.

Haider Javed Warraich is a resident in internal medicine at the Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center.

The Drone Debate: Dismantling Terrorism Hubs or Creating More Terrorism Recruitment Opportunities

Are Drone Strikes Killing Terrorists or Creating Them?

What the evidence says about one of the biggest questions in the debate over targeted killings.

Hassan Abbas, The Atlantic, March 31, 2013

There's been a lot of chatter recently about "Out of Sight, Out of Mind," a new online infographic which shows a chilling visualization of all estimated deaths in Pakistan caused by U.S. drone strikes, including children and civilians, based on estimates from the Bureau of Investigative Journalism and New America Foundation. Whether you agree with the numbers, or the politics, behind this particular project (put together by the data visualization firm Pitch Interactive), at least it's sparking debate. And that's got to be a good thing -- there's still so much we don't know about this highly controversial issue.

To say that the use of drone strikes is a polarizing topic would be a vast understatement. In U.S. policy circles, it's projected as an effective counter-terrorism tactic, whereas globally, it is often seen as tacit abuse of state sovereignty. And that's before you get to the debate over potential international law and human rights violations.

Take, for example, the use of drone strikes to target al-Qaida, the Taliban and their affiliates in the restive tribal belt of Pakistan bordering Afghanistan. There are a variety of studies available regarding the accuracy, reliability and ultimate effectiveness of this tool of war, and, using the same data, analysts can come to very different conclusions depending on their particular point of view, or -- in some cases -- that of their employers.

For some, the percentage of civilian deaths is the criterion, and for others, denying the terrorists sanctuary is a critical benchmark. The problem is a lack of credible data (and consensus) regarding exactly how many terrorists have been killed by drone strikes and who those terrorists are. Thus, objectivity has become another victim in the process.

For complete article, click here or here (Asia Society)

Policing in Karachi - A Tale of Corruption

In Pakistan underworld, a cop is said to be a king
By By SEBASTIAN ABBOT and ADIL JAWAD,
Associated Press, March 30, 2013

KARACHI, Pakistan (AP) — A corrupt, low-level cop with a healthy dose of street smarts rises to control hundreds of illegal gambling dens in Pakistan's largest city. By doling out millions of dollars in illicit proceeds, he protects his empire and becomes one of the most powerful people in Karachi.

The allegations against Mohammed Waseem Ahmed — or Waseem "Beater" as he is more commonly known — emerged recently from surprise testimony by a top police commander before a crusading anti-crime Supreme Court judge. The story has given a rare and colorful glimpse into the vast underworld in Karachi, a chaotic metropolis of 18 million people on Pakistan's southern coast.

The sprawling city has become notorious for violence, from gangland-style killings and kidnappings to militant bombings and sectarian slayings. Further worrying authorities have been signs that the Pakistani Taliban are using the chaos to gain a greater foothold in the city.

For months, the Supreme Court's Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry has been leading special hearings on Karachi's crime, berating the city's top police officers for failing to act. This past week, he demanded they move in to clean up so-called "no-go" areas — entire neighborhoods where police fear to tread — according to local press reports.

Further fueling the problem is rampant police corruption, undermining efforts to combat the city's violent gangs and extremists. Among the public, the police nationwide are seen as the country's most crooked public sector organization, a high bar given claims of pervasive corruption throughout the government.

........

Hassan Abbas, an expert on the Pakistani police at the New York-based Asia Society, said Ahmed's case provides a stark illustration of the level of corruption in the Karachi police force, which he described as the worst in any of Pakistan's major cities. Criminal cases are currently pending against 400 police officers serving in Karachi, said Abbas.

Civilian officials, who also benefit from corruption, have shown no willingness to reform the system, making the force relatively ineffective in cracking down on criminal gangs and Islamist militants in the city, said Abbas.

"The chaos in Karachi provides criminal gangs with the cover they need to operate," said Abbas. "Corruption provides an incentive to continue that chaos."

For complete article, click here or here (Dawn)

How to Defeat Sectarianism in Pakistan: Atlantic Council Event

Education, Police Reform, and Personal Responsibility Necessary to Stop Sectarian Violence in Pakistan

Hassan Abbas, professor of international security studies at National Defense University; and Knox Thames, director of policy and research at the US Commission on International Religious Freedom visited the South Asia Center on March 13 to discuss ethnic and sectarian violence in Pakistan.

Summary:
The speakers addressed the dire domestic security situation facing Pakistan in light of recent growing targeted killings and ethnic violence, and offered their advice to the country’s leaders and the international community. Expressing concern over an inadequate response by the government, Mr. Thames stated the need for more visible consequences for perpetrators and suggested international engagement with the provinces, beyond the federal level in Pakistan. Dr. Abbas, citing an unprecedented 34 attacks on Sufi shrines, underscored the widespread nature of this problem affecting everyday Pakistanis. He stated the two paths to change are education and police reform, and cautioned the US of favoring sides in sectarian conflict. In his opening remarks, Moderator and Director of the South Asia Center Shuja Nawaz challenged the common critique of the Pakistan government by stating, “if Pakistani society fails to protect its own, it is the failure of everyone, the State, the civil government , the military establishment, the civil society, and each and every Pakistani. Passing the buck will not solve this cancerous problem. Nor will simply citing the litany of loses caused by the mayhem.”

For audio of the event, click here

Afghanistan - Pakistan Debates: An Ideas Whose Time Has Come

Af-Pak Debate: Across the Border
Thursday, 14 March 2013 14:40 Written by TOLOnews.com

In the first show of a series of Afghanistan-Pakistan debates, On Soy-e Marz, or, Across the Border, TOLOnews and Pakistan's Express TV jointly discuss how the two countries can move forward in fight against terrorism, with panelists in Kabul and Islamabad studios.

Former Afghan spy chief Amrullah Saleh and ex-interior minister Hanif Atmar are on the panel in Kabul and ISI's former chief Asad Durani, Musharraf's information minister Sheikh Rashid Ahmed and senator Haji Adeel are on the Islamabad panel.

Dozens of civil society activists and journalists accompany both panels in the two capitals.

To watch the show, click here or here:

Related:
Click: The Role of Regional Nations in Afghanistan's Future