Watandost means "friend of the nation or country". The blog contains news and views that are insightful but are often not part of the headlines. It also covers major debates in Muslim societies across the world including in the West. An earlier focus of the blog was on 'Pakistan and and its neighborhood' (2005 - 2017) the record of which is available in blog archive.
Wednesday, December 31, 2008
Britain, US late to predict Iran's Islamic revolution: Newly Revealed Documents
Britain, US late to predict Iran's Islamic revolution: documents
Katherine Haddon, Yahoo News, December 30, 2008
Britain and the United States clung to the belief that the shah of Iran would remain in power until shortly before the Islamic revolution, newly declassified documents from 1978 revealed Tuesday.
Officials thought Mohammad Reza Pahlavi would continue to rule in some form up to the final weeks of 1978, in spite of violence, protests and the increasing influence of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini.
The shah left Iran in January 1979 and later Khomeini became supreme leader of the Islamic republic, the creation of which was one of the key events in 20th century Middle Eastern history.
"It is not so much that the regime is in danger; more that their car has bogged down in soft ground and it is difficult to see how they are going to pick up speed again," wrote Britain's then ambassador to Tehran Sir Anthony Parsons in May 1978.
A US official said in September that year that it was "more likely than not that the shah could weather the next period. It was not in his nature to throw in the sponge."
The Western powers' views were revealed in files released by the National Archives in London under laws which allow official papers to be made public after 30 years.
Parsons kept London updated on the situation in Iran throughout 1978 in a series of messages.
In one of the longest, on May 10, 1978, he said he did not think there was a serious risk of the shah being overthrown and dismissed the influence of religious leaders.
"The religious leadership... thunder from the mosques about the destruction of traditional Islamic and Iranian values by the blind adoption of Western customs, Western technology and so on," Parsons wrote.
Speaking of the opposition more generally, he added: "I do not believe that this conjuncture poses a threat to the present shah's regime."
A briefing from Britain's Tehran mission to the Foreign Office on August 29 added that "the Islamic church as such has no real interest in seeing the Pahlavi regime overthrown when the complexion of any alternative is so uncertain."
On September 8, Britain's ambassador to the United States Peter Jay sent a message to London indicating the US was not thinking in terms of the shah being deposed, either.
Jay reported then US deputy secretary of state Warren Christopher had "confirmed US concern, though he saw the shah as given to pessimism and was not aware of anything really new."
Eight days later, Parsons sent another note to London which an official annotated with a note of concern about the shah's "passivity and depression". Then British prime minister James Callaghan added: "Yes. But he can come back!"
Amid more violence and the imposition of martial law in major cities, Callaghan later became more uncertain -- on October 24, he wrote on a report from Parsons: "On the basis of this, I wouldn't give much for the shah's chance."
Intensifying unrest saw an attack on the British embassy in Tehran on November 5, 1978 which caused extensive damage.
By November 20, Parsons was voicing "very little cause for optimism."
"The only hope I can see at present is that, for reasons of exhaustion and general concern about a slide into total anarchy, the temper of the country may abate and Khomeini's simple anti-shah message decline in attraction," he added.
In a letter to then US president Jimmy Carter on December 2, Callaghan said it was "impossible" to forecast whether the shah would cling on.
But he predicted that if he did not, it would have the "gravest" implications "for our two countries, with their great stake in Iran, in particular".
"It is only a minor consolation that continued chaos in the country or the emergence of an extreme government dominated by the religious right wing might create almost as many problems for the Soviet Union," Callaghan wrote.
By December 7, Parsons was telling London that it was "increasingly difficult" to see the shah remaining, just a few days before Jay got in touch, quoting Carter as saying he "fully expected" him to retain power.
On December 19, Parsons said it was "as difficult as ever to predict the outcome" and said the "only hope" for continuing the dynasty was for him to become a constitutional monarch and hand over to his son quickly.
Britain finally advised its subjects to leave Iran on December 31 unless they had a compelling reason to remain, and the shah followed soon after, on January 16, 1979.
Pakistani Position on Ajmal Kasab and the Latest Wall Street Journal Report
SIM used by Kasab was issued from Austria, says Kamal Shah
By Tahir Niaz, Daily Times, December 31, 2008
ISLAMABAD: Interior Secretary Kamal Shah on Tuesday revealed that one of the mobile phone Subscriber Identity Modules (SIMs) allegedly recovered from the lone surviving gunman of the Mumbai terrorist attacks, Ajmal Kasab, was issued from Austria.
He told a group of reporters at the National Database and Registration Authority (NADRA) headquarters that NADRA record did not verify Kasab as a Pakistani citizen. He also expressed doubts over the authenticity of the letter reportedly written by Kasab to Pakistani authorities seeking legal assistance, saying the language and contents of the letter did not match those of a ‘real’ Pakistani.
"They (Indians) have simply tried to make up a story and they have even failed in that too," the interior secretary said. He said, "Why did the Indians not share the identity of the others accused in the attacks? They are talking just about Ajmal Kasab who was not even arrested from the crime scene." Shah said according to Indian authorities, the terrorists reached India from Pakistan through a boat on the very day they attacked Mumbai. He asked how a foreigner could manage a terrorist attack of that scale within hours.
Pakistan's Probe Finds Local Links To Attacks On Mumbai -
Wall Street Journal, December 31, 2008
By ZAHID HUSSAIN, MATTHEW ROSENBERG and PETER WONACOTT
ISLAMABAD -- Pakistan's own investigation of terror attacks in Mumbai has begun to show substantive links between the 10 gunmen and an Islamic militant group that its powerful spy agency spent years supporting, say people with knowledge of the probe.
At least one top leader of militant group Lashkar-e-Taiba, or "Army of the Pure," captured in a raid earlier this month in Pakistani-controlled Kashmir, has confessed the group's involvement in the attack as India and the U.S. have alleged, according to a senior Pakistani security official.
For complete article, click here
Also See:
Photographers Recorded Mumbai Rampage in Stark Detail - New York Times
Burney seeks access to Ajmal Kasab - The News
By Tahir Niaz, Daily Times, December 31, 2008
ISLAMABAD: Interior Secretary Kamal Shah on Tuesday revealed that one of the mobile phone Subscriber Identity Modules (SIMs) allegedly recovered from the lone surviving gunman of the Mumbai terrorist attacks, Ajmal Kasab, was issued from Austria.
He told a group of reporters at the National Database and Registration Authority (NADRA) headquarters that NADRA record did not verify Kasab as a Pakistani citizen. He also expressed doubts over the authenticity of the letter reportedly written by Kasab to Pakistani authorities seeking legal assistance, saying the language and contents of the letter did not match those of a ‘real’ Pakistani.
"They (Indians) have simply tried to make up a story and they have even failed in that too," the interior secretary said. He said, "Why did the Indians not share the identity of the others accused in the attacks? They are talking just about Ajmal Kasab who was not even arrested from the crime scene." Shah said according to Indian authorities, the terrorists reached India from Pakistan through a boat on the very day they attacked Mumbai. He asked how a foreigner could manage a terrorist attack of that scale within hours.
Pakistan's Probe Finds Local Links To Attacks On Mumbai -
Wall Street Journal, December 31, 2008
By ZAHID HUSSAIN, MATTHEW ROSENBERG and PETER WONACOTT
ISLAMABAD -- Pakistan's own investigation of terror attacks in Mumbai has begun to show substantive links between the 10 gunmen and an Islamic militant group that its powerful spy agency spent years supporting, say people with knowledge of the probe.
At least one top leader of militant group Lashkar-e-Taiba, or "Army of the Pure," captured in a raid earlier this month in Pakistani-controlled Kashmir, has confessed the group's involvement in the attack as India and the U.S. have alleged, according to a senior Pakistani security official.
For complete article, click here
Also See:
Photographers Recorded Mumbai Rampage in Stark Detail - New York Times
Burney seeks access to Ajmal Kasab - The News
Monday, December 29, 2008
Bangladesh: Awami League Returns to Power
Bangladesh Election Won by Ex-Prime Minister Hasina
By Ed Johnson, Bloomberg, December 30, 2008
Dec. 30 (Bloomberg) -- Former Bangladesh Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina Wajed’s political alliance was swept back to power in national elections, ending two years of military-backed emergency rule.
Hasina’s Awami League won a parliamentary majority with results declared in 267 of 300 seats, S.M. Asadujan, the Election Commission’s public relations officer, said by telephone today from the capital, Dhaka, citing preliminary results.
Hasina urged supporters to “exercise utmost restraint” and wait until final results are announced later today to avoid clashes with the main rival Bangladesh Nationalist Party, the English-language Daily Star newspaper reported, citing party official Abul Kalam Azad.
The new government, which campaigned on a platform of cutting food prices and combating terrorism, faces the challenge of raising living standards in the nation of more than 150 million people, where almost 40 percent of the population lives on less than $1 a day.
About a third of Bangladesh, the world’s seventh most populous nation, floods during the annual monsoon, hampering development. A “smooth” transition between governments is needed for Bangladesh’s $72 billion economy to grow at the forecast rate of 6.5 percent in the year to June 2009, according to the Asian Development Bank.
Islamic Radicalization
A return to a civilian elected government is also essential to stop increasing Islamic radicalization in the Muslim-majority nation, according to the International Crisis Group.
India earlier this month asked the army-backed interim government to stop militants using Bangladeshi territory to stage attacks across the border.
With ballot papers still being counted, the Awami League- led alliance had 258 seats, compared with 32 for an alliance of four parties headed by the BNP, the Star said. Turnout among the 81 million registered voters was 70 percent, the newspaper reported on its Web site.
For complete article, click here
Also See:
Q+A - What does a Hasina win mean for Bangladesh? - Reuters India
Sheikh Hasina set for Bangladesh landslide win - AFP
Sense of joy at Bangladesh polls - BBC
Turnout rate in Bangladesh's ninth parliamentary election highest in history - Xinhua
FACTBOX - Bangladesh: economic challenges, turbulent past - Reuters
Taliban Hit Pakistan Town That Fought Back: NYT
Taliban Hit Pakistan Town That Fought Back
By RICHARD A. OPPEL Jr. and PIR ZUBAIR SHAH, New York Times, December 29, 2008
ISLAMABAD, Pakistan — Four months ago, the people of the Pakistani mountain village of Shalbandi gained national repute after a village posse hunted down and killed six Taliban fighters who had tied up and killed eight local policemen. The posse displayed the Taliban corpses like trophies for other residents to see, and the village was celebrated as a courageous sign that the Taliban could be repelled.
On Sunday morning, the Taliban struck back.
A suicide car bomber set off an explosion at a school in Shalbandi that was serving as a polling place, as voters lined up to elect a representative to the National Assembly. More than 30 people were killed and more than two dozen wounded, according to local political and security officials. Children and several policemen were among the dead.
The attack was the latest demonstration of the Taliban’s bloody encroachment eastward and deeper into Pakistan from the lawless tribal areas on the western border. Shalbandi is less than 100 miles northwest of Islamabad, the capital, and lies just south of the lush Swat Valley, a onetime ski resort known as the “Switzerland of Pakistan” that has been largely taken over by the Taliban despite large-scale army operations.
In the frenzied aftermath of the car bombing, survivors and witnesses offered conflicting accounts of the attack, said Mian Iftikhar Hussain, information minister for the North-West Frontier Province, where Shalbandi is located.
In one version, he said, the bomber sped his car toward the school but plowed into adjacent shops. The explosion was so large that it destroyed part of the school and killed many people waiting to vote. In the other version, he said, the killer parked near the school and told people he was having car trouble. As people gathered, he detonated the bomb inside.
For complete article, click here
By RICHARD A. OPPEL Jr. and PIR ZUBAIR SHAH, New York Times, December 29, 2008
ISLAMABAD, Pakistan — Four months ago, the people of the Pakistani mountain village of Shalbandi gained national repute after a village posse hunted down and killed six Taliban fighters who had tied up and killed eight local policemen. The posse displayed the Taliban corpses like trophies for other residents to see, and the village was celebrated as a courageous sign that the Taliban could be repelled.
On Sunday morning, the Taliban struck back.
A suicide car bomber set off an explosion at a school in Shalbandi that was serving as a polling place, as voters lined up to elect a representative to the National Assembly. More than 30 people were killed and more than two dozen wounded, according to local political and security officials. Children and several policemen were among the dead.
The attack was the latest demonstration of the Taliban’s bloody encroachment eastward and deeper into Pakistan from the lawless tribal areas on the western border. Shalbandi is less than 100 miles northwest of Islamabad, the capital, and lies just south of the lush Swat Valley, a onetime ski resort known as the “Switzerland of Pakistan” that has been largely taken over by the Taliban despite large-scale army operations.
In the frenzied aftermath of the car bombing, survivors and witnesses offered conflicting accounts of the attack, said Mian Iftikhar Hussain, information minister for the North-West Frontier Province, where Shalbandi is located.
In one version, he said, the bomber sped his car toward the school but plowed into adjacent shops. The explosion was so large that it destroyed part of the school and killed many people waiting to vote. In the other version, he said, the killer parked near the school and told people he was having car trouble. As people gathered, he detonated the bomb inside.
For complete article, click here
Does Obama understand his biggest foreign-policy challenge?
Does Obama understand his biggest foreign-policy challenge?
The president-elect wants to work with the Pakistani government to "stamp out" terror. It's not nearly that simple.
By Juan Cole, Salon.com; Dec. 12, 2008
A consensus is emerging among intelligence analysts and pundits that Pakistan may be President-elect Barack Obama's greatest policy challenge. A base for terrorist groups, the country has a fragile new civilian government and a long history of military coups. The dramatic attack on Mumbai by members of the Pakistan-based Lashkar-e Tayiba, the continued Taliban insurgency on the Pakistan-Afghanistan border, the frailty of the new civilian government, and the country's status as a nuclear-armed state have all put Islamabad on the incoming administration's front burner.
But does Obama understand what he's getting into? In his "Meet the Press" interview with Tom Brokaw on Sunday, Obama said, "We need a strategic partnership with all the parties in the region -- Pakistan and India and the Afghan government -- to stamp out the kind of militant, violent, terrorist extremists that have set up base camps and that are operating in ways that threaten the security of everybody in the international community." Obama's scenario assumes that the Pakistani government is a single, undifferentiated thing, and that all parts of the government would be willing to "stamp out" terrorists. Both of those assumptions are incorrect.
Pakistan's government has a profound internal division between the military and the civilian, which have alternated in power since the country was born from the partition of British India in 1947. It is this military insubordination that creates most of the country's serious political problems. Washington worries too much about other things in Pakistan and too little about the sheer power of the military. United States analysts often express fears about an internal fundamentalist challenge to the chiefs of staff. The main issue, however, is not that Pakistan's military is too weak, but that it is too strong. And that is complicated by the fact that elements within the military are at odds, not just with the civilian government, but also with each other.
For complete article, click here
The president-elect wants to work with the Pakistani government to "stamp out" terror. It's not nearly that simple.
By Juan Cole, Salon.com; Dec. 12, 2008
A consensus is emerging among intelligence analysts and pundits that Pakistan may be President-elect Barack Obama's greatest policy challenge. A base for terrorist groups, the country has a fragile new civilian government and a long history of military coups. The dramatic attack on Mumbai by members of the Pakistan-based Lashkar-e Tayiba, the continued Taliban insurgency on the Pakistan-Afghanistan border, the frailty of the new civilian government, and the country's status as a nuclear-armed state have all put Islamabad on the incoming administration's front burner.
But does Obama understand what he's getting into? In his "Meet the Press" interview with Tom Brokaw on Sunday, Obama said, "We need a strategic partnership with all the parties in the region -- Pakistan and India and the Afghan government -- to stamp out the kind of militant, violent, terrorist extremists that have set up base camps and that are operating in ways that threaten the security of everybody in the international community." Obama's scenario assumes that the Pakistani government is a single, undifferentiated thing, and that all parts of the government would be willing to "stamp out" terrorists. Both of those assumptions are incorrect.
Pakistan's government has a profound internal division between the military and the civilian, which have alternated in power since the country was born from the partition of British India in 1947. It is this military insubordination that creates most of the country's serious political problems. Washington worries too much about other things in Pakistan and too little about the sheer power of the military. United States analysts often express fears about an internal fundamentalist challenge to the chiefs of staff. The main issue, however, is not that Pakistan's military is too weak, but that it is too strong. And that is complicated by the fact that elements within the military are at odds, not just with the civilian government, but also with each other.
For complete article, click here
"U.S. draws India into the Afghan war": The Hindu
U.S. draws India into the Afghan war
M.K. Bhadrakumar, The Hindu, December 25, 2008
The time has come to carefully assess the U.S. motivations in widening the gyre of the Afghan war, which commenced seven years ago.
The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff of the United States armed forces, Admiral Mike Mullen, has lent his voice to the incipient idea of a “regional” approach to the Afghanistan problem. He said the over-arching strategy for success in Afghanistan must be regional in focus and include not just Afghanistan but also Pakistan and India. The three South Asian countries, he stressed, must figure a way to reduce tensions among them, which involves addressing 8220;long-standing problems that increase instability in the region.”
Adm. Mullen then referred to Kashmir as one such problem to underline that if India-Pakistan tensions decreased, it “allowed the Pakistani leadership to focus on the west [border with Afghanistan].” He regretted that the terror attack in Mumbai raised India-Pakistan tensions, and “in the near term, that might force the Pakistani leadership to lose interest in the west,” apart from the likelihood of a nuclear flashpoint. Interestingly, he gave credit to the Pakistani top brass for its recent cooperation in the tribal areas which, he said, has had a “positive impact” on the anti-Taliban operations.
For complete article, click here
Also See:
No Easy Indian Response to Pakistan’s Troop Shift - New York Times
M.K. Bhadrakumar, The Hindu, December 25, 2008
The time has come to carefully assess the U.S. motivations in widening the gyre of the Afghan war, which commenced seven years ago.
The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff of the United States armed forces, Admiral Mike Mullen, has lent his voice to the incipient idea of a “regional” approach to the Afghanistan problem. He said the over-arching strategy for success in Afghanistan must be regional in focus and include not just Afghanistan but also Pakistan and India. The three South Asian countries, he stressed, must figure a way to reduce tensions among them, which involves addressing 8220;long-standing problems that increase instability in the region.”
Adm. Mullen then referred to Kashmir as one such problem to underline that if India-Pakistan tensions decreased, it “allowed the Pakistani leadership to focus on the west [border with Afghanistan].” He regretted that the terror attack in Mumbai raised India-Pakistan tensions, and “in the near term, that might force the Pakistani leadership to lose interest in the west,” apart from the likelihood of a nuclear flashpoint. Interestingly, he gave credit to the Pakistani top brass for its recent cooperation in the tribal areas which, he said, has had a “positive impact” on the anti-Taliban operations.
For complete article, click here
Also See:
No Easy Indian Response to Pakistan’s Troop Shift - New York Times
If Gaza Falls?
If Gaza falls . . .
Sara Roy, London Review of Books, January 1, 2009
Israel’s siege of Gaza began on 5 November, the day after an Israeli attack inside the strip, no doubt designed finally to undermine the truce between Israel and Hamas established last June. Although both sides had violated the agreement before, this incursion was on a different scale. Hamas responded by firing rockets into Israel and the violence has not abated since then. Israel’s siege has two fundamental goals. One is to ensure that the Palestinians there are seen merely as a humanitarian problem, beggars who have no political identity and therefore can have no political claims. The second is to foist Gaza onto Egypt. That is why the Israelis tolerate the hundreds of tunnels between Gaza and Egypt around which an informal but increasingly regulated commercial sector has begun to form. The overwhelming majority of Gazans are impoverished and officially 49.1 per cent are unemployed. In fact the prospect of steady employment is rapidly disappearing for the majority of the population.
On 5 November the Israeli government sealed all the ways into and out of Gaza. Food, medicine, fuel, parts for water and sanitation systems, fertiliser, plastic sheeting, phones, paper, glue, shoes and even teacups are no longer getting through in sufficient quantities or at all. According to Oxfam only 137 trucks of food were allowed into Gaza in November. This means that an average of 4.6 trucks per day entered the strip compared to an average of 123 in October this year and 564 in December 2005. The two main food providers in Gaza are the UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) and the World Food Programme (WFP). UNRWA alone feeds approximately 750,000 people in Gaza, and requires 15 trucks of food daily to do so. Between 5 November and 30 November, only 23 trucks arrived, around 6 per cent of the total needed; during the week of 30 November it received 12 trucks, or 11 per cent of what was required. There were three days in November when UNRWA ran out of food, with the result that on each of these days 20,000 people were unable to receive their scheduled supply. According to John Ging, the director of UNRWA in Gaza, most of the people who get food aid are entirely dependent on it. On 18 December UNRWA suspended all food distribution for both emergency and regular programmes because of the blockade.
The WFP has had similar problems, sending only 35 trucks out of the 190 it had scheduled to cover Gazans’ needs until the start of February (six more were allowed in between 30 November and 6 December). Not only that: the WFP has to pay to store food that isn’t being sent to Gaza. This cost $215,000 in November alone. If the siege continues, the WFP will have to pay an extra $150,000 for storage in December, money that will be used not to support Palestinians but to benefit Israeli business.
The majority of commercial bakeries in Gaza – 30 out of 47 – have had to close because they have run out of cooking gas. People are using any fuel they can find to cook with. As the UN Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) has made clear, cooking-gas canisters are necessary for generating the warmth to incubate broiler chicks. Shortages of gas and animal feed have forced commercial producers to smother hundreds of thousands of chicks. By April, according to the FAO, there will be no poultry there at all: 70 per cent of Gazans rely on chicken as a major source of protein.
Banks, suffering from Israeli restrictions on the transfer of banknotes into the territory were forced to close on 4 December. A sign on the door of one read: ‘Due to the decision of the Palestinian Finance Authority, the bank will be closed today Thursday, 4.12.2008, because of the unavailability of cash money, and the bank will be reopened once the cash money is available.’
The World Bank has warned that Gaza’s banking system could collapse if these restrictions continue. All cash for work programmes has been stopped and on 19 November UNRWA suspended its cash assistance programme to the most needy. It also ceased production of textbooks because there is no paper, ink or glue in Gaza. This will affect 200,000 students returning to school in the new year. On 11 December, the Israeli defence minister, Ehud Barak, sent $25 million following an appeal from the Palestinian prime minister, Salaam Fayad, the first infusion of its kind since October. It won’t even cover a month’s salary for Gaza’s 77,000 civil servants.
On 13 November production at Gaza’s only power station was suspended and the turbines shut down because it had run out of industrial diesel. This in turn caused the two turbine batteries to run down, and they failed to start up again when fuel was received some ten days later. About a hundred spare parts ordered for the turbines have been sitting in the port of Ashdod in Israel for the last eight months, waiting for the Israeli authorities to let them through customs. Now Israel has started to auction these parts because they have been in customs for more than 45 days. The proceeds are being held in Israeli accounts.
During the week of 30 November, 394,000 litres of industrial diesel were allowed in for the power plant: approximately 18 per cent of the weekly minimum that Israel is legally obliged to allow in. It was enough for one turbine to run for two days before the plant was shut down again. The Gaza Electricity Distribution Company said that most of the Gaza Strip will be without electricity for between four and 12 hours a day. At any given time during these outages, over 65,000 people have no electricity.
No other diesel fuel (for standby generators and transport) was delivered during that week, no petrol (which has been kept out since early November) or cooking gas. Gaza’s hospitals are apparently relying on diesel and gas smuggled from Egypt via the tunnels; these supplies are said to be administered and taxed by Hamas. Even so, two of Gaza’s hospitals have been out of cooking gas since the week of 23 November.
Adding to the problems caused by the siege are those created by the political divisions between the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank and the Hamas Authority in Gaza. For example, Gaza’s Coastal Municipalities Water Utility (CMWU), which is not controlled by Hamas, is supposed to receive funds from the World Bank via the Palestinian Water Authority (PWA) in Ramallah to pay for fuel to run the pumps for Gaza’s sewage system. Since June, the PWA has refused to hand over those funds, perhaps because it feels that a functioning sewage system would benefit Hamas. I don’t know whether the World Bank has attempted to intervene, but meanwhile UNRWA is providing the fuel, although they have no budget for it. The CMWU has also asked Israel’s permission to import 200 tons of chlorine, but by the end of November it had received only 18 tons – enough for one week of chlorinated water. By mid-December Gaza City and the north of Gaza had access to water only six hours every three days.
According to the World Health Organisation, the political divisions between Gaza and the West Bank are also having a serious impact on drug stocks in Gaza. The West Bank Ministry of Health (MOH) is responsible for procuring and delivering most of the pharmaceuticals and medical disposables used in Gaza. But stocks are at dangerously low levels. Throughout November the MOH West Bank was turning shipments away because it had no warehouse space, yet it wasn’t sending supplies on to Gaza in adequate quantities. During the week of 30 November, one truck carrying drugs and medical supplies from the MOH in Ramallah entered Gaza, the first delivery since early September.
The breakdown of an entire society is happening in front of us, but there is little international response beyond UN warnings which are ignored. The European Union announced recently that it wanted to strengthen its relationship with Israel while the Israeli leadership openly calls for a large-scale invasion of the Gaza Strip and continues its economic stranglehold over the territory with, it appears, the not-so-tacit support of the Palestinian Authority in Ramallah – which has been co-operating with Israel on a number of measures. On 19 December Hamas officially ended its truce with Israel, which Israel said it wanted to renew, because of Israel’s failure to ease the blockade.
How can keeping food and medicine from the people of Gaza protect the people of Israel? How can the impoverishment and suffering of Gaza’s children – more than 50 per cent of the population – benefit anyone? International law as well as human decency demands their protection. If Gaza falls, the West Bank will be next.
Sara Roy teaches at Harvard’s Center for Middle Eastern Studies and is the author of Failing Peace: Gaza and the Palestinian-Israeli Conflict.
Also See:
Protests Over Gaza Strikes Erupt In Muslim World - NPR
Sara Roy, London Review of Books, January 1, 2009
Israel’s siege of Gaza began on 5 November, the day after an Israeli attack inside the strip, no doubt designed finally to undermine the truce between Israel and Hamas established last June. Although both sides had violated the agreement before, this incursion was on a different scale. Hamas responded by firing rockets into Israel and the violence has not abated since then. Israel’s siege has two fundamental goals. One is to ensure that the Palestinians there are seen merely as a humanitarian problem, beggars who have no political identity and therefore can have no political claims. The second is to foist Gaza onto Egypt. That is why the Israelis tolerate the hundreds of tunnels between Gaza and Egypt around which an informal but increasingly regulated commercial sector has begun to form. The overwhelming majority of Gazans are impoverished and officially 49.1 per cent are unemployed. In fact the prospect of steady employment is rapidly disappearing for the majority of the population.
On 5 November the Israeli government sealed all the ways into and out of Gaza. Food, medicine, fuel, parts for water and sanitation systems, fertiliser, plastic sheeting, phones, paper, glue, shoes and even teacups are no longer getting through in sufficient quantities or at all. According to Oxfam only 137 trucks of food were allowed into Gaza in November. This means that an average of 4.6 trucks per day entered the strip compared to an average of 123 in October this year and 564 in December 2005. The two main food providers in Gaza are the UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) and the World Food Programme (WFP). UNRWA alone feeds approximately 750,000 people in Gaza, and requires 15 trucks of food daily to do so. Between 5 November and 30 November, only 23 trucks arrived, around 6 per cent of the total needed; during the week of 30 November it received 12 trucks, or 11 per cent of what was required. There were three days in November when UNRWA ran out of food, with the result that on each of these days 20,000 people were unable to receive their scheduled supply. According to John Ging, the director of UNRWA in Gaza, most of the people who get food aid are entirely dependent on it. On 18 December UNRWA suspended all food distribution for both emergency and regular programmes because of the blockade.
The WFP has had similar problems, sending only 35 trucks out of the 190 it had scheduled to cover Gazans’ needs until the start of February (six more were allowed in between 30 November and 6 December). Not only that: the WFP has to pay to store food that isn’t being sent to Gaza. This cost $215,000 in November alone. If the siege continues, the WFP will have to pay an extra $150,000 for storage in December, money that will be used not to support Palestinians but to benefit Israeli business.
The majority of commercial bakeries in Gaza – 30 out of 47 – have had to close because they have run out of cooking gas. People are using any fuel they can find to cook with. As the UN Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) has made clear, cooking-gas canisters are necessary for generating the warmth to incubate broiler chicks. Shortages of gas and animal feed have forced commercial producers to smother hundreds of thousands of chicks. By April, according to the FAO, there will be no poultry there at all: 70 per cent of Gazans rely on chicken as a major source of protein.
Banks, suffering from Israeli restrictions on the transfer of banknotes into the territory were forced to close on 4 December. A sign on the door of one read: ‘Due to the decision of the Palestinian Finance Authority, the bank will be closed today Thursday, 4.12.2008, because of the unavailability of cash money, and the bank will be reopened once the cash money is available.’
The World Bank has warned that Gaza’s banking system could collapse if these restrictions continue. All cash for work programmes has been stopped and on 19 November UNRWA suspended its cash assistance programme to the most needy. It also ceased production of textbooks because there is no paper, ink or glue in Gaza. This will affect 200,000 students returning to school in the new year. On 11 December, the Israeli defence minister, Ehud Barak, sent $25 million following an appeal from the Palestinian prime minister, Salaam Fayad, the first infusion of its kind since October. It won’t even cover a month’s salary for Gaza’s 77,000 civil servants.
On 13 November production at Gaza’s only power station was suspended and the turbines shut down because it had run out of industrial diesel. This in turn caused the two turbine batteries to run down, and they failed to start up again when fuel was received some ten days later. About a hundred spare parts ordered for the turbines have been sitting in the port of Ashdod in Israel for the last eight months, waiting for the Israeli authorities to let them through customs. Now Israel has started to auction these parts because they have been in customs for more than 45 days. The proceeds are being held in Israeli accounts.
During the week of 30 November, 394,000 litres of industrial diesel were allowed in for the power plant: approximately 18 per cent of the weekly minimum that Israel is legally obliged to allow in. It was enough for one turbine to run for two days before the plant was shut down again. The Gaza Electricity Distribution Company said that most of the Gaza Strip will be without electricity for between four and 12 hours a day. At any given time during these outages, over 65,000 people have no electricity.
No other diesel fuel (for standby generators and transport) was delivered during that week, no petrol (which has been kept out since early November) or cooking gas. Gaza’s hospitals are apparently relying on diesel and gas smuggled from Egypt via the tunnels; these supplies are said to be administered and taxed by Hamas. Even so, two of Gaza’s hospitals have been out of cooking gas since the week of 23 November.
Adding to the problems caused by the siege are those created by the political divisions between the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank and the Hamas Authority in Gaza. For example, Gaza’s Coastal Municipalities Water Utility (CMWU), which is not controlled by Hamas, is supposed to receive funds from the World Bank via the Palestinian Water Authority (PWA) in Ramallah to pay for fuel to run the pumps for Gaza’s sewage system. Since June, the PWA has refused to hand over those funds, perhaps because it feels that a functioning sewage system would benefit Hamas. I don’t know whether the World Bank has attempted to intervene, but meanwhile UNRWA is providing the fuel, although they have no budget for it. The CMWU has also asked Israel’s permission to import 200 tons of chlorine, but by the end of November it had received only 18 tons – enough for one week of chlorinated water. By mid-December Gaza City and the north of Gaza had access to water only six hours every three days.
According to the World Health Organisation, the political divisions between Gaza and the West Bank are also having a serious impact on drug stocks in Gaza. The West Bank Ministry of Health (MOH) is responsible for procuring and delivering most of the pharmaceuticals and medical disposables used in Gaza. But stocks are at dangerously low levels. Throughout November the MOH West Bank was turning shipments away because it had no warehouse space, yet it wasn’t sending supplies on to Gaza in adequate quantities. During the week of 30 November, one truck carrying drugs and medical supplies from the MOH in Ramallah entered Gaza, the first delivery since early September.
The breakdown of an entire society is happening in front of us, but there is little international response beyond UN warnings which are ignored. The European Union announced recently that it wanted to strengthen its relationship with Israel while the Israeli leadership openly calls for a large-scale invasion of the Gaza Strip and continues its economic stranglehold over the territory with, it appears, the not-so-tacit support of the Palestinian Authority in Ramallah – which has been co-operating with Israel on a number of measures. On 19 December Hamas officially ended its truce with Israel, which Israel said it wanted to renew, because of Israel’s failure to ease the blockade.
How can keeping food and medicine from the people of Gaza protect the people of Israel? How can the impoverishment and suffering of Gaza’s children – more than 50 per cent of the population – benefit anyone? International law as well as human decency demands their protection. If Gaza falls, the West Bank will be next.
Sara Roy teaches at Harvard’s Center for Middle Eastern Studies and is the author of Failing Peace: Gaza and the Palestinian-Israeli Conflict.
Also See:
Protests Over Gaza Strikes Erupt In Muslim World - NPR
Sunday, December 28, 2008
Remembering Benazir Bhutto (1953-2007)
I will expose Benazir’s killers: Zardari
* President says he knows who killed Benazir Bhutto
* Democracy, dialogue, politics are solution to Pakistan’s problems
* Asks New Delhi not to push Islamabad for action
Daily Times, September 28, 2008
NAUDERO: President Asif Ali Zardari said on Saturday he knew the killers of Benazir Bhutto and that he would expose them.
He was addressing Pakistan People’s Party leaders who had gathered at Benazir’s family home in Naudero to honour her on her first death anniversary.
“I will expose the killers of Benazir Bhutto. I know the killers, I will expose the killers to save the country,” Zardari said. He appreciated a statement by United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-moon that the world body would soon initiate an independent inquiry into Benazir’s assassination.
“We will have to wait for UN even if it takes a long time,” he said, adding the ‘enemies of Pakistan’ were being impatient and provoking people. “They are the same people who had raised the slogan Pakistan Na Khapay (Pakistan not needed) in Garhi Khuda Bukhsh.”
He said the Pakistani people and the parliament knew Benazir had been assassinated in an attempt to disintegrate Pakistan, but vowed his government would keep it united.
For Complete article, ckick here
Also See:
Why Benazir Bhutto still lives - Sherry Rehman
Tens of thousands gather for Bhutto commemorations - AFP
A Year After Bhutto: Tears and Troop Movements - TIME
Pakistani neocons and UN sanctions
POSTCARD USA: Pakistani neocons and UN sanctions — Khalid Hasan
Daily Times, September 28, 2008
Like bullfrogs out after heavy summer rains, Pakistani cyberspace and the realm of the printed word are full of the croaking of neocons who have convinced the already ignorant that the Security Council sanctions against Jama’at-ud Dawa and certain individuals only came because Pakistani officials were either sleeping at the post or had conspired with the 15-member Security Council to let the axe fall.
These people are not interested in facts. They only have opinions.
One cybercon who answers to the name Ahmed Quraishi writes on December 24, “We have a government with shady characters in key places, strongly backed by the Bush administration, acting and behaving as if they were representing a US occupation government in Pakistan.” Under “recommendation”, he proposes, “We need to start a witch-hunt in Pakistan to cleanse our academia and public life of such self-haters and defeatists who poison the minds of young Pakistanis about their homeland. Such academics and human rights activists should not be allowed to hide behind the freedom of expression.”
The two “traitors” he refers to are Pervaiz Hoodbhoy and Asma Jehangir.
Then there is the Ann Coulter of Pakistan, Shireen Mazari, who writes, “Thanks to the pusillanimity shown by our leaders ever since the Mumbai acts of terrorism, Pakistan is being squeezed by so-called friends and foe alike.” She goes on to predict, “However, let there be no doubt that India is going to carry out surgical strikes, probably beginning with AJK. After all, the extraordinary and unscheduled Envoys Conference can only have been called to contain the diplomatic fallout of such strikes.”
For complete article, click here
Daily Times, September 28, 2008
Like bullfrogs out after heavy summer rains, Pakistani cyberspace and the realm of the printed word are full of the croaking of neocons who have convinced the already ignorant that the Security Council sanctions against Jama’at-ud Dawa and certain individuals only came because Pakistani officials were either sleeping at the post or had conspired with the 15-member Security Council to let the axe fall.
These people are not interested in facts. They only have opinions.
One cybercon who answers to the name Ahmed Quraishi writes on December 24, “We have a government with shady characters in key places, strongly backed by the Bush administration, acting and behaving as if they were representing a US occupation government in Pakistan.” Under “recommendation”, he proposes, “We need to start a witch-hunt in Pakistan to cleanse our academia and public life of such self-haters and defeatists who poison the minds of young Pakistanis about their homeland. Such academics and human rights activists should not be allowed to hide behind the freedom of expression.”
The two “traitors” he refers to are Pervaiz Hoodbhoy and Asma Jehangir.
Then there is the Ann Coulter of Pakistan, Shireen Mazari, who writes, “Thanks to the pusillanimity shown by our leaders ever since the Mumbai acts of terrorism, Pakistan is being squeezed by so-called friends and foe alike.” She goes on to predict, “However, let there be no doubt that India is going to carry out surgical strikes, probably beginning with AJK. After all, the extraordinary and unscheduled Envoys Conference can only have been called to contain the diplomatic fallout of such strikes.”
For complete article, click here
Saturday, December 27, 2008
One Year After Benazir's Assassination
Tens of thousands gather for Bhutto commemorations
AFP, December 27, 2008
LARKANA, Pakistan (AFP) — Tens of thousands of Pakistanis have massed near the tomb of slain former premier Benazir Bhutto on the eve of ceremonies marking the first anniversary of her killing, according to officials.
More than 35,000 people had already arrived in rural southern Pakistan ahead of Saturday's ceremonies at the Bhutto family mausoleum in Garhi Khuda Bakhsh, Pakistan People's Party (PPP) spokesman Ijaz Durrani told AFP.
People were travelling by train, bus, car, bicycle and even on foot to reach the site, he said. Hundreds of thousands were expected by Saturday.
Bhutto, 54, was assassinated on December 27, 2007 in a gun and suicide attack at an election rally in the garrison city of Rawalpindi, just two months after returning to Pakistan from exile.
Her killing threw the world's only nuclear-armed Islamic nation into chaos, sparking violence and leading to months of political turmoil that ended in September when her widower Asif Ali Zardari claimed the presidency.
For complete article click here
ALSO SEE:
A song half-sung - Tariq Islam, Dawn
Benazir killed before exposing rigging cell - By Amir Mir, The News
One year on, Benazir’s murder is still a mystery, but not so much - The News
Bhutto's Pakistan, A Year On - Shuja Nawaz, Post global, The Washington Post
Too many questions still unanswered: Benazir’s assassination - Dawn
Friday, December 26, 2008
Pakistan moves troops toward Indian border
Pakistan moves troops toward Indian border
By SEBASTIAN ABBOT – AFP, December 26, 2008
ISLAMABAD, Pakistan (AP) — Pakistan began moving thousands of troops away from the Afghan border toward India on Friday amid tensions following the Mumbai attacks, intelligence officials said.
The move represents a sharp escalation in the standoff between the nuclear-armed neighbors and will hurt Pakistan's U.S.-backed campaign against al-Qaida and Taliban taking place near Afghanistan's border.
Two intelligence officials said the army's 14th Division was being redeployed to Kasur and Sialkot, close to the Indian border. They said some 20,000 troops were on the move. Earlier Friday, a security official said that all troop leave had been canceled.
The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the situation.
Indian officials could not be immediately reached for comment.
Prime Minister Manmohan Singh met Friday with the chiefs of the army, navy and air force to discuss "the prevailing security situation," according to an official statement.
An Associated Press reporter in Dera Ismail Khan, a district that borders the Afghan-frontier province of South Waziristan, said he saw around 40 trucks loaded with soldiers heading away from the Afghan border.
India is blaming Pakistan-based militants for last month's attacks on Mumbai. Islamabad has said it will cooperate in any probe, but says it has seen no evidence backing up India's claims.
Pakistan and India have fought three wars since their independence from Britain in 1947. They came close to a fourth in 2001 after suspected Pakistani militants attacked India's parliament. Both countries rushed troops to the disputed Kashmir region but tensions cooled after intensive international diplomacy.
The neighbors have said they want to avoid military conflict this time around, but Pakistan has promised to respond aggressively if India uses force, an option the Indian government has not ruled out.
Pakistan has deployed more than 100,000 soldiers in Waziristan and other northwestern regions to fight Islamic militants blamed for surging violence against Western troops in Afghanistan.
The United States has givens millions of dollars in aid to Pakistan's army to fight the militants in the region, which is believed to be a hiding place for Osama bin Laden and other top al-Qaida leaders.
A senior security official refused to comment directly on Friday's troop movements, but said, "Necessary defensive measures have been taken, they are in place and Pakistan's armed forces are prepared to tackle any eventuality."
He asked his name not be used, citing the sensitivity of the situation.
Also See:
Pakistan cancels army leave amid tensions - China View
Troop changes after India tension - BBC
By SEBASTIAN ABBOT – AFP, December 26, 2008
ISLAMABAD, Pakistan (AP) — Pakistan began moving thousands of troops away from the Afghan border toward India on Friday amid tensions following the Mumbai attacks, intelligence officials said.
The move represents a sharp escalation in the standoff between the nuclear-armed neighbors and will hurt Pakistan's U.S.-backed campaign against al-Qaida and Taliban taking place near Afghanistan's border.
Two intelligence officials said the army's 14th Division was being redeployed to Kasur and Sialkot, close to the Indian border. They said some 20,000 troops were on the move. Earlier Friday, a security official said that all troop leave had been canceled.
The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the situation.
Indian officials could not be immediately reached for comment.
Prime Minister Manmohan Singh met Friday with the chiefs of the army, navy and air force to discuss "the prevailing security situation," according to an official statement.
An Associated Press reporter in Dera Ismail Khan, a district that borders the Afghan-frontier province of South Waziristan, said he saw around 40 trucks loaded with soldiers heading away from the Afghan border.
India is blaming Pakistan-based militants for last month's attacks on Mumbai. Islamabad has said it will cooperate in any probe, but says it has seen no evidence backing up India's claims.
Pakistan and India have fought three wars since their independence from Britain in 1947. They came close to a fourth in 2001 after suspected Pakistani militants attacked India's parliament. Both countries rushed troops to the disputed Kashmir region but tensions cooled after intensive international diplomacy.
The neighbors have said they want to avoid military conflict this time around, but Pakistan has promised to respond aggressively if India uses force, an option the Indian government has not ruled out.
Pakistan has deployed more than 100,000 soldiers in Waziristan and other northwestern regions to fight Islamic militants blamed for surging violence against Western troops in Afghanistan.
The United States has givens millions of dollars in aid to Pakistan's army to fight the militants in the region, which is believed to be a hiding place for Osama bin Laden and other top al-Qaida leaders.
A senior security official refused to comment directly on Friday's troop movements, but said, "Necessary defensive measures have been taken, they are in place and Pakistan's armed forces are prepared to tackle any eventuality."
He asked his name not be used, citing the sensitivity of the situation.
Also See:
Pakistan cancels army leave amid tensions - China View
Troop changes after India tension - BBC
Thursday, December 25, 2008
Jinnah's Birth Anniversary: His Views about Women Emancipation
FOUNDING FATHER: Jinnah And Women’s Emancipation
Sharif al Mujahid discusses the Quaid’s commitment to the cause of women’s progress
Dawn, December 25, 2008
It would not be wrong to say that Mohammad Ali Jinnah was a liberal, par excellence. According to a quote by Hector Bolitho, his official biographer, Jinnah said, “… I happened to meet several important English Liberals with whose help I came to understand the doctrine of Liberalism … which became part of my life.”
In tandem with his liberal ethos and his consuming concern with human rights was his burgeoning passion for reversing the “wretched” condition of women, who stood marginalised, not only in the pre-modern East, but also in the modern West, in the later half of the twentieth century.
Miss Agatha Harrison, one of the speakers at a memorial meeting for Jinnah in London, on September 14, 1948, narrated, “When Jinnah was a student in London, the suffragette movement was gathering momentum; …young Jinnah always came to our meetings and spoke in defence of the vote for women. Even then he was not afraid of championing an unpopular cause.”
Jinnah’s belief that women should be extended all the opportunities available to men at various stages in their lives was amply reflected in his handling of the schooling and career orientation of Fatima Jinnah, his youngest sister and ward. Much against the family and the community traditions, she was sent first to the Bandhara Convent School, then to the St. Patrick School, both in Bombay, where she did her Senior Cambridge, and later, all the way to Dr Ahmad Dental College, in Calcutta, to qualify for a professional career. There she stayed at a hostel, as in Bombay, although her sister, Maryam, along with her family, was living in the city.
After graduation, Fatima opened a dental clinic on Abdur Rahman Street, in Bombay, in 1923, and simultaneously worked at the nearby Dhobi Talau Municipal Clinic in the evening, on a voluntary basis. All this was, of course, nothing less than a rare phenomenon even for cosmopolitan Bombay. Yet it was made possible only because Jinnah believed that women have an inalienable right to carve out for themselves a career of their own choice.
During his long parliamentary career, Jinnah consistently and religiously stood against every sort and shade of discrimination against women and other unprivileged classes. Thus, he stoutly supported Bhupendranath Basu’s Special Marriage Amendment Bill, which provided for legal cover to marriages falling outside the Hindu and Muslim laws, although it caused unrestrained consternation among vast sections of the vocal Muslim strata.
Likewise, 23 years later, when he was already a universally acknowledged Muslim leader, he materially helped in the passage of the controversial Sarda Act, prohibiting child marriage, which again, was stoutly opposed by the predominantly conservative segments of the Indian society.
However, Jinnah’s major role in the emancipation of Muslim women came in the mid 1930s when he began reorganising and revitalising the moribund All India Muslim League (AIML), the most authoritative Muslim political organisation since its inception in 1906. Till then, the Muslim women were shrouded, silent creatures, strictly quarantined to the four walls of their homes, deeply steeped in dogma and superstition, and routinely denied the fruits of modern education, health care and a career.
For complete article, click here
Also See:
A Thought for the Quaid - Editorial, The News
Barbarism in Swat
Barbarism in Swat
By Khurshid Khan, Dawn, December 25, 2008
SWAT’S Sangota Public School was blown to smithereens on Oct 7, 2008 — a dark day in the history of the area.
This convent school was established in 1964 by Miangul Jahanzeb, popularly known as Wali sahib, the last ruler of Swat who not only donated land for the school but also provided generous financial aid for its construction and operations. It was renowned for its quality of education in the entire Malakand region.
This epitome of architectural perfection was situated in a beautiful and enchanting location on the left bank of the meandering and bounteous Swat river, spreading the light of education. Most of the teachers were Irish nuns who had devoted their lives to educating Swat’s children. They arrived in the bloom of their youth and returned in the autumn of their lives. They also educated the young girls in neighbouring villages and hamlets, without any thought of financial gains, teaching them the same courses as were being taught in the school in the morning.
A co-education system was in place until the 1990s but after the establishment of Excelsior College, the boys were shifted there and from then onwards only girls were admitted to this prestigious school. The school was closed on the DCO Swat’s orders because of the turbulence and volatile atmosphere in Swat much against the wishes of the students’ parents. The school administration decided to vacate the premises and as soon as it was vacated, it was razed to the ground by militants the next day, as was the premises of Excelsior College.
The first school in Swat was established in 1922 by Miangul Abdul Wadood. Both boys and girls were educated here until the primary level. It was not until 1926 when a separate school was established for girls. His successor Miangul Jehanzeb established a network of schools and colleges in the whole of Swat, Buner, Shanglapar and Indus-Kohistan which were then a part of the Swat state.
Education was not only encouraged but free. Scholarships were awarded and students were sent to western countries for higher education. Those who completed their education were given attractive employment. Thanks to these incentives, people swarmed to Swat for education. Students from Dir, Chitral, Malakand, Charsadda, Mardan, Swabi and other parts of the country turned to Swat for education.
After the merger of Swat state in 1969, several other schools and colleges in the public sector were opened, especially girls’ schools and colleges. Private schools also emerged. Gradually, Swat came to be regarded as a centre of learning by adjoining districts. But this evolution of education was strangulated by the militants in 2007 and 2008. Swat is now being pushed back to the pre-1922 period. Even then there were no militants who destroyed their own people.
Adjoining districts Shangla, Buner and Dir have suffered equally adverse effects. The people of these areas sent their children to Swat for education but now they are compelled to send their children to Peshawar, even to Punjab, where expenses are comparatively high.
Meanwhile, back to the Sangota Public School. The religious extremists and rival private schools generated negative propaganda against it but parents were not taken in by these rumours and continued to send their children to school there. They knew that not a single student had been converted to Christianity.
The people of the nearby villages looted the furniture, libraries, computers and other precious accessories of Sangota Public School and Excelsior College after their destruction declaring it war booty. The vandalism and looting continued all day. Security forces stationed in the overlooking mountains watched this humiliating process but still remained silent and unmoved. Eyewitnesses say that even if the forces had fired in the air, the looting would have stopped.
Taliban spokesperson Muslim Khan in a BBC interview alleged that the school had been following a co-educational system and was also preaching Christianity. Therefore, its signs had to be obliterated. But what about the scores of other schools where there was no linkage whatsoever with co-education or Christianity? Why were these demolished?
There may be two hidden motives, i.e. to discourage education and increase poverty in Swat. Ignorance and poverty breed extremism and this is actually happening in Swat. Unemployment is on the rise. People are drawn towards militancy because they are given a handsome remuneration for becoming one of the Taliban. State-of-the-art weapons, handsome salaries and the assurance of paradise in the hereafter are some of the temptations that lure the youth.
These young men are the major source of strength and power for militant leaders. Through them militants have succeeded in banishing the influential people of Swat and have compelled political leaders to kneel before them. Police do not dare to patrol the areas and the army is very cautious in its movements and operations here.
The barbaric Huns destroyed the Gandhara civilisation in the 5th century AD and burnt to ashes educational institutions including the university at Taxila. Today, all the laboriously constructed educational institutions are once again the victims of vandalism. Precious cultural antiquities are being destroyed. These barbaric activities are certainly the handiwork of a strange and peculiar mindset.
It is shocking and surprising that as schools and colleges in Swat are being levelled to the ground one after the other, the people do not protest and the government is averse to taking serious action. Parliamentarians are also silent spectators. Their tongues are tied and their hands fastened.
The process of Talibanisation is progressing in Swat. There are many simple-headed people there who either openly or secretly support the movement, all in ignorance and clearing the ground for it. The valley is fertile and all the ingredients of building and maintaining a civilisation are there in abundance. In spite of possessing all these valuable resources, if we still keep silent, then barbarism will certainly replace civilisation in the valley.
One hopes that the demolition of educational institutions, especially of girls’ schools, does not mean that the people of Swat will stop educating their children. After all, the wheel of time is not meant to reverse its direction; it must move forward.
Also See:
Taliban ban female education in Swat district - Daily Times
Pakistan militants kill rival, bring fear to valley - Reuters, December 17, 2008
By Khurshid Khan, Dawn, December 25, 2008
SWAT’S Sangota Public School was blown to smithereens on Oct 7, 2008 — a dark day in the history of the area.
This convent school was established in 1964 by Miangul Jahanzeb, popularly known as Wali sahib, the last ruler of Swat who not only donated land for the school but also provided generous financial aid for its construction and operations. It was renowned for its quality of education in the entire Malakand region.
This epitome of architectural perfection was situated in a beautiful and enchanting location on the left bank of the meandering and bounteous Swat river, spreading the light of education. Most of the teachers were Irish nuns who had devoted their lives to educating Swat’s children. They arrived in the bloom of their youth and returned in the autumn of their lives. They also educated the young girls in neighbouring villages and hamlets, without any thought of financial gains, teaching them the same courses as were being taught in the school in the morning.
A co-education system was in place until the 1990s but after the establishment of Excelsior College, the boys were shifted there and from then onwards only girls were admitted to this prestigious school. The school was closed on the DCO Swat’s orders because of the turbulence and volatile atmosphere in Swat much against the wishes of the students’ parents. The school administration decided to vacate the premises and as soon as it was vacated, it was razed to the ground by militants the next day, as was the premises of Excelsior College.
The first school in Swat was established in 1922 by Miangul Abdul Wadood. Both boys and girls were educated here until the primary level. It was not until 1926 when a separate school was established for girls. His successor Miangul Jehanzeb established a network of schools and colleges in the whole of Swat, Buner, Shanglapar and Indus-Kohistan which were then a part of the Swat state.
Education was not only encouraged but free. Scholarships were awarded and students were sent to western countries for higher education. Those who completed their education were given attractive employment. Thanks to these incentives, people swarmed to Swat for education. Students from Dir, Chitral, Malakand, Charsadda, Mardan, Swabi and other parts of the country turned to Swat for education.
After the merger of Swat state in 1969, several other schools and colleges in the public sector were opened, especially girls’ schools and colleges. Private schools also emerged. Gradually, Swat came to be regarded as a centre of learning by adjoining districts. But this evolution of education was strangulated by the militants in 2007 and 2008. Swat is now being pushed back to the pre-1922 period. Even then there were no militants who destroyed their own people.
Adjoining districts Shangla, Buner and Dir have suffered equally adverse effects. The people of these areas sent their children to Swat for education but now they are compelled to send their children to Peshawar, even to Punjab, where expenses are comparatively high.
Meanwhile, back to the Sangota Public School. The religious extremists and rival private schools generated negative propaganda against it but parents were not taken in by these rumours and continued to send their children to school there. They knew that not a single student had been converted to Christianity.
The people of the nearby villages looted the furniture, libraries, computers and other precious accessories of Sangota Public School and Excelsior College after their destruction declaring it war booty. The vandalism and looting continued all day. Security forces stationed in the overlooking mountains watched this humiliating process but still remained silent and unmoved. Eyewitnesses say that even if the forces had fired in the air, the looting would have stopped.
Taliban spokesperson Muslim Khan in a BBC interview alleged that the school had been following a co-educational system and was also preaching Christianity. Therefore, its signs had to be obliterated. But what about the scores of other schools where there was no linkage whatsoever with co-education or Christianity? Why were these demolished?
There may be two hidden motives, i.e. to discourage education and increase poverty in Swat. Ignorance and poverty breed extremism and this is actually happening in Swat. Unemployment is on the rise. People are drawn towards militancy because they are given a handsome remuneration for becoming one of the Taliban. State-of-the-art weapons, handsome salaries and the assurance of paradise in the hereafter are some of the temptations that lure the youth.
These young men are the major source of strength and power for militant leaders. Through them militants have succeeded in banishing the influential people of Swat and have compelled political leaders to kneel before them. Police do not dare to patrol the areas and the army is very cautious in its movements and operations here.
The barbaric Huns destroyed the Gandhara civilisation in the 5th century AD and burnt to ashes educational institutions including the university at Taxila. Today, all the laboriously constructed educational institutions are once again the victims of vandalism. Precious cultural antiquities are being destroyed. These barbaric activities are certainly the handiwork of a strange and peculiar mindset.
It is shocking and surprising that as schools and colleges in Swat are being levelled to the ground one after the other, the people do not protest and the government is averse to taking serious action. Parliamentarians are also silent spectators. Their tongues are tied and their hands fastened.
The process of Talibanisation is progressing in Swat. There are many simple-headed people there who either openly or secretly support the movement, all in ignorance and clearing the ground for it. The valley is fertile and all the ingredients of building and maintaining a civilisation are there in abundance. In spite of possessing all these valuable resources, if we still keep silent, then barbarism will certainly replace civilisation in the valley.
One hopes that the demolition of educational institutions, especially of girls’ schools, does not mean that the people of Swat will stop educating their children. After all, the wheel of time is not meant to reverse its direction; it must move forward.
Also See:
Taliban ban female education in Swat district - Daily Times
Pakistan militants kill rival, bring fear to valley - Reuters, December 17, 2008
South Asia descends into terror's vortex: Two Perspectives from Asia Times
South Asia descends into terror's vortex
By M K Bhadrakumar, Asia Times, December 25, 2008
South Asians will watch the year end in a pall of gloom. The region is fast getting sucked into the vortex of terrorism. The Afghan war has crossed the Khyber and is stealthily advancing towards the fertile Indo-Gangetic plains.
Whatever hopes might have lingered that Barack Obama would be a harbinger of "change", have also been dashed by US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. The Financial Times of London reported on Monday that in an exclusive interview Rice prophesied that the incoming Obama administration might have little option but to follow the current US approach on a range of foreign policy issues. Significantly, her prognosis figured in the course of a foreign policy review that primarily focused on Russia, Iran and Afghanistan.
South Asian security is at a crossroads. On the one hand, the United States made great strides in getting embedded in the region on a long-term footing. South Asia must figure as a rare exception in the George W Bush era's dismal foreign policy legacy. On other hand, the big pawn on the South Asian chessboard, India, is heading for parliamentary elections. Almost certainly, a new government with new thinking will assume office in Delhi by May. US-India ties will also come under scrutiny.
For complete article, click here
Pakistan's spies reined in
By Syed Saleem Shahzad, Asia times, December 24, 2008
KARACHI - Two major events are likely to mark the beginning of 2009 and decide the new rules of war and peace in the region. In Pakistan, the foremost is curtailing the powerful military dominated intelligence agency, the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), and the second is the unveiling of a new strategy in Afghanistan.
These two steps have emerged after months of high-level consultations between all the regional players, including the Afghan, Pakistani and Indian political leadership and the Western military establishment. American military officials have gone the extra mile to set up an incentive package to make these plans successful.
The process of clipping the wings of the ISI, elements of which have sympathies with the Taliban in Afghanistan and militants, could not take place during the rule of former president General Pervez Musharraf, who was succeeded by a civilian government early in the year after nine years of rule.
Moves were made to place the ISI under the civilian authority of the Ministry of Interior, but these were blocked by the military. Still, a few weeks ago the ISI's political cell was shut down, a development announced by Prime Minister Syed Yousuf Raza Gillani.
The next move is to appoint a civilian as director general of the ISI with the aim of eventually reducing the agency to an intelligence wing of the Ministry of Interior, from the grand secret service it was that earned international fame during the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in the 1980s in support of the mujahideen resistance.
For complete article, click here
ALSO SEE:
Pakistan MPs condemn 'unsubstantiated' Indian claims on Mumbai - AFP
UK joins US pressure chorus - Dawn
Trappend in Hysteria - By I A Rahman, Dawn
By M K Bhadrakumar, Asia Times, December 25, 2008
South Asians will watch the year end in a pall of gloom. The region is fast getting sucked into the vortex of terrorism. The Afghan war has crossed the Khyber and is stealthily advancing towards the fertile Indo-Gangetic plains.
Whatever hopes might have lingered that Barack Obama would be a harbinger of "change", have also been dashed by US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. The Financial Times of London reported on Monday that in an exclusive interview Rice prophesied that the incoming Obama administration might have little option but to follow the current US approach on a range of foreign policy issues. Significantly, her prognosis figured in the course of a foreign policy review that primarily focused on Russia, Iran and Afghanistan.
South Asian security is at a crossroads. On the one hand, the United States made great strides in getting embedded in the region on a long-term footing. South Asia must figure as a rare exception in the George W Bush era's dismal foreign policy legacy. On other hand, the big pawn on the South Asian chessboard, India, is heading for parliamentary elections. Almost certainly, a new government with new thinking will assume office in Delhi by May. US-India ties will also come under scrutiny.
For complete article, click here
Pakistan's spies reined in
By Syed Saleem Shahzad, Asia times, December 24, 2008
KARACHI - Two major events are likely to mark the beginning of 2009 and decide the new rules of war and peace in the region. In Pakistan, the foremost is curtailing the powerful military dominated intelligence agency, the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), and the second is the unveiling of a new strategy in Afghanistan.
These two steps have emerged after months of high-level consultations between all the regional players, including the Afghan, Pakistani and Indian political leadership and the Western military establishment. American military officials have gone the extra mile to set up an incentive package to make these plans successful.
The process of clipping the wings of the ISI, elements of which have sympathies with the Taliban in Afghanistan and militants, could not take place during the rule of former president General Pervez Musharraf, who was succeeded by a civilian government early in the year after nine years of rule.
Moves were made to place the ISI under the civilian authority of the Ministry of Interior, but these were blocked by the military. Still, a few weeks ago the ISI's political cell was shut down, a development announced by Prime Minister Syed Yousuf Raza Gillani.
The next move is to appoint a civilian as director general of the ISI with the aim of eventually reducing the agency to an intelligence wing of the Ministry of Interior, from the grand secret service it was that earned international fame during the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in the 1980s in support of the mujahideen resistance.
For complete article, click here
ALSO SEE:
Pakistan MPs condemn 'unsubstantiated' Indian claims on Mumbai - AFP
UK joins US pressure chorus - Dawn
Trappend in Hysteria - By I A Rahman, Dawn
Wednesday, December 24, 2008
Who assassinated Benazir Bhutto?
Who assassinated Benazir Bhutto?
The News, December 23, 2008
By Lubna Thomas
ISLAMABAD: Former prime minister Benazir Bhutto was attacked from three sides on December 27, 2007 in Rawalpindi. One of the assassins seen in the videos fired at her from the left side but the cause of her death was a wound on the right side of her head. Her vehicle was supposed to turn left towards Gawalmandi from the Liaquat Bagh but police blocked the road from the left side and her vehicle was forced to turn right after the public meeting and she was attacked immediately after taking the right turn.
These facts were revealed in a special investigative episode of Capital Talk on Geo News on Monday night. Hamid Mir conducted the investigations and interviewed all those who were present with Benazir Bhutto in her vehicle at the time of the attack. He also interviewed some key eyewitnesses who were injured in the attack.
Benazir Bhutto also wrote an email to an American journalist, Wolf Blitzer, on October 26, 2007 before her assassination, saying Musharraf should be held responsible if she was killed. Benazir was also aware of the dangers to her life, as the Interior Ministry had already informed her about the threats to her life on December 12, 2007. But in spite of all these threats, she continued her election campaign. She said on December 26, 2007 in a public gathering in Peshawar that life should be spent like a lion, not like a jackal.
The investigative feature of Geo was based on 12 questions: 1) Why did Benazir come out of the sunroof? 2) Why was there no sufficient security on her return from the Liaquat Bagh? 3) Why was her car turned right when it had to go left? 4) Was her death caused by the lever of the vehicle or a bullet? 5) Were the firing and blast triggered by one person? 6) Did more than one person fire at Benazir? 7) Why was her autopsy not done? 8) Who ordered to wash the crime scene immediately? 9) Which direction was she shot from — left or right? 10) Are the accused arrested in her murder case the real killers? 11) What did the government say in reply to the letter she wrote to General (retd) Musharraf, naming three persons who should be held responsible for her murder? 12) Why her last email to Wolf Blitzer was not made the basis of the investigations into her murder?
For complete article, click here
Tuesday, December 23, 2008
Islam in the West: Young Muslims Build a Subculture on an Underground Book
Young Muslims Build a Subculture on an Underground Book
By CHRISTOPHER MAAG, New York Times, December 22, 2008
CLEVELAND — Five years ago, young Muslims across the United States began reading and passing along a blurry, photocopied novel called “The Taqwacores,” about imaginary punk rock Muslims in Buffalo.
“This book helped me create my identity,” said Naina Syed, 14, a high school freshman in Coventry, Conn.
A Muslim born in Pakistan, Naina said she spent hours on the phone listening to her older sister read the novel to her. “When I finally read the book for myself,” she said, “it was an amazing experience.”
The novel is “The Catcher in the Rye” for young Muslims, said Carl W. Ernst, a professor of Islamic studies at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Springing from the imagination of Michael Muhammad Knight, it inspired disaffected young Muslims in the United States to form real Muslim punk bands and build their own subculture.
Now the underground success of Muslim punk has resulted in a low-budget independent film based on the book.
For complete article, click here
Monday, December 22, 2008
Book Review: The Duel, Pakistan on the Flight Path of American Power
COVER STORY: Point Of Return
Reviewed By Shahid Javed Burki, Dawn, December 21, 2008
The Duel, Pakistan on the Flight Path of American Power
By Tariq Ali
Tariq Ali’s latest book could not have been published at a better time. On November 26 Mumbai was attacked by a small group of terrorists who, it is said, came from the sea and took over a couple of five star hotels, the city’s main railway station, a hospital, and a Jewish centre.
According to the Indian intelligence agencies, there were only 10 terrorists who held some of the symbols of Mumbai’s economic power, social vibrancy and dynamism in their grip for three days. By the time they were overpowered, nearly 200 people were dead, many more were injured, the home minister of the Indian government had resigned and India and Pakistan were once again locked in a verbal dispute that could deteriorate into something worse by the time this review is published.
What is the relevance of this incident to the book under review? Tariq Ali looks dispassionately at the factors that have contributed to Pakistan earning the reputation of being ‘the most dangerous place on earth’. The common wisdom in the West is not the one Ali holds. It is said in dozens of books, academic articles and in hundreds of newspaper accounts that have appeared in recent years that the country is fast slipping into anarchy.
The main consequence of this will be that the extremist elements will gain strength, and may even gain control of the country and its nuclear arsenal. That, of course, is the West’s worst nightmare. Ali challenges this view and suggests that it will be the West and not Pakistanis that may force the country to move in that direction. Left to itself, Pakistan is inclined to follow a different path.
According to the author extremists occupy only a small margin of Pakistani society. The salience they have acquired is almost entirely the consequence of the American — and later the European — response to the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. President George W. Bush responded to 9/11 by unleashing the full military might of his country first against Afghanistan and then, a few months later, against Iraq — a country that had no connection whatsoever with the group that mounted the attacks on America. The attack on Afghanistan was initially successful. The Taliban regime in Kabul that had offered a sanctuary to Al Qaeda was quickly overthrown and was replaced by a government that was friendly towards Washington.
Had America stayed involved and turned its attention to nation-building in Afghanistan, the situation would not have deteriorated to the point that Washington is once again confronted with a conflict it cannot win with the use of military power. If it uses excessive force, the author argues, instead of solving the Afghan problem, it will push the entire region towards extremism and lead to a prolonged conflict between those who believe they represent Islam and the Christian West.
Ali explores at some length why Pakistani society, once known for religious tolerance and practicing mostly the Sufi version of Islam, has become associated with extremism. The story he tells is a familiar one for those who know the political history of Pakistan. Also, in an earlier work (Shadows of the Pomegranate Tree, 1996) he has written extensively about Spain under its Muslim rulers where the Islam that was practiced was of an exceptionally tolerant variety. That is the type of Islam that would have become the creed of Pakistan had the country’s leaders not failed in such a spectacular way.
In assigning blame for what has happened to Pakistan since its birth in 1947, Ali does not spare the civilian leadership. He focuses in particular on Prime Minster Zulfikar Ali Bhutto and the way he acquired political power and used it once he was in office.
One of the more interesting ‘what ifs?’ of Pakistan’s history concerns Bhutto’s behaviour in office. If he had governed as a true democrat, been tolerant of opposition and interested in promoting the welfare of the country’s common citizens, Pakistan would today be working with a better set of economic and political institutions instead of operating in an institutional vacuum.
My reading of the book is that the author still sees hope for the country if it is not pushed by the West into going in the direction in which it would not like to travel. Pakistanis, he says, want to modernise their country and join the world as responsible citizens. They don’t want to be pushed to the margins of the global political and economic systems. He has with this important book, therefore, joined the debate that is going on in a number of policy circles about how to deal with the situation in the no-man’s land between Afghanistan and Pakistan.
Earlier this year I attended a conference organised by the British Foreign Office at Wilton Park, a mayoral mansion south of London. The conference was about Pakistan and was attended by more than 80 people, most of them Europeans and Americans. America’s war in Afghanistan was one of the several themes discussed at the conference. The small Pakistani contingent made two statements; one was made by a former Pakistani Ambassador to Kabul and the other by a retired civil servant who had served in a number of senior positions in the North West Frontier Province.
The ambassador was of the view that the only solution to the Afghan problem is the complete withdrawal of western forces from Afghanistan and the return of the Federally Administered Tribal Areas, the FATA, to their traditional ways.
The other view was that only a deep involvement by Pakistan and its western allies in the economic and social development of the Pakhtoon areas on both sides of the Afghan-Pakistan divide will wean the people of the region away from religious extremism.
Tariq Ali’s timely book and the thesis that it puts out should be read by the people who, along with President-elect Barack Obama, are preparing to define the new American approach towards what is now being called the Pakistan problem.
The Duel should also be read by the Indian leadership. Both New Delhi and Washington have by their actions brought Pakistan to where it is today. Missteps by both could plunge the country into chaos which will generate a tsunami that will not just leave Pakistan in ruins but hit many other shores.
Sunday, December 21, 2008
Newsweek's Global Elite - Pakistan's Army Chief is No. 20!
Gen. Ashfaq Parvez Kayani
NEWSWEEK, Published Dec 20, 2008
From the magazine issue dated Jan 5, 2009
In theory this mumbling, chain-smoking general answers to President Asif Ali Zardari. But Kayani and his troops remain the dominant power in what could be the most dangerous country in the world. He's responsible for Pakistan's nukes; for the battle against Al Qaeda and its tribal allies along the Afghan border; and for managing tensions with neighbor India. So far, his army has kept itself out of politics and seems focused on the battle against jihadists. In the wake of the November terrorist attacks in Mumbai, Kayani stood firm on Pakistan's sovereignty while also taking measures against the alleged sponsors of the outrage.
Kayani insists he's a committed democrat, but he nevertheless argues that military interventions (there have been four since independence 61 years ago) are sometimes necessary to maintain Pakistan's stability. He likens coups to temporary bypasses that are created when a bridge collapses on democracy's highway. After the bridge is repaired, he says, then there's no longer any need for the detour.
For the complete list, click here
NEWSWEEK, Published Dec 20, 2008
From the magazine issue dated Jan 5, 2009
In theory this mumbling, chain-smoking general answers to President Asif Ali Zardari. But Kayani and his troops remain the dominant power in what could be the most dangerous country in the world. He's responsible for Pakistan's nukes; for the battle against Al Qaeda and its tribal allies along the Afghan border; and for managing tensions with neighbor India. So far, his army has kept itself out of politics and seems focused on the battle against jihadists. In the wake of the November terrorist attacks in Mumbai, Kayani stood firm on Pakistan's sovereignty while also taking measures against the alleged sponsors of the outrage.
Kayani insists he's a committed democrat, but he nevertheless argues that military interventions (there have been four since independence 61 years ago) are sometimes necessary to maintain Pakistan's stability. He likens coups to temporary bypasses that are created when a bridge collapses on democracy's highway. After the bridge is repaired, he says, then there's no longer any need for the detour.
For the complete list, click here
Arms recovered from Lal Masjid stolen from Islamabad Police Station
Arms recovered from Lal Masjid stolen
The News, December 22, 2008
SHO among 10 cops arrested; SSP removed, ASP suspended
By Shakeel Anjum
ISLAMABAD: Heavy consignment of arms and ammunition, recovered during the Lal Masjid operation in July last year, has been stolen from the Aabpara police station, police and intelligence agencies sources told The News. About 80 guns, including mortars, heavy machine guns (HMGs), light machine guns (LMGs), Kalashnikovs and a large quantity of bullets were among the stolen weapons.
Adviser on Interior Rehman Malik, taking serious notice of the incident, has removed SSP Islamabad Capt (retd) Ahmad Latif from his post with immediate effect and suspended ASP (city) Dr Shahzad Asif while station house officer (SHO) Malik Naeem Iqbal, five assistance sub-inspectors (ASIs), including Muharrar, a head constable and four constables have been arrested. The interior adviser has asked the Inspector General of Police (IGP) Islamabad to hold inquiry into the incident.
Rehman Malik, while talking to the News, said a joint investigation team (JIT) has been constituted to investigate the issue. He said DIG (security) Inayatullah Farooq would be the head of the team while representatives of Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), Federal Investigation Agency (FIA) and Intelligence Bureau (IB) would be members of the team.
For complete article, click here
The News, December 22, 2008
SHO among 10 cops arrested; SSP removed, ASP suspended
By Shakeel Anjum
ISLAMABAD: Heavy consignment of arms and ammunition, recovered during the Lal Masjid operation in July last year, has been stolen from the Aabpara police station, police and intelligence agencies sources told The News. About 80 guns, including mortars, heavy machine guns (HMGs), light machine guns (LMGs), Kalashnikovs and a large quantity of bullets were among the stolen weapons.
Adviser on Interior Rehman Malik, taking serious notice of the incident, has removed SSP Islamabad Capt (retd) Ahmad Latif from his post with immediate effect and suspended ASP (city) Dr Shahzad Asif while station house officer (SHO) Malik Naeem Iqbal, five assistance sub-inspectors (ASIs), including Muharrar, a head constable and four constables have been arrested. The interior adviser has asked the Inspector General of Police (IGP) Islamabad to hold inquiry into the incident.
Rehman Malik, while talking to the News, said a joint investigation team (JIT) has been constituted to investigate the issue. He said DIG (security) Inayatullah Farooq would be the head of the team while representatives of Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), Federal Investigation Agency (FIA) and Intelligence Bureau (IB) would be members of the team.
For complete article, click here
Saturday, December 20, 2008
Indian Muslims and Mumbai
Indian Muslims and Mumbai
By Kunwar Idris, Dawn, December 21, 2008
THE agonising memories of the disintegration of Pakistan have returned to haunt at a time when rebels freely roam vast swathes of our territory in the northwest and India is growling in anger from across the eastern border.
Can it happen again? Hopefully, it will not. This hope is instinctive and not born of glib talk coming from the president and the prime minister assuring us that Pakistan is capable and ready to defend its integrity. Such assurances were plentiful in 1971.
As Karachi’s district magistrate in those fateful days, it was the lot of this writer to witness President Yahya and other leaders flying into Karachi from Dhaka one after the other and telling the people that the ‘miscreants’ had been crushed and that calm had returned to East Pakistan.
Gen Tikka Khan was the last to arrive past midnight one day. He was then surrounded by a gaggle of journalists who had been monitoring the news, contrary to official accounts, of the tough resistance put up by rebels long after the army crackdown. A firecracker exploding on the border did not constitute resistance was the general’s curt comment. He then sped off telling the agitated pressmen to go home and sleep and to let him sleep too. That was just months before the surrender.
Admittedly, the rebels here at this point are few, on the fringes, and all are not secessionists. India too is not poised to attack. But the point to emphasise is that if it chose to do so Pakistan would hardly have any supporter or sympathiser. Britain and China epitomise the current worldwide attitude.
According to British Prime Minister Gordon Brown the majority of the terrorist plots that his government had investigated had originated in Pakistan. And China, for the first time, did not feel persuaded to veto a UN committee resolution carrying the implication of Pakistan being branded a terrorist state if it did not outlaw religious organisations suspected of sponsoring the Mumbai attack and arrest their leaders.
The world at large and the powers that matter are all inclined to believe that the terrorists who struck so mercilessly in Mumbai had come from Pakistan. But they do not find much credence in Pakistan’s charge that India foments and finances insurgents in its tribal region. The world also believes that Pakistan is not restraining radical elements even if its intelligence agencies are not colluding in training and equipping them.
With Pakistan put in the dock in full public view and no one to defend it, the Mumbai horror is bound to recoil on the Indian Muslims among whom the government there would surely be seeking out local collaborators of the foreign attackers. In 1946, when the British finally decided to quit India, Maulana Abul Kalam Azad, a staunch supporter of India’s unity, cautioned Muslims that by supporting partition they would become aliens in their own country. What has come to pass over a period of 60 years is much worse.
A commission headed by Mr Rajinder Sachar, a former Chief Justice of India, reported in 2006 that India’s Muslim community had sunk to the bottom of the heap, below even the untouchables, when it came to benefits flowing from government-run welfare schemes, access to education, employment, bank credit, etc. Poverty and insecurity have driven them into ghettos where they are open to exploitation by corrupt officials and Hindu fanatics. Though they form 12.5 per cent of the population their representation in the public services is less than one-third of that.
Pakistan owes it to the Muslims of India who staked their own future on its creation not to add to their woes. It may be recalled that Partition became inevitable only when Nehru unilaterally retracted after the Congress and Muslim League had both accepted the Cabinet Mission Plan. Jinnah felt betrayed. For him then there was no going back despite lobbying by Lord Mountbatten and Maulana Azad.
Under that plan India was to be divided into three autonomous regions. The centre was to retain only defence, foreign affairs and communications. The three regions are now independent states but continue to carry the bitter burden of the division of Punjab and Bengal and the bloodshed and mass migrations that followed.
The passage of time and a legacy of mistrust and hostility leave no room to think about a loose federation now. But it should still be possible for the governments of India, Pakistan and Bangladesh to form a bloc or union of the kind that emerged in Europe out of the hostilities of the Second World War. Evolving a common mechanism that diverts their attention and resources from the weapons of war to the poverty of their people could be the first step in that direction.
Pakistan would stand to gain more than the others because as a percentage of national income it spends twice as much on defence than India and also suffers from terrorism much more than India does. In such a collaborative arrangement 470 million Muslims of the subcontinent would count for more than they do at present, spread as they are, almost equally, over three countries.
In a long confrontation punctuated by wars the losers all round have been only the people of Pakistan and the Muslims of India. The Mumbai massacre has highlighted this fact and also underlined the need for the reversal of policies pursued so far. The controversy pertaining to culpability and evidence, as in past incidents, can lead nowhere.
kunwaridris@hotmail.com
By Kunwar Idris, Dawn, December 21, 2008
THE agonising memories of the disintegration of Pakistan have returned to haunt at a time when rebels freely roam vast swathes of our territory in the northwest and India is growling in anger from across the eastern border.
Can it happen again? Hopefully, it will not. This hope is instinctive and not born of glib talk coming from the president and the prime minister assuring us that Pakistan is capable and ready to defend its integrity. Such assurances were plentiful in 1971.
As Karachi’s district magistrate in those fateful days, it was the lot of this writer to witness President Yahya and other leaders flying into Karachi from Dhaka one after the other and telling the people that the ‘miscreants’ had been crushed and that calm had returned to East Pakistan.
Gen Tikka Khan was the last to arrive past midnight one day. He was then surrounded by a gaggle of journalists who had been monitoring the news, contrary to official accounts, of the tough resistance put up by rebels long after the army crackdown. A firecracker exploding on the border did not constitute resistance was the general’s curt comment. He then sped off telling the agitated pressmen to go home and sleep and to let him sleep too. That was just months before the surrender.
Admittedly, the rebels here at this point are few, on the fringes, and all are not secessionists. India too is not poised to attack. But the point to emphasise is that if it chose to do so Pakistan would hardly have any supporter or sympathiser. Britain and China epitomise the current worldwide attitude.
According to British Prime Minister Gordon Brown the majority of the terrorist plots that his government had investigated had originated in Pakistan. And China, for the first time, did not feel persuaded to veto a UN committee resolution carrying the implication of Pakistan being branded a terrorist state if it did not outlaw religious organisations suspected of sponsoring the Mumbai attack and arrest their leaders.
The world at large and the powers that matter are all inclined to believe that the terrorists who struck so mercilessly in Mumbai had come from Pakistan. But they do not find much credence in Pakistan’s charge that India foments and finances insurgents in its tribal region. The world also believes that Pakistan is not restraining radical elements even if its intelligence agencies are not colluding in training and equipping them.
With Pakistan put in the dock in full public view and no one to defend it, the Mumbai horror is bound to recoil on the Indian Muslims among whom the government there would surely be seeking out local collaborators of the foreign attackers. In 1946, when the British finally decided to quit India, Maulana Abul Kalam Azad, a staunch supporter of India’s unity, cautioned Muslims that by supporting partition they would become aliens in their own country. What has come to pass over a period of 60 years is much worse.
A commission headed by Mr Rajinder Sachar, a former Chief Justice of India, reported in 2006 that India’s Muslim community had sunk to the bottom of the heap, below even the untouchables, when it came to benefits flowing from government-run welfare schemes, access to education, employment, bank credit, etc. Poverty and insecurity have driven them into ghettos where they are open to exploitation by corrupt officials and Hindu fanatics. Though they form 12.5 per cent of the population their representation in the public services is less than one-third of that.
Pakistan owes it to the Muslims of India who staked their own future on its creation not to add to their woes. It may be recalled that Partition became inevitable only when Nehru unilaterally retracted after the Congress and Muslim League had both accepted the Cabinet Mission Plan. Jinnah felt betrayed. For him then there was no going back despite lobbying by Lord Mountbatten and Maulana Azad.
Under that plan India was to be divided into three autonomous regions. The centre was to retain only defence, foreign affairs and communications. The three regions are now independent states but continue to carry the bitter burden of the division of Punjab and Bengal and the bloodshed and mass migrations that followed.
The passage of time and a legacy of mistrust and hostility leave no room to think about a loose federation now. But it should still be possible for the governments of India, Pakistan and Bangladesh to form a bloc or union of the kind that emerged in Europe out of the hostilities of the Second World War. Evolving a common mechanism that diverts their attention and resources from the weapons of war to the poverty of their people could be the first step in that direction.
Pakistan would stand to gain more than the others because as a percentage of national income it spends twice as much on defence than India and also suffers from terrorism much more than India does. In such a collaborative arrangement 470 million Muslims of the subcontinent would count for more than they do at present, spread as they are, almost equally, over three countries.
In a long confrontation punctuated by wars the losers all round have been only the people of Pakistan and the Muslims of India. The Mumbai massacre has highlighted this fact and also underlined the need for the reversal of policies pursued so far. The controversy pertaining to culpability and evidence, as in past incidents, can lead nowhere.
kunwaridris@hotmail.com
Barbarians at the gate: Militant Islamist forces Vs. democratic forces of enlightenment
Barbarians at the gate
The News, December 21, 2008
by Ghazi Salahuddin
There has been no dearth, for some time, of foreign experts and analysts who imply that Pakistan is becoming a failed state. That Nawaz Sharif should now have reasons to corroborate this assessment is surely ominous. Reflecting the impression that the global media has projected about Pakistan being the most dangerous place in the world, he has said that the country has become ungovernable, though he pointedly attributes this to the damage done by the dictatorial rule of Pervez Musharraf.
If Pakistan is beginning to present the look of a failed state and if it is ungovernable in the eyes of a politician of Nawaz Sharif's importance – and that too in the aftermath of the Mumbai carnage that has planted frightening thoughts in the minds of most Pakistanis – what lies ahead?
At one level, remarks made by the leader of his faction of Pakistan Muslim League in Geo's 'Aaj Kamran Khan Ke Saath' on Thursday evening signal the advent of a flaming confrontation in domestic politics. But this confrontation can only be played out on the sidelines of the great crisis in which Pakistan finds itself. Given the stance that has been adopted by both Pakistan and India with relation to the terrorist attack in Mumbai, the situation is likely to get worse, at least in the near future.
As for Nawaz Sharif taking an offensive against the Pakistan People's Party-led government in Islamabad, the bugle had actually sounded on Wednesday when he revealed that he had been offered a deal to keep quiet over the Farah Dogar case. That this time was chosen for an offensive against the ruling coalition has intrigued some observers, though many had seen it coming against the backdrop of politics in Punjab and the red rag that Salman Taseer has become.
However, the main crisis of Pakistan transcends this confrontation and the other issues that keep bubbling in the media. I have always held – and this view has repeatedly surfaced in my columns – that the conflict between the potentially militant Islamist forces and the democratic forces of enlightenment will decide the fate of this nation. This historic contest is surely becoming rather ferocious, mainly because of the complexity that has been injected by the global war against terrorism and the social and economic deprivations of the people of Pakistan.
Unfortunately, not all our political players and opinion makers are aware of the seminal nature of this antagonistic tussle. Hence, there are parties and leaders who straddle the dividing line, often for short-term expediencies. But the time has come when all of us should be aware of what is really at stake and have the courage to speak out and act in defence of our beliefs and, indeed, our survival.
One problem in this encounter is the power and the role of the establishment that had initially promoted Islamist militancy. There is general confusion about what the establishment has learnt in the face of emerging realities and the imperative for Pakistan's progress and prosperity. At the same time, the parties that have supported the jihadist sentiments have to understand the consequences of their approach.
Let me now refer to a few instances of what the jihadists are doing in this age and time. On Tuesday – this was December 16, a day that lives in infamy – there was this report published in some newspapers that the militants exhumed the body of Pir Sameeullah and hanged it along with four followers in a public place in Mingora. The pir had been killed in a gunbattle with the militants. Have the leaders of the likes of Qazi Hussain Ahmed and Imran Khan expressed their horror over this act of barbarism? Have the people of Pakistan had time to contemplate the meaning of this incident which, alas, is not out of character for militants who have been allowed to thrive in our northern areas?
The next day, on Wednesday, I read this report, quoting BBC Urdu, that the "Pakistani Taliban have issued a video of five slain people, accused of spying on key Al Qaeda leader Abu Laith Al-Libi". The report added that the beheaded bodies were found in different parts of North Waziristan Agency at different times. For many people, this may not be totally surprising because this is how the jihdists have behaved as a matter of routine. Remember Daniel Pearl, who was brutally killed in front of a video camera in early 2002?
In a different context but relevant to the struggle for enlightenment and sanity in the country, there are increasing reports of honour killings and inhuman, tribal ways of administrating 'justice'. For instance, this newspaper's Islamabad/Rawalpindi edition published on Tuesday a large picture of a man walking on burning coal to prove his innocence in a murder case in Dera Murad Jamali in Balochistan. What is more lamentable is that a tribal leader, when interviewed by a private TV channel, defended this practice. Remember Mir Israrullah Zehri and Mir Hazar Khan Bijarani, now members of the federal cabinet?
Coming back to the thought of Pakistan becoming a failed state and being ungovernable, who should we expect to pick up the pieces and set a direction for Pakistan that is in consonance with the dictates of the modern world and, to invoke a clichƩ, the vision of Mohammad Ali Jinnah? I wonder if Jinnah would be able to live in Pakistan of today without feeling threatened and insecure.
We know that Pakistan of today is beset by grave challenges, the aftermath of the Mumbai carnage being only one dimension of what our ruling ideas have wrought. One of my major regrets is that the forces that should be on the side of democracy and enlightenment are not united and have not been mobilised into action. This is one reason why I feel disenchanted with the leadership of Asif Ali Zardari and mourn his apparent loss of credibility and moral authority.
Could Benazir Bhutto, had she been spared by the forces of evil, done better – given the 'deal' that was made? Well, this is the week that will revive our memories of a great charismatic leader who symbolised, in her person, the struggle for liberal values and our political emancipation. She had the capacity and the courage to take difficult decisions and to adjust to emerging realities. She was the only major leader of Pakistan to have come out so forthrightly and boldly against religious militancy and terrorism.
As we grieve for a leader whose assassination – (and who were her murderers?) – has left a void in our polity, it is necessary, as the poet said, "to find strength in what is left behind". We still have our ruling ideas and we do not know if the establishment has the power and the will to finally slay the monster of militancy.
The writer is a staff member. Email: ghazi_salahuddin@hotmail.com
The News, December 21, 2008
by Ghazi Salahuddin
There has been no dearth, for some time, of foreign experts and analysts who imply that Pakistan is becoming a failed state. That Nawaz Sharif should now have reasons to corroborate this assessment is surely ominous. Reflecting the impression that the global media has projected about Pakistan being the most dangerous place in the world, he has said that the country has become ungovernable, though he pointedly attributes this to the damage done by the dictatorial rule of Pervez Musharraf.
If Pakistan is beginning to present the look of a failed state and if it is ungovernable in the eyes of a politician of Nawaz Sharif's importance – and that too in the aftermath of the Mumbai carnage that has planted frightening thoughts in the minds of most Pakistanis – what lies ahead?
At one level, remarks made by the leader of his faction of Pakistan Muslim League in Geo's 'Aaj Kamran Khan Ke Saath' on Thursday evening signal the advent of a flaming confrontation in domestic politics. But this confrontation can only be played out on the sidelines of the great crisis in which Pakistan finds itself. Given the stance that has been adopted by both Pakistan and India with relation to the terrorist attack in Mumbai, the situation is likely to get worse, at least in the near future.
As for Nawaz Sharif taking an offensive against the Pakistan People's Party-led government in Islamabad, the bugle had actually sounded on Wednesday when he revealed that he had been offered a deal to keep quiet over the Farah Dogar case. That this time was chosen for an offensive against the ruling coalition has intrigued some observers, though many had seen it coming against the backdrop of politics in Punjab and the red rag that Salman Taseer has become.
However, the main crisis of Pakistan transcends this confrontation and the other issues that keep bubbling in the media. I have always held – and this view has repeatedly surfaced in my columns – that the conflict between the potentially militant Islamist forces and the democratic forces of enlightenment will decide the fate of this nation. This historic contest is surely becoming rather ferocious, mainly because of the complexity that has been injected by the global war against terrorism and the social and economic deprivations of the people of Pakistan.
Unfortunately, not all our political players and opinion makers are aware of the seminal nature of this antagonistic tussle. Hence, there are parties and leaders who straddle the dividing line, often for short-term expediencies. But the time has come when all of us should be aware of what is really at stake and have the courage to speak out and act in defence of our beliefs and, indeed, our survival.
One problem in this encounter is the power and the role of the establishment that had initially promoted Islamist militancy. There is general confusion about what the establishment has learnt in the face of emerging realities and the imperative for Pakistan's progress and prosperity. At the same time, the parties that have supported the jihadist sentiments have to understand the consequences of their approach.
Let me now refer to a few instances of what the jihadists are doing in this age and time. On Tuesday – this was December 16, a day that lives in infamy – there was this report published in some newspapers that the militants exhumed the body of Pir Sameeullah and hanged it along with four followers in a public place in Mingora. The pir had been killed in a gunbattle with the militants. Have the leaders of the likes of Qazi Hussain Ahmed and Imran Khan expressed their horror over this act of barbarism? Have the people of Pakistan had time to contemplate the meaning of this incident which, alas, is not out of character for militants who have been allowed to thrive in our northern areas?
The next day, on Wednesday, I read this report, quoting BBC Urdu, that the "Pakistani Taliban have issued a video of five slain people, accused of spying on key Al Qaeda leader Abu Laith Al-Libi". The report added that the beheaded bodies were found in different parts of North Waziristan Agency at different times. For many people, this may not be totally surprising because this is how the jihdists have behaved as a matter of routine. Remember Daniel Pearl, who was brutally killed in front of a video camera in early 2002?
In a different context but relevant to the struggle for enlightenment and sanity in the country, there are increasing reports of honour killings and inhuman, tribal ways of administrating 'justice'. For instance, this newspaper's Islamabad/Rawalpindi edition published on Tuesday a large picture of a man walking on burning coal to prove his innocence in a murder case in Dera Murad Jamali in Balochistan. What is more lamentable is that a tribal leader, when interviewed by a private TV channel, defended this practice. Remember Mir Israrullah Zehri and Mir Hazar Khan Bijarani, now members of the federal cabinet?
Coming back to the thought of Pakistan becoming a failed state and being ungovernable, who should we expect to pick up the pieces and set a direction for Pakistan that is in consonance with the dictates of the modern world and, to invoke a clichƩ, the vision of Mohammad Ali Jinnah? I wonder if Jinnah would be able to live in Pakistan of today without feeling threatened and insecure.
We know that Pakistan of today is beset by grave challenges, the aftermath of the Mumbai carnage being only one dimension of what our ruling ideas have wrought. One of my major regrets is that the forces that should be on the side of democracy and enlightenment are not united and have not been mobilised into action. This is one reason why I feel disenchanted with the leadership of Asif Ali Zardari and mourn his apparent loss of credibility and moral authority.
Could Benazir Bhutto, had she been spared by the forces of evil, done better – given the 'deal' that was made? Well, this is the week that will revive our memories of a great charismatic leader who symbolised, in her person, the struggle for liberal values and our political emancipation. She had the capacity and the courage to take difficult decisions and to adjust to emerging realities. She was the only major leader of Pakistan to have come out so forthrightly and boldly against religious militancy and terrorism.
As we grieve for a leader whose assassination – (and who were her murderers?) – has left a void in our polity, it is necessary, as the poet said, "to find strength in what is left behind". We still have our ruling ideas and we do not know if the establishment has the power and the will to finally slay the monster of militancy.
The writer is a staff member. Email: ghazi_salahuddin@hotmail.com
Friday, December 19, 2008
Memo to the President: Expand the Agenda in Pakistan and Afghanistan
Memo to the President: Expand the Agenda in Pakistan and Afghanistan
To: President-Elect Obama
From: Vanda Felbab-Brown, The Brookings Institution
Date: December 18, 2008
Re: Expand the Agenda in Pakistan and Afghanistan
The Situation
You inherit a dangerous crisis in South Asia. The war in Afghanistan is not being won. Al Qa’eda has built a stronghold in the mountains between Pakistan and Afghanistan. The November attacks in Mumbai painfully show the serious threat of jihadist terrorism. As a result of those attacks, tensions are running high between India and Pakistan, two nuclear-armed countries that have fought four wars.
Your administration will need to deal urgently with many interrelated dimensions of the crisis:
The Taliban insurgency in Afghanistan is becoming stronger and has succeeded in creating an atmosphere of great insecurity. In much of Afghanistan’s south and increasingly in its east, government officials, international advisers and even local district chiefs do not dare travel outside provincial capitals without military escort.
In many locales the insecurity has brought economic development to a standstill. Afghanistan is one of the poorest countries in the world; lawful economic opportunities remain meager for many, and only international aid saves millions of people from dire food crisis.
Poppy cultivation and the drug trade are burgeoning, providing resources for the insurgency and fueling government corruption.
The Afghan people are questioning the performances of the government of President Hamid Karzai and the international community. The people are deeply troubled by the growing insecurity, the weakness and corruption of the government, the rise in criminality and the lack of rule of law.
Across the border in Pakistan, the Taliban and Al Qa’eda enjoy safe havens and have integrated themselves into a complex web of jihadist groups. Despite some of these groups’ long-standing links to the Pakistani intelligence services, they increasingly threaten the security of Pakistan itself.
Pakistan is a fragile and failing state with weak civilian leadership, reflecting a long history of military coups and ineffective governance, and a collapsed economy.
The current tensions between India and Pakistan easily could escalate into a proxy war in Kashmir or Afghanistan, if not into a direct military confrontation. Highly dangerous in itself, an escalation would—as before—divert Pakistan’s military resources away from its border with Afghanistan and weaken the government’s resolve to take on the jihadist groups.
Despite the grave situation, there are several promising opportunities:
The Mumbai attacks underscore, for Congress and the general public, the strategic importance of the region and the need for broad, multilateral and coordinated efforts against terrorism in South Asia and globally. There is now a general recognition in the United States that the war in Afghanistan is not going well and needs an infusion of resources and a new strategy.
Our NATO allies and countries in the region are looking to your administration for leadership and a new direction in Afghanistan. They also look to you to spur multilateral engagement with Pakistan.
The Afghan people are similarly turning to your administration to help reverse the disturbing trends in their country. Despite their current dissatisfaction, the people as a whole have not embraced the Taliban. They still want an Afghanistan free of oppressive armed groups, warlords and criminals and capable of satisfying their fundamental economic needs.
Although weak and facing multiple internal challenges, the Pakistani civilian leadership of President Asif Ali Zardari has repeatedly indicated its willingness to reach accommodation with India and counter the terrorist threats facing both countries.
Your Stance
During the campaign, you identified the resurgence of Al Qa’eda and the Taliban in Pakistan and Afghanistan as the greatest single threat to U.S. security. You repeatedly promised to refocus attention and resources on the region by:
Increasing troop levels in Afghanistan. Three more American brigades have been authorized already. Reductions in troop deployments to Iraq will permit further increases in Afghanistan.
Seeking a similar contribution from our allies. Your political capital and a new focus on Afghanistan will enable you to show how the allies can contribute to success in the region in a productive, sustained way.
Pressing the Afghan government to meet more of the needs of its population and tackle corruption and the opium trade. Your administration’s increased engagement can help convince the Kabul government to take resolute action against corruption, including drug trafficking, and improve governance, especially if our contributions are backed by additional technical assistance from other countries. It is equally necessary to find ways to strengthen provincial and district governments.
Increase nonmilitary aid to Pakistan while holding it accountable for disrupting Taliban safe havens and providing security along the border with Afghanistan. The Biden-Lugar bill that would commit $15 billion in development aid to Pakistan over 10 years provides a vehicle for assistance. While beefing up economic assistance, you need to stress to Pakistan that jihadist terrorism now threatens its own security and that combating terrorism is in its own national interest.
Further Recommendations
In addition to implementing your campaign proposals, you should broaden your efforts in South Asia, demonstrating further your vision and resolve.
Security in Pakistan: You should continue counterinsurgency aid and training for the Pakistani military, enhanced with careful monitoring of the flow of dollars. Although U.S. military action against high-level jihadists in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas may sometimes be warranted, such strikes should be undertaken with great care to avoid civilian casualties.
Security in Afghanistan: It is necessary to increase troop levels in Afghanistan. In addition to obtaining greater deployment of NATO troops, you should continue efforts to enlarge the Afghan National Army, which ultimately must hold responsibility for the country’s security. Swift reform of the Afghan National Police, now widely seen as corrupt and incompetent, is also necessary, as is strengthening the Afghan judicial system. These institutions need to focus on delivering the essential rule of law to the population.
Although earning the confidence of Afghan tribal leaders is important, the tribes are unprepared to assume a military role in the counterinsurgency. Fractious, fundamentally weak and caught up in local disputes, they have a poor record in fighting the Taliban. Similarly, strategic negotiations with the Taliban hold little promise of success. Although a mechanism for demobilizing individual fighters and small splinter groups would be highly beneficial, the Taliban leadership has repeatedly shown a lack of interest in any outcome short of NATO withdrawal.
Socio-Economic Development and the Drug Trade: Socio-economic development is critical for Afghanistan’s future, for sustaining any gains in security and for achieving progress in counter-narcotics. It should lead to improvements in infrastructure, irrigation and micro-credit and to the creation of value-added chains and employment. And, it should be directed to high-value, labor-intensive crops as well as to off-farm income, such as from textiles. Targeting high-level drug traffickers in Afghanistan is essential. Eradication of poppy crops should focus on areas where there are enough lawful economic activities to offer a viable alternative.
Development efforts should be imbedded in a regional economic framework that also helps develop Pakistan’s border areas.
Donor Coordination: Lack of coordination among the Afghan government and the international actors hampers both security and development. While several initiatives have been undertaken to improve coordination, they have proved insufficient so far. Your administration can help build organizational structures to streamline program management and make greater use of existing mechanisms.
Public Awareness Campaign: Many development projects have improved the lives of the Afghan people; roads and wells have been built. Yet, inundated with Taliban propaganda, the Afghan people appear mostly unaware of these successes. In Pakistan, the United States—rather than Al Qa’eda and Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan—is blamed for the violence that is ravaging the country. To win local support, the administration should craft and sufficiently fund an effective public awareness campaign.
Regional Framework: Unfortunately, the Mumbai attacks are likely to derail any rapprochement between India and Pakistan, including over Kashmir. Yet, it is critical that your administration help the two countries deescalate the current tensions and avoid a military confrontation or a proxy war. While urging Pakistan to cooperate more fully in counterterrorism efforts, the administration should engage India in a direct and robust relationship. However tragic and destabilizing, the Mumbai attacks can inject an important sense of urgency into regional stakeholder deliberations, by showing that terrorism in any form cannot be tolerated and that a platform for multilateral engagement must be constructed. Besides Afghanistan, Pakistan and India, engagement should also include Europe and our other important allies in Afghanistan, as well as China, Russia, Iran and Saudi Arabia.
Conclusion
You may wish to consider outlining your overall strategy toward South Asia in your Inaugural address, when Americans and leaders across the globe will be listening carefully. The upcoming NATO summit in April 2009 will provide another important opportunity to roll out a new policy for the region.
Success is vital. A complete state failure in Pakistan would generate a grave and severe crisis, as would any serious military confrontation between India and Pakistan. Across the border in Afghanistan, failure against the Taliban would indicate how limited the United States and the international community can be in helping countries achieve security and development. The world is looking to you for leadership in reversing dangerous trends and building a security framework in a vital region.
To: President-Elect Obama
From: Vanda Felbab-Brown, The Brookings Institution
Date: December 18, 2008
Re: Expand the Agenda in Pakistan and Afghanistan
The Situation
You inherit a dangerous crisis in South Asia. The war in Afghanistan is not being won. Al Qa’eda has built a stronghold in the mountains between Pakistan and Afghanistan. The November attacks in Mumbai painfully show the serious threat of jihadist terrorism. As a result of those attacks, tensions are running high between India and Pakistan, two nuclear-armed countries that have fought four wars.
Your administration will need to deal urgently with many interrelated dimensions of the crisis:
The Taliban insurgency in Afghanistan is becoming stronger and has succeeded in creating an atmosphere of great insecurity. In much of Afghanistan’s south and increasingly in its east, government officials, international advisers and even local district chiefs do not dare travel outside provincial capitals without military escort.
In many locales the insecurity has brought economic development to a standstill. Afghanistan is one of the poorest countries in the world; lawful economic opportunities remain meager for many, and only international aid saves millions of people from dire food crisis.
Poppy cultivation and the drug trade are burgeoning, providing resources for the insurgency and fueling government corruption.
The Afghan people are questioning the performances of the government of President Hamid Karzai and the international community. The people are deeply troubled by the growing insecurity, the weakness and corruption of the government, the rise in criminality and the lack of rule of law.
Across the border in Pakistan, the Taliban and Al Qa’eda enjoy safe havens and have integrated themselves into a complex web of jihadist groups. Despite some of these groups’ long-standing links to the Pakistani intelligence services, they increasingly threaten the security of Pakistan itself.
Pakistan is a fragile and failing state with weak civilian leadership, reflecting a long history of military coups and ineffective governance, and a collapsed economy.
The current tensions between India and Pakistan easily could escalate into a proxy war in Kashmir or Afghanistan, if not into a direct military confrontation. Highly dangerous in itself, an escalation would—as before—divert Pakistan’s military resources away from its border with Afghanistan and weaken the government’s resolve to take on the jihadist groups.
Despite the grave situation, there are several promising opportunities:
The Mumbai attacks underscore, for Congress and the general public, the strategic importance of the region and the need for broad, multilateral and coordinated efforts against terrorism in South Asia and globally. There is now a general recognition in the United States that the war in Afghanistan is not going well and needs an infusion of resources and a new strategy.
Our NATO allies and countries in the region are looking to your administration for leadership and a new direction in Afghanistan. They also look to you to spur multilateral engagement with Pakistan.
The Afghan people are similarly turning to your administration to help reverse the disturbing trends in their country. Despite their current dissatisfaction, the people as a whole have not embraced the Taliban. They still want an Afghanistan free of oppressive armed groups, warlords and criminals and capable of satisfying their fundamental economic needs.
Although weak and facing multiple internal challenges, the Pakistani civilian leadership of President Asif Ali Zardari has repeatedly indicated its willingness to reach accommodation with India and counter the terrorist threats facing both countries.
Your Stance
During the campaign, you identified the resurgence of Al Qa’eda and the Taliban in Pakistan and Afghanistan as the greatest single threat to U.S. security. You repeatedly promised to refocus attention and resources on the region by:
Increasing troop levels in Afghanistan. Three more American brigades have been authorized already. Reductions in troop deployments to Iraq will permit further increases in Afghanistan.
Seeking a similar contribution from our allies. Your political capital and a new focus on Afghanistan will enable you to show how the allies can contribute to success in the region in a productive, sustained way.
Pressing the Afghan government to meet more of the needs of its population and tackle corruption and the opium trade. Your administration’s increased engagement can help convince the Kabul government to take resolute action against corruption, including drug trafficking, and improve governance, especially if our contributions are backed by additional technical assistance from other countries. It is equally necessary to find ways to strengthen provincial and district governments.
Increase nonmilitary aid to Pakistan while holding it accountable for disrupting Taliban safe havens and providing security along the border with Afghanistan. The Biden-Lugar bill that would commit $15 billion in development aid to Pakistan over 10 years provides a vehicle for assistance. While beefing up economic assistance, you need to stress to Pakistan that jihadist terrorism now threatens its own security and that combating terrorism is in its own national interest.
Further Recommendations
In addition to implementing your campaign proposals, you should broaden your efforts in South Asia, demonstrating further your vision and resolve.
Security in Pakistan: You should continue counterinsurgency aid and training for the Pakistani military, enhanced with careful monitoring of the flow of dollars. Although U.S. military action against high-level jihadists in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas may sometimes be warranted, such strikes should be undertaken with great care to avoid civilian casualties.
Security in Afghanistan: It is necessary to increase troop levels in Afghanistan. In addition to obtaining greater deployment of NATO troops, you should continue efforts to enlarge the Afghan National Army, which ultimately must hold responsibility for the country’s security. Swift reform of the Afghan National Police, now widely seen as corrupt and incompetent, is also necessary, as is strengthening the Afghan judicial system. These institutions need to focus on delivering the essential rule of law to the population.
Although earning the confidence of Afghan tribal leaders is important, the tribes are unprepared to assume a military role in the counterinsurgency. Fractious, fundamentally weak and caught up in local disputes, they have a poor record in fighting the Taliban. Similarly, strategic negotiations with the Taliban hold little promise of success. Although a mechanism for demobilizing individual fighters and small splinter groups would be highly beneficial, the Taliban leadership has repeatedly shown a lack of interest in any outcome short of NATO withdrawal.
Socio-Economic Development and the Drug Trade: Socio-economic development is critical for Afghanistan’s future, for sustaining any gains in security and for achieving progress in counter-narcotics. It should lead to improvements in infrastructure, irrigation and micro-credit and to the creation of value-added chains and employment. And, it should be directed to high-value, labor-intensive crops as well as to off-farm income, such as from textiles. Targeting high-level drug traffickers in Afghanistan is essential. Eradication of poppy crops should focus on areas where there are enough lawful economic activities to offer a viable alternative.
Development efforts should be imbedded in a regional economic framework that also helps develop Pakistan’s border areas.
Donor Coordination: Lack of coordination among the Afghan government and the international actors hampers both security and development. While several initiatives have been undertaken to improve coordination, they have proved insufficient so far. Your administration can help build organizational structures to streamline program management and make greater use of existing mechanisms.
Public Awareness Campaign: Many development projects have improved the lives of the Afghan people; roads and wells have been built. Yet, inundated with Taliban propaganda, the Afghan people appear mostly unaware of these successes. In Pakistan, the United States—rather than Al Qa’eda and Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan—is blamed for the violence that is ravaging the country. To win local support, the administration should craft and sufficiently fund an effective public awareness campaign.
Regional Framework: Unfortunately, the Mumbai attacks are likely to derail any rapprochement between India and Pakistan, including over Kashmir. Yet, it is critical that your administration help the two countries deescalate the current tensions and avoid a military confrontation or a proxy war. While urging Pakistan to cooperate more fully in counterterrorism efforts, the administration should engage India in a direct and robust relationship. However tragic and destabilizing, the Mumbai attacks can inject an important sense of urgency into regional stakeholder deliberations, by showing that terrorism in any form cannot be tolerated and that a platform for multilateral engagement must be constructed. Besides Afghanistan, Pakistan and India, engagement should also include Europe and our other important allies in Afghanistan, as well as China, Russia, Iran and Saudi Arabia.
Conclusion
You may wish to consider outlining your overall strategy toward South Asia in your Inaugural address, when Americans and leaders across the globe will be listening carefully. The upcoming NATO summit in April 2009 will provide another important opportunity to roll out a new policy for the region.
Success is vital. A complete state failure in Pakistan would generate a grave and severe crisis, as would any serious military confrontation between India and Pakistan. Across the border in Afghanistan, failure against the Taliban would indicate how limited the United States and the international community can be in helping countries achieve security and development. The world is looking to you for leadership in reversing dangerous trends and building a security framework in a vital region.
Murder she wrote
Murder she wrote
By Ayesha Siddiqa, Dawn, December 19, 2008
THESE days a common concern of many ordinary Pakistanis pertains to the conspiracy to destroy the country. But what happens when the country’s own institutions are involved in spinning a cobweb or falling into a trap that can cause ultimate damage to the state is a question worth asking. This line of questioning stems from a story recently published in Britain’s Sunday Times on Dec 14 and reported by Dawn the following day.
The story titled ‘UK may help find Pakistani general’s killers’ written by Carey Schofield is about the mysterious death of former Special Services Group Maj-Gen Amir Faisal Alavi. The article claims that Gen Alavi was not killed by militants in November 2008 as claimed initially but that those responsible may have been some of his senior colleagues about whom he had complained to army chief Gen Kayani with regard to their alleged involvement in evil and corrupt transactions with the Taliban. These officers, whose names were blacked out by the writer herself before publication, had apparently been a cause of Gen Alavi’s removal from service two years ago while he was serving in Wana, Waziristan.
The military publicity machine, of course, went into action soon after. It made counterclaims that the general in question had been removed due to his involvement with a woman in Islamabad. Considering former Gen Pervez Musharraf’s reputation as a cultural liberal (not to be confused with political liberal), he was hardly the person to have questioned or punished his officers for such a crime. Or perhaps there were too many people involved in the affair.
Undoubtedly the Schofield story raises questions about the military’s reputation as a professional and cohesive force. What it says between the lines is that rather than a cohesive force it may be divided between those officers who compromise on the national interest by doing questionable deals with the Taliban who then target army personnel and others who choose to confide in foreign journalists and governments about internal wrongdoings. According to the story, Gen Alavi had not only foretold his own death to the journalist after he dispatched the letter to the army chief, but had also complained to the British military in August 2005 (during his visit to the headquarters of the special forces or the SAS) about the lack of the army’s will to fight terrorism.
A closer look shows that the story paints the highest command of the service in a bad light. Were there moles in the army chief’s secretariat who leaked the contents of his letter to those that Alavi accused of being involved in his removal from service? Of course, the other question that comes to mind is that knowing his organisation and the fact that the letter would be opened as a routine before it reached the chief, why did Alavi choose to send it ‘through the proper channel’ rather than secure a private meeting with the top boss?
However, a question that the official-sponsored rebuttal did not ask was about the access provided to the British journalist to write a book on the Pakistan Army. It was in the process of doing so that she came into contact with Alavi and many other generals including Pervez Musharraf. The real and untold story is that of the disappointment felt by the army’s top brass at being accused of killing one of their own. Sources claim that she had direct access to Musharraf and many other generals.
Carey Schofield, whose main expertise is the Soviet military and not South Asia, was introduced a few years ago to the GHQ by one of the army’s favourite writers via one of Musharraf’s most favoured diplomats. The idea was probably to have a foreigner, not popularly known in the world of academia, write a book on the army so that it could sell against all other literature being produced by Pakistani writers generally considered to be unfriendly by the GHQ. She had more access than what an ordinary writer could dream of. Her introduction on the Oxford University Leverhulme Project describes her as writing a book in collaboration with the GHQ in Rawalpindi. We don’t know if she was also given access to classified material but that is hardly the issue.
Our military and civil bureaucrats and politicians say a lot of things during informal discussions. The tendency to tell the real story while boasting about their performance gives away many a secret. It is also worth asking whether anyone bothered to check on her background before providing access.
I remember the British author from my book launch at the International Institute for Strategic Studies, London, last year. Schofield questioned me on the use of a particular term in my book, Military Inc, with the objective of embarrassing me. Later, a colonel boasted about how the question was passed on to her.
The point I am trying to make here is that it has often been the army’s strategy to support sponsored research in order to create army-friendly literature through luring foreign academics and journalists with free trips, hospitality and access to the institution and its secrets. This approach was used at least on three earlier occasions.
Very briefly, the first book published in 1979 by an unknown publisher never made it beyond a few libraries. The second book the research for which was sponsored by Gen Ziaul Haq was banned. The third one has made the rounds but the author has no academic standing. Finally, an unknown British publisher will publish the latest book by Schofield. What is a matter of greater concern, however, is that at this point the GHQ might not even be sure of the contents of the book for which tremendous cooperation was given to the author.
While Carey Schofield seems to have burnt some if not all of her bridges with the Pakistan Army by publishing the story in the Sunday Times, a question that the generals must ponder over pertains to what else might have landed on the table of the British intelligence other than the Alavi story. This time the facts may be irrefutable because the army itself volunteered them.
The writer is an independent strategic and political analyst.ayesha.ibd@gmail.com
By Ayesha Siddiqa, Dawn, December 19, 2008
THESE days a common concern of many ordinary Pakistanis pertains to the conspiracy to destroy the country. But what happens when the country’s own institutions are involved in spinning a cobweb or falling into a trap that can cause ultimate damage to the state is a question worth asking. This line of questioning stems from a story recently published in Britain’s Sunday Times on Dec 14 and reported by Dawn the following day.
The story titled ‘UK may help find Pakistani general’s killers’ written by Carey Schofield is about the mysterious death of former Special Services Group Maj-Gen Amir Faisal Alavi. The article claims that Gen Alavi was not killed by militants in November 2008 as claimed initially but that those responsible may have been some of his senior colleagues about whom he had complained to army chief Gen Kayani with regard to their alleged involvement in evil and corrupt transactions with the Taliban. These officers, whose names were blacked out by the writer herself before publication, had apparently been a cause of Gen Alavi’s removal from service two years ago while he was serving in Wana, Waziristan.
The military publicity machine, of course, went into action soon after. It made counterclaims that the general in question had been removed due to his involvement with a woman in Islamabad. Considering former Gen Pervez Musharraf’s reputation as a cultural liberal (not to be confused with political liberal), he was hardly the person to have questioned or punished his officers for such a crime. Or perhaps there were too many people involved in the affair.
Undoubtedly the Schofield story raises questions about the military’s reputation as a professional and cohesive force. What it says between the lines is that rather than a cohesive force it may be divided between those officers who compromise on the national interest by doing questionable deals with the Taliban who then target army personnel and others who choose to confide in foreign journalists and governments about internal wrongdoings. According to the story, Gen Alavi had not only foretold his own death to the journalist after he dispatched the letter to the army chief, but had also complained to the British military in August 2005 (during his visit to the headquarters of the special forces or the SAS) about the lack of the army’s will to fight terrorism.
A closer look shows that the story paints the highest command of the service in a bad light. Were there moles in the army chief’s secretariat who leaked the contents of his letter to those that Alavi accused of being involved in his removal from service? Of course, the other question that comes to mind is that knowing his organisation and the fact that the letter would be opened as a routine before it reached the chief, why did Alavi choose to send it ‘through the proper channel’ rather than secure a private meeting with the top boss?
However, a question that the official-sponsored rebuttal did not ask was about the access provided to the British journalist to write a book on the Pakistan Army. It was in the process of doing so that she came into contact with Alavi and many other generals including Pervez Musharraf. The real and untold story is that of the disappointment felt by the army’s top brass at being accused of killing one of their own. Sources claim that she had direct access to Musharraf and many other generals.
Carey Schofield, whose main expertise is the Soviet military and not South Asia, was introduced a few years ago to the GHQ by one of the army’s favourite writers via one of Musharraf’s most favoured diplomats. The idea was probably to have a foreigner, not popularly known in the world of academia, write a book on the army so that it could sell against all other literature being produced by Pakistani writers generally considered to be unfriendly by the GHQ. She had more access than what an ordinary writer could dream of. Her introduction on the Oxford University Leverhulme Project describes her as writing a book in collaboration with the GHQ in Rawalpindi. We don’t know if she was also given access to classified material but that is hardly the issue.
Our military and civil bureaucrats and politicians say a lot of things during informal discussions. The tendency to tell the real story while boasting about their performance gives away many a secret. It is also worth asking whether anyone bothered to check on her background before providing access.
I remember the British author from my book launch at the International Institute for Strategic Studies, London, last year. Schofield questioned me on the use of a particular term in my book, Military Inc, with the objective of embarrassing me. Later, a colonel boasted about how the question was passed on to her.
The point I am trying to make here is that it has often been the army’s strategy to support sponsored research in order to create army-friendly literature through luring foreign academics and journalists with free trips, hospitality and access to the institution and its secrets. This approach was used at least on three earlier occasions.
Very briefly, the first book published in 1979 by an unknown publisher never made it beyond a few libraries. The second book the research for which was sponsored by Gen Ziaul Haq was banned. The third one has made the rounds but the author has no academic standing. Finally, an unknown British publisher will publish the latest book by Schofield. What is a matter of greater concern, however, is that at this point the GHQ might not even be sure of the contents of the book for which tremendous cooperation was given to the author.
While Carey Schofield seems to have burnt some if not all of her bridges with the Pakistan Army by publishing the story in the Sunday Times, a question that the generals must ponder over pertains to what else might have landed on the table of the British intelligence other than the Alavi story. This time the facts may be irrefutable because the army itself volunteered them.
The writer is an independent strategic and political analyst.ayesha.ibd@gmail.com
Thousands rally against US, NATO in NW Pakistan: AFP
Thousands rally against US, NATO in NW Pakistan
AFP, December 18, 2008
PESHAWAR, Pakistan (AFP) — Thousands of protesters rallied in the northwestern Pakistani city of Peshawar on Thursday, demanding that Islamabad end its logistical support for US and NATO troops in Afghanistan.
The crowd of about 5,000 demonstrators chanted "Allahu akbar" (God is greater), "Crush America" and "No to NATO supplies" as they marched through Peshawar, an AFP correspondent witnessed.
The rally came amid a recent spike in attacks by Taliban militants on NATO and US supply depots on Peshawar's outskirts, close to Pakistan's lawless tribal areas -- a hotbed of Taliban and Al-Qaeda activity.
International forces in Afghanistan are hugely dependent on Islamabad for their supplies and equipment, with about 80 percent transported through Pakistan and then across the border.
The chief of the radical Jamaat-i-Islami party, Qazi Hussain Ahmad, told protesters: "It is a shame for an Islamic country to supply logistics to the US, which is working against the interests of Muslims all over the world."
He demanded the government abandon its role as an ally in the US-led "war on terror", warning that if logistical support is not suspended, "we will force the government with public support to halt all supplies."
On Wednesday, missiles fired by suspected Taliban militants targeting a NATO supply convoy killed a woman and wounded her two children in the Khyber tribal district, on the main supply route into Afghanistan.
AFP, December 18, 2008
PESHAWAR, Pakistan (AFP) — Thousands of protesters rallied in the northwestern Pakistani city of Peshawar on Thursday, demanding that Islamabad end its logistical support for US and NATO troops in Afghanistan.
The crowd of about 5,000 demonstrators chanted "Allahu akbar" (God is greater), "Crush America" and "No to NATO supplies" as they marched through Peshawar, an AFP correspondent witnessed.
The rally came amid a recent spike in attacks by Taliban militants on NATO and US supply depots on Peshawar's outskirts, close to Pakistan's lawless tribal areas -- a hotbed of Taliban and Al-Qaeda activity.
International forces in Afghanistan are hugely dependent on Islamabad for their supplies and equipment, with about 80 percent transported through Pakistan and then across the border.
The chief of the radical Jamaat-i-Islami party, Qazi Hussain Ahmad, told protesters: "It is a shame for an Islamic country to supply logistics to the US, which is working against the interests of Muslims all over the world."
He demanded the government abandon its role as an ally in the US-led "war on terror", warning that if logistical support is not suspended, "we will force the government with public support to halt all supplies."
On Wednesday, missiles fired by suspected Taliban militants targeting a NATO supply convoy killed a woman and wounded her two children in the Khyber tribal district, on the main supply route into Afghanistan.
Thursday, December 18, 2008
Who Killed Hemant Karkare?
Profile: All about Abdul Rahman Antulay
CNN-IBN, December 18, 2008
The Government appeared embarrassed on Wednesday after Minority Affairs Minister denied doubting that terrorists killed a senior police officer in Mumbai.
The minister denied making controversial statements on the murder of chief of Maharashtra police's anti-terrorist squad, Hemant Karkare, who was killed during the Mumbai terror attacks on November 26.
He told Parliament that he wanted to know who sent Kakare and two other police officers after terrorists.
The man who gave way to a new debate in the Parliament is Abdul Rahman Antulay. He is the Minority Affairs Minister in the UPA Government.
This 79-year-old minister is a four time Lok Sabha MP and represents the Kulaba Lok Sabha seat of Raigad, Maharashtra.
Antulay was the Chief Minister of Maharashtra from 1980 to 1982, the only Muslim politician to be the chief minister of the state so far.
He had to quit as chief minister in 1982 following the cement scandal and fought a long court battle to clear his name.
In 2003, Antulay quit as the head of the Congress minority cell and there were even reports that he was all set to walk out of the party.
In July 2006, Antulay created a stir when he cited reports that a mystery blast in district Nanded in Maharashtra in April, 2006 was orchestrated by Hindus posing as Muslims.
Also See:
‘Killing of Indian terrorist squad chief conspiracy’ - Daily Times
Antulay self-goal: sees a Malegaon mystery in Karkare Mumbai murder - Indian Express
CNN-IBN, December 18, 2008
The Government appeared embarrassed on Wednesday after Minority Affairs Minister denied doubting that terrorists killed a senior police officer in Mumbai.
The minister denied making controversial statements on the murder of chief of Maharashtra police's anti-terrorist squad, Hemant Karkare, who was killed during the Mumbai terror attacks on November 26.
He told Parliament that he wanted to know who sent Kakare and two other police officers after terrorists.
The man who gave way to a new debate in the Parliament is Abdul Rahman Antulay. He is the Minority Affairs Minister in the UPA Government.
This 79-year-old minister is a four time Lok Sabha MP and represents the Kulaba Lok Sabha seat of Raigad, Maharashtra.
Antulay was the Chief Minister of Maharashtra from 1980 to 1982, the only Muslim politician to be the chief minister of the state so far.
He had to quit as chief minister in 1982 following the cement scandal and fought a long court battle to clear his name.
In 2003, Antulay quit as the head of the Congress minority cell and there were even reports that he was all set to walk out of the party.
In July 2006, Antulay created a stir when he cited reports that a mystery blast in district Nanded in Maharashtra in April, 2006 was orchestrated by Hindus posing as Muslims.
Also See:
‘Killing of Indian terrorist squad chief conspiracy’ - Daily Times
Antulay self-goal: sees a Malegaon mystery in Karkare Mumbai murder - Indian Express
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)