Monday, September 28, 2009

India-Pakistan Peace Process in the Doldrums

India and Pakistan Fail to Restart Negotiations
By NEIL MacFARQUHAR, New York Times, September 28, 2009

UNITED NATIONS — An attempt by India and Pakistan to agree on resuming either open or back-channel negotiations over the full range of their differences stalled on Sunday, stuck once more by the fallout from the 2008 terrorist attack on Mumbai by Pakistani militants.

After meeting for nearly two hours on the sidelines of the United Nations General Assembly, the foreign ministers of the two countries, Shah Mahmood Qureshi of Pakistan and S. M. Krishna of India, said both sides endorsed the idea of resuming negotiations but failed to concur on a timetable.

India, without making it an outright condition that resuming talks depended on Pakistan’s prosecuting of those responsible for the Mumbai attacks, made clear that substantial progress would be required before negotiations could restart, said Salman Bashir, Pakistan’s foreign secretary, the No. 2 in the ministry.

“It has not been spelled out in that manner, but they want to see some visible action,” Mr. Bashir told reporters at a hotel in Midtown Manhattan where the talks were held. Pakistan had proposed restarting talks before year’s end, an idea the Indians did not reject outright but did not accept either, he said.

Militants of the Pakistani-based group Lashkar-e-Taiba killed 163 people while rampaging through downtown Mumbai, India’s financial capital, last November.

After repeated delays, the trial of eight men accused of helping plan the attack is due to start in Pakistan on Saturday, but the Indian government has demanded that the Pakistanis reach higher in the group’s ranks. Both Indian and Western officials blame Hafez Saeed, the founder of Lashkar, for masterminding the attacks. He was released from house arrest, but Mr. Qureshi said he was still being questioned based on evidence presented to the Pakistanis.

India seeks strengthened relations with Pakistan, Mr. Krishna said, but its neighbor’s fight against terrorist groups needed time to “gather greater momentum.” It is impossible that so few could have been responsible for attacks on the scale of those carried out in Mumbai, he said.

“We have continuing concerns about the threat from extremism and terrorist groups in Pakistan,” Mr. Krishna said.

The Indian government faced a wave of public criticism last summer after the two countries first issued a joint statement saying they would work on resuming talks.

For complete article, click here

Related:
No India-Pakistan deal on talks - BBC
‘Pakistan-India ties should not be hostage to one issue’ - Dawn
Pakistan’s Pursuit of Militant May Not Revive India Peace Talks - James Rupert, Bloomberg

Sunday, September 27, 2009

Terror’s Training Ground By Ayesha Siddiqa

Terror’s Training Ground
By Ayesha Siddiqa, Newsline, September 2009

A few years ago, I met some young boys from my village near Bahawalpur who were preparing to go on jihad. They smirked politely when I asked them to close their eyes and imagine their future. “We can tell you without closing our eyes that we don’t see anything.”

It was not entirely surprising. South Punjab is a region mired in poverty and underdevelopment. There are few job prospects for the youth. While the government has built airports and a few hospitals, these projects are symbolic and barely meet the needs of the area. It’s in areas like this, amid economic stagnation and hopelessness, that religious extremists find fertile ground to plant and spread their ideology.

The first step is recruitment – and the methodology is straightforward. Young children, or even men, are taken to madrassas in nearby towns. They are fed well and kept in living conditions considerably better than what they are used to. This is a simple psychological strategy meant to help them compare their homes with the alternatives offered by militant organisations. The returning children, like the boys I met, then undergo ideological indoctrination in a madrassa. Those who are indoctrinated always bring more friends and family with them. It is a swelling cycle.

Madrassas nurturing armies of young Islamic militants ready to embrace martyrdom have been on the rise for years in the Punjab. In fact, South Punjab has become the hub of jihadism. Yet, somehow, there are still many people in Pakistan who refuse to acknowledge this threat.

Four major militant outfits, the Sipah-e-Sahaba Pakistan (SSP), Lashkar-e-Jhangvi (LeJ), Jaish-e-Mohammad (JeM) and Lashkar-e-Tayyaba (LeT), are all comfortably ensconced in South Punjab (see article “Brothers in Arms”). Sources claim that there are about 5,000 to 9,000 youth from South Punjab fighting in Afghanistan and Waziristan. A renowned Pakistani researcher, Hassan Abbas cites a figure of 2,000 youth engaged in Waziristan. The area has become critical to planning, recruitment and logistical support for terrorist attacks in Pakistan and Afghanistan. In fact, in his study on the Punjabi Taliban, Abbas has quoted Tariq Pervez, the chief of a new government outfit named the National Counter-Terrorism Authority (NCTA), as saying that the jihad veterans in South Punjab are instrumental in providing the foot soldiers and implementing terror plans conceived and funded mainly by Al-Qaeda operatives. This shouldn’t come as a surprise considering that the force that conquered Khost in 1988-89 comprised numerous South Punjabi commanders who fought for the armies of various Afghan warlords such as Gulbuddin Hikmatyar and Burhanuddin Rabbani. Even now, all the four major organisations are involved in Afghanistan.

The above facts are not unknown to the provincial and federal governments or the army. It was not too long ago that the federal Interior Minister Rehman Malik equated South Punjab with Swat. The statement was negated by the IG Punjab. Perhaps, the senior police officer was not refuting his superior but challenging the story by Sabrina Tavernese of The New York Times (NYT). The story had highlighted jihadism in South Punjab, especially in Dera Ghazi Khan. The NYT story even drew a reaction from media outlets across the country. No one understood that South Punjab is being rightly equated with Swat, not because of violence but due to the presence of elements that aim at taking the society and state in another direction.

An English-language daily newspaper reacted to the NYT story by dispatching a journalist to South Punjab who wrote a series of articles that attempted to analyse the existing problem. One of the stories highlighted comments by the Bahawalpur Regional Police Officer (RPO) Mushtaq Sukhera, in which he denied that there was a threat of Talibanisation in South Punjab. He said that all such reports pertaining to South Punjab were nothing more than a figment of the western press’s imagination. Many others express a similar opinion. There are five explanations for this.

Firstly, opinion makers and policy makers are in a state of denial regarding the gravity of the problem. Additionally, they believe an overemphasis on this region might draw excessive US attention to South Punjab – an area epitomising mainstream Pakistan. Thus, it is difficult even to find anecdotal evidence regarding the activities of jihadis in this sub-region. We only gain some knowledge about the happenings from coincidental accidents like the blast that took place in a madrassa in Mian Chunoon, exposing the stockpile of arms its owner had stored on the premises.

Secondly, officer Sukhera and others like him do not see any threat because the Punjab-based outfits are “home-grown” and are not seen as directly connected to the war in Afghanistan. This is contestable on two counts: South Punjabi jihadists have been connected with the Afghan jihad since the 1980s and the majority is still engaged in fighting in Afghanistan.

For complete article, click here

Related:
The Two Faces of Jihad - Newsline
Importing Intolerance - Newsline

Thursday, September 24, 2009

Statement from Co-Chairs of the Friends of Democratic Pakistan Summit in New York

FRIENDS OF DEMOCRATIC PAKISTAN

SUMMIT MEETING
CONCLUDING STATEMENT BY THE CO-CHAIRS

The Friends of Democratic Pakistan, established as a forum in September 2008, held its first Summit in New York City on September 24, 2009, under the co-chairmanship of President Barack Obama, President Asif Ali Zardari, and Prime Minister Gordon Brown. Also attending were twelve Heads-of Government and senior representatives of nine countries and five multilateral institutions.

1. The Summit Leaders congratulated the people of Pakistan for achieving significant progress in the democratic transformation of their country, and recognized the great significance of democracy to the stability of Pakistan, the region and the global community of nations. They recognized that democracy must be enabled to deliver on the promise of a new hope and for realizing the aspirations of the people for prosperity and peace.

2. Reflecting on the positive Ministerial and senior officials meetings of the Group of Friends in Abu Dhabi in November 2008, in Tokyo in April 2009 and in Istanbul in August 2009 – of whose conclusion Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan provided his assessment- the Summit Leaders confirmed that the international community, in particular members of the Friends of Democratic Pakistan, would continue to provide political and strategic support to the Pakistani people in their national effort to achieve greater socio-economic development and to overcome the challenges of terrorism, militancy and extremism.

3. The Summit Leaders acknowledged the progress and the sacrifices made by the people of Pakistan in the struggle against terrorism, militancy and extremism. They applauded the united resolve of the Pakistani nation and institutions to eliminate these threats as well as the crucial importance of continued support for them to take the lead. They promised to support and collaborate with Pakistan in these efforts.

4. The Summit Leaders welcomed the announcement by the World Bank and the Government of Pakistan to establish a Multi Donor Trust Fund to provide for a coordinated financing mechanism for donor support of areas affected by terrorism, militancy, and extremism. They urged bilateral and multilateral partners to extend and co-ordinate this support in order to align fully behind the Government’s proposed comprehensive approach.

5. The Summit Leaders recognized the suffering of the Pakistani people due to the prolonged shortfalls in electricity and agreed to assist as a crucial means of support for Pakistan’s economic and human development. They agreed that a next focus of the Friends will be to support Pakistan’s efforts in formulating a sustainable, integrated energy plan and noted the Asian Development Bank’s support in mobilizing the Friends for energy sector assistance. Leaders anticipate a report on energy at the next Ministerial meeting of the Friends.

6. The Summit Leaders expressed solidarity with those affected by terrorism, militancy, and extremism, including the millions of people displaced from their homes in the North West Frontier Province and the Federally-Administered Tribal Areas (FATA). They also recognised further the indirect impact on all people in Pakistan.

7. The Summit Leaders applauded Pakistan’s recent success in containing and reversing militancy and terrorism in the Malakand area. It praised, in particular, the special effort made by the Government in designing a strategy for the reconstruction and development of the Malakand Division, in close consultation with the Friends of Democratic Pakistan. The Summit Leaders reinforced their commitments to offering further humanitarian and early recovery assistance for those in need, and also to reconstruction of affected areas in particular in the light of the needs assessments.

8. The Summit Leaders emphasised that the Pakistani Government’s long-term strategic approach to security and socio-economic development presents a constructive framework for international co-operation to confront terrorism, militancy, and extremism. The Group of Friends welcomed Pakistan’s commitment to quickly develop and implement an integrated and comprehensive approach to address issues of security and development in FATA.

9. The Summit Leaders stressed the need for the Pakistani Government and the Friends to strengthen their partnership in addressing other critical priorities identified by the Government. They welcomed the support of the United Nations for Pakistan's efforts in mobilizing assistance and encouraging partnerships.

10. The Summit Leaders underlined the importance of helping Pakistan enhance, comprehensively, its institutional capacities, and in this context, reaffirmed that the Friends would facilitate a partnership approach.

11. The Summit Leaders welcomed the Pakistani Government’s commitment to address the challenge of enabling an effective application of the rule of law across Pakistan as a means of tackling the challenges of extremism and development.

12. The Summit Leaders welcomed the intention of the Government of Pakistan to revive and revitalise the annual Pakistan Development Forum to serve as a platform for a substantive policy dialogue between Government and international partners on Pakistan’s development priorities, including health, education, social protection, inclusive economic growth and strengthening institutions. They welcomed the support of International Financial Institutions, as well as Pakistan’s other partners, to assist Pakistan in its development agenda.

13. The Summit Leaders encouraged donors to follow through with their bilateral commitments as pledged in Tokyo in April 2009 to ensure that financial support and development assistance is delivered as soon as possible to the Pakistani people.

14. The Summit Leaders recognised the value of enhanced market access as a means to revive economic activity and to promote the well-being of the people of Pakistan. They agreed to positively consider Pakistan’s call for enhanced trade development and market access.

15. The Summit Leaders recognised the importance of promoting engagement by the business sector in Pakistan and other countries to enable Pakistan’s socio-economic development. They undertook to encourage, promote and facilitate public-private partnerships and joint ventures, and to engage in sustained dialogue with respective business sectors with a view to removing existing hurdles to trade and investment.

16. The Summit Leaders stressed the value of the Group of Friends of Democratic Pakistan as a political forum to express international solidarity with the Pakistani people’s aspiration to build a stable, democratic and prosperous nation. They also stressed the importance of the Group as a catalyst to mobilise concrete support to the Pakistani government and people and to promote better understanding of Pakistan's rich cultural heritage.

17. The Summit Leaders instructed their Foreign Ministers to meet as often as necessary to achieve these aims and to demonstrate the ongoing high level of attention being given to supporting the people of Pakistan.

Issued by the Co-Chairs of the Friends Summit:

President of Pakistan
President of the United States
Prime Minister of the United Kingdom

New York
24 September 2009

Monday, September 21, 2009

Obama’s AfPak metrics miss the mark on Pakistan

Obama’s AfPak metrics miss the mark on Pakistan
By Hassan Abbas, AfPak Channel at FP, September 21, 2009

The draft metrics devised by the Obama administration to evaluate progress in the AfPak theater, while providing a useful list of issues to follow, analyze and gauge the developing situation in Afghanistan, leaves much to be desired in its treatment of the Pakistan side of things. The informed and constructive analysis of said metrics by Steve Coll and Katherine Tiedemann in this forum are must reads to understand the context of this discussion. I almost entirely agree with their assessments but believe that a few additional lacunas in the document must be addressed. Of course, not having access to the ‘classified annex' (regarding Objective 1: disruption and degradation of terrorist networks and their capability in Afghanistan and Pakistan) limits one's ability to grade the overall effort (if you may)!

It is quite striking that framers of the metrics have avoided the merest mention of Pakistan-India relations as a factor in understanding which way the wind is blowing in Pakistan's security environment. While the Obama administration has every right to wish that Pakistan delink its rivalry with India in the Kashmir region from its policy towards Afghanistan (and consequently in Federally Administered Tribal Areas), one cannot ignore the prevailing ground realities. Rather than continuing to evade the relevance of the India factor to AfPak theater, the Obama administration must energetically facilitate and monitor the India-Pakistan peace process (which is lately showing some signs of life courtesy resumption of back channel diplomacy).

The second omission (less glaring than the above) relates to the reform and capacity building of Pakistan's law enforcement and police. This issue is mentioned in the metrics in general, I must admit, but it is lumped together with the ‘effectiveness' of intelligence and military counterinsurgency operations, which amounts to minimizing the critical nature of the issue. The Bush-era policy of overwhelming emphasis on ‘military action' reduced the importance of devising ‘law enforcement' strategies. Indeed, for Pakistan, the success of this spring's military campaign against the Taliban and al Qaeda in the FATA and the Swat Valley should not be underestimated, but the country's investment in police reform and the overhaul of the criminal justice system are more crucial for nabbing and prosecuting extremists in South Punjab, for instance. Whether or not Pakistan moves in this direction by taking significant reform-oriented steps should be followed closely.

While pursuing "an enduring, strategic partnership" with Pakistan is a laudable goal, it can be achieved only when Pakistani public perceptions about the U.S. improve. As recent polls indicate, an increasing number of Pakistanis view the United States as the greatest threat to their country. Hence, gauging American image in Pakistan can be a useful barometer, and effective targeting of the forthcoming U.S. development aid (which is mentioned in the metrics) can potentially start turning the tide in favor of the U.S..

Finally, the list mentions performance and stability of Pakistan's civilian government and aptly links the stability factor with ‘military involvement' in governmental affairs. However, this is something that is also dependent on how the Obama administration approaches its relationship with Pakistan. While it is expedient for the U.S. to engage all power centers in Pakistan, it must be recognized that civilian authority in Pakistan will be strengthened when the U.S. government also directs all its communications and links with the country through what in Pakistan is called the ‘proper channel,' which in this case implies talking to the highest political office first and routing all communication, even about defense issues, through the foreign office and civilian leadership. Moreover, transition from military to civilian rule is a process that takes years and given the influence, resources and past role of the army, it will likely continue to play a crucial role in defining Pakistan's policy towards regional security issues.

Hassan Abbas is a Bernard Schwartz fellow at the Asia Society and senior advisor at the Belfer Center, Harvard Kennedy School. He is also the author of Pakistan's Drift into Extremism.

Dr Abdul Qadeer Khan - New Revelations

Investigation: Nuclear scandal - Dr Abdul Qadeer Khan
The Pakistani scientist who passed nuclear secrets to the world’s rogue states has been muzzled by his government. In a smuggled letter, AQ Khan reveals his side of the story
Simon Henderson, Times online, September 20, 2009

It could be a scene from a film. On a winter’s evening, around 8pm, in a quiet suburban street in Amsterdam, a group of cars draw up. Agents of the Dutch intelligence service, the AIVD, accompanied by uniformed police, ring the bell and knock on the door of one of the houses. The occupants, an elderly couple and their unmarried daughter, are slow to come to the door. The bell-ringing becomes more insistent, the knocks sharper. When the door opens, the agents request entry but are clearly not going to take no for an answer.

The year was 2004. The raid went unreported but was part of the worldwide sweep against associates of Dr Abdul Qadeer Khan, the Pakistani scientist and “father of the Islamic bomb”, who had just been accused of selling nuclear secrets to Libya, Iran and North Korea. The house belonged to one of his brothers, a retired Pakistani International Airlines manager, who lived there with his wife and daughter. The two secret agents asked the daughter for a letter she had recently received from abroad. Upstairs in her bedroom, she pulled it from a drawer. It was unopened. The agents grabbed it and told her to put on a coat and come with them.

The daughter, Kausar Khan, was taken to the local police station, although, contrary to usual practice, she was neither signed in nor signed out. The Dutch agents wanted to know why she had not opened the letter and whether she knew what was in it. She didn’t; she had merely been asked to look after it. Inside the envelope was a copy of a letter that Pakistan did not want to reach the West. The feared Pakistani Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) had found the letter when they searched Dr AQ Khan’s home in Islamabad. He had also passed a copy on to his daughter Dina to take to her home in London, as rumours of Khan’s “proliferation” — jargon for the dissemination of nuclear secrets — swept the world. The Pakistani ISI were furious. “Now you have got your daughter involved,” they reportedly said. “So far we have left your family alone, but don’t expect any leniency now.”

Dr Khan collapsed in sobs. Under pressure, he agreed to telephone Dina in London and ordered her to destroy the documents. He used three languages: Urdu, English and Dutch. It was code for her to obey his instructions. Dina dutifully destroyed the letter. That left the copy that was confiscated by the Dutch intelligence service in Amsterdam. I know there is at least one other copy: mine.

Just four pages long, it is an extraordinary letter, the contents of which have never been revealed before. Dated December 10, 2003, and addressed to Henny, Khan’s Dutch wife, it is handwritten, in apparent haste. It starts simply: “Darling, if the government plays any mischief with me take a tough stand.” In numbered paragraphs, it outlines Pakistan’s nuclear co-operation with China, Iran and North Korea, and also mentions Libya. It ends: “They might try to get rid of me to cover up all the things they got done by me.”

When I acquired my copy of the secret letter in 2007, I was shocked. On the third page, Khan had written: “Get in touch with Simon Henderson… and give him all the details.” He had also listed my then London address, my telephone number, fax number, mobile-phone number and the e-mail address I used at the time. It has been my luck, or fate, call it what you will, to develop a relationship with AQ Khan.

For complete article, click here

Related:
Profile: A.Q. Khan, godfather of Pakistan's nuclear programme - Telegraph
A.Q. Khan boasts of helping Iran's nuclear programme - Telegraph

Sunday, September 20, 2009

American Rose fights for Pakistani husband: Dawn

American Rose fights for Pakistani husband By Salman Siddiqui
Dawn, 17 Sep, 2009

ISLAMABAD: Rose, a 32-year-old American woman in Islamabad, is seeking justice for her Pakistani husband, Hasan, who claims that he was detained and tortured by officials of the United States Department of Homeland Security (DHS) before being deported in 2006.

The couple, who have asked that their last names be withheld for security reasons, is currently appealing to the US embassy in Islamabad to review their case so that the family can be repatriated to the US, where Hasan was a legal resident since 2003. They have not filed a lawsuit against Hasan’s detention in the US civilian courts as they cannot afford legal counsel. However, a motion on Hasan’s behalf has been filed in the International Criminal Court by a Florida-based human rights’ campaigner.

Although Hasan has been back in Pakistan since 2006 – Rose and the couple’s two children followed in 2008 – the couple chose not to pursue Hasan’s case earlier because they saw no hope for justice under the former Bush administration. They are now pinning everything on President Barack Obama’s government.

‘I got a phone call from the US embassy today,’ says Rose, eyes shining with excitement in her two-room rented basement house in the capital city. The embassy has acknowledged the case for the first time since Rose’s arrival in Pakistan in January 2008.

‘Before, [the embassy officials] simply told me to leave my husband, just divorce him,’ says Rose. ‘They encouraged me to return to the US with my children and to forget about Hasan.’ She adds that the officials told Rose, a US citizen, that three other US citizens would have to vouch for her on her arrival in the US.

For complete story, click here

Saturday, September 19, 2009

The Real Issues in Pakistan

The real issues
Dawn Editorial, 18 Sep, 2009

PEOPLE are dying queuing for grain in Pakistan. This is a country where food inflation is forcing parents to pull their children out of school – they can eat sparsely or be educated, not both. Lives are being lost to ailments that are easily curable. Street crime is rampant across a country where human life is worth less than a cellphone. Yet our political leaders appear oblivious to the misery that is everywhere. They seem to have no perspective, no grip on reality. Does a man who can’t feed his children really care whether or not Pervez Musharraf is tried for treason? Is a mother whose child has died of gastroenteritis likely to give much thought to America’s military presence in the region? Will a jobless person be impressed by the president’s much-touted ‘achievements’ during his first year in office? Our leaders have clearly lost sight of the core issues.

This is a country where religious minorities are targeted by Muslim mobs while the law-enforcers look on. Deadly attacks against Christians, in particular, are on the rise in Punjab. As is usually the case in such incidents, the violence has been triggered by unproven allegations of blasphemy. Robert Fanish Masih, who had been arrested last Saturday on blasphemy charges after Muslims went on the rampage in village Jaithikey near Sialkot, was found dead in his cell on Tuesday. The next day his family and community members, who had all been forced to flee Jaithikey, were prevented from burying him in their native village. And this heartless, inhumane act wasn’t the work of Muslim vigilantes alone. The local police also told the mourners to turn back, on the grounds that their presence could fan violence. In short the victims were punished, not the aggressors.

The Punjab government needs to take urgent steps to protect minorities in the province for the situation there is deteriorating. Its stance on minority rights will be gauged by its response. The centre, meanwhile, should start working towards the repeal of the blasphemy laws. For too long they have been used to settle personal scores, grab land – and to kill. These draconian laws must be struck off the books.

Friday, September 18, 2009

Growing questions on death of Benazir Bhutto: New Revelation

Growing questions on death of Benazir Bhutto
Bruce Loudon, The Australian, September 19, 2009

UNITED Nations investigators are preparing to question former Pakistani president Pervez Musharraf about the assassination of Benazir Bhutto, amid mounting doubts over official versions of how she died and claims of a cover-up.

The Weekend Australian Magazine reveals today evidence that a bullet - probably sniper fire from a high-velocity rifle - killed the former prime minister.

The Musharraf regime said a "bump on the head" resulting from a Taliban or al-Qa'ida suicide bomber killed Bhutto on December 27, 2007, shortly before an election she was expected to win.

This evidence contradicts the regime's claim that the murder was the work of the Pakistan Taliban leader Baitullah Mehsud, who was killed in a US unmanned drone attack.

There is no history of the militants using sniper fire - or even regular gunfire - in any of the hundreds of suicide attacks they have mounted in Pakistan.

Also revealed in The Weekend Australian Magazine is detail of the cover-up that followed Bhutto's murder. The crime scene in Liaquat Bagh, a park in Rawalpindi, was washed with high-pressure hoses within 45 minutes of the blast, destroying almost all forensic evidence.

Naheed Khan, Bhutto's political secretary for 23 years, who cradled her head as she died, told The Weekend Australian Magazine: "There were bullets coming from different directions. There are lots of high buildings overlooking the area. This was a typical intelligence (agency) operation."

Ms Khan's husband, senator Safdar Abbasi, who is also a doctor, was in the Toyota Landcruiser when Bhutto was attacked. "The way she died - her instant death - suggests very sharp sniper fire. A typical intelligence (agency) operation."

The Weekend Australian Magazine reveals that, despite the law in Pakistan mandating autopsies in all cases of murder, and doctors attending Bhutto telling police that one should be carried out, none was performed on her or others who died in Liaquat Bagh.

Within hours, her body had been flown to Sindh province for burial, without a full forensic examination.

There is no suggestion of any involvement by Mr Musharraf in her murder. But the UN investigators want to question the former general. Given the authority he wielded in Pakistan, including over the army and its agencies, Mr Musharraf, 66, is thought to be in a better position than most to cast light on events surrounding the assassination.

At his apartment off London's Edgeware Road, living under the protection of the British government, Mr Musharraf has appeared untroubled by demands to bring him back to Pakistan. He has played bridge with friends and eaten out during the holy month of Ramadan.

An internationally brokered secret deal allowed Mr Musharraf to step down and assured his future security.

After long delays in getting Security Council approval for its mission, the UN investigators started looking into Bhutto's death in July and are expected to report to Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon this year.

The investigators are reported to be preparing to talk to people in London and Washington, including CNN presenter Wolf Blitzer. On October 20, 2007, Bhutto sent Blitzer an email, through a friend, reading: "If it is God's will, nothing will happen to me. But if anything happened to me, I would hold Pervez Musharraf responsible."

Investigations into Bhutto's killing are the subject of controversy in Pakistan.

Nawaz Sharif - Osama Bin Laden Links?

‘Nawaz Sharif was ready to join hands with Musharraf League to block Zardari’s presidential election’
Amir Mir, M E Transparent, Thursday 10 September 2009

LAHORE: In a desperate bid to obstruct Asif Ali Zardari’s election as the President of Pakistan, former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif had gone to the extent of agreeing to join hands with the Musharraf-backed Pakistan Muslim League (Quaid-e-Azam) to field a joint presidential candidate. However, the plan could not get through despite several meetings between the leadership of the two Leagues, mainly due to Nawaz Sharif’s indecisiveness, says Khalid Khawaja, a former Inter Services Intelligence (ISI) officer who had been close to Osama bin Laden and who himself claims to be a part of the “stop Zardari plan”.

Khalid Khawaja, a retired squadron leader of the Pakistan Air Force, who currently runs a non-government organisation with the name of Defence for Human Rights, has claimed in a recent interview that Nawaz Sharif had been seeing Osama bin Laden before the 9/11 attacks and that he had arranged these meetings on the former prime minister’s request, who wanted to dislodge Benazir Bhutto from the power corridors with bin Laden’s financial backing. After he wrote a critical letter to President General Zia ul-Haq, who ruled Pakistan from 1977 till 1988, in which he labeled Zia as hypocrite, he was removed from the ISI and forced to retire from the Pakistan Air Force. Khawaja then went straight to Afghanistan in 1987 and fought against the Soviets occupation forces along side with Osama Bin Laden, thus developing a relationship of firm friendship and trust.

In an exclusive interview, Khawaja said that Nawaz Sharif had authorised him on the heels of the 2008 presidential election (during a meeting at the Punjab House in Islamabad) to hold talks with the president of the Musharraf-backed Pakistan Muslim League (Quaid-e-Azam) Chaudhry Shujaat Hussain and his first cousin Chaudhry Pervez Elahi and to see if the two Muslim Leagues could reunite to field a joint presidential candidate of the opposition parties who could defeat Asif Zardari. According to Khawaja, he subsequently held lengthy parleys with Shujaat Hussain. “Although he was quite willing to reunite the two Leagues, his “reunion formula” was the withdrawal of the PML-N’s presidential candidate Justice (retd) Saeeduzamman Siddiqi in favour of the PML-Q’s candidate Syed Mushahid Hussain to pave the way for the grand merger. Shujaat was of the view that Mushahid is a veteran Leaguer and a former close associate of Nawaz Sharif and Mian Sahib should not have a problem in backing a Leaguer in the presidential election instead of a former judge, “especially if he was actually sincere in reuniting the Leagues for a greater cause”, Khawaja said.

Khalid Khawaja said that by the time he met with Shujaat Hussain, Nawaz Sharif had already tasked some senior party leaders, including Syed Ghaus Ali Shah, Zafar Iqbal Jhagra and Ishaq Dar to hold “reunion talks” with Chaudhry Shujaat Hussain. “However, their meeting with Shujaat Hussain not only failed but proved simply disastrous and left him extremely annoyed. Shujaat was of the view that the PML-N leaders were stubborn and not sincere in reuniting the Muslim Leagues. They were also over confident and mistaken to believe that they will be able to clinch the support of Maulana Fazalur Rehman and Altaf Hussain, who were already hobnobbing with Asif Zardari. I subsequently held another meeting with Nawaz Sharif and sought his permission to see Shujaat once again. During my second meeting with him, Shujaat again expressed his willingness to join hands with Sharif. However, he kept insisting that the reunion formula should be a decent and honourable one as they were not dying to join hands with the PML-N. Eventually, Shujaat authorized myself and Ejazul Haq to take whatever decision we deemed was appropriate to pave the way for a swift merger of the two Leagues. Shujaat had actually agreed to withdraw his presidential candidate in PML-N’s favour, provided Mian Sahib agreed to visit his place to extend the reunion proposal. I immediately traveled to the Punjab House to finalise the merger deal with Nawaz Sharif. But he acted strangely and told me that he was about to leave for Lahore. As I insisted that it was time to take a decision on the merger issue, his party workers somehow came to know of the issue and started shouting slogans: ‘Mian Sahib won’t go, Mian Sahib won’t go’, thus fizzling out the PML reunion plan”, Khawaja said.

Asked about the PML-N leadership’s allegations that his attempts to link the former prime minister with Osama bin Laden were part of a grand conspiracy aimed at Nawaz Sharif’s character assassination, Khalid Khawaja regretted that it was actually the PML-N which has launched a vicious character assassination campaign to malign him by describing him a liar. “I warn Mian Nawaz Sharif tender an unconditional apology for having ordered my character assassination campaign despite knowing fully well that whatever I had stated about him and Osama bin Laden was truth and nothing but the truth. Otherwise, I have every right to approach the court of law against the PML-N leader and file a defamation suit against him for trying to damage my credibility. Many other Pakistani politicians like Qazi Hussain Ahmed, Maulana Samiul Haq, Hafiz Hussain Ahmed and Hameed Gul too had seen Osama in the past, but never refuted their meetings unlike Sharif. Even if Nawaz Sharif’s party refused to admit a contact between Osama and Nawaz, it will not change the facts which were witnessed by many people including Khayyam Qaisar (Nawaz Sharif’s personal staff officer) and myself”, Khawaja said.

He added: “Mian Sahib met Osama on at least five occasions and was desperately seeking his financial assistance to topple the government of Benazir Bhutto. Osama provided me with funds, which I handed over to Nawaz Sharif, then the chief minister of Punjab. Nawaz insisted that I arrange a direct meeting with the “Sheikh”, which I did in Saudi Arabia. The most historic was the meeting in the Green Palace Hotel in Medina between Nawaz Sharif, Osama and myself, where Osama had asked Nawaz to devote himself to jehad in Kashmir. Nawaz immediately said, “I love jehad.” Osama smiled, and then stood up from his chair and went to a nearby pillar and said. “Yes, you may love jehad, but your love for jehad is this much.” He then pointed to a small portion of the pillar. “Your love for children is this much,” he said, pointing to a larger portion of the pillar. “And your love for your parents is this much,” he continued, pointing towards the largest portion. “I agree that you love jehad, but this love is the smallest in proportion to your other affections in life. But these sorts of arguments were beyond Nawaz’ comprehension who kept asking me. “Manya key nai manya?” [Agreed or not?] He was looking for a grant of 500 million rupee. Though Osama gave a comparatively smaller amount, the landmark thing he secured for Nawaz was a meeting with the Saudi royal family, which gave him a lot of political support, and it remained till he was dislodged by General Musharraf. Now with these immortal accounts secured in my memory I see the denials in newspapers that Nawaz had nothing to do with Osama, and I think “how can people forget their mentors”, Khalid Khawaja concluded.

However, approached for comments, the PML-N spokesman Siddiqul Farooq said that Khalid Khawaja’s so-called revelations about Nawaz Sharif’s anti-Zardari efforts prior to the 2008 presidential elections as well as his meetings with Osama bin Laden were a mere pack of lies and motivated. “I would like to ask whether Khalid Khawaja is worth being tasked by a twice-elected prime minister to make efforts for the PML reunification. Even otherwise, a reunion with the PML-Q was totally out of question because Nawaz Sharif’s principled stance is known to even a lay man in the street - he would never join hands with those who had sided with a dictator like Musharraf. Therefore, any such move on Nawaz Sharif’s part was simply out of question.”

amir.mir1969@gmail.com

Related:
‘Khawaja’s tirade part of character assassination campaign’ - Daily Times
To know more about Khalid Khawaja's background, click here and here

Wednesday, September 16, 2009

The Road to Corruption in Pakistan...

The road to corruption? By Zubeida Mustafa
Dawn, 16 Sep, 2009

For many decades governments in Pakistan considered it a waste of resources to invest in education.

This was such a neglected sector that those aspiring to a ministerial portfolio generally shunned the offer to head the education ministry. Then the scene changed when foreign donors demanded that we educate our children.

The education sector turned lucrative as billions began to flow in from abroad. Fabulous projects were designed and education became the fashion. This new interest in education was on two counts.

First, as one of the largest employers in the country this sector provided openings for jobs. According to the Pakistan Economic Survey 2008-09, the country has over 1.3 million teachers at all levels — an increase of 7.6 per cent per annum over the last decade. This is in addition to the substantial non-teaching staff in the administration. With the political advantage that control over jobs offers, the education sector is no more the Cinderella it once was.

Secondly, who doesn’t like money? Being awash in funds, the education sector offers perks, if not directly then indirectly, if not honestly then dishonestly. Stories of moneymaking ventures in education are legion.

In view of this sector’s dismal performance, one feels cynical about the talk of the massive injection of funds into it. This is one of the reasons why the National Education Policy (NEP) announced last week did not bring cheer. I am not anti-education. Nor am I against our measly education spending being increased to provide for the intellectual development of Pakistan’s youth. I worry about how this fund will be used.

According to the NEP, last year the government spent 2.5 per cent of GDP on education while 0.5 per cent came from the private sector. The Economic Survey puts the government’s spending at 2.1 per cent (Rs275.5bn). Hence eyebrows shot up when the NEP announced that by 2015 our education spending would be jacked up to seven per cent. Doubts have been expressed if this huge amount will really be made available. One should also ask whether the money will be put to good use or be siphoned off to line people’s pockets as is being done today.

For complete article, click here

Review of Two Important Books on Pakistan and Afghanistan - By Ahmed Rashid

The Afghanistan Impasse
By Ahmed Rashid, New york Review of Books
Volume 56, Number 15 · October 8, 2009

To Live or to Perish Forever: Two Tumultuous Years in Pakistan
by Nicholas Schmidle
Henry Holt, 254 pp., $25.00

Seeds of Terror: How Heroin Is Bankrolling the Taliban and al Qaeda
by Gretchen Peters
Thomas Dunne/St. Martin's, 300 pp., $25.95

On August 5, Baitullah Mehsud, the all-powerful and utterly ruthless commander of the Pakistani Taliban, was killed in a US missile strike in South Waziristan. At the time of the strike, he was undergoing intravenous treatment for a kidney ailment, and was lying on the roof of his father-in-law's house with his young second wife. At about one o'clock that morning, a missile fired by an unmanned CIA drone tore through the house, splitting his body in two and killing his wife, her parents, and seven bodyguards.

His death marked the first major breakthrough in the war against extremist leaders in Pakistan since 2003, when several top al-Qaeda members based in the country were arrested or killed. Over the last few years, Mehsud's estimated 20,000 fighters gained almost total control over the seven tribal agencies that make up the Federal Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) bordering Afghanistan.

Mehsud's death plunged the Pakistani Taliban, composed of some two dozen Pashtun tribal groups, into an intense struggle over leadership, creating an opportunity for the CIA and Pakistan's Interservices Intelligence (ISI) to take action against the extremists. After ousting in April and May the militants who had seized the Swat valley—which is not in the tribal areas but north of the capital city of Islamabad—the Pakistani army is now pursuing the Pakistani Taliban with more determination: in mid-August, two of Mehsud's senior aides were arrested, one in FATA and the other in Islamabad while seeking medical treatment. The US is anxious for Pakistan to continue its pressure by launching an offensive in Waziristan, the region in the southern part of FATA—first in South Waziristan to eliminate the Pakistani Taliban there and then in North Waziristan, where al-Qaeda and Afghan Taliban leaders are based.

For complete article, click here

Resolving the Afghanistan Quagmire

Afghanistan’s Other Front
By JOSEPH KEARNS GOODWIN, New York Times, September 16, 2009

ALLEGATIONS of ballot-stuffing in the presidential election in Afghanistan last month are now so widespread that a recount is necessary, and perhaps even a runoff. Yet this electoral chicanery pales in comparison to the systemic, day-to-day corruption within the administration of President Hamid Karzai, who has claimed victory in the election. Without a concerted campaign to fight this pervasive venality, all our efforts there, including the sending of additional troops, will be in vain.

I have just returned from Afghanistan, where I spent seven months as a special adviser to NATO’s director of communications. On listening tours across the country, we left behind the official procession of armored S.U.V.’s, bristling guns and imposing flak jackets that too often encumber coalition forces when they arrive in local villages. Dressed in civilian clothes and driven in ordinary cars, we were able to move around in a manner less likely to intimidate and more likely to elicit candor.

The recurring complaint I heard from Afghans centered on the untenable encroachment of government corruption into their daily lives — the homeowner who has to pay a bribe to get connected to the sewage system, the defendant who tenders payment to a judge for a favorable verdict. People were so incensed with the current government’s misdeeds that I often heard the disturbing refrain: “If Karzai is re-elected, then I am going to join the Taliban.”

For complete article, click here

Related:
A ‘weapons system’ based on wishful thinking - Boston Globe
Obama sets Afghanistan, Pakistan objectives-document - Reuters
No More Troops for Afghanistan - Huffington Post

Tuesday, September 15, 2009

Links Between Sri Lankan LTTE and Pakistani Militant Groups

‘LTTE had links with jihadi groups’ By Frances Bulathsinghala
Dawn, 14 Sep, 2009

COLOMBO: Sri Lankan experts on terrorism have said that the LTTE maintained a front company in Karachi to arrange arms smuggling and a safe house in Peshawar for contacts with Taliban.

According to Shanaka Jayasekara, who carried out research on terrorism at the Macquarie University of Australia, LTTE’s arms procurer Selvarasa Pathmanathan alias KP travelled from Bangkok to Kabul via Karachi on May 19, 2001, and met Taliban leaders to discuss matters relating to the so-called ‘Sharjah network’, an arms supply line run by the Russian dealer Victor Bout who operated three to four flights a day to Kabul to transport weapons.

Lakbima News online quotes Mr Jayasekara as saying that the LTTE operated a cargo company in Dubai, 17kms from the offices of the Sharjah network.

The company named ‘Otharad Cargo’ was headed by Daya, younger brother of Nithi, a Canada-based member of LTTE’s arms procurement unit under KP.

Otharad Cargo is believed to have acquired several consignments of military hardware as part of consolidated purchase arrangements with Taliban’s Sharjah network.


Mr Jayasekara claims that information recovered from a laptop computer of an LTTE procurement agent, now in the custody of a western country, has provided detailed information on LTTE’s activities in Pakistan.

The LTTE had registered the front company in Karachi which procured several consignments of weapons for the LTTE as well as Pakistani militant groups.

A shipment of weapons procured by the company was intercepted and destroyed by Sri Lankan navy in September 2007, he says.

Lakbima News cites a Jane’s Intelligence report of November 2002 on terrorist financing in South Asian states which says that LTTE’s shipping fleet provided logistic support to Harakatul Mujahideen for transporting a consignment of weapons to the Abu Sayyaf Group (ASG) in the Philippines.

The LTTE used a merchant vessel registered by a front company in Lattakia, Syria, until 2002 to service most of its 'grey/black charters'.


According to Rohan Gunaratna, a Sri Lankan expert on terrorism with the International Centre for Political Violence and Terrorism in Malaysia, the LTTE had links with jihadis in the NWFP and had a safe house in Peshawar.


Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani said recently that Sri Lankan President Mahinda Rajapaksa had told him in Tripoli that elements in Sri Lanka were linked with terrorist incidents in Pakistan, including an attack on the Sri Lankan cricket team in Lahore on March 3.

Related:
Sri Lankan team attack mystery deepens - Amir Mir, The News,

Who's coming to Clinton's Iftar dinner?

Who's coming to Clinton's Iftar dinner?
Laura Rozen, Politico, September 15, 2009
Who's coming to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's Iftar dinner tonight at the State Department?

At quick glance of the 10-page guest list: the ambassadors of Jordan, Turkey, Egypt, Lebanon, Iraq, Libya, Algeria, Morocco, Tunisia, Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, UAE, Bahrain, Oman, Sweden, France, Germany, the UK, Netherlands, Albania, Bosnia, Azerbaijan, Tajikistan, Kyrgystan, Afghanistan, Pakistan, India, Bangladesh, Malaysia, Uganda, Chad, Senegal, Cameroon, Gabon, Guinae, and Madagascar, Al Arabiya's Hisham Melham, Al Jazeera's English language bureau chief Abderrahim Foukara, Newsweek's Fareed Zakaria, Al Hayat's Joyce Karam, Pakistani GeoTv's Khamran Khan, Harvard's Hassan Abbas, and other academics, the Islamic Institute of Boston's Talal Eid, assistant secretaries of state Robert Blake, Jeff Feltman, Johnnie Carson, Kurt Campbell, AfPak envoy Richard Holbrooke, special advisor Vali Nasr, Clinton's special rep to Muslim communities Farah Pandith (who was sworn in today), North Korea envoy Stephen Bosworth, State Department deputy chiefs of staff Huma Abedin and Jake Sullivan, national security advisor Gen. James Jones, deputy national security advisor Thomas Donilon, NSC deputy national security advisor Denis McDonough, the NSC's Dennis Ross, the OVP's Herro Mustafa, the White House office of global engagement senior director Pradeep Ramamurthy, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Rep. Keith Ellison, Reps. Howard Berman and Ileana Ros-Lehtinen from the House Foreign Affairs Committee, the Muslim Congressional Staffers Association president Jihad Saleh, government officials from the OMB, FBI, DHS, State Department, Congress, etc. of Islamic heritage, the American Task Force for Palestine's president Ziad Asali, the New America Foundation's Afshin Molavi, the Carnegie Endowment's Karim Sadjadpour, the University of Maryland's Shibley Telhami, Muslim Student Association president Asma Mirza, Egyptian American country singer Kareem Salama, artist Nasreen Haroon, other leaders of NGOs and foundations, journalists, writers, and entrepreneurs.

"Ambassadors of [Organization of Islamic Country] OIC states were invited, or countries with significant Muslim minorities," one official explained. A rabbi friend of Clinton's, Rabbi Menachem Genack, CEO of the Orthodox Union's kosher division, will also be there, an official says. The Syrian, Israeli and some other embassies have also been added to the invite list. "As folks have expressed interest they have found a very welcoming State," the official said.

Related:
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to Host Iftar Dinner - U.S. Department of State

Inside Afghanistan...

Official Says Contractor in Kabul May Be Ousted
By GINGER THOMPSON, New York Times, September 15, 2009

WASHINGTON — The State Department official responsible for overseeing private contracts said Monday that the government was seriously considering terminating its $189 million arrangement with ArmorGroup North America because of recent disclosures of misbehavior by guards at the United States Embassy in Afghanistan.

At a hearing before a federal commission investigating wartime spending, Patrick F. Kennedy, the under secretary of state for management, said ArmorGroup managers had failed to notify the government about parties in which drunken, half-naked guards had urinated on and groped one another.

In response to commission members’ demands that the company be held accountable, Mr. Kennedy said, “We are seeing a very, very serious case being made for termination.”

Mr. Kennedy spoke at a hearing of the independent Commission on Wartime Contracting in Iraq and Afghanistan that was scheduled after a nonprofit oversight group released photographs two weeks ago of the ArmorGroup bacchanals. Those photos led to a State Department investigation and the firing of several ArmorGroup managers.

“It’s a no-brainer — that conduct was appalling,” Mr. Kennedy said. “And the failure on the part of the ArmorGroup managers to stop it caused us to ask for their removal.”

For complete article, click here

Related:
Afghan Troop Pullout Plan Sought by German Minister Steinmeier - Bloomberg
Obama has hard sell over Afghan troop hike - Reuters
Rights for Bagram prisoners - Dawn Editorial

Musharraf quit as part of negotiated settlement: Zardari

Musharraf quit as part of negotiated settlement: Zardari
* Int’l, local stakeholders acted as guarantors
* President hoped Musharraf would ‘play golf’
* Wants Asma to head truth commission

By Sajjad Malik, Daily Times, September 14, 2009

ISLAMABAD: President Asif Zardari on Monday disclosed for the first time that his predecessor General (r) Pervez Musharraf had resigned as part of a negotiated settlement guaranteed by “international and local” stakeholders.

“All international and local powers, which have stakes in the region, were guarantors of General (r) Pervez Musharraf’s negotiated resignation,” the president told journalists at an iftar-dinner he hosted for them.

Though the president did not say much on the issue, he tacitly conceded that Musharraf could not be tried under Article 6 of the Constitution as was being demanded by some opposition parties, especially the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N). “I had been hoping that he (Musharraf) would play golf.”

When a journalist asked whether army chief General Ashfaq Kayani was also one of the negotiators and guarantors, the president asked: “Why do you want to bring him (Kayani) in this debate?”

The president avoided responding to a question when specifically asked whether the Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) government would try General (r) Musharraf. “The PPP never recognised him (Musharraf) as the country’s president,” Zardari said.

About the constitution of a truth and reconciliation commission, the president said: “I would advise my party (the PPP) to set up such a commission ... and it is my desire that a person like Asma Jehangir should head this commission.”

For complete article, click here

Related:
Musharraf playing dirty games in desperation - The News
Musharraf admits US aid diverted - BBC
Musharraf undecided on returning to Pakistan - AFP

Monday, September 14, 2009

Saudi Charity Links with Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan

Saudi charity funds al-Qaeda linked Pak terror outfits
The News, September 14, 2009
News Desk

ISLAMABAD: A Saudi Arabian charity believed to be a front for al-Qaeda has provided USD 15 million (55 million dirhams) to extremist groups in Pakistan for carrying out terror attacks, according to a secret report prepared by Pakistani police.

A major chunk of the funds provided by the Al-Haramain Foundation went to the Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan, said the report prepared by the Crime Investigation Department.

The Al-Haramain Foundation has been banned by the UN Security Council for its links to al-Qaeda. According to the CID report, Hakimullah Mehsud, the successor to slain Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan chief Baitullah Mehsud, has vowed to avenge his killing in a US drone attack in August.

“The Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan is likely to strike major cities of the Punjab,” said the report.The report further said: “The joint plans of Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan and Sipah-e-Sahaba Pakistan are to target Shias. The plans are meant to avenge the recent killing of a top Sipahe-e-Sahaba Pakistan man in Karachi.

“The new Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan chief Hakimullah Mehsud and his cousin Qari Hussain Ahmed have strong anti-Shia views and ties with the (banned) Lashkar-e-Jhangvi and Jaish-e-Mohammed.”

Related:
Fight for spoils splits Taliban - Dawn, August 19, 2009
Pakistan Says West Must Cut Source of Taliban’s Funding, Arms - Bllomberg

Sunday, September 13, 2009

Explaining 9/11 to a Muslim Child

Explaining 9/11 to a Muslim Child
By Moina Noor, The New York Times Magazine, September 11, 2009

Recently on the morning drive to school my 8-year-old son asked me a question I’ve been dreading since he was a baby, “Mom, what happened on 9/11?”

Mass murder is impossible to explain to yourself, let alone a child. But how do I, as a parent, explain the slaughter of innocent people in the name of a religion that I am trying to pass on to my boy?

Bilal was just 8 months old when September 11 happened. He was just starting to crawl and put everything in sight into his mouth, and I remember having to peel my gaze away from the television screen and remind myself to keep a watchful eye on where he lay nearby.

After Bilal was born I viewed everything — especially current events — through the lens of parenthood. I knew the world had changed irreparably on 9/11, and while I mourned the innocent and raged against my crazy coreligionists, my nagging anxiety was for my son.

Even in those early surreal hours after the attacks when images of towers falling and long-bearded men in caves flooded the television screen, I knew that Bilal’s childhood would not be like mine.

When I was growing up in suburban Connecticut few people knew much about Muslims, let alone cared. My parents and their friends would gather in community rooms or church basements for our version of Sunday school. They were devout but weren’t necessarily interested in teaching their neighbors about Islam. We were few in number and invisible.

After 9/11, the spotlight was aimed at Muslims everywhere, especially here in America. Like many Muslims, I felt the need to defend my religious identity. I threw myself into all things Muslim, and explained and explained: “We are like you. Islam is peaceful. Complex sociopolitical factors create lunatics who kill people. Please don’t judge a billion people by a few bad apples.”

I hung tightly to my spiritual rope. I could not let go of a faith has given me and my family comfort and solace for generations.

Since 9/11, I’ve worried how Bilal would feel about his identity as a Muslim living in America. A survey conducted by the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life appeared in 2007 stating that 35 percent of respondents had an unfavorable opinion about Islam. Could one of those 3 in 10 people be Bilal’s teacher or soccer coach?

Over the past eight years I’ve read about Muslims being deported and pulled off airplanes and mosques being vandalized. My sister, a former middle school teacher in Brooklyn, heard kids taunt a Muslim student on the playground, calling him a terrorist. And even though I fear the possibility of discrimination for Bilal, what I fear most of all is that the din of Islamophobia will rob my son of self-respect and confidence.

So just as I became an activist, I became a proactive Muslim mommy. When Bilal was a preschooler, I took him to Muslim playgroups, organized activities in Ramadan and bought him board books about the Prophet Muhammed. I pushed him in his stroller at peace walks and brought him to interfaith events. These days, I organize local Islamic school classes and give talks about the Hajj at his elementary school. My husband and I read him books about Islamic contributions to math and science.

Over the years, I’ve tried to protect my son from any negative associations made with Islam. I’ve developed lightening quick reflexes — the second I hear a story about suicide bombers or terrorists on the radio, I switch to a pop music station. I’ve made my husband limit his CNN time to after the kids go to sleep. I don’t want to have to answer the question, “Mom, what is the ‘threat of radical Islamic extremism?’ ”

For me, the thought of talking to Bilal about terrorism is a bit like talking about sex for the first time. It is awkward and difficult I’m just not sure how much a child his age is ready to hear.

This year 9/11 falls during Ramadan, the Muslim holy month of fasting. I made Bilal watch President Obama’s five minute long “Ramadan Message to Muslims” on the Internet. President Obama spoke with respect, knowledge and a sense optimism to Muslims around the world. He found the speech interesting but nothing out of the ordinary. For Bilal, who is just starting to become conscious of a world bigger than our front yard, there is no “clash of civilizations”.

Bilal is proud to tell others that he was named after “the Prophet’s best friend,” an African Muslim with a beautiful voice who gave the first call to prayer. He is also a Cub Scout who has learned how to fold the American flag.

I did try and answer Bilal’s question. I relayed the day’s events in broad cartoonish strokes: bad guys attack, buildings collapse. Don’t worry, I assured him, we’ll get the bad guys so they won’t do it again. As I looked at Bilal in the rearview mirror, I explained that good and bad exists in every group, even your own. I think he understands.

Watandost Blog in News

Watandost blog creator ultimate fixer?
Staff Report, Samaa.tv, September 9, 2009

SALT LAKE CITY: An American student who has won a scholarship competition for her essay about Pakistan has named Watandost blog founder Dr Hassan Abbas as the person who could come up with an achievable solution to the Pak-Afghan problem.

Kelsey Price wrote about the region in Pakistan that borders Afghanistan and the problems it poses for a successful relationship between the U.S. and Pakistan. She will use the $1,000 award on tuition at the University of Utah.

The Our Voice Our County contest encouraged entrants to identify an urgent national problem and propose solutions or nominate experts to help address the problem.

She nominated Dr. Hassan Abbas as a problem solver who could come up with an achievable solution. Abbas is now a Bernard Schwartz fellow at the Asia Society in New York.

For complete article, click here

Related:
U.of U. freshman's Pakistan proposal earns national prize - The Salt Lake Tribune
Student receives $1K scholarship for essay - The Daily Utah Chronicle

More Americans empathizing with Muslims

More Americans empathizing with Muslims
A change in attitude towards Islam and Muslims in America is undoubtedly the result of more American Muslims making the effort to reach out to their neighbors and explaining away the misunderstandings about their faith.
By Parvez Ahmed, September 11, 2009, altmuslim.com

Eight years after the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, the latest survey from the Pew Research Center for People and the Press shows an unmistakable trend of Americans slowly but surely beginning to appreciate the challenges and aspirations of its fellow Muslim citizenry. Perhaps this trend is a result of nearly half of Americans saying that they personally know someone who is a Muslim. The fact that so many Americans profess knowing a Muslim is surprising given the fact that American Muslims makeup fewer than 2 percent of the overall U.S. population. The latest Pew poll shows the percentage of Americans who view Islam to be a violent religion is at its lowest level in recent years although not lower than the 25 percent mark recorded in the first Pew poll on this subject shortly after the terrorist attacks on 9-11. The biggest change in attitude came among surprisingly conservative Republicans, a 13 point decrease in the view that Islam is violent.

Coinciding with this positive trend are the findings that show more Americans, nearly 6 in 10, saying that Muslims are subject, “to a lot of discrimination.” While the empathy factor for Muslims have increased, knowledge about Islam and Muslims remain pitifully low. Two-thirds of people who are not Muslims find Islam to be “very different or somewhat different” from their faiths. The Pew report states that, “slim majorities of the public are able to correctly answer questions about the name Muslims use to refer to God (53%) and the name of Islam’s sacred text (52%).” Only four-in-ten correctly answered both “Allah” and “the Quran.” Those who know a Muslim are least likely to see Islam as encouraging of violence and most likely to express favorable views of Muslims.

The change in attitude towards Islam and Muslims are undoubtedly the result of more American Muslims than ever before taking the time to and making the effort to reach out to their neighbors and colleagues trying to explain away the misunderstandings about their faith. In recent days and months, major American leaders have also taken extraordinary steps in reminding fellow Americans about the valuable contributions being made by American Muslims. “I saw….a photo essay …of a mother in Arlington Cemetery, and she had her head on the headstone of her son's grave….you could see the writing on the headstone. And it gave his awards -- Purple Heart, Bronze Star -- showed that he died in Iraq….. He was 20 years old. And then, at the very top of the headstone …. it had crescent and a star of the Islamic faith. And his name was Kareem Rashad Sultan Khan, and he was an American. ….. He was 14 years old at the time of 9/11, and he waited until he can go serve his country, and he gave his life,” observed General Colin Powell, former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and former Secretary of State in while being interviewed on Meet the Press.

More recently President Barack Obama speaking at a Ramadan iftar noted, “And like the broader American citizenry, the American Muslim community is one of extraordinary dynamism and diversity -- with families that stretch back generations and more recent immigrants; with Muslims of countless races and ethnicities, and with roots in every corner of the world. Indeed, the contribution of Muslims to the United States are too long to catalog because Muslims are so interwoven into the fabric of our communities and our country. American Muslims are successful in business and entertainment; in the arts and athletics; in science and in medicine. Above all, they are successful parents, good neighbors, and active citizens.” Perhaps the President stated the obvious but if more American opinion leaders find the courage to do just that then the trend towards a more positive view Islam and Muslims will undoubtedly accelerate. And America will be better for that.

Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, recently noted that U.S. military is bungling its outreach to the Muslim world and squandering good will by failing to live up to its promises. Adm. Mullen’s views are backed by data that shows opinions about America and America’s intentions remain alarmingly poor in much of the Muslim world. To change the hearts and mind, American rhetoric will have to be backed by American action. Adm. Mullen went on to say, “Our messages lack credibility because we haven’t invested enough in building trust and relationships, and we haven’t always delivered on promises.” One reason we have failed to build trust relationships with the Muslim world, is because so few Americans understand Islam and Muslims.

American Muslims will have to increase their efforts to reach out to their neighbors and colleagues. Americans of other faiths will have to reciprocate. Undoubtedly understanding is a two-way street. Muslims must also increase their efforts to understand the faiths of other people. Given today’s global political tensions, economic unease, and ecological concerns, the need for identifying our common ground and working together for the common good is urgent.

Parvez Ahmed, Ph.D. is currently a U.S. Fulbright Scholar visiting Bangladesh. He is associate professor of finance at the University of North Florida. He is also a frequent commentator on Islam and the American Muslim experience. To read his articles visit, http://drparvezahmed.blogspot.com.

Tuesday, September 08, 2009

Latest in Counter-insurgency Campaign in Pakistan

Thousands flee new Pakistan anti-militant push
(AFP) – September 7, 2009

PESHAWAR, Pakistan — Thousands of civilians have fled a fresh military bombardment against Islamist rebels in northwest Pakistan, officials said Monday, as dozens of militants were reported dead in the push.

Fighter jets and helicopter gunships began strafing suspected militant hideouts in the fabled Khyber district bordering Afghanistan about a week ago, sparking an exodus of civilians who fear being caught in the crossfire.

"Thousands have fled the military operation in Khyber. Around 30,000 people have arrived in Peshawar since yesterday," said Sahibzada Mohammad Anis, administrative chief in the northwest capital Peshawar.

Khyber local government chief Tariq Hayat also told AFP that as many as 30,000 civilians had left when a military curfew was relaxed on Sunday.

"More than 30,000 people have arrived in Peshawar so far. More are coming today (Monday) as the curfew was lifted again," he said.

"Some are living in rented houses, some with their relatives in Peshawar. The government has no plan to set up camps for them because this operation will not last long. It will be over in the next few days."

United Nations officials put the number of displaced a lot lower.

"UNHCR estimates that 500 to 800 families, mainly women and children, have moved out of Bara in Khyber agency," said Ariane Rummery, spokeswoman in Islamabad for the UN refugee agency UNHCR.

"The families on the move are seeking refuge with friends and relatives on the outskirts of Peshawar," Rummery told AFP, adding that the agency had offered to help the government provide for the displaced people.

The military launched an offensive against militant group Lashkar-e-Islam (Army of Islam) in Khyber seven days ago after a suicide bomber blew himself up near a border post with Afghanistan killing 22 Pakistani policemen.

Hayat said the army had by Sunday killed 121 militants in Khyber, while 10 more were reported dead by the paramilitary Frontier Corps on Monday. Such tolls, however, are impossible to independently confirm.

"Security forces killed at least 10 militants and destroyed four hideouts of militants including a training centre in Kula Markaz village of Khyber," a statement from the paramilitary Frontier Corps said.

Pakistan is already grappling with a huge displacement crisis after nearly two million people fled a punishing military offensive against Taliban insurgents in northwest Swat valley beginning in late April.

The military says it has now cleared that area of insurgents, and about 1.3 million displaced people have returned. But skirmishes continue, raising fears that the Taliban are regrouping in the mountains.

Buoyed by the apparent Swat success against the Taliban, the military has vowed to track down their hardcore leadership in the lawless tribal belt along the Afghan border, also a known bolthole for Al-Qaeda fighters.

The Lashkar-e-Islam has some ties to the Pakistan Taliban. The Khyber pass is the main land and supply route through Pakistan into Afghanistan, where international forces are also battling a Taliban insurgency.

In other unrest in the northwest on Monday, five soldiers were killed and four others wounded in a roadside bomb and gun fights in Shakai village in the Taliban stronghold of South Waziristan, a security official said.

Related:
Ten militants killed in Khyber agency: military - Dawn
Gates praises Pakistan's grip on extremists - AFP
Militants attack schoolchildren in Orakzai, four dead - Dawn
No more organised resistance in Swat: ISPR - The News

Healthcare in Pakistan

SIUT is a philosophy of life, says Dr Rizvi
* Says SIUT operates free of cost on 3 patients daily and on every organ transplant Rs 200,000 are spent
By Amar Guriro, Daily Times, September 8, 2009

KARACHI: Pakistan's leading organ plantation expert and founder of Sindh Institute of Urology and Transplantation (SIUT) Dr Adib Rizvi has said that SIUT is not just a building but a philosophy of life.

"Healthcare is the fundamental right of every newborn and not charity," said Dr Rizvi. "The difference should be clear and not like the education sector where blue and yellow schools are separate, which is not fair."

A doctor is a friend of the patient and should guide him till he gets well.

"A doctor's duty is not limited to diagnose the disease and prescribe the medication, but he or she must follow the patient in the treatment process, as everyone knows that majority of the patients in Pakistan are unable to buy medicines," he said.

Addressing an Iftar party in his honour at Karachi Press Club organised by SUPPORT organisation, Dr Rizvi said that most of the people are unable to pay the specialists, even a general practitioner (GP) charges about Rs 300 per patient that is also unaffordable for majority of the people.

"When there is nothing to eat, vaccination is a luxury," said Dr Rizvi. He quoted an example that recently a man came from Mardan with stones in both kidneys and when he started treating the man, he found amulets painted on his back and on inquiry, the patient revealed that he was unable to go through the treatments, so he went to a local faith healer to get these amulets painted on the hopes that he may get well.

While addressing the ceremony at KPC, former student leader and Democratic Students Federation (DSF) activist, Dr Rizvi recalled the past that he regularly used to visit KPC to distribute DSF press releases. Talking to this scribe, Dr Rizvi recalled the past that how he got the idea to establish such a mass level institute, he said that thanks to the flood that had given him an idea to establish such an institute. "It was 1973 when torrential floods hit Sindh and I was visiting district Thatta with some friends, when in village Chohar Jamali, under a bayan tree I found a mother scattering channas in the mud before her hungry children and when I asked why she is doing so, she said that her children are hungry for the past three days and if she handed the channas over to them they would eat them at once and ask for more so she was scattering them in the mud so that it may take time for them to search and eat. After learning about that incident I came to know that life is not just a bed of roses," he recalled.

SIUT, the largest public sector health organisation in the country, provides free, comprehensive and modern medical care in kidney diseases and transplantation of different human organs. After being given autonomy in 1991, SIUT has treated over 1 million patients and spent over a billion rupees on curing patients. SIUT treats 650,000 patients annually, majority of these patients arrive from rural areas and all of them are treated free of cost at SIUT.

"With the passage of time, the healthcare facilities have increased along with the patients and diseases. In the past we used to operate on a single patient every month, but now we operate on three patients everyday and on every organ transplant case we have to spend Rs 200,000," he said.

SIUT started working in 1974 and the ever first organ transplant was held in 1980 and since then SIUT has conducted 2,800 cases of organ transplant. "In SIUT everyday 38 operations are conducted out of which two to three operations are of organ transplants," he said.

To visit SIUT website, click here and to support SIUT from the US, click here

Saturday, September 05, 2009

The Demand for Pakistan and the Partition of India

“It is a mistake to equate the demand for Pakistan with the partition of India”
Ayesha Jalal, Pakistani historian and author of The Sole Spokesman, picks through the tangle of the Jinnah controversy with Shoma Chaudhury
By Shoma Chaudhury, Tejleqa.com, September 5, 2009

What strikes you, personally, as the sharpest irony of the Jinnah- Jaswant Singh controversy and its fallout in India?

What strikes me as most ironic is the extent to which the '''secular' Congress and the 'communal' BJP end up subscribing to the same common idioms of Indian nationalism when it comes to Pakistan and its most potent symbol, Mohammad Ali Jinnah.

Jinnah of the 1916 Lucknow Pact where Sarojini Naidu hailed him as the “ambassador of Hindu-Muslim unity”; Jinnah of the 1940 Lahore Declaration and two-nation theory; Jinnah who wanted Pakistan to be a “laboratory of Islam”; the secular Jinnah of the August 11 1947 address. And the Jinnah of the personal domain: a Parsi wife, smoking, drinking. How is one to reconcile all these? Were these all stages in the evolution of Jinnah’s political thinking, or were they expedient positions?

Like any other successful politician, Jinnah changed tactics without losing sight of his ultimate strategic objectives in response to shifting political dynamics during a career spanning several decades. Only a most superficial and politically tainted understanding of Jinnah can lead to the conclusion that there was an irreconcilable contradiction between his early career when he was hailed as the ‘ambassador of Hindu-Muslim unity’ and his later years when he orchestrated the demand for a Pakistan in order to win an equitable share of power for Muslims in an independent India.

As for the presumed contradiction between his personal lifestyle and championing of a Pakistan in which Islam would play a role, the problem again lies with an insufficient understanding of what Jinnah meant by Islam. The Islam he advocated was neither bigoted nor narrow-minded, but one based on principles of equity, justice and fairplay for all, regardless of caste or creed. Jinnah never abandoned his secular and liberal vision for purposes of expediency. This is amply in evidence from the speeches he gave in the aftermath of partition on the place of religion and the minorities in the Muslim state of Pakistan.

Your own book The Sole Spokesman argues that Partition was a gross miscalculation and Jinnah never wanted it till the end. How is one to read his demand for two nations then? And what, according to you, did Jinnah really want?

What I argued in The Sole Spokesman was that it was a mistake to equate the demand for Pakistan with the partition of India as it took place in 1947. After 1940, the demand for Pakistan was intended by Jinnah as a means to stake a claim for the Muslim share of power in India once the British quit. He argued that the unitary centre of the raj was a British construction and would stand dissolved at the moment of decolonization. Any reconstitution of the centre would have to be based on the premise that there were ‘two nations’ in India – the Muslim nation represented by the Muslim-majority provinces in the north-west and north-east (Pakistan) and the Hindu nation represented by the Hindu-majority provinces (Hindustan). Once the Congress and the British conceded the principle of a Pakistan, Jinnah left it an open question whether the two parts of India would arrive at treaty arrangements on matters of common concern as two sovereign states or enter into a confederal arrangement on the basis of equality. Jinnah always insisted that ‘Pakistan’ had to be based on undivided Punjab and Bengal and resolutely opposed the partition of these two provinces along ostensibly religious lines until the bitter end. By insisting on a wresting power at a strong center with only the most nominal concessions to the provincial autonomy demanded by the Muslim-majority provinces, by endorsing the Hindu Mahasabha’s call to partition Punjab and Bengal and, above all, by refusing to grant Muslims the share of power at the all-India level demanded by Jinnah, the Congress led by Nehru and Patel foreclosed the possibility of keeping India united. Jinnah did miscalculate in believing Gandhi’s voice was still dominant in the Congress.

Was the idea of an eminent Muslim domain within a sovereign Indian Union a tenable idea? Indian states were in any case carved along linguistic lines, would a Muslim State have been in keeping with this principle? And if so, why were the Congress stalwarts so against it?

This is a counterfactual question. However, the irony is that it was Jinnah and the Muslim League who wanted undivided Punjab and Bengal and the Mahasabha-Congress combine that insisted on their division along lines of religion. The Congress stalwarts were against such a Muslim state because it entailed diluting their control over the centre and gave far too much power to Jinnah and the Muslim League. Linguistic states in a federal union was not incompatible with Jinnah’s vision.

For complete article, click here

Islam and Democracy Debate

In spite of Islam
Moataz-Bellah Abdel-Fattah explains to Gihan Shahine why democracy is severely lacking in Muslim-majority countries even though its principles are deeply-rooted in the basic tenets of Islam
Al-Ahram, 3 - 9 September 2009

As a firm believer in the benefits of democracy, Moataz-Bellah Abdel-Fattah attempts to find answers to the tough question of whether the attitude of ordinary, educated Muslims constitutes a barrier to the adoption of democracy. Abdel-Fattah is the author of eight books and several academic and journalistic articles in Arabic and English, but what is interesting about Democratic Values in the Muslim World -- and was probably the reason why the study was chosen as one of the most outstanding books in 2006 by Choice Academic Review -- is the fact that Abdel-Fattah allowed Muslims to speak for themselves rather than draw conclusions about them by equating all Muslims to "a group of extremists and anti-modernity radicals" who, according to Abdel-Fattah, "have been very vocal in their criticism of democracy".

"I used several empirical tools, such as survey and focus-group discussions, to colour a picture that has been brush-stroked in black and white in the West thanks to the Western neo-orientalist scholarship that does not distinguish between different Muslim sub-cultures and societies," Abdel-Fattah said. "Colouring the picture of Muslims' perception of democracy is analogous to breaking down the big stereotypical picture into its original components."

The book concludes that Muslims are so diverse that they defy any one-size-fits-all characterisation regarding their attitudes towards democracy. Some Muslim societies are in a struggle between the sub-culture of "democracy-as-a-must" versus the sub- culture of "dictator... but" that justified autocracy (example: Pakistan and Algeria). Other Muslim societies (Turkey, Mali, and Malaysia) have already settled this debate by respecting democratic values and institutions. Other cultures, (Saudi Arabia and the UAE) still perceive democracy as an alien concept or a solution to a problem they do not have.

"Other countries have a more complicated political culture," Abdel-Fattah said. "Egyptians, for instance, have general acceptance of democracy and give it lip service, yet they are not ready to sacrifice for it. But if the political elite decide to move forward towards a real liberal state, Egyptians would not object."

At the individual level, whether Muslims are supportive of democracy, personal experiences and perceived benefits of democratisation play an important role in shaping Muslim attitudes towards democracy.

"We can conclude, then, that Muslims are not passionately and irrationally anti- democratic as the popular media and some scholars in the West have often implied, but rather they are conditioned to viewing democracy with positive expectations or scepticism," Abdel-Fattah noted.

For complete article, click here

Related:
Can Islam and Democracy Coexist? - National Geographic, 2003
Islam, the Modern World, and the West: Contemporary Topics - Resources by Professor Alan Godlas
Islam and Democracy - John Esposito and John Voll

Assassination attempt on Pakistan's Religious Affairs Minister

Pakistan critic of attacks now victim of one
Zarar Khan, Associated Press
San Francisco Chronicle, September 3, 2009

Suspected militants opened fire on a vehicle carrying Pakistan's religious affairs minister Wednesday, wounding him and killing his driver in a brazen attack in the heart of the capital.

Hamid Saeed Kazmi had been critical of Muslim extremists blamed for scores of attacks in Pakistan over the last 21/2 years.

Fellow ministers said the Taliban were suspected in the shooting, which took place as police in Islamabad were on high alert amid fears of revenge attacks following the Aug. 5 killing of Pakistani Taliban leader Baitullah Mehsud in a CIA missile strike.

"We are not scared - we are not afraid of these cowardly acts," said Health Minister Ejaz Jhakrani.

The broad daylight ambush raised fresh fears for security in Pakistan's cities, in addition to the northwestern border areas where the military has battled al Qaeda-linked extremists.

Pakistan recently intensified its fight against various Islamist militant groups in the country's northwest, including a new operation in the Khyber region near the Afghan border that the military said destroyed six bases Wednesday.

Related:
Pakistan minister escapes assassination attempt - CNN
Six suspects held for attack on Kazmi: Hunt on for collaborator of attackers in ministry - DT

NATO Airstrike in Afghanistan - Consequences?

NATO Strike Magnifies Divide on Afghan War
By STEPHEN FARRELL and RICHARD A. OPPEL Jr.
New york times, September 4, 2009

KUNDUZ, Afghanistan — A NATO airstrike on Friday exploded two fuel tankers that had been hijacked by the Taliban, setting off competing claims about how many among the scores of dead were civilians and raising questions about whether the strike violated tightened rules on the use of aerial bombardment.

Afghan officials said that up to 90 people were killed by the strike near Kunduz, a northern city where the trucks got stuck after militants tried to drive them across a river late Thursday night.

The strike came at a time of intense debate over the Afghan war in both the United States and Europe and after a heavily disputed election that has left Afghanistan tense and, at least temporarily, without credible leaders.

Though there seemed little doubt some of the dead were militants, it was unclear how many of the dead were civilians, and with anger at the foreign forces high here, NATO ordered an immediate investigation.

Recently, Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal, the top American and NATO commander here, severely restricted the use of airstrikes, arguing that America risked losing the war if it did not reduce civilian casualties.

Underscoring his concern, on Friday he recorded a video message, translated into Dari and Pashto, to be released to Afghan news organizations.

The general began by greeting “the great people of Afghanistan, salaam aleikum.”

“As commander of the International Security Assistance Force, nothing is more important than the safety and protection of the Afghan people,” General McChrystal said in the brief message. “I take this possible loss of life or injury to innocent Afghans very seriously.”

General McChrystal said he had ordered the investigation “into the reasons and results of this attack, which I will share with the Afghan people.”

Two 14-year-old boys and one 10-year-old boy were admitted to the regional hospital here in Kunduz, along with a 16-year-old who later died. Mahboubullah Sayedi, a spokesman for the Kunduz provincial governor, said most of the estimated 90 dead were militants, judging by the number of charred pieces of Kalashnikov rifles found. But he said civilians were also killed.

In explaining the civilian deaths, military officials speculated that local people were conscripted by the Taliban to unload the fuel from the tankers, which were stuck near a river several miles from the nearest villages.

But some people wounded by the strike said that they had gone to the scene with jerrycans after other people had run through their villages saying that free fuel was available.

For complete article, click here

Related:
US Official Reaffirms Need for Afghanistan Society Building - VOA
UN planning summit in Afghanistan next spring - Reuters
Blooming Financial Support - Col Oliver North, Fox News

Thursday, September 03, 2009

Helping Pakistan Defeat the Taliban: ISPU Report


Helping Pakistan Defeat the Taliban: A Joint Action Agenda for the United States & Pakistan
By Haider Ali Hussein Mullick, ISPU, August 2009

EXCERPT

In late April 2009, taking full advantage of a failing state, the Pakistani Taliban were sixty miles away from the capital of nuclear-armed Pakistan. Pakistan had capitulated in the Swat Valley by granting carte blanche to the Taliban to exercise administrative and judicial control, thus placing even more territory under direct Taliban rule after Pakistan lost control of most of its tribal agencies abutting Afghanistan. Two months after an unprecedented military operation, however, Taliban forces were in retreat and more than 2.5 million denizens of the Swat valley were displaced. After five years of a failed counterinsurgency policy, the Pakistani military was finally willing to strengthen the “lessons learned loop” in its decision-making process. While this transformation is anything but complete, the civil-military complex in Islamabad has moved away, albeit slowly, from using unrestrained brute force toward using stabilization operations that focus on protecting civilians and the economic infrastructure. Moreover, Islamabad has upgraded the Taliban to the status of Pakistan’s number one enemy, even while it alleges Indian support for the insurgency in Baluchistan and its indirect support in terms of arms to militants in Pakistan’s northwest.

There are more positive signs. For example, President Barack Obama is pushing for a regional approach (AfPak) and a broad assistance package (socio-economic and military assistance), both of which are resonating in Islamabad – especially the American commitment to help rehabilitate Pakistan’s approximately 2.5 million internally displaced persons (IDPs). At present, more than 95 percent of the Swat Valley and its environs are under Islamabad’s control as thousands are being repatriated back to major cities like Mingora.

Furthermore, Pakistan’s current military success against the Taliban is garnering public support, and its shift toward population security abetted by the use of precision weapons is increasing troop morale and uniting mainstream political parties. Positive developments include the timely support offered by the United States Congress, the Pentagon, and the State Department to bolster Islamabad’s efforts to win this war. Moreover, Pakistan has shifted its threat perception toward the Taliban and away from India even while issues of accountability, trainers, and equipment remain unresolved.

The return of the Congress government in India, with a greater majority and willingness to work toward Pakistan-India peace process, raises hopes for an extended dĆ©tente between the two countries. The recent meeting between Pakistan’s Prime Minister Yusuf Reza Gilani and India’s Prime Minister Dr. Manmohan Singh on the sidelines of the Non-Alliance Movement meeting at Sharm El-Sheikh, Egypt, has broken the stalemate between the two nuclear states after last fall’s terrorist attacks in Mumbai. The joint statement issued clearly states the common threat from terrorism and the need for bilateral talks to resolve all outstanding issues, including Kashmir and India’s suspected involvement in Baluchistan. If this process continues, Pakistan will be able to move more troops away from its eastern border with India and toward its western border to bolster its ongoing campaign against the Taliban, which the American military will welcome. In addition, there is reason to believe that India’s recent change of heart was influenced by United States Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s visit.

For complete report (pdf), click here