tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16644746236501816922024-03-05T00:41:43.949-08:00pakpotpourri2Pakpotpourri2 supports no individual or party. It only supports a strong Pakistan.YASMEEN ALIhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10748945833762147296noreply@blogger.comBlogger110125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1664474623650181692.post-25422857278126453512015-03-22T16:59:00.001-07:002015-03-22T16:59:18.350-07:00Moving beyond 1947<strong style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.8000001907349px; font-style: inherit; line-height: 1.7;"><em style="font-weight: inherit; line-height: 1.7;"><span style="font-family: georgia, serif; font-size: medium;">Article in Weekly Pulse on 23rd March 2015</span></em></strong><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.8000001907349px;">
<b><span style="font-family: Georgia, serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 18.3999996185303px;"><br /></span></b></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhs_YU8rzlrAeUo3O0T7PJc4PUHiGVa0zStKULM3ZXcQw1sfCmD32_M9JogKymhQgmZXNLp0LML5wahrrsA8Nc6y8YcB8PhrzNUL1TOWO0f4QqQDQPrTkRtJH6bxyZQ8zznqeSUIZuUfYw/s1600/3+(1%2Bof%2B1)My%2BPic.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhs_YU8rzlrAeUo3O0T7PJc4PUHiGVa0zStKULM3ZXcQw1sfCmD32_M9JogKymhQgmZXNLp0LML5wahrrsA8Nc6y8YcB8PhrzNUL1TOWO0f4QqQDQPrTkRtJH6bxyZQ8zznqeSUIZuUfYw/s1600/3+(1+of+1)My+Pic.jpg" height="320" width="213" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.8000001907349px;">
<b><span style="font-family: Georgia, serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 18.3999996185303px;">Yasmeen Aftab Ali</span></b></div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.8000001907349px;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia, serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.8000001907349px;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia, serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.8000001907349px;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia, serif;">Trains upon trains pulled in the Lahore Railways Station with mutilated bodies of old men and women, children, women pregnant and young men and girls. No one was spared. A few lucky ones who were spared were those who were taken as dead; bathed in blood of those killed around them, buried in the pile of dead bodies, pretending to be as dead as their fellow passengers. This was the standard scene of post Pakistan creation trains heading from India. Unfortunately, instead of moving forward beyond this hatred in 1947, India has chosen to stay stuck in this familiar zone. How has this choice been made, one may ask? Firstly, by illegally occupying Kashmir. This disputed area holds great strategic importance for both India and Pakistan. The Indus and the tributaries flowing from Indus are the source of fresh water for a largely agricultural economy of Pakistan. Controlling water by increasing or decreasing the flow can damage crops in Pakistan. This is exactly what happened </span><span style="background-image: initial; background-repeat: initial; font-family: Georgia, serif;">soon after Independence, India had shut off the canals of Central Bari Doab. The result was damage to crops it being the sowing season. Historian <i>Naveed Tajammal </i> in an article states, “</span><span style="color: black; font-family: Georgia, serif;">The article lll of the Indus Water Treaty binds the Government of India not to hinder the flow of the western rivers, i.e. Indus, Jhelum and Chenab, to Pakistan, and India cannot store any water or construct any storage works, on the above cited rivers, having been given total rights since march 1973, of Ravi, Beas and Sutlej. We get flood surplus of these rivers which is released in case of excessive rains, which helps in recharging our ground waters levels, but that too will cease after the second Ravi-Beas Link is made. Today while we slumber, India has started works on, the following projects; Pakal Dul 1000MW, Kiru 600 MW,Karwar 520 MW, Baglihar (eventual 900 MW),Sawalkot 1200MW (two 600mw units),Salal 390 MW, Sewa-ll 120 MW, and finally the Bursur project on the Marusudar river, which, is a major tributary of Chenab river, here the Foxland intends to build a massive water storage dam, which will control and regulate the flow to maintain levels of Pakal dul, Dul Hasti, Rattle, Baglihar, Sawalkot and Salal Hydro-projects, on the Chenab. Jhelum will be blessed by the foxland with Kishanganga 330 MW and Uri-ll 240 MW.” (Published March 6, 2012)</span></div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.8000001907349px;">
<span style="color: black; font-family: Georgia, serif;">Kashmir has another significance for both countries and this is the existence of Silk Route. The main land connection between Pakistan and China that passes through Kashmir. Kashmir has led both countries to war. It represents the main bone of contention between both. No amount of superficial handling of relationships between both and by both nations can lead to continuing peace between both nations. Only an intelligent settlement of the dispute can deliver this result. In light of the existing government in India, any such settlement is unlikely. In fact, to expect any government togive away a territory it has occupied, albeit illegally will be political suicide.</span></div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.8000001907349px;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia, serif;">Perhaps Pundit Jawaharlal Nehru, gave the solution to this issue </span><span style="background-image: initial; background-repeat: initial; font-family: Georgia, serif;">in his statement in the Indian Parliament on 7th August, 1952; “Pandit Nehru said, “Let me say clearly that we accept the basic proposition that the future of Kashmir is going to be decided finally by the goodwill and pleasure of her people. The goodwill and pleasure of this Parliament is of no importance in this matter, not because this Parliament does not have the strength to decide the question of Kashmir but because any kind of imposition would be against the principles that this Parliament holds. Kashmir is very close to our minds and hearts and if by some decree or adverse fortune, ceases to be a part of India, it will be a wrench and a pain and torment for us. If, however, the people of Kashmir do not wish to remain with us, let them go by all means. We will not keep them against their will, however painful it may be to us. I want to stress that it is only the people of Kashmir who can decide the future of Kashmir. It is not that we have merely said that to the United Nations and to the people of Kashmir, it is our conviction and one that is borne out by the policy that we have pursued, not only in Kashmir but everywhere. Though these five years have meant a lot of trouble and expense and in spite of all we have done, we would willingly leave if it was made clear to us that the people of Kashmir wanted us to go. However sad we may feel about leaving we are not going to stay against the wishes of the people. We are not going to impose ourselves on them on the point of the bayonet.” (Arundhati Roy in<i>The Hindu </i>November 28, 2010) And this by the way was neither the first nor the last time he opined on the issue.</span><span style="font-family: Georgia, serif;"></span></div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.8000001907349px;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia, serif;">This main cause has led to a cascading fountain of negativity that has given birth to more actions and reactions that one can recount. A deep distrust of each other, nurtured and watered by the continuing existence of the dispute has stopped both India and Pakistan to move forward confidently into the future developing programmes that focus on their people not upon fear of each other.</span></div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.8000001907349px;">
<span style="font-family: Georgia, serif;">This very fear has led India to fear that “<span style="background-image: initial; background-repeat: initial;">with the “official end” of war in terror in Afghanistan heralded by the departure of US combat forces, Pakistan shall launch the jihadists in India-occupied Kashmir. Nothing can be further from the truth. One; Pakistan does not “own” the jihadists as claimed by India and two; Pakistan is facing terrorism within its borders.” (My op-ed September 24, 2013) This very fear has led to focus on the Ayni Air Base also called as 'Gissar Air Base' located 10 km west of the capital of Tajikistan-Dushanbe. Between years 2002-2010, India invested approximately $70 million in renovations, installing state-of-the-art air defense navigational facilities. The runway was further extended. This access offers immediate strategic depth in the region to India. This very fear has also led to India’s decision to maintain a strong foothold at the Farkhor Air Base; a military air base located near the town of Farkhor in Tajikistan. To be noted; aircrafts taking off from Farkhor could be over the Pakistani skies within minutes. </span></span></div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.8000001907349px;">
<span style="background-image: initial; background-repeat: initial; font-family: Georgia, serif;">This very fear has led to spending of funds from both sides in equipping their armies, their fleets and air forces with bigger, better machines and equipment in case needed against each other. If not anything else; to be viewed as a deterrent towards each other. The question here would be; why must this money be spent based on the fear of each other? Why should not this money be spent on the development of facilities, healthcare and education of its people? According to a U.N research study, “</span><span style="background-image: initial; background-repeat: initial; font-family: Georgia, serif;">Far more people in India have access to a cell phone than to a toilet and improved sanitation. Says <i>Zafar Adeel</i>, Director of United Nations University’s Canada-based think-tank for water, the Institute for Water, Environment and Health: “It is a tragic irony to think that in India, a country now wealthy enough that roughly half of the people own phones, about half cannot afford the basic necessity and dignity of a toilet.” (United Nations University 2010)</span></div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.8000001907349px;">
<span style="background-image: initial; background-repeat: initial; font-family: Georgia, serif;">India being the one occupying Kashmir must bear greater responsibility for this climate of distrust and hostility between both nations. It has been sixty-eight years to the birth of both nations being free from the yolk of their colonial masters. Yet they continue to live with the legacy that has only created hatred. Is that wise?</span></div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.8000001907349px;">
<span style="background-image: initial; background-repeat: initial; font-family: Georgia, serif;">Time to take stock.</span></div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.8000001907349px;">
<b><i><span style="background-image: initial; background-repeat: initial; font-family: Georgia, serif;">The writer is a lawyer, academic and political analyst. She has authored a book titled ‘A Comparative Analysis of Media & Media Laws in Pakistan.’ She can be contacted at: <a href="mailto:yasmeenali62@gmail.com" style="color: #1155cc;" target="_blank">yasmeenali62@gmail.com</a> and tweets at @yasmeen_9</span></i></b></div>
YASMEEN ALIhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10748945833762147296noreply@blogger.com6tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1664474623650181692.post-28951901841793483382015-03-22T16:46:00.001-07:002015-03-22T16:46:12.698-07:00The Pakistani Identity<b style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: georgia, serif; font-size: large;"><i>Article in The Dawn (Supplement 23rd March 2015)</i></b><br />
<b style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: georgia, serif; font-size: large;"><i>This is a cross post.</i></b><br />
<b style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: georgia, serif; font-size: large;"><i><br /></i></b>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjrai4-Z3gB0hiFmJYyRXarJbS1If2SqVt6IPYyawpnpDu7ITlBuIHM39X298ZrLekxGQjAWZxvjaNu5KRmiuP6gIR1RKkgt802wQ2x8WysxtuZuA0UZ6M7fml2rjnbEHhKDyWWto9E2hI/s1600/3+(1%2Bof%2B1)My%2BPic.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjrai4-Z3gB0hiFmJYyRXarJbS1If2SqVt6IPYyawpnpDu7ITlBuIHM39X298ZrLekxGQjAWZxvjaNu5KRmiuP6gIR1RKkgt802wQ2x8WysxtuZuA0UZ6M7fml2rjnbEHhKDyWWto9E2hI/s1600/3+(1%2Bof%2B1)My%2BPic.jpg" height="320" width="213" /></a></div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: 'Open Sans', 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 23.7999992370605px; margin-bottom: 0.825em;">
<strong style="font-style: inherit; line-height: 1.7;">Yasmeen Aftab Ali</strong></div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: 'Open Sans', 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 23.7999992370605px; margin-bottom: 0.825em;">
Pakistan continues to suffer from its birth convulsions since 1947, unable to determine a common bond of identity, with other Pakistanis, across the board. To understand the dilemma, one must have a clear understanding of terms involved. The simplest meaning of identity can be defined as a distinctive character marking an individual, group of individuals, an ethnic group, a nation. Most Pakistanis however, remain confused to this date regarding their identity. Some measure it by religion, others by culture, yet some use other varied markers. Each of these markers are used in exclusion of other elements involved; a fatal mistake.</div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: 'Open Sans', 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 23.7999992370605px; margin-bottom: 0.825em;">
The first seed of the split was sown when the speech of Quaid-e-Azam for 11<span style="font-size: 10px; font-style: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: 1; min-height: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">th</span> August 1947 was censored by Chowdhery Muhammad Ali. The only paper to publish it uncensored was <em style="font-weight: inherit; line-height: 1.7;">The Dawn</em>. Chowdhery probably did not agree with the Quaid when he stated, “You are free; you are free to go to your temples, you are free to go to your mosques, or to any other place of worship in this State of Pakistan. You may belong to any religion or caste or creed-that has nothing to do with the business of the State…. Even now there are some states in existence, where there are discriminations, made and bars imposed against a particular class. Thank God, we are not starting in those days. We are starting in the days when there is no discrimination, no discrimination between one community and another, no discrimination between one caste or creed and another. We are starting with this fundamental principle that we are all citizens and equal citizens of one State.”</div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: 'Open Sans', 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 23.7999992370605px; margin-bottom: 0.825em;">
Little did Jinnah know that the identity that had emerged as a strength in the pre-partition era would be damaged, molested and torn apart by divisions created by different vested interest groups. It was this understanding of a pluralistic society that gave birth to Pakistan; yet today we stand, in 2015, trying to piece together what exactly that identity is. The identity is not based upon religion to the exclusion of rights of those not following the religion of the majority. The excerpt shared above of Jinnah’s speech stands testimony to that. Also standing testimony to this thought process is the Chapter of Fundamental Rights of the Constitution of Pakistan 1973, as does Article 19 that deals with Freedom of Expression and Speech and states thus:</div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: 'Open Sans', 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 23.7999992370605px; margin-bottom: 0.825em;">
“Every citizen shall have the right to freedom of speech and expression, and there shall be freedom of the press, subject to any reasonable restrictions imposed by law in the interest of the glory of Islam or the integrity, security or defence of Pakistan or any part thereof, friendly relations with foreign States, public order, decency or morality, or in relation to contempt of court, [commission of]<span style="font-size: 10px; font-style: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: 1; min-height: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"> </span>or incitement to an offence.”</div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: 'Open Sans', 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 23.7999992370605px; margin-bottom: 0.825em;">
The term citizen denotes every person holding the citizenship of Pakistan irrespective of the caste, creed or religion. If I may add: exactly as promised by Jinnah. Freedom of expression is deemed to be a basic human right, that includes; freedom of thought, freedom of press, freedom to express oneself in arts, poetry, architecture, crafts, lifestyles, dressing, eating, culture, music, sculptures, professing one’s faith, so on and so forth. Every citizen of Pakistan has the right to freedom of expression; also an integral part of the constitution, in line with Jinnah’s philosophy. Pakistani identity therefore, does not offer this gift to members of one religion while excluding others. Nor does it offer an advantage to one sect within the religion to the exclusion of another.</div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: 'Open Sans', 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 23.7999992370605px; margin-bottom: 0.825em;">
Some promote the theory that there are at least six distinct ethnic races in Pakistan ie the Pathans, the Punjabis, the Baluchis, the Sindhis, Kashmiris and the Urdu Speaking. They opine that since these ethnic races have a cultural heritage spanning centuries, therefore the Pakistani Identity (whatever it may be) takes a back- bench and has thereby failed to develop. This, as put forth by them; includes not only cultural differences but also difference in language spoken by them. Lack of a common language base is promoted as a major dividing factor by these theorists.</div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: 'Open Sans', 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 23.7999992370605px; margin-bottom: 0.825em;">
Let me submit here, that nations geographically and demographically bigger than us, have had more cultural diversity in terms of ethnicity than we can imagine, yet they have managed to emerge as one nation. One such example is the US. The US Census Bureau map shows the ancestry of its 317 million people of which Germans are by far the largest with 49,206,934 people. This is followed by the African-Americans. Then there are roughly 4.5 million Irish people settled in the larger cities of the US including New York, Boston and Chicago to name a few. The English-Americans are also sizeable in number. Those claiming a Mexican ancestry are said to be at 31,789,483 in number. Yet, this does not stop any one of them from thinking and acting only as Americans.</div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: 'Open Sans', 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 23.7999992370605px; margin-bottom: 0.825em;">
In countries having served time under colonial rule, English has more often than not been given a legislative status. Most African states for example, had English as their national and official language to curb ethnic disputes, which would otherwise arise from existence of multi-tribes and ethnicities.</div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: 'Open Sans', 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 23.7999992370605px; margin-bottom: 0.825em;">
We made the mistake of trying to impose one uniform language; Urdu from top down ignoring the multitude of local languages especially Bengali. A region where few spoke or understood Urdu. The result dear readers, was the 1971 episode. Among other reasons, effort at imposition of Urdu on a Bengali speaking ethnic race led to disastrous results. The educational policies followed by successive governments to create different classes based on language preferences namely the elite and regular (English language being mandatory for good jobs) has undoubtedly created a deep schism within the Pakistani society. We must move towards a solution, as it is high time, not remain bogged down by deterrents preventing us from achieving greatness.</div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: 'Open Sans', 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 23.7999992370605px; margin-bottom: 0.825em;">
To move towards that solution, we must first address the question posed; what is then a Pakistani Identity?</div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: 'Open Sans', 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 23.7999992370605px; margin-bottom: 0.825em;">
I believe the Pakistani Identity must be seen in a bigger context as opposed to being relegated to religious, linguistic, or similar levels to the exclusion of other elements at play.</div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: 'Open Sans', 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 23.7999992370605px; margin-bottom: 0.825em;">
Pakistani Identity evolved in 1947 as a political statement. It is composed of different ethnic groups and different religious groups; further sub-divided into different sects within these different religious groups. Pakistan was and is created for each one of these groups as clearly enunciated in Jinnah’s speech of 11<span style="font-size: 10px; font-style: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: 1; min-height: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">th</span> 1947. </div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: 'Open Sans', 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 23.7999992370605px; margin-bottom: 0.825em;">
No country can develop as a nation if it negates its component parts. Translated, it means, a Pakistani Identity cannot establish and entrench itself in the psyche of its people minus the identity of being a composition of all its multi-cultural and multi-religious roots. To deny the uniformity leads to a national identity. Acknowledgement and nurturing of sub- cultures making up these layers; does. Imposition of any form that is alien will not create an identity; it will only destroy the existing one leaving one groping in the dark in confusion. Subscribing to the thought expounded above, <em style="font-weight: inherit; line-height: 1.7;">Hywel Coleman, </em>an Honorary Research Fellow of Leeds, did a research paper for the British Council in 2010 addressing the weightage awarded to English Language competency in the Civil Service Exams in Pakistan. He suggested that applicants should need to demonstrate not only competency in English language but also the language generally understood by all; Urdu as well as competency in at least one regional language. In one stroke of brilliance, Hywel told us that though English is necessary in today’s world based on inter-linking of nations, important too is to link Pakistanis across board under the ‘umbrella’ of Urdu understood by all. He has at the same time awarded equality to regional languages as well thereby emphasizing upon the importance of one’s roots.</div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: 'Open Sans', 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 23.7999992370605px; margin-bottom: 0.825em;">
The Pakistani Identity is not based on one aspect alone to the exclusion of every other component involved; it is multidimensional and multilayered. It is many things rolled in one. The objective never was that once the goal of creation of Pakistan was achieved, Pakistanis would meet out the exact same treatment to their minorities as meted out to them in undivided India. At least, that was not Jinnah’s vision. Pakistan is essentially pluralistic in its identity; a society composed of different ethnicities, religions and cultures and as such must be given the environment to nourish, gain strength and grow, learning in the process to love and celebrate their differences. Belittling or nullifying these varieties of flavor will only damage the fabric of our combined identity. Yet at the same time, one needs to understand that all are intertwined as one under the umbrella of ‘Pakistan’ and this; defines each of us!</div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: 'Open Sans', 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 23.7999992370605px; margin-bottom: 0.825em;">
Multiculturalism is the underlying thread that weaves the Pakistani Identity and holds it together. Emphasizing on the citizenship alone will fail to gel people from different faiths and cultures as one. Accepting and celebrating the differences, initiating serious inter-faith dialogues and appreciation of cultural flavors will create a bonding. </div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: 'Open Sans', 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 23.7999992370605px; margin-bottom: 0.825em;">
<strong style="font-style: inherit; line-height: 1.7;">Endnote: </strong><strong style="font-style: inherit; line-height: 1.7;">“</strong>In any case Pakistan is not going to be a theocratic State — to be ruled by priests with a divine mission. We have many non- Muslims — Hindus, Christians, and Parsis — but they are all Pakistanis. They will enjoy the same rights and privileges as any other citizens and will play their rightful part in the affairs of Pakistan.”(<em style="font-weight: inherit; line-height: 1.7;">Jinnah </em> in February 1948 address in US)</div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: 'Open Sans', 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 23.7999992370605px; margin-bottom: 0.825em;">
<br /></div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: 'Open Sans', 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 23.7999992370605px; margin-bottom: 0.825em;">
<strong style="font-style: inherit; line-height: 1.7;"><em style="font-weight: inherit; line-height: 1.7;">The writer is a lawyer, academic and political analyst. She has authored a book titled ‘A Comparative Analysis of Media & Media Laws in Pakistan.’ Her mail ID is <a href="mailto:yasmeenali62@gmail.com" style="color: #1155cc;" target="_blank">yasmeenali62@gmail.com</a> and tweets at @yasmeen_9</em></strong></div>
YASMEEN ALIhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10748945833762147296noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1664474623650181692.post-42244903649866864202011-09-06T22:56:00.001-07:002011-09-06T22:59:00.079-07:00MILITARY INC BY AYESHA SIDDIQA REVIEWEDBy Afreen Baig<div><p class="MsoNormal">Dr Ayesha Siddiqa's 'The Military Inc.' is a book deflective of reality, highly derogatory and against the very notion of sovereignty.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">Dr Ayesha Siddiqa launches the book by giving the impression that her intention is to cover the entrepreneurial activities of military worldwide. However, in depth reading reaffirms suspicions that her book massively targets the Pakistan Military and the top echelons of the Armed Forces, most of which are based upon self serving assumptions and intentional hoodwinking. A labyrinth of financial figures is presented to further obscure the ordinary reader's intelligence.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">The book sets forward four arguments. First, that MILBUS (Military Business) is military capital that perpetuates the military's political predatory style; and is kept concealed and includes questionable transfer of resources from public sector to individuals connected with armed Forces. Second, the military's economic greed increases in totalitarian systems. Third, Military convinces the citizens to bear additional costs for security on basis of conceived threats to the State. Fourth, the book considers the Pakistan Military the cause of all ills, social disparity and democratic fiasco.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">Let's start by setting the record straight. MILBUS in Pakistan - is the result of honest intentions and visionary policies - to raise independent resources, to self-finance the on-going national technological development, to modernize strategic assets, and most importantly, the determination to rely less on Foreign Aid. While at the same time, build facilities for retired military personnel and their families; and slowly withdrawing from National Defense budget allocation as a percentage of GDP.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">MILBUS also exists in well developed countries like the USA, UK, France, China, Israel or even Turkey. The Milbus or the PMEs (Private Military Enterprises) are generally known as the Private Military Industry. Famous US PMEs include Halliburton, Black-water worldwide, Defensecurity, Titan Corporations, Kellogg Brown & Root, Air Scan, DynCorp's, CACI International, etc. Famous UK PMEs include Black-Op's and Aegis Defense Services. Most of these are active beneficiaries of the Iraq War. The worldwide PME industry is now worth over $100 billion a year. Thus, this is not just a Pakistan specific industry.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">MILBUS in Pakistan is being criticized unnecessarily, with the sole intention to malign the Armed Forces. The Pakistan military has never intended to deliberately conceal their economic activities and they do not cause injustice by weighing heavily on civilian corporate sector or individual leaders.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">The book 'Military Inc' is based upon a series of presumptions and false accusations. Throughout her book, the author obstinately insists that the growth of Military economy is the case of self interest and predatory acquisition by senior officers, in which it allow the Generals to seek benefit for themselves and their clients.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">The author fails to provide, any concrete evidence that could confirm her allegations, that questionable transfer of wealth is made to individuals connected with armed forces. All she could give in example were the 500 sq yard official plots given to the Generals at the end of their service, as part of their benefits, and hence her assumption that a retired general is worth from Rs.150 million to Rs.400 million.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">Rarely do critics mention, that nominal deduction from the pay of all military officers are made during their service, in return for a small apartment or a small housing, which is handed over at the time of their retirement. However, this facility is still not available to all retiring servicemen.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">Next, the book alleges that the military's economic greed increases in totalitarian systems, where the general public, private businessmen, civilian corporate sector and national business units are all oppressed to encourage and endorse military business units. Her book focuses largely on the four welfare projects managed by the Pakistan Military i.e. The Fauji Foundation (FF), the Army Welfare Trust (AWT), Shaheen Foundation (SF) and Bahria Foundation (BF), and in some places the Frontier Works Organization (FWO).</p> <p class="MsoNormal">The author believes that "the profit earned by military is directly proportional to power and gives the armed forces a sense of being independent of the incompetent civilians" - which can only be considered as an extremely reckless comment.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">There was great wisdom behind establishing these welfare projects. The visionary minds knew that "the profit earned by the military will be directly proportional to Sovereignty of the Country and the Institution".</p> <p class="MsoNormal">The Military established its first welfare foundation in 1954, with funds received from the British as part of Pakistan's share of the Post War Services Reconstruction Fund. In India, those funds were distributed immediately amongst those who fought the Second World War. Unlike India, Pakistan's wise military opted to use those funds to establish projects that would ensure the overall well-being, availability of jobs, and a decent pension for their armed forces.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">The initial purpose of these welfare projects was to create employment opportunities for the honorable retired or disabled military personnel.<span> </span>Servicemen - whose only obligation is defending the borders of Pakistan.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">This one wise decision, not only raised the morals of the serving military men, but also gave the ordinary citizens a reason to join the Armed Forces of Pakistan and serve their country. Assured that their future is protected, the servicemen live their lives in testing times on borders, remote locations and a life away from family.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">The Fauji Foundation, Shaheen Foundation and Bahria Foundation were all established under the Charitable Endowments Act 1890. The Army Welfare Trust was established under the Societies Registration Act 1860.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">Then all these entities are registered Tax-paying Companies. The Army Welfare Trust and the Fauji Foundation pays tax at 20% of their profits. Shaheen Foundation and Bahria Foundation pay Taxes at 30% of their profits. Fair enough!</p> <p class="MsoNormal">This limited industrial base that evolved over years added to the military's credibility and resolves to contribute towards the Nation's socio-economic development and Pakistan's Gross Domestic Product (GDP). Like any ordinary successful businessmen or multi-national corporations (MNCs), the Pakistan Military utilized their available structure, nominal budget and dedicated their human resources for the welfare of the uniformed men and civilians working in those companies. While also pioneering technology, developing expertise and establishing quality control.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">The book 'Military Inc' accuses the Pakistan Armed forces of running business (MILBUS) that are diverse in nature, ranging from small scale to large scale corporate enterprises. As examples, it quotes Schools, Banks, Insurance Company, Radio and TV, a Fertilizer company, Hospitals and Clinics, Cement plant, Universities and institutes, etc.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">Dr. Ayesha Siddiqa left no opportunity to magnify and exaggerate the limited and partial presence of MILBUS competing in Pakistan's broad based expanding economy.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">Let's analyze the limited magnitude and negligible worth of these Military run ventures, compared to similar mega business entities currently present in Pakistan.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">According to State Bank of Pakistan, there are total 73 Banks in Pakistan. From which, there are 24 Limited banks, 11 Foreign Banks, 8 Financial Banks, 4 Specialized Banks, 13 Investment Banks, 7 Micro-finance Banks and 6 Islamic banks. Out of these total 73 banks - Dr Ayesha Siddiqa tends to be intolerable towards ONE 'Askari Bank' run by Military? In 2007, Askari Bank paid a Tax of Rs. 743 million.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">According to Federal Bureau of Statistics, there are 24 Cement plants in Pakistan, and only ONE owned by 'Fauji Cement Company Ltd'. A Tax-paying company listed on the Stock Exchange.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">According to State Bank of Pakistan, there are total 59 Insurance companies in Pakistan. There are 4 in the Public sector, 50 companies in the private sector and 5 are incorporated abroad. Why should anyone be narrow-minded towards ONE owned by military - 'Askari General Insurance Ltd', which is listed on the Stock Exchange and pays Tax?</p> <p class="MsoNormal">According to the Health Division and the P.M.D.C, there are around 924 Hospitals, 12,726 Medical Institutions, 560 Rural Health Centers and 4712 Dispensaries all over Pakistan. Out of these, if 10 Hospitals and 20 Medical Centers are being run by Fauji Foundation, what's the hue & cry about? These Medical services are offered to the military and civilians alike. Even the prestigious Aga Khan Health Services (AGHS) own 7 Hospitals and 164 Medical Centers.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">According to State Bank Pakistan, there are above 10 Fertilizer Plants in Pakistan from which 6 are State owned and the rest are private. Out of these, only ONE is military owned, the 'Fauji Fertilizer Company Ltd', which is listed on the Stock Exchange and audited by KPMG Taseer Hadi & Co, and pays Tax annually.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">According to Higher Education Commission, there are 122 Universities in Pakistan. Out of which, 65 are in the Public sector and 57 in the private sector. Foundation University and Bahria University are the only two affiliated with Armed Forces providing quality education to all citizens alike.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">Foundation Schools have 90 branches all over Pakistan; compared to the City School which has more than 150 branches and the Beacon-house School which has around 130 branches. We as a Nation should triumph the quality education being promoted by the Foundation schools and the model paradigm implemented.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">The Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan (SECP) has 50,125 companies registered with it. From these only 9 are MILBUS projects. Why can't Dr. Ayesha Siddiqa accept these 9 MILBUS projects out of the 50,125 projects broadmindedly?</p> <p class="MsoNormal">The author also alleges that Military's Internal Economy is hampering the growth of Pakistan's free market economy - which of course is not true. For her information, under this same system and era, and under the leadership of General Musharraf, Pakistan's free market economy boomed from $75 billion in 1999 to become $160 billion in 2007.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">In the last 6 years, the free market economy of Pakistan expanded by $85 billion. The expansion and growth the Civilian Corporate sector, National Business Units and Multi-National Corporations witnessed in these last 6 years remain unprecedented in Pakistan's Economic History. Hence proven, that Military's Internal Economy did not hamper Pakistan's free market economy!</p> <p class="MsoNormal">According to Dr Ayesha Siddiqa's book, the worth of Fauji Foundation is $169m, the worth of Army Welfare trust is $862m, the worth of Shaheen Foundation is $34.4m and the worth of Bahria Foundation is $69m. Total worth of MILBUS entities in Pakistan arise to ONLY $1.135 billion.<span> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Hence, the presence of MILBUS companies, in Pakistan's free economy of $160 billion, amongst these other sectors and enterprises arises to a negligible maximum 0.8%.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">The Karachi Stock Exchange (KSE) Market Capitalization in January 2008 stood at $75 billion. MILBUS worth as compared to KSE again arises to only 1.5%.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">It's amusing to note that Dr Ayesha Siddiqa wrote a whole book, to malign a system (MILBUS) whose worth does not exceed 0.8% of Pakistan's free market economy.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">Dr Ayesha Siddiqa's desire to portray the Pakistan Military as a coercive and self serving breed aiming to consolidate their economic power at the expense of Pakistan, not only erodes her neutrality into bias, but the above economic comparisons also contradict all her presumptuous and sham claims. As MILBUS in Pakistan has been competing fairly in free market and contributing to today's knowledge-based economy. It has played an active role to generate revenue for Pakistan and in contributing to overall GDP.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">One of the greatest wisdom foreseen, behind establishing MILBUS was to liberate the Pakistan Armed Forces of international aid assistance and interference. Classified financial autonomy gives the Armed Forces a sense of self-respect and confidence of being independent of the dominating 'International Coalition of the willing' and their foreign aid.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">The Pakistan Army has received a total of around $17 billion from the United States for arms, equipment and compensation since 1954, the year the United States entered into defense pacts with Pakistan. Much of it was uselessly spend during the 1980's Afghan war and the wars Pakistan fought with India. After 9/11, the famous foreign assistance of $10 billion comprises 60% reimbursement costs for expenditure incurred by the Pakistani Military while patrolling on PAK-Afghan border, recorded in the 'Coalition Support Funds'. These worthless assistances have not helped the Pakistan Army contrary to perception propagated in media reports.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">Because, with these insignificant and worthless assistance, follows a series of humiliating articles and editorials composed in American print media. The clueless and prejudice Pakistani media ignorantly picks up the chanting and further plays an important role in distorting and altering the actual facts and figures. No relevant person is approached to clarify and set facts straight. Authors like Dr Ayesha Siddiqa bank on such distortion to further slander the admirable Pakistan Military.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">After year 2000, the $85 billion expansion of Pakistan's economy, decreased the ratio of US aid & assistance to Pakistan's economy by around 100%. Now the U.S aid & assistance account to only 6.25% of Pakistan's expanding economy. Pakistan is successfully wriggling out of foreign influence. Visionary MILBUS was the right step in the right direction at the right time!</p> <p class="MsoNormal">Pakistan Military requires a proper platform utilized to clear the misperceptions being propagated against them and counter the sham allegations. In short, Pakistan military lacks the exposure to enhance their PR with the Public. Pakistani GHQ and ISPR should take up an active role similar to Pentagon and make their interactions more effective.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">Next, the book 'Military Inc' considers Pakistan Military the root cause of social disparity and democratic fiasco. It alleges that socio-political fragmentation would result in strengthening the army's control over politics. Throughout her book, Dr Ayesha Siddiqa lambasts and scoffs at the concept of MILBUS accusing the military of building assets and calling them as the 'new land barons'.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">In her desperation to smear the Army, she even fails to condemn the corruption practiced and coercive measures exercised by the inept political leaders. How these redundant leaders influence the bureaucracy, alter the constitution, plunder national institutions, stagnated the trade & exports, multiplied the foreign debts for the country, rob the country of the foreign reserves and accumulate their wealth in developed countries - is all together ignored by her conveniently.<span> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal">The truth is that the Armed forces are forced to intervene reluctantly and take control of the state to save it from the irresponsible and hopeless politicians, who drag the country towards brink of collapse, every time they come to power.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">In short, Pakistan's external debt rose from $18 billion in 1988 to become $38 billion by end of 1999. In 1999, Pakistan's total debt (internal & external) was almost 90% of its GDP. External debt in ratio to foreign exchange earnings were 347%. Debt servicing allocated in 1999 budget was 61% of total revenue resources. According to the World Bank, in 1999-2000 Pakistan was amongst the highly indebted countries.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">Despite the above mentioned debacle for Pakistan - the substantial expansion in the personal wealth, land and business interests of Mr. Zardari and Mr. Nawaz Sharif has earned them a place in the 'Top 5 richest people' of Pakistan in 2007. Not a single General or military servicemen made it to the list of 'Top 40 Richest Pakistani'. Who should we consider a peril to Pakistan's existence - these fraudulent politicians or the reserved military?</p> <p class="MsoNormal">The Raiwind complex of Nawaz Sharif, build on an area of around 2000 acre, consist of palatial<span> </span>residences, 300 acre farm, 500 bed hospital, a school, 200 acre dairy farm, etc - constructed at a cost of above Rs. 800 million. He personally owns Ittefaq foundries, three Sugar mills, numerous Textile mills, Steel Mills, Paper Mills, Spinning mills, Engineering companies, and numerous other business units. He owns several residential properties in Lahore and Muree. He owns vast acres of lands in Sheikhapura, Chunian, Raiwind, Multan and Bhopattian. These feudal turned politicians can easily be labeled as the 'old Pakistani barons'.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">Dr Ayesha Siddiqa also alleges that the military convinces the citizens to bear additional costs for security on basis of conceived threats to the State. She wants the public to believe that their taxes are being exploited at the expense of the notion 'National Security'. This statement of hers is an attempt to ignore and snub the volatile situation Pakistan faces at its borders.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">She also remains oblivious to the fact, that India allocates 5 times that of Pakistan's defense spending.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">However, under President Musharraf, the military spending DECREASED as percentage of GDP and National budget. It now stands at 3% of GDP and 15% of National budget. It strikes out though, how Dr Ayesha Siddiqa veils and ignores the bulk of the National budget of 85% that lies at the disposal of the manipulative hands of our shady politicians. The public has the right to know, what proper utilization has been brought about with that unaccountable 85% in the 1990's?</p> <p class="MsoNormal">This derogatory book 'Military Inc' intends to sow seeds of disenchantment amongst the general public against the modest and patriotic institution of the Armed forces of Pakistan, and lower its grace.<span> </span>Those Armed Forces of Pakistan that run to protect and deliver relief, to ordinary Pakistanis in times of calamities, natural disasters, floods, train accidents, and earthquakes. Does Pakistan have any other force or institution which is as disciplined and effective in providing speedy help immediately? Shouldn't we strengthen this only institution that we have?</p> <p class="MsoNormal">The publication of Dr Ayesha Siddiqa's own book 'Military Inc' in 2007, in President Musharraf's era, repudiates her claims to term the military rule as manipulative and suppressive. It's evident that no subtle or coercive measures were taken against her or any arm-twisting to curb the publication of this highly controversial book! Where would she find such boundless and gracious freedom? The book 'Military Inc' has become a checker of the chessboard being maneuvered by the unknown and ambiguous foreign powers interested in Balkanization of Pakistan.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">The ultimate objective of the book 'Military Inc' is to perpetrate friction and cause dissent amongst the ranks of the disciplined Armed Forces. By deliberately triggering upheaval within the lower ranks, the intention appears to encourage internal revolt. As a consequence, the unity, discipline and allegiance of the Armed Forces of Pakistan can be destroyed.<span> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Thus, to protect the allegiance of the Armed Forces, the whole concept of visionary MILBUS is justified, as a set of activities for the development of Pakistan's military might, meant to counter the rising regional threat convergence and decreasing dependence upon foreign aid - ultimately protecting the sovereignty of Pakistan and its savior Armed Forces!</p> <p class="MsoNormal">Glory and Triumph to Pakistan Armed Forces!</p> <p class="MsoNormal">Afreen Baig is an independent analyst majoring in International Relations and Economics. </p></div>Yasmeenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03738869583776491936noreply@blogger.com9tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1664474623650181692.post-70924875081100026672011-09-06T22:56:00.000-07:002011-09-06T22:58:44.325-07:00MILITARY INC BY AYESHA SIDDIQA REVIEWEDBy Afreen Baig<div><p class="MsoNormal">Dr Ayesha Siddiqa's 'The Military Inc.' is a book deflective of reality, highly derogatory and against the very notion of sovereignty.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">Dr Ayesha Siddiqa launches the book by giving the impression that her intention is to cover the entrepreneurial activities of military worldwide. However, in depth reading reaffirms suspicions that her book massively targets the Pakistan Military and the top echelons of the Armed Forces, most of which are based upon self serving assumptions and intentional hoodwinking. A labyrinth of financial figures is presented to further obscure the ordinary reader's intelligence.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">The book sets forward four arguments. First, that MILBUS (Military Business) is military capital that perpetuates the military's political predatory style; and is kept concealed and includes questionable transfer of resources from public sector to individuals connected with armed Forces. Second, the military's economic greed increases in totalitarian systems. Third, Military convinces the citizens to bear additional costs for security on basis of conceived threats to the State. Fourth, the book considers the Pakistan Military the cause of all ills, social disparity and democratic fiasco.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">Let's start by setting the record straight. MILBUS in Pakistan - is the result of honest intentions and visionary policies - to raise independent resources, to self-finance the on-going national technological development, to modernize strategic assets, and most importantly, the determination to rely less on Foreign Aid. While at the same time, build facilities for retired military personnel and their families; and slowly withdrawing from National Defense budget allocation as a percentage of GDP.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">MILBUS also exists in well developed countries like the USA, UK, France, China, Israel or even Turkey. The Milbus or the PMEs (Private Military Enterprises) are generally known as the Private Military Industry. Famous US PMEs include Halliburton, Black-water worldwide, Defensecurity, Titan Corporations, Kellogg Brown & Root, Air Scan, DynCorp's, CACI International, etc. Famous UK PMEs include Black-Op's and Aegis Defense Services. Most of these are active beneficiaries of the Iraq War. The worldwide PME industry is now worth over $100 billion a year. Thus, this is not just a Pakistan specific industry.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">MILBUS in Pakistan is being criticized unnecessarily, with the sole intention to malign the Armed Forces. The Pakistan military has never intended to deliberately conceal their economic activities and they do not cause injustice by weighing heavily on civilian corporate sector or individual leaders.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">The book 'Military Inc' is based upon a series of presumptions and false accusations. Throughout her book, the author obstinately insists that the growth of Military economy is the case of self interest and predatory acquisition by senior officers, in which it allow the Generals to seek benefit for themselves and their clients.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">The author fails to provide, any concrete evidence that could confirm her allegations, that questionable transfer of wealth is made to individuals connected with armed forces. All she could give in example were the 500 sq yard official plots given to the Generals at the end of their service, as part of their benefits, and hence her assumption that a retired general is worth from Rs.150 million to Rs.400 million.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">Rarely do critics mention, that nominal deduction from the pay of all military officers are made during their service, in return for a small apartment or a small housing, which is handed over at the time of their retirement. However, this facility is still not available to all retiring servicemen.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">Next, the book alleges that the military's economic greed increases in totalitarian systems, where the general public, private businessmen, civilian corporate sector and national business units are all oppressed to encourage and endorse military business units. Her book focuses largely on the four welfare projects managed by the Pakistan Military i.e. The Fauji Foundation (FF), the Army Welfare Trust (AWT), Shaheen Foundation (SF) and Bahria Foundation (BF), and in some places the Frontier Works Organization (FWO).</p> <p class="MsoNormal">The author believes that "the profit earned by military is directly proportional to power and gives the armed forces a sense of being independent of the incompetent civilians" - which can only be considered as an extremely reckless comment.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">There was great wisdom behind establishing these welfare projects. The visionary minds knew that "the profit earned by the military will be directly proportional to Sovereignty of the Country and the Institution".</p> <p class="MsoNormal">The Military established its first welfare foundation in 1954, with funds received from the British as part of Pakistan's share of the Post War Services Reconstruction Fund. In India, those funds were distributed immediately amongst those who fought the Second World War. Unlike India, Pakistan's wise military opted to use those funds to establish projects that would ensure the overall well-being, availability of jobs, and a decent pension for their armed forces.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">The initial purpose of these welfare projects was to create employment opportunities for the honorable retired or disabled military personnel.<span> </span>Servicemen - whose only obligation is defending the borders of Pakistan.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">This one wise decision, not only raised the morals of the serving military men, but also gave the ordinary citizens a reason to join the Armed Forces of Pakistan and serve their country. Assured that their future is protected, the servicemen live their lives in testing times on borders, remote locations and a life away from family.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">The Fauji Foundation, Shaheen Foundation and Bahria Foundation were all established under the Charitable Endowments Act 1890. The Army Welfare Trust was established under the Societies Registration Act 1860.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">Then all these entities are registered Tax-paying Companies. The Army Welfare Trust and the Fauji Foundation pays tax at 20% of their profits. Shaheen Foundation and Bahria Foundation pay Taxes at 30% of their profits. Fair enough!</p> <p class="MsoNormal">This limited industrial base that evolved over years added to the military's credibility and resolves to contribute towards the Nation's socio-economic development and Pakistan's Gross Domestic Product (GDP). Like any ordinary successful businessmen or multi-national corporations (MNCs), the Pakistan Military utilized their available structure, nominal budget and dedicated their human resources for the welfare of the uniformed men and civilians working in those companies. While also pioneering technology, developing expertise and establishing quality control.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">The book 'Military Inc' accuses the Pakistan Armed forces of running business (MILBUS) that are diverse in nature, ranging from small scale to large scale corporate enterprises. As examples, it quotes Schools, Banks, Insurance Company, Radio and TV, a Fertilizer company, Hospitals and Clinics, Cement plant, Universities and institutes, etc.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">Dr. Ayesha Siddiqa left no opportunity to magnify and exaggerate the limited and partial presence of MILBUS competing in Pakistan's broad based expanding economy.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">Let's analyze the limited magnitude and negligible worth of these Military run ventures, compared to similar mega business entities currently present in Pakistan.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">According to State Bank of Pakistan, there are total 73 Banks in Pakistan. From which, there are 24 Limited banks, 11 Foreign Banks, 8 Financial Banks, 4 Specialized Banks, 13 Investment Banks, 7 Micro-finance Banks and 6 Islamic banks. Out of these total 73 banks - Dr Ayesha Siddiqa tends to be intolerable towards ONE 'Askari Bank' run by Military? In 2007, Askari Bank paid a Tax of Rs. 743 million.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">According to Federal Bureau of Statistics, there are 24 Cement plants in Pakistan, and only ONE owned by 'Fauji Cement Company Ltd'. A Tax-paying company listed on the Stock Exchange.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">According to State Bank of Pakistan, there are total 59 Insurance companies in Pakistan. There are 4 in the Public sector, 50 companies in the private sector and 5 are incorporated abroad. Why should anyone be narrow-minded towards ONE owned by military - 'Askari General Insurance Ltd', which is listed on the Stock Exchange and pays Tax?</p> <p class="MsoNormal">According to the Health Division and the P.M.D.C, there are around 924 Hospitals, 12,726 Medical Institutions, 560 Rural Health Centers and 4712 Dispensaries all over Pakistan. Out of these, if 10 Hospitals and 20 Medical Centers are being run by Fauji Foundation, what's the hue & cry about? These Medical services are offered to the military and civilians alike. Even the prestigious Aga Khan Health Services (AGHS) own 7 Hospitals and 164 Medical Centers.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">According to State Bank Pakistan, there are above 10 Fertilizer Plants in Pakistan from which 6 are State owned and the rest are private. Out of these, only ONE is military owned, the 'Fauji Fertilizer Company Ltd', which is listed on the Stock Exchange and audited by KPMG Taseer Hadi & Co, and pays Tax annually.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">According to Higher Education Commission, there are 122 Universities in Pakistan. Out of which, 65 are in the Public sector and 57 in the private sector. Foundation University and Bahria University are the only two affiliated with Armed Forces providing quality education to all citizens alike.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">Foundation Schools have 90 branches all over Pakistan; compared to the City School which has more than 150 branches and the Beacon-house School which has around 130 branches. We as a Nation should triumph the quality education being promoted by the Foundation schools and the model paradigm implemented.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">The Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan (SECP) has 50,125 companies registered with it. From these only 9 are MILBUS projects. Why can't Dr. Ayesha Siddiqa accept these 9 MILBUS projects out of the 50,125 projects broadmindedly?</p> <p class="MsoNormal">The author also alleges that Military's Internal Economy is hampering the growth of Pakistan's free market economy - which of course is not true. For her information, under this same system and era, and under the leadership of General Musharraf, Pakistan's free market economy boomed from $75 billion in 1999 to become $160 billion in 2007.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">In the last 6 years, the free market economy of Pakistan expanded by $85 billion. The expansion and growth the Civilian Corporate sector, National Business Units and Multi-National Corporations witnessed in these last 6 years remain unprecedented in Pakistan's Economic History. Hence proven, that Military's Internal Economy did not hamper Pakistan's free market economy!</p> <p class="MsoNormal">According to Dr Ayesha Siddiqa's book, the worth of Fauji Foundation is $169m, the worth of Army Welfare trust is $862m, the worth of Shaheen Foundation is $34.4m and the worth of Bahria Foundation is $69m. Total worth of MILBUS entities in Pakistan arise to ONLY $1.135 billion.<span> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Hence, the presence of MILBUS companies, in Pakistan's free economy of $160 billion, amongst these other sectors and enterprises arises to a negligible maximum 0.8%.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">The Karachi Stock Exchange (KSE) Market Capitalization in January 2008 stood at $75 billion. MILBUS worth as compared to KSE again arises to only 1.5%.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">It's amusing to note that Dr Ayesha Siddiqa wrote a whole book, to malign a system (MILBUS) whose worth does not exceed 0.8% of Pakistan's free market economy.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">Dr Ayesha Siddiqa's desire to portray the Pakistan Military as a coercive and self serving breed aiming to consolidate their economic power at the expense of Pakistan, not only erodes her neutrality into bias, but the above economic comparisons also contradict all her presumptuous and sham claims. As MILBUS in Pakistan has been competing fairly in free market and contributing to today's knowledge-based economy. It has played an active role to generate revenue for Pakistan and in contributing to overall GDP.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">One of the greatest wisdom foreseen, behind establishing MILBUS was to liberate the Pakistan Armed Forces of international aid assistance and interference. Classified financial autonomy gives the Armed Forces a sense of self-respect and confidence of being independent of the dominating 'International Coalition of the willing' and their foreign aid.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">The Pakistan Army has received a total of around $17 billion from the United States for arms, equipment and compensation since 1954, the year the United States entered into defense pacts with Pakistan. Much of it was uselessly spend during the 1980's Afghan war and the wars Pakistan fought with India. After 9/11, the famous foreign assistance of $10 billion comprises 60% reimbursement costs for expenditure incurred by the Pakistani Military while patrolling on PAK-Afghan border, recorded in the 'Coalition Support Funds'. These worthless assistances have not helped the Pakistan Army contrary to perception propagated in media reports.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">Because, with these insignificant and worthless assistance, follows a series of humiliating articles and editorials composed in American print media. The clueless and prejudice Pakistani media ignorantly picks up the chanting and further plays an important role in distorting and altering the actual facts and figures. No relevant person is approached to clarify and set facts straight. Authors like Dr Ayesha Siddiqa bank on such distortion to further slander the admirable Pakistan Military.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">After year 2000, the $85 billion expansion of Pakistan's economy, decreased the ratio of US aid & assistance to Pakistan's economy by around 100%. Now the U.S aid & assistance account to only 6.25% of Pakistan's expanding economy. Pakistan is successfully wriggling out of foreign influence. Visionary MILBUS was the right step in the right direction at the right time!</p> <p class="MsoNormal">Pakistan Military requires a proper platform utilized to clear the misperceptions being propagated against them and counter the sham allegations. In short, Pakistan military lacks the exposure to enhance their PR with the Public. Pakistani GHQ and ISPR should take up an active role similar to Pentagon and make their interactions more effective.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">Next, the book 'Military Inc' considers Pakistan Military the root cause of social disparity and democratic fiasco. It alleges that socio-political fragmentation would result in strengthening the army's control over politics. Throughout her book, Dr Ayesha Siddiqa lambasts and scoffs at the concept of MILBUS accusing the military of building assets and calling them as the 'new land barons'.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">In her desperation to smear the Army, she even fails to condemn the corruption practiced and coercive measures exercised by the inept political leaders. How these redundant leaders influence the bureaucracy, alter the constitution, plunder national institutions, stagnated the trade & exports, multiplied the foreign debts for the country, rob the country of the foreign reserves and accumulate their wealth in developed countries - is all together ignored by her conveniently.<span> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal">The truth is that the Armed forces are forced to intervene reluctantly and take control of the state to save it from the irresponsible and hopeless politicians, who drag the country towards brink of collapse, every time they come to power.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">In short, Pakistan's external debt rose from $18 billion in 1988 to become $38 billion by end of 1999. In 1999, Pakistan's total debt (internal & external) was almost 90% of its GDP. External debt in ratio to foreign exchange earnings were 347%. Debt servicing allocated in 1999 budget was 61% of total revenue resources. According to the World Bank, in 1999-2000 Pakistan was amongst the highly indebted countries.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">Despite the above mentioned debacle for Pakistan - the substantial expansion in the personal wealth, land and business interests of Mr. Zardari and Mr. Nawaz Sharif has earned them a place in the 'Top 5 richest people' of Pakistan in 2007. Not a single General or military servicemen made it to the list of 'Top 40 Richest Pakistani'. Who should we consider a peril to Pakistan's existence - these fraudulent politicians or the reserved military?</p> <p class="MsoNormal">The Raiwind complex of Nawaz Sharif, build on an area of around 2000 acre, consist of palatial<span> </span>residences, 300 acre farm, 500 bed hospital, a school, 200 acre dairy farm, etc - constructed at a cost of above Rs. 800 million. He personally owns Ittefaq foundries, three Sugar mills, numerous Textile mills, Steel Mills, Paper Mills, Spinning mills, Engineering companies, and numerous other business units. He owns several residential properties in Lahore and Muree. He owns vast acres of lands in Sheikhapura, Chunian, Raiwind, Multan and Bhopattian. These feudal turned politicians can easily be labeled as the 'old Pakistani barons'.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">Dr Ayesha Siddiqa also alleges that the military convinces the citizens to bear additional costs for security on basis of conceived threats to the State. She wants the public to believe that their taxes are being exploited at the expense of the notion 'National Security'. This statement of hers is an attempt to ignore and snub the volatile situation Pakistan faces at its borders.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">She also remains oblivious to the fact, that India allocates 5 times that of Pakistan's defense spending.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">However, under President Musharraf, the military spending DECREASED as percentage of GDP and National budget. It now stands at 3% of GDP and 15% of National budget. It strikes out though, how Dr Ayesha Siddiqa veils and ignores the bulk of the National budget of 85% that lies at the disposal of the manipulative hands of our shady politicians. The public has the right to know, what proper utilization has been brought about with that unaccountable 85% in the 1990's?</p> <p class="MsoNormal">This derogatory book 'Military Inc' intends to sow seeds of disenchantment amongst the general public against the modest and patriotic institution of the Armed forces of Pakistan, and lower its grace.<span> </span>Those Armed Forces of Pakistan that run to protect and deliver relief, to ordinary Pakistanis in times of calamities, natural disasters, floods, train accidents, and earthquakes. Does Pakistan have any other force or institution which is as disciplined and effective in providing speedy help immediately? Shouldn't we strengthen this only institution that we have?</p> <p class="MsoNormal">The publication of Dr Ayesha Siddiqa's own book 'Military Inc' in 2007, in President Musharraf's era, repudiates her claims to term the military rule as manipulative and suppressive. It's evident that no subtle or coercive measures were taken against her or any arm-twisting to curb the publication of this highly controversial book! Where would she find such boundless and gracious freedom? The book 'Military Inc' has become a checker of the chessboard being maneuvered by the unknown and ambiguous foreign powers interested in Balkanization of Pakistan.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">The ultimate objective of the book 'Military Inc' is to perpetrate friction and cause dissent amongst the ranks of the disciplined Armed Forces. By deliberately triggering upheaval within the lower ranks, the intention appears to encourage internal revolt. As a consequence, the unity, discipline and allegiance of the Armed Forces of Pakistan can be destroyed.<span> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal">Thus, to protect the allegiance of the Armed Forces, the whole concept of visionary MILBUS is justified, as a set of activities for the development of Pakistan's military might, meant to counter the rising regional threat convergence and decreasing dependence upon foreign aid - ultimately protecting the sovereignty of Pakistan and its savior Armed Forces!</p> <p class="MsoNormal">Glory and Triumph to Pakistan Armed Forces!</p> <p class="MsoNormal">Afreen Baig is an independent analyst majoring in International Relations and Economics. </p></div>Yasmeenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03738869583776491936noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1664474623650181692.post-12393759597831822012011-04-14T17:49:00.000-07:002011-04-14T17:53:26.308-07:00Afghanistan put on the back burner?<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; "><p><strong>This is a Pakpotpourri Exclusive</strong></p><p>By: Yasmeen Ali <a href="http://pakpotpourri2.files.wordpress.com/2011/04/jirga-large1.jpg" style="color: rgb(188, 4, 4); "><img class="alignright size-medium wp-image-1210" title="Jirga-large" src="http://pakpotpourri2.files.wordpress.com/2011/04/jirga-large1.jpg?w=300&h=176" alt="" width="300" height="176" style="float: right; margin-top: 1em; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 1em; max-width: 100%; width: auto; height: auto; " /></a></p><p>Has the world forgotten Afghanistan? The developments recently in Libya seem to have diverted world media to America’s new play field. The old one lies, ravaged, raped, destructed and now, ignored like yesterday’s newspaper.</p><p>Libya was attacked by America, as in Iraq, and Afghanistan, it was first preceded by an avalanche of propaganda against it’s ruler. Eric Margolis, in an article, stated and I quote,” America’s glaring double standard in the Mideast and Muslim world is a major reason for growing hatred of our nation. America would be hailed as genuine liberator of long-suffering Libyans if it also intervened in Bahrain and Yemen — and perhaps Saudi Arabia — to protect civilians from the ferocity of their despotic governments and promote real democracy. But it’s only oil-rich Libya that is getting the “humanitarian” treatment from the US and oil-hungry western European former colonial powers”. <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/eric-margolis/after-bombing-libya-what-_b_838548.html" style="color: rgb(188, 4, 4); ">http://www.huffingtonpost.com/eric-margolis/after-bombing-libya-what-_b_838548.html</a></p><p>Coming to Afghanistan, America & her allies, must have by now realized that the physical invasion of a country is a far cry from subjugation of the will of the people of the country and holding that country as captive. Superior technology, well developed war toys, can make invasion the easier part, it is what follows thereafter is the difficult part.</p><p>Karzai is not a person the Afghans trust. He is seen as an American front man and someone in a position for the sake of serving American interests. The increasing corruption of his government does not help either.</p><p>A report of February 28<sup>th</sup>, 2011 states that Maj. Gen. John Campbell, commander of NATO coalition forces in eastern Afghanistan, said he has been repositioning some of his troops since last August to make them more effective in the region that borders Pakistan.</p><p>The terrain that is the border between Afghanistan and Pakistan is the toughest in the world. Also, impossible to man, owing to the area, geography and weather conditions.</p><p>The question, Obama must ask of himself , is, what gains have been attained after invading Afghanistan. Have the terrorist attacks ended? The answer, is a resounding No. Afghanistan, invaded by US and British forces in direct response to the September 11 attacks, saw a rise from very few before 2003 to 802 since then. The “war on terror” seems to have made the world a more insecure, a more dangerous place to live in.</p><p>What then, should the USA and her allies do, to bring peace to the region, if, that is the objective?</p><p>Killing and attacks is not the answer as the years of their presence in Afghanistan has already proved.</p><p>The answer lies in reverting to the Rule of Tribal Balance. There are many tribes in Afghanistan and FATA/NWFP areas. But all, subscribe to the code known as “Pashtunwali”. It may be interpreted as the “way of life of the Pashtuns”. Those who digress, face the repercussion of being denounced by their tribe. One principle of the code, is revenge from the wrong doer, committed in any date, even 1000 years ago. An invasion of their homes, thereby taking away their honor, is definitely considered as a wrong doing. America’s presence in their homeland will thereby, always be opposed and resisted by this race.</p><p>Historically speaking, it is the Pashtunwali that made the system of “jirga” successful with the Pashtuns. . A Loya Jirga(Tribal Jirga), is a mass meeting to choose a new king or, discuss an emergency of mammoth proportions. It is a forum unique to Pashtuns of Afghanistan and Pakistan, bringing the tribal elders together. However, all tribes are given equality within decision making, hence the success of Rule of Tribal Balance.</p><p>The Barakzai clan, successfully ruled Afghanistan from 1826 to 1929, or 1973 after the end of the rule of Mohammad Zahir Shah.</p><p>America has not understood the cultural norms and the local traditions of the country she purports to rule. The traditional western solution of Presidential rule will fail in Afghanistan. History has proved, anything that is forced upon a nation, in contradiction to their code of life, will fail to hold.</p><p>Any solution that is based away from the one respected, understood and followed by the Afghans, will and must, fail. What America needs to do, is to feel the pulse of the nation. And not to foist an individual, a system that may have worked in America, but instead, to put a system in place that is acceptable and workable with the local people of Afghanistan.</p><p>Yasmeen Ali is a lawyer teaching in a university in Lahore. You may visit her website at: <a href="http://pakpotpourri2.wordpress.com/" style="color: rgb(188, 4, 4); ">http://pakpotpourri2.wordpress.com/</a> .</p><div class="pd-rating" id="pd_rating_holder_2484157_post_1207" style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; display: inline-block; "><div id="pd_rate_2484157_post_1207" style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; float: left; "><div id="PDRTJS_2484157_post_1207_stars_1" style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 1px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; cursor: pointer; width: 16px; height: 16px; background-image: url(http://i0.poll.fm/ratings/images/star-yellow-sml.png); background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: initial; float: left; background-position: 0% 0%; background-repeat: initial initial; "></div><div id="PDRTJS_2484157_post_1207_stars_2" style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 1px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; cursor: pointer; width: 16px; height: 16px; background-image: url(http://i0.poll.fm/ratings/images/star-yellow-sml.png); background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: initial; float: left; background-position: 0% 100%; background-repeat: initial initial; "></div><div id="PDRTJS_2484157_post_1207_stars_3" style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 1px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; cursor: pointer; width: 16px; height: 16px; background-image: url(http://i0.poll.fm/ratings/images/star-yellow-sml.png); background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: initial; float: left; background-position: 0% 100%; background-repeat: initial initial; "></div><div id="PDRTJS_2484157_post_1207_stars_4" style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 1px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; cursor: pointer; width: 16px; height: 16px; background-image: url(http://i0.poll.fm/ratings/images/star-yellow-sml.png); background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: initial; float: left; background-position: 0% 100%; background-repeat: initial initial; "></div><div id="PDRTJS_2484157_post_1207_stars_5" style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 1px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; cursor: pointer; width: 16px; height: 16px; background-image: url(http://i0.poll.fm/ratings/images/star-yellow-sml.png); background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: initial; float: left; background-position: 0% 100%; background-repeat: initial initial; "></div></div><span style="float: left; "> </span><div id="rating_info_2484157_post_1207" style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; display: block; float: left; background-image: url(http://i0.poll.fm/images/ratings/info.png); background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: initial; width: 16px; height: 16px; cursor: pointer; background-position: 3px 2px; background-repeat: no-repeat no-repeat; "></div><div id="PDRTJS_2484157_post_1207_msg" style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 5px; float: left; text-align: left; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); ">1 Vote</div></div></span>Yasmeenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03738869583776491936noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1664474623650181692.post-86219479138666378142011-03-18T12:51:00.000-07:002011-03-18T12:54:07.235-07:00Releasing Raymond Davis<div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="-webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 4px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 4px; font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: medium; "><h1 align="left"><em><span >Why I Agree With Zardari</span></em></h1><div><em><span ><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-style: normal; font-size: medium; "><p><span >By YASMEEN ALI</span></p><p><em>Lahore</em></p><p class="style2" style="font-size: 13px; font-family: Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; "><span class="style50" style="font-size: 24px; color: rgb(153, 0, 0); ">T</span>he atmosphere in Pakistan is charged with emotions: fury at the release of Raymond Davis, the U. S contractor who killed two Pakistanis in cold blood. The government, especially the President, is coming under firing for “doing” this. A rally by Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaaf was organized in a few hours. All kinds and shades of experts are speaking 24/7 on the electronic media airing their views. Print media is working over time trying to prove the government is ineffective and the “deal” struck between the victims families and Raymond Davis is immoral, wrong, without justice.</p><p class="style2" style="font-size: 13px; font-family: Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; ">Pakistan is being labeled as a “bargain basement”, ridiculed. Emotions aside, let us examine the facts:</p><p class="style2" style="font-size: 13px; font-family: Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; ">Pakistan refused to accept the diplomatic status of Raymond Davis. In spite of the pressure on the Pakistan by the powerful executives of the U. S government, During a press conference in Washington, no less a person than Obama himself, said that the US official, identified as Raymond Davis, enjoys diplomatic immunity. "If our diplomats are in another country, then they are not subject to that country's local prosecution," Obama stated. The Pakistan Government did not back down! They did not cave in!</p><p class="style2" style="font-size: 13px; font-family: Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; ">The case was registered as per law of the country, and the matter referred to the court. The entire nation, media, politicians, rejoiced. Pakistan had decided to stand up to The Power and go by the Law. Raymond Davis was kept in the Koth Lakhpath jail throughout the period of the hearing of the case.</p><p class="style2" style="font-size: 13px; font-family: Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; ">The Court indicted Raymond Davis for double murder after rejecting plea for diplomatic immunity. This had made every Pakistani proud. There is faith in the justice system that has decided the case according to the tenants of law and not pressure, no matter how immense.</p><p class="style2" style="font-size: 13px; font-family: Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; ">Then came disillusion. News broke out that the families of the victims have accepted “blood money”, Raymond Davis has not only been released but flown out of Pakistan, as have the families of the victims. The latter to USA.</p><p class="style2" style="font-size: 13px; font-family: Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; ">Let us first explore the concept of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zia-ul-Haq's_Islamization#Qisas_and_Diyat_Ordinance_1990">“blood money”</a> under which this was made possible. In the Qisas and Diyat Ordinance Section 315 is relevant in the case under discussion:</p><blockquote><p class="style2" style="font-size: 13px; font-family: Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; ">Section 315:Qatl Shibh-I-Amd. </p><p class="style2" style="font-size: 13px; font-family: Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; ">Whoever with the intent to cause harm to the body or mind of any person causes the death of that or of any other person by means of a weapon or act which in the ordinary course of nature is not likely to cause death is said to commit qatl shibh-I-amd.<br /><br />Punishment : whoever commits qatl shibh-I-amd shall be liable to Diyat [compensation specified in section 323, payable to the heirs of the victim by the offender, Eds] and may also be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term up to 14 years as ta’zir.</p></blockquote><p class="style2" style="font-size: 13px; font-family: Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; ">When we say ”may also” it becomes an option in law. Court may or may not add imprisonment as part of the punishment. In a case where the victims forgive the accused after accepting diyat, the punishment will not accrue.</p><p class="style2" style="font-size: 13px; font-family: Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; ">Here rises the question whether or not the families of victims were pressurized into accepting the diyat. This decision, is to be taken by the free will of the heirs.</p><p class="style2" style="font-size: 13px; font-family: Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; ">According to the lawyer representing the victims, pressure was exerted. However, to be admissible as proof this has to be certified by the concerned parties themselves and not by others.</p><p class="style2" style="font-size: 13px; font-family: Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; ">The pressure could have been from either side, to accept the diyat and also by others not to accept diyat. Let us remember they were poor people with no contacts to save them from the repercussions of pressures or threats. Thereby, it made sense, for their own safety, to remove them to a place of safety from their abodes.</p><p class="style2" style="font-size: 13px; font-family: Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; ">We, as a nation, need to make a focused decision. Do we want to accept the decision on the basis of law or on the basis of emotions? If our vote is for the former, then let us accept that the decision was taken lawfully. Yes, the speed with which all events took place; the court’s indictment, Davis’s release, his departure, has made politicians and “analysts”, play on the emotional pitch of their countrymen they understand so well.</p><p class="style2" style="font-size: 13px; font-family: Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; ">A friend wrote to me, on the protests against Davis’s release:</p><blockquote><p class="style2" style="font-size: 13px; font-family: Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; ">“[As for]the parties protesting, except for the Pakistan Muslim League, no one gave the families any financial aid. They are just using this for their political gains. The special fund created by an advocate with the help of AAJ TV got only Rs,49,000;this too from poor people. No rich person contributed any thing! What a shame. If the nation had contributed if not billions but at least a decent sum; one rupee per person even then these protests would have been justified.”</p></blockquote><p class="style2" style="font-size: 13px; font-family: Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; ">What should have been questioned by politicians, media and the civil society, is not the case of diyat which is a perfectly acceptable Islamic option, but as to why, when Lytton Road police had put Davis’ arrest on record in the <a href="http://tribune.com.pk/story/111878/fir-registered-against-davis-for-using-illegal-weapon/">second FIR registered against him</a> under charges of carrying an illegal pistol (Express Tribune February 3rd 2011), this finds no mention in the final analysis. All focus was on the murder charges and not on the offence committed by him against the State.</p><p class="style2" style="font-size: 13px; font-family: Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; ">The case of Raymond Davis will have far reaching effects on the relationship of both the countries. For one, the world realizes that irrespective of the country of origin, a wrong doer will be nabbed and charged in Pakistan.</p><p class="style2" style="font-size: 13px; font-family: Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; ">Second, after the arrest of Raymond Davis, Pakistan has began scrutinizing records of the Americans living in Pakistan and discovered several discrepancies, causing many suspected American operatives to maintain a low profile and others to leave the country altogether.</p><p class="style2" style="font-size: 13px; font-family: Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; ">Extract from a report by Express Tribune by Asad Kharal published Februray 23rd 2011:</p><blockquote><p class="style2" style="font-size: 13px; font-family: Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; ">“The foreign ministry states that there are 851 Americans with diplomatic immunity currently in Pakistan, of whom 297 are not working in a diplomatic capacity. However, sources at the interior ministry put the number of non-diplomats at 414. The majority of these ‘special Americans’ (as the ministry refers to them) are concentrated in Islamabad, with some also residing in Karachi, Lahore and Peshawar. Interior ministry records show that most of the “special Americans” live in upscale neighborhoods in Islamabad and Lahore, with smaller presences in Karachi and Peshawar.”</p></blockquote><p class="style2" style="font-size: 13px; font-family: Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; ">Third, this should be a lesson to Pakistan not to put all its eggs in one basket!</p><p class="style2" style="font-size: 13px; font-family: Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; "><strong>Yasmeen Ali</strong> is a lawyer based in Lahore, teaching in a University. See her site, <a href="http://pakpotpourri2.blogspot.com/">http://pakpotpourri2.blogspot.com/</a> and <span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: medium; "><em><span ><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-style: normal; font-size: medium; "></span></span></em></span></p><p class="style2" style="font-size: 13px; font-family: Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; display: inline !important; "><em><span ><a href="http://pakpotpourri2.wordpress.com/">http://pakpotpourri2.wordpress.com/</a></span></em></p></span><p></p><p class="style2" style="font-size: 13px; font-family: Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; "><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: medium; "><em><span ><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-style: normal; font-size: medium; ">THIS IS A CROSS POST FROM COUNTER PUNCH.</span></span></em></span></p><p class="style2" style="font-size: 13px; font-family: Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; "><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: medium; "><em><span ><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-style: normal; font-size: medium; ">LINK:</span></span></em></span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: medium; "><em><span ><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-style: normal; font-size: medium; "></span></span></em></span></p><p class="style2" style="font-size: 13px; font-family: Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; display: inline !important; "><em><span ><a href="http://www.counterpunch.org/yasmeen03182011.html">http://www.counterpunch.org/yasmeen03182011.html</a></span></em></p><p></p><p class="style2" style="font-size: 13px; font-family: Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; "> </p><p> </p></span></em></div></span></div><div><br /></div>Yasmeenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03738869583776491936noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1664474623650181692.post-10196673489459983992011-03-14T08:22:00.000-07:002011-03-14T08:23:07.608-07:00Needed: Democratic Infra structural Changes in Pakistan<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; "><p><strong>This is a Pakpotpourri Exclusive</strong></p><p>By: Yasmeen Ali <a href="http://pakpotpourri2.files.wordpress.com/2011/03/dsc000131.jpg" style="color: rgb(188, 4, 4); "><img class="alignright size-thumbnail wp-image-1023" title="DSC00013" src="http://pakpotpourri2.files.wordpress.com/2011/03/dsc000131.jpg?w=150&h=112" alt="" width="150" height="112" style="float: right; margin-top: 1em; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 1em; " /></a></p><p>Since it’s inception in 1947, Pakistan has been riddled with the question of finding a system of governance tailor made for her needs. In the quest,Pakistan has had affairs with Parliamentary System, Presidential System, semi-Presidential System…..but has been unable so far, to determine what suits her best.</p><p>All shades of governments and rulers came and went. Democracy was replaced by Dictatorship and Dictatorship by Democracy. Governments formed, mostly in coalition by the winning party joining hands with one winning provincially to form a majority and set up government.</p><p>If we look at the 2008 General Elections results, it provides an enlightening picture. Pakistan Peoples Party won a total of 94 seats excluding 4 for minorities and 23 reserved for women, bringing the score up to 130 seats. Pakistan Muslim League- N bagged 95 seats, including 3 for minorities and 17 reserved for women. Pakistan Muslim League-Q secured 55 seats including 2 for minorities and 10 reserved for women. Muttahida Qaumi Movement (MQM) walked away with 26 seats, including 1 for minorities and 5 for women. Pakistan Muslim League-Fazlur Rehman Group nabbed 5 seats including one reserved for women. Pakistan Peoples Party –Sherpao Group took 1 seat as did the National Peoples Party. Baluchistan National Party-Awami, bagged a whooping 18 seats .</p><p>Thereby, a total of 226 seats were contested for and won by various parties in elections, 60 reserved for women, 10 reserved for minorities, bringing the total to 336. Jamiat-Ulema-e-Islam (F) did not contest.</p><p>The picture becomes clear as the mist clears by figures quoted.</p><p>Collaboration and partnership of Muttahida Qaumi Movement becomes mandatory if the party bagging most votes needs to set up a government in Sindh. Once done,there are the constant tantrums thrown, and the provincial party, following in the footsteps of a film heroin, falls out with her lover, then is cajoled with sweets, flowers, and more expensive offerings. There are situations leading to a near complete break up of the love-hate relationship, only to realize, by both, near the brink ,how important the partnership is,managing to pull back and embrace- letting bygones be bygones- till the same cycle happens all over again!</p><p>Likewise, in Baluchistan, the active support of Baluchistan National Party (BNP) is mandatory to form government in province.</p><p>In Peshawar, it was Awami National Party that won 13 seats, but none from Hazara. To form government, support by ANP to the party forming the provincial government is needed.</p><p>What clearly emerges from the above scenario was that no single party is, across the board acceptable to the people of Pakistan. PPP emerges as the only party with representation in all four provinces securing half the seats in Sindh, one-third of seats in the Punjab, and roughly 30 per cent seats in NWFP and Baluchistan. PML-N, the second largest party is routed to Punjab only, with no representation in Sindh and Baluchistan, and, in NWFP, secured seats only in the non-Pushto speaking Hazara area. Ethnicity has started playing a big role in electing candidates-a dangerous trend.</p><p>The net result of this scenario is the following of an Appeasement Policy in dealing with the parties on board by the ruling party-whichever party is in the steering position, the 2008 General Elections results used as an example only. Instead of focusing on issues that should be focused on, time , energy, funds and resources are misdirected towards keeping the coalition partners happy and willing to keep government intact. Good governance suffers. It becomes relegated to the back burner. Insults are hurled at each other, accusations, counter accusations hold the day. Then miraculously, a ministry here, a promise there, and the sun comes out, bright and clear, till the next round!</p><p>The interests of these small pockets of seats won by local parties may,and do, differ widely on issues from that of the ruling party. In the long run, it may be the national interest that is sacrificed at the alter of Appeasement!</p><p>Who is to be blamed? The smaller parties? The ruling party? Or both?</p><p>I think it is the wrong system that is to be held responsible. So long there are smaller parties nibbling in the pie, demanding a slice, good governance will continue to suffer.</p><p>Pakistan must seriously look at changing over to a Two Party System rather than a Multi-Party System it presently is. This is something we have never tried. Something so basically, glaringly wrong in our whole approach to democracy, that that it has effected governance by whomsoever government has been in power.</p><p>Yes! It is time for those democratic infra structural changes in Pakistan.</p><p>(Yasmeen Ali is a lawyer based in Lahore. She also teaches in a University and moderates her blog Pakpotpourri2).</p></span>Yasmeenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03738869583776491936noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1664474623650181692.post-87671546413344978732011-03-06T17:27:00.000-08:002011-03-06T17:28:58.224-08:00America's secret plan to arm Libya's rebels<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEizvPo4wGZc9iE0RtdkaahakPhefmpdbj0Mmu1RJZsMLJdtjza1x7OzNwiZB1bYxxLpwiMa_jT-O4sOH5UHxsW3zjTtsFyuEQm3t5-uY-KOuOUicU297h480_GlaRD_y0ZH9LwHI3mAuns/s1600/Libya.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 300px; height: 204px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEizvPo4wGZc9iE0RtdkaahakPhefmpdbj0Mmu1RJZsMLJdtjza1x7OzNwiZB1bYxxLpwiMa_jT-O4sOH5UHxsW3zjTtsFyuEQm3t5-uY-KOuOUicU297h480_GlaRD_y0ZH9LwHI3mAuns/s400/Libya.jpg" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5581143875907129298" /></a><br /><p>Obama asks Saudis to airlift weapons into Benghazi</p> <p>By Robert Fisk </p> <p>Desperate to avoid US military involvement in Libya in the event of a prolonged struggle between the Gaddafi regime and its opponents, the Americans have asked Saudi Arabia if it can supply weapons to the rebels in Benghazi. The Saudi Kingdom, already facing a "day of rage" from its 10 per cent Shia Muslim community on Friday, with a ban on all demonstrations, has so far failed to respond to Washington's highly classified request, although King Abdullah personally loathes the Libyan leader, who tried to assassinate him just over a year ago.</p> <p>Washington's request is in line with other US military co-operation with the Saudis. The royal family in Jeddah, which was deeply involved in the Contra scandal during the Reagan administration, gave immediate support to American efforts to arm guerrillas fighting the Soviet army in Afghanistan in 1980 and later – to America's chagrin – also funded and armed the Taliban.</p> <p>But the Saudis remain the only US Arab ally strategically placed and capable of furnishing weapons to the guerrillas of Libya. Their assistance would allow Washington to disclaim any military involvement in the supply chain – even though the arms would be American and paid for by the Saudis.</p> <p>The Saudis have been told that opponents of Gaddafi need anti-tank rockets and mortars as a first priority to hold off attacks by Gaddafi's armour, and ground-to-air missiles to shoot down his fighter-bombers.</p> <p>Supplies could reach Benghazi within 48 hours but they would need to be delivered to air bases in Libya or to Benghazi airport. If the guerrillas can then go on to the offensive and assault Gaddafi's strongholds in western Libya, the political pressure on America and Nato – not least from Republican members of Congress – to establish a no-fly zone would be reduced.</p> <p>US military planners have already made it clear that a zone of this kind would necessitate US air attacks on Libya's functioning, if seriously depleted, anti-aircraft missile bases, thus bringing Washington directly into the war on the side of Gaddafi's opponents.</p> <p>For several days now, US Awacs surveillance aircraft have been flying around Libya, making constant contact with Malta air traffic control and requesting details of Libyan flight patterns, including journeys made in the past 48 hours by Gaddafi's private jet which flew to Jordan and back to Libya just before the weekend.</p> <p>Officially, Nato will only describe the presence of American Awacs planes as part of its post-9/11 Operation Active Endeavour, which has broad reach to undertake aerial counter-terrorism measures in the Middle East region.</p> <p>The data from the Awacs is streamed to all Nato countries under the mission's existing mandate. Now that Gaddafi has been reinstated as a super-terrorist in the West's lexicon, however, the Nato mission can easily be used to search for targets of opportunity in Libya if active military operations are undertaken.</p> <p>Al Jazeera English television channel last night broadcast recordings made by American aircraft to Maltese air traffic control, requesting information about Libyan flights, especially that of Gaddafi's jet.</p> <p>An American Awacs aircraft, tail number LX-N90442 could be heard contacting the Malta control tower on Saturday for information about a Libyan Dassault-Falcon 900 jet 5A-DCN on its way from Amman to Mitiga, Gaddafi's own VIP airport.</p> <p>Nato Awacs 07 is heard to say: "Do you have information on an aircraft with the Squawk 2017 position about 85 miles east of our [sic]?"</p> <p>Malta air traffic control replies: "Seven, that sounds to be Falcon 900- at flight level 340, with a destination Mitiga, according to flight plan."</p> <p>But Saudi Arabia is already facing dangers from a co-ordinated day of protest by its own Shia Muslim citizens who, emboldened by the Shia uprising in the neighbouring island of Bahrain, have called for street protests against the ruling family of al-Saud on Friday.</p> <p>After pouring troops and security police into the province of Qatif last week, the Saudis announced a nationwide ban on all public demonstrations.</p> <p>Shia organisers claim that up to 20,000 protesters plan to demonstrate with women in the front rows to prevent the Saudi army from opening fire.</p> <p>If the Saudi government accedes to America's request to send guns and missiles to Libyan rebels, however, it would be almost impossible for President Barack Obama to condemn the kingdom for any violence against the Shias of the north-east provinces.</p> <p>Thus has the Arab awakening, the demand for democracy in North Africa, the Shia revolt and the rising against Gaddafi become entangled in the space of just a few hours with US military priorities in the region.</p> <div> <div>(Robert Frisk is a world renowned writer and political analyst.He is Middle East Corrospondent of The Independent , UK)</div> <div>NOTE:This is a cross post from The Independent, UK.</div></div>Yasmeenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03738869583776491936noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1664474623650181692.post-65134155975387561082011-02-18T00:35:00.000-08:002011-02-18T00:35:00.909-08:00An imperial hubris<strong><span style="font-size: large;">Editor's Note: The edited version of this article under a different headline was carried by a newspaper today. The writer has offered unedited version of the same to be used exclusively on Pakpotpourri2.</span></strong><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiyFu909L2zMmquinYnPKF-QCMD-VSmar24NimHxFNc8TSBH_P-2tFMKtt7zXLkYZW8HA3Ofa6MLO3eeqHKrvVqkEAALo8Gzz01iZKaUKcYZQfvRRXcvwdfcYz80nRraH2KIBZPGr-Akhk/s1600/MAZARI.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="240" j6="true" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiyFu909L2zMmquinYnPKF-QCMD-VSmar24NimHxFNc8TSBH_P-2tFMKtt7zXLkYZW8HA3Ofa6MLO3eeqHKrvVqkEAALo8Gzz01iZKaUKcYZQfvRRXcvwdfcYz80nRraH2KIBZPGr-Akhk/s320/MAZARI.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><strong><span style="font-family: Georgia, "Times New Roman", serif;">By: <span class="Apple-style-span" style="-webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; border-collapse: separate; color: black; font: small "Times New Roman"; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span"><span style="font-family: Times New Roman; font-size: small;">Shireen M Mazari</span> </span></span></span></strong><br />
<strong><span style="font-family: Georgia, "Times New Roman", serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="-webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; border-collapse: separate; color: black; font: small "Times New Roman"; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span">Once again Pakistan is being subject to the usual US imperial arrogance – this time on the Davis case. We have had threats of all kinds simply to get a murderer released and even President Obama has jumped into the fray, imperially claiming Davis has diplomatic immunity! Of course US Presidents, in recent times at least, have been known for their lies with Bush commencing his Iraq war on the WMD lie and Colin Powell brazenly lying to the UN Security Council! So Obama may be following yet another Bush tradition – after his exuberant adoption of the drones’ policy. Such imperial hubris reflected in the threats of aid and meetings’ cut-offs should be seen as an opportunity by the Pakistani state to re-evaluate its whole relationship with the US and restructure it more favourably. If the whole “strategic” edifice is under threat over the issue of Raymond Davis, one really wonders whether there ever was such a relationship to begin with. Take the example of our longstanding strategic ally China: has this relationship ended despite the targeted killings of Chinese in Pakistan?</span></span></span></strong><br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
Perhaps if the US could see beyond its imperial arrogance, it would realise that right now its own interests would be damaged far more than the suffering the Pakistani nation may suffer – as opposed to the ruling elite – especially in terms of its so-called “war on terror”! But the US rarely sees reality beyond its blinkered vision and its contemptuous arrogance towards the Pakistani state is so immense that it has chosen not to have a lawyer represent Davis in the Lahore High Court!<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
It is also amusing and ironic to see the Obama Administration, as well as US lawmakers, suddenly accuse Pakistan of not abiding by international law! Given how the US not only flouts international law at every opportunity but refuses to subscribe to accept the International Criminal Court and any International Court of Justice Advisory Opinion that goes against it (Remember the Nicaragua harbour mining case?), it is hardly in a position to adopt the high moral ground on international law. Only recently, the US violated the Non Proliferation Treaty (NPT) it had put its signature to, when it signed its nuclear deal with India – something Senator Kerry felt he should educate us on in terms of the Vienna Conventions. By going for this deal the US contravened Articles I and III:2 of the NPT, which amongst other restrictions, forbid transfer of sensitive and dual use technology to non-NPT states.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
However, what is the Pakistan government up to with its Ministry of Foreign Affairs seeking three weeks further to give a simple response to the issue of Raymond Davis’s immunity issue? As if the absurd proclamations and retractions of the PPP office bearers and ministers were not folly enough, we have now had the Punjab Chief Minister state that Interior Minister Rehman Malik had informed him that the Federal Government was going to give Davis diplomatic immunity and would be informing the Lahore High Court of the same. Clearly that too did not happen on Thursday as the case got underway and the nation must be grateful for these small hiccups in the path of total subjugation to the US Will. Unfortunately, the LHC has had to stay the proceedings till the federal government overcomes its habitual pusillanimity when confronted by the US and plucks up the courage to take a clear position on the immunity issue.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
But why is the Pakistani political leadership so hesitant on the Davis case since whichever legal perspective one takes, there is no ground on which Davis can claim diplomatic immunity. In view of the documents already in the public domain, including the “official visa” – and there is a qualitative difference between his visa and a diplomatic visa – there is no ground on which Davis could be placed in the category of a diplomat. However, even if one were to concede the US argument of his being “Administrative and technical staff” and thereby entitled to “diplomatic immunity” under the 1961 Vienna Convention; for such staff this “immunity” is not applicable to actions outside “official functions” under Articles 31:1c and 37:2.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
In any case, with the material evidence, including photographs of sensitive military offices, recovered from Davis as well as his pay slip for the period beginning September 2010, he clearly falls into the category of being hired by the US State Department’s Bureau of Diplomatic Security and is in all probability a CIA “stringer” intelligence agent. In fact, as the facts of Davis come to light, it appears he may have deliberately allowed the second car to speed away as it may have had more covert operatives in it. Interestingly, in November 2009 and later in 2010, Davis was caught in restricted military locations in Peshawar and sources state that the Foreign Office verbally asked the US Embassy to remove him from Peshawar. Proper interrogation of Davis is essential now for Pakistan to discover the linkages with a range of US covert activities.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
While we can sigh with relief over the halt in drone attacks since the arrest of Davis, the cause for this halt is probably the US fear that the location of other stringer agents may be revealed through these attacks. That brings up another interesting aspect of the Davis case: the possibility of charging him with espionage given the massive evidence already available and made public. After all, if the federal and provincial governments manage to persuade, through fair means or foul, the families of the victims to accept “blood money”, Davis still needs to be detained on espionage charges and tried for the same. This is one criminal who must not be allowed to get away with impunity.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
Most important, though, the Davis case should persuade the Pakistani state to rein in the thousands of US operatives – both CIA and private security contractors – and rid the country of them as soon as possible so that there is no repeat of this lethal incident again on our territory. <br />
(<span class="Apple-style-span" style="-webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; border-collapse: separate; color: black; font: 16px "Times New Roman"; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #666666; font-family: tahoma, verdana, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 11px;"><span style="color: black; font-family: Georgia, "Times New Roman", serif; font-size: small;">The writer is a former editor of The Nation and ex-head of the Institute of Strategic Studies in Islamabad).</span></span></span>YASMEEN ALIhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10748945833762147296noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1664474623650181692.post-36275403870904627452011-02-08T21:05:00.001-08:002011-02-18T00:25:07.150-08:00Raymond Davis, Murder and Vienna Convention 1961By Yasmeen Ali<br />
<br />
<strong><em>This ia a Pakpotpourri Exclusive</em></strong><br />
<br />
By: Yasmeen Ali<br />
<a href="http://pakpotpourri2.files.wordpress.com/2011/02/16862119_raymond-davis-1.jpg"><img alt="" class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-851" height="146" src="http://pakpotpourri2.files.wordpress.com/2011/02/16862119_raymond-davis-1.jpg?w=110&h=146" title="16862119_raymond-davis-1" width="110" /></a><br />
You cannot open the TV, or read a paper here without more and more news about Raymond Davis and his murderous act. His killing on Jan. 27 of two young Pakistanis has created international waves, too, plunging the Pakistan-America relationship into stormy waters.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
A great deal has been written about the case: Raymond Davis’s employment status, whether he is a diplomat or not, who his victims were and what led to their demise at his hands, and finally whether or not Davis can be detained and ultimately tried under the Pakistani Law.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
Interestingly though, nobody in the media has made a study of the Vienna Diplomatic Coventions that discuss diplomatic immunity. The convention of 1961 gets cited routinely by the American government, which claims it grants all diplomatic workers immunity from prosecution.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
But that claim overstates the case. The actual document — never actually quoted — is more nuanced.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
A friend notes, “The issue is not who the two Pakistanis were. The real issue is: The US media has confirmed what the US government is denying: Davis runs a private security firm. He is a military contractor. He is registered in Colorado as the owner of a security firm.” He says the questions that should be asked are: What was his real job in Lahore/Islamabad/Peshawar? And can a diplomats carry an unlicensed gun?”<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
This same friend also suggests that the indentity of the two Pakistani shooting victims — according to a number of Pakistani reports, and to several in the US, including ABC News, they were working for Pakistani intelligence and were tailing Davis — is a distraction. He says the real issues are what Davis was doing here and secondly, can a so-called “technical advisor”–the term the US State Department finally settled on to describe his job — claim diplomatic immunity?<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
I would argue, though, that the real issue is a general ignorance concerning what diplomatic immunity is, and whether such immunity extends to all acts of any nature committed by an individual, even if that individual does qualify as a diplomat. All other questions are a distraction.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
The concept of diplomatic rights was established in the mid-17th century in Europe and since then came gradually to be accepted throughout the world. These rights were formalized by the 1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, which protects diplomats from being persecuted or prosecuted while on a diplomatic mission.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
However, if we examine the specific articles of that Vienna Convention of 1961, some interesting facts emerge.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
First, Article 29 states that the person of a diplomatic agent shall be inviolable. He shall not be liable to any form of arrest or detention. The receiving or host state shall treat him with due respect and shall take all appropriate steps to prevent any attack on his person, freedom or dignity. But those, like the US State Department and Davis’s Pakistani attorney, who demand the release of Raymond Davis on this ground, have obviously neglected to read, or don’t want others to read, the related articles within the Convention which strip away any absolute blanket coverage under the guise of “diplomatic immunity” for visiting or appointed diplomats.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
Article 38 of the Vienna Convention 1961 states that except where additional privileges and immunities have been specifically granted by the host State, a diplomatic agent who is a national of or permanently resident in that State shall enjoy only immunity from jurisdiction, and inviolability, in respect of official acts performed in the exercise of his functions.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
The above article clearly differentiates between an act carried out as part of his official duties and those done as a personal act. Any actions done personally and outside the ambit of official consular duties shall not be covered by “diplomatic immunity.”<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
Article 37 of the 1961 convention goes on to reinforce the above limitation on immunity by stating:<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
…Members of the administrative and technical staff of the mission, together with members of their families forming part of their respective households, shall, if they are not nationals of or permanently resident in the receiving State, enjoy the privileges and immunities specified in articles 29to 35, except that the immunity from civil and administrative jurisdiction of the receiving State specified in paragraph 1 of article 31 shall not extend to acts performed outside the course of their duties.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
The question then becomes not whether or not those murdered were Inter-Service Intelligence (ISI) agents, robbers or fruit sellers, but whether Davis did or did not have diplomatic immunity, but whether his fatal shooting of the two men was conducted while he was involved in performing his official duties.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
If the answer to that question is no, Raymond Davis cannot claim diplomatic immunity.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
The US State Department is also carefully avoiding mentioning a later treaty, the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations of 1963. That treaty, which extends and further clarifies, and where there may be a conflict, would supersede the earlier treaty, states in Section II, Article 41 in its first paragraph regarding the “Personal inviolability of consular officers”:<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
Consular officers shall not be liable to arrest or detention pending trial, except in the case of a grave crime and pursuant to a decision by the competent judicial authority.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
The law here would seem to be quite clear. If Davis was in Lahore on anything other than official consular business, and if he killed two people “in cold blood” as the Lahore prosecutor has stated, then legal authorities in Pakistan are absolutely within their rights under the Vienna Conventions to be holding him for trial.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
If he is released before a judicial determination regarding his claim of immunity, or if he is found to be properly detained but is released anyhow before standing trial for the killings, it would be not because he has diplomatic immunity, but because of political pressure from the US. But that would be something that is outside of the realm of the law.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
Yasmeen Ali is a Pakistani attorney who lives in Lahore<br />
<br />
NOTE:This article was published in PAKISTAN OBSERVER and COUNTER PUNCHYASMEEN ALIhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10748945833762147296noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1664474623650181692.post-34574545660345729022011-01-15T19:45:00.001-08:002011-01-15T19:45:35.970-08:00The civilized and the uncivilized<span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: collapse; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 19px;"><b><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 14pt; line-height: 28px;">Humayun Gauhar</span></b></span><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiGXgniRUNWEkZEhbhD3HKS2UBM44dl8k9LgTU-RZEy3h3_dhbcUoG9Y_6t8FyG-Urf8TmLDNglDMRXbZvuTpI6OHgkyQOuPnVRnY3R3P3VLY47yaMBckDp0wLqiyAsQlrNPfJFWc9ZNPg/s1600/Masses.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="221" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiGXgniRUNWEkZEhbhD3HKS2UBM44dl8k9LgTU-RZEy3h3_dhbcUoG9Y_6t8FyG-Urf8TmLDNglDMRXbZvuTpI6OHgkyQOuPnVRnY3R3P3VLY47yaMBckDp0wLqiyAsQlrNPfJFWc9ZNPg/s320/Masses.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: collapse; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 19px;"><b><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 14pt; line-height: 28px;"><br />
</span></b></span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: collapse; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 19px;"><b><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 14pt; line-height: 28px;"><br />
</span></b></span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: collapse; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 19px;"><b><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 14pt; line-height: 28px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;"></span></span></b></span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 19px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; text-align: justify;"><b><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 14pt; line-height: 28px;">Populations are classified using different measures, like sex, rural-urban, income, education, age, profession, religious persuasion… The most misleading is ‘elite’. ‘Elite’ means crème de la crème, the best of the best in any field. What they mean is the ruling class and the ruled; both may have elite amongst them.</span></b></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 19px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; text-align: justify;"><b><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 14pt; line-height: 28px;">To understand the mentality and national psyche of a society one has to understand its value system and find a different classification. I believe the best is ‘civilized’ and ‘uncivilized’. It is most egalitarian because people separated by other convenient yardsticks can come into it. For example, a rich man can be an uncivilized upstart while a poor man can be dignified and civilized; an ‘educated’ person can lack wisdom while a poor man can be wise. However, to avoid one’s own definitions and prejudices interfering, one should go by certain markers that are universally accepted.</span></b></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 19px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; text-align: justify;"><b><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 14pt; line-height: 28px;">A person is civilized if he either belongs to a ‘civilization’ or subscribes to one. This informs his mentality. Such people are ‘civil’.</span></b></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 19px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; text-align: justify;"><b><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 14pt; line-height: 28px;">A civilization is a highly developed and refined society where people feel comfort in living.</span></b></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 19px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; text-align: justify;"><b><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 14pt; line-height: 28px;">It is rich in languages, poetry, prose, music and the arts.</span></b></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 19px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; text-align: justify;"><b><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 14pt; line-height: 28px;">It has an advanced education system and curriculum and teachers are so good that students look up to them.</span></b></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 19px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; text-align: justify;"><b><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 14pt; line-height: 28px;">It has rich cuisines and apparel.</span></b></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 19px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; text-align: justify;"><b><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 14pt; line-height: 28px;">All can practice their faith without fear of bigotry and dogma.</span></b></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 19px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; text-align: justify;"><b><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 14pt; line-height: 28px;">There is an advanced and competent judicial system based on due process.</span></b></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 19px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; text-align: justify;"><b><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 14pt; line-height: 28px;">There is distributive justice when society is balanced without vast differences between rich and poor. None is starving or without respectable shelter or adequate food or medical care.</span></b></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 19px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; text-align: justify;"><b><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 14pt; line-height: 28px;">Where people have dignity and recourse against slander and libel and protection is guaranteed by the State.</span></b></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 19px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; text-align: justify;"><b><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 14pt; line-height: 28px;">Where people have the basic things in life and enjoy their God-given birthrights – food with nutrition, free clean drinking water, justice with due process, egalitarianism, the right to develop their minds to their full potential, to medicine, travel and so forth. This can only come when society accepts that everyone has the right to earn an honest and respectable living.</span></b></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 19px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; text-align: justify;"><b><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 14pt; line-height: 28px;">Where the primitive feudal mindset is in retreat and people get fair wages for their labour.</span></b></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 19px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; text-align: justify;"><b><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 14pt; line-height: 28px;">Where there is no slavery or bonded labour.</span></b></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 19px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; text-align: justify;"><b><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 14pt; line-height: 28px;">Where there is gender respect and equality and women and children are not treated like chattel and are not the victims of <i>vani </i>and ‘honour’ killings.</span></b></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 19px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; text-align: justify;"><b><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 14pt; line-height: 28px;">Where society ensures all these rights by crafting a political, economic and social system that makes the State deliver those rights and make them affordable.</span></b></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 19px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; text-align: justify;"><b><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 14pt; line-height: 28px;">Where there is tolerance, moderation and enlightenment.</span></b></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 19px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; text-align: justify;"><b><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 14pt; line-height: 28px;">Above all, where the independence of a people is jealously protected.</span></b></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 19px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; text-align: justify;"><b><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 14pt; line-height: 28px;">Such societies are civilized.</span></b></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 19px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; text-align: justify;"><b><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 14pt; line-height: 28px;">Civilized people don’t abdicate their thinking to others, like churches and clerics of every ilk and let them do their thinking for them. Neither do they tolerate clerics in the camouflage of ‘scholars’.</span></b></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 19px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; text-align: justify;"><b><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 14pt; line-height: 28px;">Such people are civil because they belong to a vibrant and dynamic civilization.</span></b></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 19px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; text-align: justify;"><b><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 14pt; line-height: 28px;">They live within their means and like upstarts don’t show off beyond their means, so they won’t tolerate their country living beyond its means either and reducing them to beggary.</span></b></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 19px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; text-align: justify;"><b><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 14pt; line-height: 28px;">Their rulers are not corrupt and the ruled do not tolerate corruption. Rulers and the rich pay taxes, don’t default on fair loans and don’t accept pardons to escape accountability.</span></b></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 19px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; text-align: justify;"><b><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 14pt; line-height: 28px;">They are polite and tolerant. They respect their parents and elders.</span></b></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 19px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; text-align: justify;"><b><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 14pt; line-height: 28px;">Their parents instill the best value system in them.</span></b></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 19px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; text-align: justify;"><b><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 14pt; line-height: 28px;">They reject rituals, traditions and customs that negate their Faith and civilization.</span></b></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 19px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; text-align: justify;"><b><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 14pt; line-height: 28px;">They truly understand the meaning of the word ‘honour’ and realize that there is great dishonor in breaking the injunctions of God and the laws of the land.</span></b></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 19px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; text-align: justify;"><b><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 14pt; line-height: 28px;">They can tell the difference between right and wrong, good and evil.</span></b></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 19px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; text-align: justify;"><b><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 14pt; line-height: 28px;">They respect life, especially human life. They protect God’s creation.</span></b></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 19px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; text-align: justify;"><b><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 14pt; line-height: 28px;">They do not procreate endlessly without regard to their wives’ health or the health of their country.</span></b></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 19px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; text-align: justify;"><b><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 14pt; line-height: 28px;">They respect others’ right to hold different views – “to you your way and to me mine” – as long as they don’t infringe on the rights of others. They understand that there is no compulsion in religion.</span></b></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 19px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; text-align: justify;"><b><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 14pt; line-height: 28px;">An uncivilized people are the opposite. What do they do?</span></b></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 19px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; text-align: justify;"><b><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 14pt; line-height: 28px;">They abdicate their faith to the cleric and let him determine their faith. That is how clerics find space in our lives. If only the civilized would bother to learn to deliver a sermon, lead our few prayers and teach their children their Holy Book themselves, there would be no need for mullahs in our lives because we Muslims have no church, by whatever name called.</span></b></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 19px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; text-align: justify;"><b><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 14pt; line-height: 28px;">They don’t pray to God directly but go through someone or something else.</span></b></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 19px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; text-align: justify;"><b><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 14pt; line-height: 28px;">They practice black magic and voodoo and make their decisions hostage to stargazers, card readers, palmists and parrots.</span></b></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 19px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; text-align: justify;"><b><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 14pt; line-height: 28px;">They tolerate extremists who take hidebound positions and would throttle those who differ.</span></b></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 19px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; text-align: justify;"><b><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 14pt; line-height: 28px;">They enjoy their media blowing issues out of proportion, promoting lies, and hold up contemptible anchors as icons instead of dangerous clowns.</span></b></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 19px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; text-align: justify;"><b><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 14pt; line-height: 28px;">They elect the worst as their rulers, corrupt with fake graduation degrees. They find comical a chief minister’s priceless defense – “A degree is a degree whether fake or genuine” – instead of kicking the man the man who stopped mid-speech in a drunken stupor, legless.</span></b></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 19px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; text-align: justify;"><b><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 14pt; line-height: 28px;">They tolerate rulers stooping to the very personal while abusing each other, dragging in wives and daughters, not that many of the latter are icons of civilization either.</span></b></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 19px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; text-align: justify;"><b><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 14pt; line-height: 28px;">They tolerate rulers living in pomp and panoply while the vast multitudes live in wretchedness.</span></b></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 19px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; text-align: justify;"><b><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 14pt; line-height: 28px;">They tolerate judges issuing contempt notices against judges, lawyers beating up judges and forcing their transfers, lawyers beating up lawyers, politicians, journalists, cameramen, policemen and even their clients. They tolerate lawyers approving the ‘execution’ of a man by a crazed religious lunatic without giving him the chance of a free and fair trial. They join such lawyers in lionizing the murderer by showering flower petals on him and forcing his case out of its area of jurisdiction. Such people are truly uncivilized. Are lawyers not officers of the courts or are they someone’s storm troopers? A civilized society’s supreme court would take immediate action against such lawyers and disbar them, for they are a stigma on justice, society, civilization and Faith. They need re-education.</span></b></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 19px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; text-align: justify;"><b><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 14pt; line-height: 28px;">Such is an uncivilized society. It is mired in decadence and decay, unaware that it has not long to go.</span></b></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 19px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; text-align: justify;"><b><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 14pt; line-height: 28px;">(The writer is a political analyst & a columnist).</span></b></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><b><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEix3qGSZKlYEz9UDhkLz5R_fTyqy09V9LPU7qzVsVXCV8ua-gDQYV5sMRyp7rIIOd281onM0x8cz9ycpnmfNsRHC7gAdXsyPR7VBXlKyIV-7BF20CkpYXG7ro9LFzsvflSLk5onePgPC4k/s1600/Humayun+Gohar.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEix3qGSZKlYEz9UDhkLz5R_fTyqy09V9LPU7qzVsVXCV8ua-gDQYV5sMRyp7rIIOd281onM0x8cz9ycpnmfNsRHC7gAdXsyPR7VBXlKyIV-7BF20CkpYXG7ro9LFzsvflSLk5onePgPC4k/s1600/Humayun+Gohar.jpg" /></a></b></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 19px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; text-align: justify;"><b><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 14pt; line-height: 28px;">NOTE:This is a cross post.</span></b></div>YASMEEN ALIhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10748945833762147296noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1664474623650181692.post-68657645061548847632010-12-24T10:09:00.000-08:002010-12-24T10:13:21.615-08:00All roads lead to Kashmir<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi9JBtwYKi3S7P6wwCYkmdB2iFyQf9O5gWJSM-mcqCY3d4rK6KxVJx7-Bo2FA_VbcdCB7RQyjMs2uWyl_5MLHEtOaXOS8llJdyfP4sULs74nbkEuaiWqB7Mi7-xrbFHD1-Eb3EJYXr3aOM/s1600/Kashmir+Issue.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 400px; height: 180px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi9JBtwYKi3S7P6wwCYkmdB2iFyQf9O5gWJSM-mcqCY3d4rK6KxVJx7-Bo2FA_VbcdCB7RQyjMs2uWyl_5MLHEtOaXOS8llJdyfP4sULs74nbkEuaiWqB7Mi7-xrbFHD1-Eb3EJYXr3aOM/s400/Kashmir+Issue.jpg" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5554313511519298034" /></a><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; border-collapse: collapse; "><b><i><span ><span lang="EN" style="font-size: 14pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; color: black; font-weight: bold; font-style: italic; ">Solving the dispute between India and Pakistan is vital to achieving a broader regional peace</span></span></i></b></span><div><b><i><span ><span lang="EN" style="color: black; "></span></span></i></b><span class="Apple-style-span" ><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: collapse; font-size: 19px;"><b><i><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; font-size: 16px; line-height: 17px; ">By <span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 204); "><span style="color: windowtext; "><a href="http://search.boston.com/local/Search.do?s.sm.query=Basharat+Peer+and+Sasha+Polakow-Suransky&camp=localsearch:on:byline:art" target="_blank" style="color: rgb(0, 0, 204); ">Basharat Peer and Sasha Polakow-Suransky</a></span></span></span></i></b></span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" ><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: collapse; font-size: 19px;"><b><i><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; font-size: 16px; line-height: 17px; "><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 204); "><br /></span></span></i></b></span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: collapse; "><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 19px; "><span style="font-weight: bold; "><span class="Apple-style-span" ><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: normal; line-height: 17px;"><br /></span></span></span></span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: collapse; "><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 19px; "><span style="font-weight: bold; "><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 204); "><span style="color: windowtext; "><a href="http://search.boston.com/local/Search.do?s.sm.query=Basharat+Peer+and+Sasha+Polakow-Suransky&camp=localsearch:on:byline:art" target="_blank" style="color: rgb(0, 0, 204); "></a></span></span><span class="Apple-style-span" ><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: normal; line-height: 17px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: arial, sans-serif; line-height: normal; font-size: 13px; "><p style="text-align: justify; line-height: 15.75pt; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; "><span ><span lang="EN" style="font-size: 13pt; ">RICHARD HOLBROOKE spent the final two years of his life struggling to bring peace to Afghanistan and Pakistan, but officially he was never allowed to touch the issue of Kashmir. In the wake of last week’s WikiLeaks revelations of the Indian government’s use of torture against Kashmiri prisoners, the time has come to put Kashmir back on the map and include it in discussions of a broader regional peace — one that would extend to Afghanistan as well.</span></span></p><p style="text-align: justify; line-height: 15.75pt; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; "><span ><span lang="EN" style="font-size: 13pt; ">The longstanding dispute over Kashmir, a predominantly Muslim region, has poisoned relations between Hindu-majority India and Muslim Pakistan for decades; spawned and sustained anti-Indian terrorist groups; prevented Pakistan’s army from fighting extremists along its border with Afghanistan; and proved deadly for the Kashmiris caught in between.</span></span></p><p style="text-align: justify; line-height: 15.75pt; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; "><span ><span lang="EN" style="font-size: 13pt; ">In early July, the bodies of three young laborers killed by Indian troops were discovered in the Indian-controlled part of Kashmir, unleashing a wave of protests. Police fired tear gas at protesters in Srinagar and killed a 17-year-old student, who was simply passing by. Soon, young Kashmiris armed with stones were battling Indian troops, who responded with bullets. An intense military curfew followed. From July to September, the Kashmiri intifada raged on killing 110 and injuring at least 1,500.</span></span></p><p style="text-align: justify; line-height: 15.75pt; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; "><span ><span lang="EN" style="font-size: 13pt; ">India has long resisted any outside attempt to mediate in Kashmir. The Indian government panicked after Barack Obama’s historic election in November 2008, fearing that Obama might appoint Bill Clinton as a special envoy to Kashmir as he had suggested during the campaign. And even before Holbrooke’s post was announced in January 2009, Indian officials and their allies in Washington lobbied furiously to have the words India and Kashmir excluded from the veteran US diplomat’s portfolio. India did not want to be seen as paying the price for US failures in Afghanistan by being forced to negotiate on Kashmir</span></span></p><p style="text-align: justify; line-height: 15.75pt; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; "><span ><span lang="EN" style="font-size: 13pt; ">Yet the occupation of Kashmir remains a stain on India’s democracy. Over 500,000 Indian troops and paramilitary forces are stationed there. Killings of civilians by security forces routinely go unreported and unpunished as a result of the Armed Forces Special Powers Act, which effectively gives Indian troops stationed in Kashmir a de facto license to kill. The most recent trove of WikiLeaks confirmed what human-rights organizations have long alleged: that Indian troops have systematically tortured Kashmiri prisoners. After documenting widespread torture and sexual humiliation of prisoners who “were rarely militants,” the Red Cross told US officials in 2005 that it had concluded that the Indian government “condones torture.”</span></span></p><p style="text-align: justify; line-height: 15.75pt; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; "><span ><span lang="EN" style="font-size: 13pt; ">Even India’s current leaders realize that they cannot suppress Kashmiris’ desire for freedom forever and that they, too, could benefit from a resolution. Sonia Gandhi, the president of India’s ruling Congress Party, recently admitted the need to address “the alienation of the whole new generation of youth that has known nothing but conflict” in Kashmir. Another decade of tear gas and torture will not help India gain a permanent seat on the UN Security Council and a larger role on the international stage.</span></span></p><p style="text-align: justify; line-height: 15.75pt; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; "><span ><span lang="EN" style="font-size: 13pt; ">Although the road to peace in Kabul does not necessarily begin in Kashmir, regional experts such as former CIA officer Bruce Riedel have argued that a lasting peace in Afghanistan is impossible without a resolution in Kashmir. So long as Pakistan’s military remains obsessed with the Indian threat and the large number of Indian troops along its eastern border, it is reluctant to redeploy its troops and its resources to go after the Taliban along Pakistan’s western border with Afghanistan. At the same time, Pakistan fears encirclement by India due to growing Indian influence in Afghanistan after the United States withdraws. Meanwhile, hawks in India seem reluctant to make major concessions in Kashmir.</span></span></p><p style="text-align: justify; line-height: 15.75pt; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; "><span ><span lang="EN" style="font-size: 13pt; ">Pakistan’s strategic calculus will only change, says Riedel, “once the logic of confrontation with India begins to be undermined.” And that will require renewed back-channel talks and incremental steps toward peace. An overt US push to resolve the Kashmir dispute along the lines of Washington’s recent efforts in the Middle East would likely fail — angering India and exposing its leaders to criticism from hawks on the right. But a softer behind-the-scenes approach could succeed.</span></span></p><p style="text-align: justify; line-height: 15.75pt; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; "><span ><span lang="EN" style="font-size: 13pt; ">After all, back-channel talks between India and Pakistan in 2006 and 2007 came very close to establishing a largely autonomous Kashmir with soft borders between the Indian- and Pakistani-controlled regions, and a gradual demilitarization of the area. Those talks fell apart when Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf lost power in August 2008, and the issue has been a political nonstarter since the Pakistani-sponsored terrorist attacks on Mumbai that November.</span></span></p><p style="text-align: justify; line-height: 15.75pt; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; "><span ><span lang="EN" style="font-size: 13pt; ">There are signs of hope. Two weeks ago, both Indian and Pakistani officials signaled that some back-channel diplomacy had resumed. More importantly, Syed Salahudin, the Pakistan-based leader of Hizbul Mujahideen, the largest Kashmiri militant group, announced in Rawalpindi that “India and Pakistan should sit at the negotiating table.” It is the first time in 20 years that Salahudin has come out in support of a negotiated resolution to the Kashmir dispute. Washington should seize the moment — but quietly.</span></span></p><p style="text-align: justify; line-height: 15.75pt; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; "><i><span ><span lang="EN" style="font-size: 11.5pt; font-family: Georgia, serif; color: black; font-style: italic; ">Basharat Peer, an Open Society Fellow, is the author of “Curfewed Night.’’ Sasha Polakow-Suransky, a senior editor at Foreign Affairs, is the author of “The Unspoken Alliance: Israel’s Secret Relationship with Apartheid South Africa.’’ </span></span></i><span ><span style="font-size: 11.5pt; font-family: Georgia, serif; color: black; "><img border="0" width="6" height="8" src="https://mail.google.com/mail/?ui=2&ik=c4361fa0c0&view=att&th=12d197af42d6c93a&attid=0.2&disp=emb&zw" alt="http://cache.boston.com/bonzai-fba/File-Based_Image_Resource/dingbat_story_end_icon.gif" /></span></span></p><p style="text-align: justify; line-height: 15.75pt; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; "><span ><span style="font-size: 11.5pt; font-family: Georgia, serif; color: black; ">NOTE:This is a cross post.</span></span></p></span></span></span></span></span></span><div><b><i><span ><span lang="EN" style="color: black; "></span></span></i></b><span class="Apple-style-span" ><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: collapse; font-size: 19px;"><b><i><br /></i></b></span></span><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; border-collapse: collapse; "><b><i><span ><span lang="EN" style="font-size: 14pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; color: black; font-weight: bold; font-style: italic; "><br /></span></span></i></b></span></div></div></div>Yasmeenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03738869583776491936noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1664474623650181692.post-81501216077081260602010-11-18T08:11:00.000-08:002010-11-18T08:19:00.649-08:00U.S. taxpayers owe the Afghan people – not the other way around<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhFm_wZFlL2Cdzu1u8dzcLx73SXM8hUqfUJ362UDIY_snJOIy7CMUykD4mnlahlbRI_rMQW8B0ZebVtq9F2-uJP2TCwLC_a4KqU-au0zS_sAIQzbk_U1df-hRQ-byfOxVl7BYadH2TS6LY/s1600/HUGHES.jpg"><img style="float:right; margin:0 0 10px 10px;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 80px; height: 75px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhFm_wZFlL2Cdzu1u8dzcLx73SXM8hUqfUJ362UDIY_snJOIy7CMUykD4mnlahlbRI_rMQW8B0ZebVtq9F2-uJP2TCwLC_a4KqU-au0zS_sAIQzbk_U1df-hRQ-byfOxVl7BYadH2TS6LY/s200/HUGHES.jpg" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5540924651424635362" /></a><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjr_-VQPyIywWPCJHgr4fucCM553GbqRfumMlf0ccOhS-FWwqORBK4BQV2z4f_7MKclCG0u3Dn6k8DJDrl33lA6Ofqhm2KT0SmbiUJT3DOS9kRifTB7nsd8H4YTIzYzkZWG3A1GODFCFjs/s1600/Karzai1.jpg"><img style="float:right; margin:0 0 10px 10px;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 210px; height: 170px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjr_-VQPyIywWPCJHgr4fucCM553GbqRfumMlf0ccOhS-FWwqORBK4BQV2z4f_7MKclCG0u3Dn6k8DJDrl33lA6Ofqhm2KT0SmbiUJT3DOS9kRifTB7nsd8H4YTIzYzkZWG3A1GODFCFjs/s400/Karzai1.jpg" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5540923965519973634" /></a><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'normal Arial', Helvetica, sans-serif; color: rgb(78, 78, 78); font-size: 12px; line-height: 14px; "><h3 property="foaf:name" datatype="" about="/user-mhughes3500" style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 3px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; border-top-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-left-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-color: initial; outline-width: 0px; outline-style: initial; outline-color: initial; font-size: 16px; vertical-align: baseline; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: transparent; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-weight: bold; line-height: 1.2; color: rgb(64, 64, 65); background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; ">By:<a href="http://www.examiner.com/afghanistan-headlines-in-national/michael-hughes" style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 3px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; border-top-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-left-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-color: initial; font-size: 16px; vertical-align: baseline; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: transparent; text-decoration: none; color: rgb(64, 64, 65); line-height: 1.2; font-weight: bold; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; ">Michael Hughes</a> </h3><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 14px; line-height: 21px; "><p style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; border-top-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-left-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-color: initial; outline-width: 0px; outline-style: initial; outline-color: initial; font-size: 14px; vertical-align: baseline; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: transparent; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; ">There’s been this constant absurd clamoring about protecting the American taxpayer when making strategic decisions related to Afghanistan – a ridiculous assertion considering American taxpayers are the ones guilty of electing pro-military leaders that played a major role in the ruination of the Afghan nation over the last 30 years. As Joseph-Marie, Comte de Maistre quipped in 1811:</p><blockquote style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 10px; padding-right: 10px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 10px; border-top-width: 1px; border-right-width: 1px; border-bottom-width: 1px; border-left-width: 1px; border-style: initial; border-color: initial; outline-width: 0px; outline-style: initial; outline-color: initial; font-size: 12px; vertical-align: baseline; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: rgb(234, 239, 245); quotes: none; border-top-style: solid; border-right-style: solid; border-bottom-style: solid; border-left-style: solid; border-top-color: rgb(224, 230, 238); border-right-color: rgb(224, 230, 238); border-bottom-color: rgb(224, 230, 238); border-left-color: rgb(224, 230, 238); font-family: Arial, sans-serif; font-weight: bold; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; "><p style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; border-top-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-left-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-color: initial; outline-width: 0px; outline-style: initial; outline-color: initial; font-size: 12px; vertical-align: baseline; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: transparent; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; ">“The people get the government they deserve”.</p></blockquote><p style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; border-top-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-left-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-color: initial; outline-width: 0px; outline-style: initial; outline-color: initial; font-size: 14px; vertical-align: baseline; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: transparent; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; ">These same aforementioned taxpayers act as if they didn’t know their tax dollars were feeding a military-commercial nexus that espoused interventionist policies primarily aimed at prosecuting war against Islamic countries.</p><p style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; border-top-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-left-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-color: initial; outline-width: 0px; outline-style: initial; outline-color: initial; font-size: 14px; vertical-align: baseline; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: transparent; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; ">I’ve said in these pages repeatedly that it’s time for the Afghans to decide their own fate. When Afghans were allowed to run their own country - and not Soviet, NATO and/or American taxpayer-backed power centers – there was a 30 year period of peace, stability and progressive reform under King Zahir Shah.</p><p style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; border-top-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-left-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-color: initial; outline-width: 0px; outline-style: initial; outline-color: initial; font-size: 14px; vertical-align: baseline; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: transparent; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; ">Some decry this notion based on the false argument that implementing a form of government other than a Western-style democracy will be unacceptable to U.S. taxpayers, after all the dollars invested to date in Afghanistan. The fact that U.S. taxpayers have put leaders in power that have misspent their tax dollars in a way that has been detrimental to most Afghans is not the fault of the Afghan people. This type of ethno-centric arrogance is why we are in this situation in the first place. We think we know what is best for the Afghans.</p><p style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; border-top-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-left-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-color: initial; outline-width: 0px; outline-style: initial; outline-color: initial; font-size: 14px; vertical-align: baseline; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: transparent; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; ">We’ve seen the results of U.S. taxpayer logic and their inability to make decisions that best serve their own interests, let alone other countries - namely by electing a string of officials who have directly and indirectly been complicit in transforming Afghan society from a stable regime that had been undergoing democratic reform in the 1970s to one of the most violent places on earth, wracked by Islamist extremism. And, by the way, this perverse fundamentalist religious movement that grew in Afghanistan since the 1950s has been fostered in no small part by the U.S. government (and the voters that created it).</p><p style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; border-top-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-left-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-color: initial; outline-width: 0px; outline-style: initial; outline-color: initial; font-size: 14px; vertical-align: baseline; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: transparent; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; ">To be fair to “Joe the Taxpayer”, the average American was in the dark in 1979 when Jimmy Carter and his hawkish National Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski persuaded the Russians to invade Afghanistan – which led to the deaths of over 1 million Afghans and the decimation of the very fabric of their society, as a result of 10 years of Soviet occupation during the 80s.</p><p style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; border-top-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-left-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-color: initial; outline-width: 0px; outline-style: initial; outline-color: initial; font-size: 14px; vertical-align: baseline; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: transparent; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; ">It was during this period that the White House was occupied by an unabashed right-wing hawk put there by Reagan Democrats who were enamored with the Hollywood actor’s borderline messianic vision to destroy communism at all costs. The Reagan administration, stock full of neoconservative Christian and Jewish fundamentalists, ran the biggest covert operation in U.S. history to defeat the Russians in Afghanistan, while supporting the most dangerous and violent Islamist extremists in the world.</p><p style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; border-top-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-left-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-color: initial; outline-width: 0px; outline-style: initial; outline-color: initial; font-size: 14px; vertical-align: baseline; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: transparent; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; ">The reign of these mujahideen warlords most of whom became depraved, corrupt and pernicious warlords responsible for furthur destroying Afghanistan during the post-Soviet civil wars - and subsequent Taliban rule helped Afghan society regress culturally and politically at a pace and nature unrivaled in world history. These warlord mujahideen committed the same heinous religious brutality against the Afghan population – but of course back then they were our compadres. Throwing acid in the faces of women wasn’t a big deal when the mujahideen were our allies and, as Reagan called them, "freedom fighters".</p><p style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; border-top-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-left-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-color: initial; outline-width: 0px; outline-style: initial; outline-color: initial; font-size: 14px; vertical-align: baseline; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: transparent; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; ">One could argue that the U.S. public did not realize countless millions were funding the CIA mission in Afghanistan, but eventually it did become known and American taxpayers weren’t bothered in the least because the commies were beaten. In the meantime they reelected Reagan and then voted George H.W. Bush into the White House, issuing each a mandate for continued military buildup.</p><p style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; border-top-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-left-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-color: initial; outline-width: 0px; outline-style: initial; outline-color: initial; font-size: 14px; vertical-align: baseline; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: transparent; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; ">However, once communism was defeated, U.S. taxpayer dollars were allocated elsewhere and Afghan society was completely neglected – negligence that set the stage for the rise of the Taliban in the mid-1990s – a movement completely ignored and even implicitly supported by the Clinton administration and other Western powers.</p><p style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; border-top-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-left-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-color: initial; outline-width: 0px; outline-style: initial; outline-color: initial; font-size: 14px; vertical-align: baseline; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: transparent; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; ">George W. Bush’s administration was responsible for inserting a corrupt puppet to rule Afghanistan and then took taxpayer dollars and funded warlords to “keep the peace” as other resources were diverted to Iraq. It was clear then that Afghanistan suffered tremendously because of the Iraqi diversion. Yet, even this didn’t seem to bother American taxpayers enough – because they reelected Bush in 2004.</p><p style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; border-top-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-left-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-color: initial; outline-width: 0px; outline-style: initial; outline-color: initial; font-size: 14px; vertical-align: baseline; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: transparent; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; ">Then Obama came in and insulted his liberal base by foolishly inserting a mid-2011 deadline for withdrawal after sending 30,000 more troops into a war with ambiguous goals against an enemy with snug safe havens located in a neighboring country.</p><p style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; border-top-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-left-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-color: initial; outline-width: 0px; outline-style: initial; outline-color: initial; font-size: 14px; vertical-align: baseline; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: transparent; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; ">The only ones who think this was a good idea are either partisan to the extreme or on Obama’s staff. But didn’t Obama run on a platform of continued military involvement in the Afghanistan / Pakistan region? Again, voters should have known what they were getting. If they did not read up on this – shame on them – it’s their responsibility to be informed.</p><p style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; border-top-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-left-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-color: initial; outline-width: 0px; outline-style: initial; outline-color: initial; font-size: 14px; vertical-align: baseline; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: transparent; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; ">And shame on the American taxpayers for hardly weighing the Afghanistan war when casting their votes in the recent mid-term elections. They primarily voted for pro-war Republicans who will now try and expand the footprint in Afghanistan and are committed to defeating both Al Qaeda and the Taliban by killing and capturing every last one of them, and they make no secret about their wish for indefinite or infinite occupation in Afghanistan and Iraq in order to keep the terrorists on the run. Which is supposed to keep America safer somehow.</p><p style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; border-top-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-left-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-color: initial; outline-width: 0px; outline-style: initial; outline-color: initial; font-size: 14px; vertical-align: baseline; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: transparent; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; ">The fact of the matter is Afghans need to be given the opportunity to create their own government and choose their own leader via Afghan custom. One alternative to accomplish this is through a series of jirgas perhaps held in neutral countries. Meanwhile, the Afghans want U.S. forces out of their country. However, they want U.S. taxpayer money to fund a localized counterinsurgency effort, but one that is led by Afghans. And they require furthur investment to rebuild their nation that was destroyed by several administrations that U.S. taxpayers put in power.</p><p style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; border-top-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-left-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-color: initial; outline-width: 0px; outline-style: initial; outline-color: initial; font-size: 14px; vertical-align: baseline; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: transparent; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; ">Americans have spent a ton of money and spilt a ton of blood purportedly on behalf of the Afghans. The biggest tragedy certainly is that U.S. soldiers have fought and died for a corrupt regime in Afghanistan, but the fact of the matter is, said government was installed by the U.S. It’s time to stop the bleeding and to cease funding President Hamid Karzai’s reprobate cabal and somehow allocate dollars in a way that actually benefits the Afghan people. It’s the least the U.S. – and its taxpayers – could and should do.</p><p style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; border-top-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-left-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-color: initial; outline-width: 0px; outline-style: initial; outline-color: initial; font-size: 14px; vertical-align: baseline; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: transparent; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; ">(<span class="Apple-style-span" style="line-height: 18px; font-size: 12px; ">Michael Hughes is a journalist and foreign policy strategist for the <a href="http://newworldstrategiescoalition.org/Home_Page.php" style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; border-top-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-left-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-color: initial; font-size: 12px; vertical-align: baseline; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: transparent; text-decoration: none; color: rgb(51, 102, 153); background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; ">New World Strategies Coalition (NWSC)</a>, a think tank founded by Afghan natives focused on developing political, economic and cultural solutions for Afghanistan. Mr. Hughes writes regularly for The Huffington Post and his work has appeared in CNN.com and Ruse the magazine. Michael graduated from the University of Notre Dame with a degree in History.)</span></p><p style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; border-top-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-left-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-color: initial; outline-width: 0px; outline-style: initial; outline-color: initial; font-size: 14px; vertical-align: baseline; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: transparent; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; "><span class="Apple-style-span" style="line-height: 18px; font-size: 12px; ">NOTE:This is a cross post.</span></p></span></div></span>Yasmeenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03738869583776491936noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1664474623650181692.post-9359254826999080152010-11-17T21:25:00.000-08:002010-11-17T21:28:34.086-08:00Rats at the Dike<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhGsRVtmx_B9YIM9tmZQdwYz1LovKOuE4s2ELdxQyx6sDyJHv48UDZE8cJgPuChJKk2FHHjcQx3VBZfCeSXjZ_Pi1vjb-VlrN_UyAzKUHjDUo01mThrBCzwKjIMmBl9-QtuDGbdRR5rCik/s1600/RatsAtTheDike.jpg"><img style="float:right; margin:0 0 10px 10px;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 300px; height: 232px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhGsRVtmx_B9YIM9tmZQdwYz1LovKOuE4s2ELdxQyx6sDyJHv48UDZE8cJgPuChJKk2FHHjcQx3VBZfCeSXjZ_Pi1vjb-VlrN_UyAzKUHjDUo01mThrBCzwKjIMmBl9-QtuDGbdRR5rCik/s400/RatsAtTheDike.jpg" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5540757165055641746" /></a><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', sans-serif; font-size: 13px; "><em style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; ">By Anwaar Hussian </em></span><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', sans-serif; font-size: 13px; "><em style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; "><br /></em></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', sans-serif; font-size: 13px; "><em style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; "><br /></em></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', sans-serif; font-size: 13px; "><em style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; "><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-style: normal; "><p style="margin-top: 12px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 12px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 10px; "><strong style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; ">It</strong> is with deep anguish that one pens what one must pen. There is no pleasure in writing this piece.</p><p style="margin-top: 12px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 12px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 10px; ">Frank Lautenberg, the oldest senator in the United States senate, once said, “One thing I have learned in my time in politics is that if one of the parties is shameless, the other party cannot afford to be spineless.”</p><p style="margin-top: 12px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 12px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 10px; ">On the Pakistani political scene, it is shamelessness and spinelessness all around. With a vile determination and barbarous statecraft, the so called Pakistani leaders have taken turns over the decades to assault the body and spirit of this blighted nation. They have plundered and ravaged it, tore its fabric, blemished it with hideous scars until now when it has become this broken, mournful land swaying like a drunkard in the wind.</p><p style="margin-top: 12px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 12px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 10px; ">Thanks to the bunch of pygmies that have been running the show in Pakistan since its birth, the country is now virtually on the brink of disaster. Perhaps like a leviathan out of the ashes, it can still rise up on its wobbly knees to the challenge but the chances are dim. And that is because Pakistan, gasping for life breaths as it already is, will have to do that with these leaders weighting it down from the throat downward, sucking its lifeblood all that while.<span id="more-2057" style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; "></span></p><p style="margin-top: 12px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 12px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 10px; ">The irony is that the Pakistani leadership, by and large, knows it. They know it not by being some kind of visionaries but by that innate hyena like sense that tells them that the prey is about to fall. They know it by those eerie howls on moonlit nights that they find themselves and their kith and kin baying involuntarily to invite each other to the carcass. They know it by that sudden urge to join the frenzy, that monstrous perversion written indelibly on their genetic code.</p><p style="margin-top: 12px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 12px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 10px; ">That much is what they know.</p><p style="margin-top: 12px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 12px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 10px; ">What we know is something entirely different. Though telling it to them is like throwing water on a duck’s back, for they sit secure in their accepted littleness, one must jot it down nonetheless. Perhaps, if time allows, another crop of our national leadership will heed these words.</p><p style="margin-top: 12px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 12px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 10px; ">What we know is that we do not need leaders like these leading us out of these dire straits. It is impossible in fact. For no one has ever heard of the looters ultimately leading the caravan they had been robbing all along to its final destination.</p><p style="margin-top: 12px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 12px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 10px; ">What we know is that there are three individual values that all national leaders must possess i.e. moral courage, competence, and commitment. That these three values are considered essential for building the trust which must exist for the leadership of a nation. And that all these are alien to the aggressively selfish dwarfs going around as Goliaths in Pakistan.</p><p style="margin-top: 12px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 12px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 10px; ">What we know is that for the nation its leaders’ moral courage is much more important than their physical courage for it is this form of courage that will make them stand firm on their values, their ethical principles, and their convictions. That it takes special courage to support unpopular decisions and to make it difficult for others to do the wrong thing. That the ‘others’ may push them to offer a ‘slightly’ unscrupulous solution as the easiest or most expedient way. That we expect them not to do that; to stand up for their beliefs and what they know is right. And that if they believe they are right after sober and careful judgment, they should hold their position and keep on coming. What we also know is that such fine distinctions are foreign to their wicked nature. They consider these to be an affront to their ancestral creed.</p><p style="margin-top: 12px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 12px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 10px; ">What we know is that a duty is a legal or moral obligation to do what should be done without being told to do it. That duty means accomplishing all the tasks to the fullest of one’s ability. That it requires willingness to accept full responsibility for one’s actions. That if one lies or tells a half-truth to make one’s own self or one’s party look good, it may be called being loyal to the leader and the party, but in fact it is being dishonorable and unethical, neglecting one’s duty to the nation that has the first claim on that office. That, to put it in even simpler terms, a leader just cannot truly do his duty without being honorable. What we also know is that these ‘leaders’ laugh in our faces for holding such ‘idiotic’ ideals, calling it a babbling gossip.</p><p style="margin-top: 12px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 12px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 10px; ">What we know is that national leaders must put the nation’s welfare ahead of their own interests. That they must resist the temptation to put self-gain, personal advantage, and self-interests ahead of what is best for the nation. That as leaders, in fact, they must be the greatest servants. That their offices and position are not personal rewards. That they earned them so that they can serve their nation. What we also know is that for cherishing such standards, right now they are silently saying ‘go climb a pole’ and suggesting that we read their lips.</p><p style="margin-top: 12px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 12px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 10px; ">What we know is that whether they like it or not, they are on display at all times. That their actions say much more than their words. That the nation watches them carefully and is likely to imitate their behavior. That they must accept the obligation to be worthy role models and that they cannot ignore the effect their behavior has on the nation. That they themselves must be willing to do what they require of their countrymen. What we also know is that in their midnight congregations, when the truth serum rages wildly through their veins, they damn us for holding close such values and bawl out their midnight howls to show their contempt for us.</p><p style="margin-top: 12px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 12px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 10px; ">After having written all these lines, I now have in my mind’s eye the mug shots of the Zardaris, the <a href="http://truthspring.info/2008/05/09/the-makh-dooms-of-pakistan/" style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; color: rgb(0, 174, 239); text-decoration: none; font-weight: bold; ">Makh-Dooms</a>, the Nawazes, the Hotis, the Raisanis, the Fazl-ur-Rehmans, the Adbullah Shahs, the countless feudal landlords and the many Generals of my <a href="http://truthspring.info/2008/08/13/pakistan-a-saga-of-misrule-2/" style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; color: rgb(0, 174, 239); text-decoration: none; font-weight: bold; ">unfortunate country</a>. It instantly brings to my mind what Edmund Burk once said, “By gnawing through a dike, even a rat may drown a nation.”</p><p style="margin-top: 12px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 12px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 10px; ">Here is a whole rat pack at the dike. How much time does Pakistan have?</p><p style="margin-top: 12px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 12px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 10px; ">(The writer is a free lance writer & a blogger).</p><p style="margin-top: 12px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 12px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 10px; ">NOTE:This is a cross post.</p></span></em></span></div>Yasmeenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03738869583776491936noreply@blogger.com8tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1664474623650181692.post-40893760389018891262010-11-14T04:09:00.000-08:002010-11-14T04:12:26.840-08:00Pakistan heads down China road<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg_iXw7Sinx_sfTGnzBIRT6nrHYlH7_Jpb0orxmWamenxaa2f37hoGG2UaaoqFm_02qtOuzsIu3720GmlnDgcf-lNQ-iiolTxCGTAGMn9MvQd7T8m44RfRcCX998n3UaAptP5YDQ6EGxIA/s1600/Obama+in+India+2.jpg"><img style="float:right; margin:0 0 10px 10px;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 259px; height: 194px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg_iXw7Sinx_sfTGnzBIRT6nrHYlH7_Jpb0orxmWamenxaa2f37hoGG2UaaoqFm_02qtOuzsIu3720GmlnDgcf-lNQ-iiolTxCGTAGMn9MvQd7T8m44RfRcCX998n3UaAptP5YDQ6EGxIA/s400/Obama+in+India+2.jpg" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5539376756449936354" /></a><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; ">By Syed Saleem Shahzad </span><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; "><br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; ">Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari has visited China on several occasions since taking office in September 2008, but these visits have been more ceremonial than of substance, in part because his Washington-backed government had gravitated so close to the United States orbit that even the Chinese envoy in Islamabad publicly complained.<br /><br />The Pakistani military establishment's pro-China lobby, highly influenced by now retired General Tariq Majeed, frowned on this tilt towards the US, and was especially upset that the Americans were allowed to establsh a naval base in Ormara in Balochistan province, and that US defense contractors were given a free rein in the country. However, the post-Pervez Musharraf-era army was </span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; ">weak and didn't have much choice except to turn a blind eye. </span></div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; "><br />This situation continued until 2009, by which time the army had regained its influence in the corridors of power and had begun to prevail over the country's decision-making process.<br /><br />Hence, Zardari's scheduled visit to China on November 11 takes on a special significance. Notably, he has not sought the counsel of his pro-US envoy in Washington, Husain Haqqani, who has consistently advised Zardari to keep his distance from Beijing. Instead, the president on Monday held a long meeting with Chief of Army Staff General Ashfaq Parvez Kiani.<br /><br />Zardari will attend the opening ceremony of the 16th Asian Games in Guangzhou, as well as meet with his counterpart Hu Jintao and senior officials.<br /><br />On the surface, the leaders will discuss the Washington-opposed plan for a fifth Chinese-built nuclear reactor in Pakistan. However, the underlying emphasis will be on new moves on the grand chessboard of South Asia.<br /><br />"This is a time of strategic uncertainty," a senior Pakistani strategic expert told Asia Times Online on the condition of anonymity. "Although there is a strategic alliance between the US and Pakistan, the recent visit by United States President Barack Obama to India, which aimed to benefit the American economy, was revealing of how economic and strategic ties between India and American will be in the future: when push comes to shove, the Americans will stand with India, not with Pakistan."<br /><br />This does not mean that Pakistan, guided by the military, is instantly going to fall into China's arms and abandon the US, but it is certainly considering adjusting its current alignments.<br /><br />"While the US has provided all sorts of financial and economic assistance to Pakistan in return for its services in providing NATO [North Atlantic Treaty Organization] a passage to Afghanistan and for fighting militancy in the tribal areas, America didn't support Pakistan in regional conflicts with India," the expert said.<br /><br />"The US intervened to help resolve disputes between India and Pakistan, but in the end the formulas that emerged from Washington were aimed at creating a situation for dialogue and engagement - trade relations without any resolution of the Kashmir dispute.<br /><br />"The only [US] goal was that Pakistan-India trade would resume and that would give the Americans a corridor from India into Afghanistan, and finally that dispensation would take India, geographically, into America's strategic loop in South Asia and facilitate India's role to work as an American strategic partner in Afghanistan and all the way up to Central Asia," the expert said.<br /><br /><b>A changing world</b><br />From January to November 5 this year, there were 15 major militant attacks in Pakistan, a dramatic drop from 209 incidents in the same period of the previous year. According to the Canadian Press, the chronology of events shows that the first half of the year was marked by a visibly anti-state insurgency, as was the case in previous years. The frequency of attacks and the dynamics of conflict visibly changed after September [1].<br /><br />Only two major attacks have occurred since then. These included suicide bomber strikes against a Sunni mosque in Darra Adam Khel in northwestern Pakistan on November 5, in which at least 67 people were killed during Friday prayers. There was also a Taliban suicide attack on a Shi'ite procession that killed 65 people in the southwestern city of Quetta on September 1, beside two other minor incidents against shrines in Karachi and Pakpattan.<br /><br />This indicates that from September the violence become sectarian, or centered on tribal disputes. The attacks by the Taliban and al-Qaeda that played havoc in Pakistan in 2009 have virtually come to a halt.<br /><br />Asia Times Online has documented the development of ceasefire initiatives between Pakistan and the militants (See <a href="http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/LI28Df02.html" style="color: rgb(0, 0, 205); text-decoration: underline; ">Vultures are circling in Pakistan</a> September 28, 2010). These were brokered with various main groups and at present only fringe groups like the Lashkar-e-Jhangvi are left to carry out attacks, and even these are sectarian in nature.<br /><br />On the other hand, attacks against Afghanistan-bound NATO supply convoys in Pakistan have increased dramatically, to the extent that they have become almost daily.<br /><br />The "understanding" between the security forces and militants has reached the stage where militants have pledged they will release all prominent prisoners without demanding a high price. These include former Inter-Services Intelligence official retired Colonel Ameer Sultan alias Imam (known as the "Father of the Taliban") and Aamir Malik, the son-in-law of former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee, retired General Tariq Majeed.<br /><br />During Pakistan's recent strategic dialogue with the US in Washington, Islamabad was directly urged to come out with a comprehensive action plan against the powerful Haqqani network in the North Waziristan tribal area. The network is a key player in the Taliban-led insurgency across the border in Afghanistan.<br /><br />However, army chief Kiani is a fervent believer in dialogue with the network and sees it as a guarantee for peace in the future. The Americans have tried their level-best to reach out to the Haqqanis - Jalaluddin and his sons Sirajuddin and Naseeruddin - and the Taliban, but their talks to start talks have collapsed. This has been confirmed by Saudi and other officials involved in the process. Asia Times Online was the first publication to break the news of the failure, (See <a href="http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/LJ30Df03.html" style="color: rgb(0, 0, 205); text-decoration: underline; ">Taliban peace talks come to a halt</a>October 30, 2010.)<br /><br />Washington is still pressing Pakistan, though, to mount operations in North Waziristan, and is even prepared to use a stick if necessary. This could be done through international institutions in which the US has influence, such as the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the World Bank, the Asia Development Bank and the United States Agency for International Development.<br /><br />The IMF's assistant director for the Middle East and Central Asia Department, Adnan Mazarie, recently warned that if these bodies stopped their credit lines to Pakistan, it would go into default. The IMF is now warning that if Pakistan does not implement a "credible and irreversible plan to implement power sector reforms", aid will be cut off.<br /><br /><b>China means business </b><br />Last Sunday, Pakistan's Daily Dawn reported that Pakistan had set aside all competitive international bidding for the induction of power plants in the country and had decided to award a contract, without bidding, to a Chinese company for the construction of 1,100 megawatt hydropower project in Pakistan-administered Kashmir, at an estimated cost of US$2.2 billion.<br /><br />Approximately 10,000 Chinese workers are engaged in 120 projects in Pakistan and total Chinese investment - which includes heavy engineering, power generation, mining and telecommunications - stood at $15 billion at the end of this year, up from $4 billion in 2007.<br /><br />One of the most significant joint development projects of recent years is the major port complex at the naval base of Gwadar in Balochistan province. The complex, inaugurated in December 2008 and now fully operational, provides a deep-sea port, warehouses and industrial facilities for more than 20 countries.<br /><br />China provided much of the technical assistance and 80% of the funds for the construction of the port. In return for providing most of the labor and capital, China gains strategic access to the Persian Gulf: the port is just 180 nautical miles from the Strait of Hormuz through which 40% of all globally traded oil is shipped.<br /><br />This enables China to diversify and secure its crude oil import routes and provides the landlocked and oil- and natural gas-rich Xinjiang province with access to the Arabian Sea. With China formally in command of Gwadar port operations, it would, along with Pakistan, gain an important regional and strategic advantage.<br />Pakistan's marriage of convenience with the US that began after September 11, 2001, with the US-led invasion of Afghanistan and the launch of the "war on terror", has endured some rocky times.<br /><br />Informed opinion in strategic quarters in Pakistan is that in the second half of next year, American aid packages, in the wake of the beginning of the US troop drawdown in Afghanistan, will be reduced or even stopped, and the US's relations with India will bloom.<br /><br />Pakistan wants to be ready for such a development, and is using China as a hedge.<br /><br /><i><b>Note</b></i><br />1. On August 23, three bomb attacks in northwest Pakistan kill at least 36. On July 9, a pair of suicide bombers kills 102 people and wounds 168 in the Mohmand tribal region. On July 2, twin suicide bombers attack Pakistan's most revered Sufi shrine in Lahore, killing 47 people and wounding 180. On May 29, two teams of seven militants attack two mosques of the Ahmadi minority sect in Lahore, killing 97. On April 19, a suicide bomber apparently targeting police at a conservative Islamic party rally in Peshawar kills 23. On April 18, two <i>burqa</i>-clad suicide bombers attack refugees lined up to register for food in Kohat district in the northwest, killing 41. On April 5, a suicide bomber attacks a rally of an anti-Taliban political party in Lower Dir district, killing 45. On March 13, two suicide bombers targeting army vehicles in Lahore kill more than 55 and wound more than 100. On February 18, a bomb tears through a mosque in the Khyber tribal region, killing 29 people and wounding 50 more. On February 5, two bombs targeting the Shi'ite Muslim minority sect in Karachi kill 33 and wound 176 and on January 1 a suicide bomber drives a truckload of explosives into a volleyball field in Lakki Marwat district, killing at least 97 people.<br /><br /><i><b>Syed Saleem Shahzad</b> is Asia Times Online's Pakistan Bureau Chief. </i></span><div><i></i><span class="Apple-style-span" ><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 13px;"><i>NOTE:This is a cross post from Asia Times Online.<br /></i></span></span><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; "><br /></span></div></div>Yasmeenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03738869583776491936noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1664474623650181692.post-7885491799182383602010-10-16T00:53:00.000-07:002010-10-16T00:53:20.269-07:00Deep State<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhS4vX84Okskwh9bf5glNB5N22PcQBb9w0Xs8ZBKecm7q1xF87ZpXbMuuDC764iT7Sg-wxYAJBsK9wsSkhALoZK4K6kBLjmrFSTyGzQdt213W8SlwPZxqrc4IhJ_Gw6SHUGpA3M8KBh6jU/s1600/NA.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="262" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhS4vX84Okskwh9bf5glNB5N22PcQBb9w0Xs8ZBKecm7q1xF87ZpXbMuuDC764iT7Sg-wxYAJBsK9wsSkhALoZK4K6kBLjmrFSTyGzQdt213W8SlwPZxqrc4IhJ_Gw6SHUGpA3M8KBh6jU/s400/NA.jpg" width="400" /></a></div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: collapse; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 19px;"><b><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 14pt; line-height: 28px;">Humayun Gauhar </span></b></span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: collapse; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 19px;"><b><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 14pt; line-height: 28px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;"></span></span></b></span><br />
<b><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 19px; margin-bottom: 10pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 14pt; line-height: 28px;">I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: this parliament must complete its natural life, no matter how bad it gets, as must the provincial assemblies. This is an absolute imperative. Else we won’t grow and mature politically and the system will not evolve. If any changes have to be made, they must only come constitutionally. There are three ways to do this:</span></div><div style="line-height: 19px; margin-bottom: 10pt; margin-left: 37pt; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 14pt; line-height: 28px;"><span>1.<span style="font: normal normal normal 7pt/normal 'Times New Roman';"> </span></span></span><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 14pt; line-height: 28px;">The National Assembly can elect a new prime minister if the incumbent feels that he has lost the confidence of the majority of its members or if he simply doesn’t want to continue, for whatever reason.</span></div><div style="line-height: 19px; margin-bottom: 10pt; margin-left: 37pt; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in; text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="line-height: 19px; margin-bottom: 10pt; margin-left: 37pt; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 14pt; line-height: 28px;"><span>2.<span style="font: normal normal normal 7pt/normal 'Times New Roman';"> </span></span></span><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 14pt; line-height: 28px;">The National Assembly must pass a vote of no confidence in the prime minister by a two-thirds majority and then elect a new one from amongst its members. So too the president, by parliament and all the provincial assemblies.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 19px; margin-bottom: 10pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in; text-align: justify;"><br />
</div><div style="line-height: 19px; margin-bottom: 10pt; margin-left: 37pt; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 14pt; line-height: 28px;"><span>3.<span style="font: normal normal normal 7pt/normal 'Times New Roman';"> </span></span></span><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 14pt; line-height: 28px;">The prime minister could call early elections, which only he can.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 19px; margin-bottom: 10pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 14pt; line-height: 28px;">The same applies to the provinces where the chief ministers have the same authority in their respective provinces. With the power of the president to dissolve the National Assembly and of governors to dissolve their provincial assemblies gone, these are the only constitutional routes available.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 19px; margin-bottom: 10pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 14pt; line-height: 28px;">The ‘Deep State’, as the Americans call it, must keep its hands off. If it cannot, let it first show if it has any realistic solutions to our deep problems. However, if it can’t help intervening and then follows the same old Standard Operating Procedure, or apply what is called the ‘Kakar Formula’ or copy some other country’s failed model, it would be doing us no service at all. It should realize that all such nostrums have proved to be so much humbug. Pakistan will remain frozen in time, like a yoyo oscillating between civilian and Deep State rule. It can serve Pakistan’s interests best by laying-off as much as possible.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 19px; margin-bottom: 10pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 14pt; line-height: 28px;">Test this system to its limit, no matter how dire it gets. This is the only way the system can correct itself, if indeed it contains a self-correcting gene. If it cannot, let it fall flat on its face by itself. Don’t push it. If you do, you will make a martyr of it and unnecessarily prolong its life, as we have already done many times. If it contains any inherent life and relevance, it will improve. If it does not, it will fail, but it will fail by itself, not be forced to seem to have failed. We have aborted the people’s learning experience repeatedly and paid dearly for it. Let the people learn and decide for themselves whether they like this constitution or they want something different. Let them decide whether they want this political system or that. Let them decide which politicians and political parties are good and which are bad. Let them decide what democracy really means. And let them strive towards it. It is only through experience, and mostly through bitter experience, that human beings learn – but only if you don’t keep aborting that learning process.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 19px; margin-bottom: 10pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 14pt; line-height: 28px;">The usual problems associated with civilian rule – corruption verging on loot and a total absence of governance – were to be expected, no matter which party or parties formed the government. No surprises here. This is in the nature of the governments this system will throw up in a largely feudal country with an agrarian economy.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 19px; margin-bottom: 10pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 14pt; line-height: 28px;">The new problem is the president: powerless though he may now be, he is also the co-Chairperson of the ruling party. That is where he derives real power from and that is what is holding the prime minister and his cabinet hostage, for fear that if they don’t comply with the president’s wishes they risk not getting party tickets come the next elections. If Mr. Zardari is forced out of the presidency, he will still continue to wield his real power over the executive. The change will only be cosmetic. If the courts rule that he cannot hold dual offices (albeit one is private and without profit) he will hit back and hit back hard. He might force a vote in the National Assembly that the executive order of the prime minister reinstating the Supreme Court judges was invalid. The cute argument that they were never thrown out of office in the first place may prove to be just so much sophistry. So let’s be careful, lest we force the Deep State in.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 19px; margin-bottom: 10pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 14pt; line-height: 28px;">Rational pragmatism demands that the judges must decide how far to go and which is more important – Pakistan or the constitution? The time to amputate a limb to save the body, as Abraham Lincoln said, has not yet come. Our pseudo analysts keep referring to Article 190; I don’t see how it provides for the Supreme Court to order the army to intervene. The justices should know that even if the Deep State follows the so-called Bangladesh Model – which is unconstitutional anyway – they could be its earliest victims.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 19px; margin-bottom: 10pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 14pt; line-height: 28px;">A frustrated, cynical people ask: will the army save us when there is nothing left to save? Did it save us in the past or just gave us breathing space and left us back at square one? And why did you the people elect this assembly in the first place? Don’t duck the question by saying that you didn’t vote. That is terrible. Our responsibility is collective regardless of which way a particular person voted or didn’t vote at all. Now we have to learn our lessons so that we don’t make the same mistakes again – hopefully.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 19px; margin-bottom: 10pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 14pt; line-height: 28px;">The Deep State is a state within a state, very much like the <i>Khwaraji</i> concept. Here the state within largely comprises the army, the ISI and the USA with its intelligence, defense and official and unofficial security organs. The army should know that even if it is forced to intervene, directly or indirectly, by the Deep State, America may support it covertly but will oppose it overtly for hypocritical appearances sake, with economic sanctions imposed. That is in its nature. A bankrupt treasury and an economy near collapse will not be able to withstand the strain and we will fall either totally in America’s lap or the many laps religious extremist groups with each carving out his own warlord-like fief. Therein lie the seeds of disintegration. Think about it.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 19px; margin-bottom: 10pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 14pt; line-height: 28px;">(Humayun Gohar is a free lance writer and an analyst).</span></div></b>YASMEEN ALIhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10748945833762147296noreply@blogger.com8tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1664474623650181692.post-23148107378115256112010-10-10T08:21:00.000-07:002010-10-10T08:22:14.347-07:00Public Opinion in Pakistan<div style="color: #565656; font-family: arial; font-size: 12px; line-height: 20px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 10px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 10px; text-align: center;"><strong>A NAF-TFT-CAMP SURVEY ON A CREEPING WOT</strong></div><div style="color: #565656; font-family: arial; font-size: 12px; line-height: 20px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 10px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 10px;"><strong></strong></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhZAhk88SLtiAZVwlrLiVzzwkD-AW46MtmEE96BNRsVpikuoAUkbt05el6DRuKMoTKK3-LipvsJ0sfpdGYYzo644vMD2fPozfmJAu6jhFih4gNauLA7xLrbmUQLH45jmCCV3B9QPzQ3x2o/s1600/PUBLIC+OPINION.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="199" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhZAhk88SLtiAZVwlrLiVzzwkD-AW46MtmEE96BNRsVpikuoAUkbt05el6DRuKMoTKK3-LipvsJ0sfpdGYYzo644vMD2fPozfmJAu6jhFih4gNauLA7xLrbmUQLH45jmCCV3B9QPzQ3x2o/s320/PUBLIC+OPINION.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><div style="color: #565656; font-family: arial; font-size: 12px; line-height: 20px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 10px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 10px;">By Brig Samson S Sharaf </div><div style="color: #565656; font-family: arial; font-size: 12px; line-height: 20px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 10px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 10px;">A recent survey carried out jointly by New America Foundation and Terror Free Tomorrow (NAF-TFT) with the local assistance of Community Appraisal and Motivation Programme (CAMP) a Pakistani NGO operating in FATA is testable. Conducted in seven tribal agencies of Pakistan, it managed to collect 498/1000 (49.8%) samples from the worst hit agencies like Orakzai, Khurram, North and South Waziristan. This particular survey in Waziristan excluded the NAF-TFT for security reasons but yet resulted in consistent conclusions.</div><div style="color: #565656; font-family: arial; font-size: 12px; line-height: 20px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 10px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 10px;">The survey could have resulted in better insights had some questions peculiar to political sociology of Pakistan been included. Yet responses to different questions if collated scientifically point towards accurate conclusions of the ground realities. Once combined with the second part ie the Leadership Sample, the findings and inferences will be further synthesized and revealing. US research organizations adept at producing biased analysis from a stand-off need to analyse this important document in detail to mellow their anti Pakistan rhetoric.</div><div style="color: #565656; font-family: arial; font-size: 12px; line-height: 20px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 10px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 10px;">In many ways the survey reinforces the common perceptions and analysis vocally spelled out by the Pakistani media and excluded political groups. Pakistan Tehreek e Insaf has been the most vocal critic of the manner in which WIT has been conducted and is closest to the hearts of the people in FATA. The survey accurately brings out the aspirations of a representative sample living in a violence ridden environment yet conforming to the awareness of Pakistani print media, common people and civil society. In many ways, it reinforces the national construct and belief in Pakistani nationalism. It is also an important document for the Government of Pakistan to redirect its policy on foreign affairs and WOT consistent with the aspirations of the people amply reflected in this document.</div><div style="color: #565656; font-family: arial; font-size: 12px; line-height: 20px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 10px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 10px;"><strong>US OPERATIONS AGAINST AL- QAEDA-TALIBAN</strong></div><div style="color: #565656; font-family: arial; font-size: 12px; line-height: 20px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 10px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 10px;">The outstanding conclusion of the survey is the opposition to US Military Operations pursuing Al- Qaeda and Taliban inside Pakistan (90%). The individuals who gave this opinion belong to a well knit tribal society where information travels like wildfire and show awareness of hostile intelligence agencies operating in the area. This is local knowledge consistent with what the majority of Pakistanis feel.</div><div style="color: #565656; font-family: arial; font-size: 12px; line-height: 20px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 10px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 10px;">Given a choice, about 70% feel that this job should be left to Pakistan Army while over 90% are favourable to the role of Army and FC in their areas. This finding links to other points of the survey in which over 60% blame USA-India-Israel for the problems in FATA. Similarly 59% also see the same nexus as the biggest threat to Pakistan. In US strategic parlance, this means the ‘Long War’ in which US Policy makers wish to include India as a major partner. These opinions based on local firsthand knowledge later transcend to very strong emotional perceptions. 59% of the same people who otherwise hate the militants in the area opine that suicide bombings against USA are justified. Spread to a larger canvas, the majority of Pakistanis disapprove US War on Terror, feel convinced that the present US Nexus is involved in covert operations in Pakistan and therefore killing them is justifiable. This hate for US policy should cause concern and raise eyebrows in the State Department, because in a LONG WAR as they perceive it, this sentiment will grow exponentially.</div><div style="color: #565656; font-family: arial; font-size: 12px; line-height: 20px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 10px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 10px;">This is what I have been terming as a War of Hate in many articles, and that based on the Social Dimension of Strategy, USA will lose it in the end. Just like Cambodia and Lagos, this creeping adventurism into Pakistan and forcing Pakistan to become the epicenter of terrorism by design may help USA in its narrow objectives but will create a reaction that the world will not be able to contend with. The same conclusion was forcefully put across by Rachel Maddow in her MSNBC show calling it ‘a New Frontier and a New War, this time Pakistan’. This also explains why young western educated men choose to act as foot soldiers against USA.</div><div style="color: #565656; font-family: arial; font-size: 12px; line-height: 20px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 10px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 10px;">With over 122 drone attacks since the Obama surges began, not 10% of Al Qaeda leadership has been neutralized. Yet this remote controlled technology is stubbornly deemed the best option for killing OBL who many believe is already history. As Bill Van Auken puts it,</div><div style="color: #565656; font-family: arial; font-size: 12px; line-height: 20px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 10px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 10px;">‘Following the strategy dictated by his generals, Obama, just like his predecessor in the White House, is attempting to exploit US military superiority to offset American capitalism’s long-term economic decline. This course is producing regional and global instability that threatens to drag the people of Pakistan and the entire world into a far bloodier conflagration’.</div><div style="color: #565656; font-family: arial; font-size: 12px; line-height: 20px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 10px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 10px;">The recent escalation in such attacks followed by physical violations of Pakistan’s international boundary have served to ferment angry reactions in Pakistan evidenced in a spate of attacks on NATO convoys. As more people shift from the fringe to radicalism, the only safe way for these convoys would be heavy military escorts provided by Pakistan; the undeclared enemy, or through the waste lands of Central Asia. US analysts and policy makers need to answer why they are doing this and what is their back up and exit plan if this already failing policy ultimately fails?</div><div style="color: #565656; font-family: arial; font-size: 12px; line-height: 20px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 10px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 10px;"><strong>PACIFICATION OPERATIONS</strong></div><div style="color: #565656; font-family: arial; font-size: 12px; line-height: 20px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 10px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 10px;">The second most important finding of the survey is the Pacification Operations; Win the hearts and minds. In any multi dimensional conflict, there always are containing fronts and in a Transylvanian such as this, there ought to be many pacification fronts. US policy makers strive to poke every conceivable fault line to stir instability and prove what Ahmad Rashid calls, ‘Pakistan’s descent into Chaos’.</div><div style="color: #565656; font-family: arial; font-size: 12px; line-height: 20px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 10px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 10px;">This conclusion is a tribute to the concept of collective wisdom of a healthy society; The people who have sustained violence for over three decades, lived in least developed areas with minimum developmental and educational infrastructure and lost many kit and kin to war. Though in awe of US policy maker they do not hate the people of USA, over 75% feel that USA could win hearts and minds by transiting to pacification operations centered on socio-economic development. These people like most Pakistanis are prepared to forgive and forget if USA leaves Pakistan to Pakistanis and engages its people through developmental economics.</div><div style="color: #565656; font-family: arial; font-size: 12px; line-height: 20px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 10px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 10px;"><strong></strong></div><div style="color: #565656; font-family: arial; font-size: 12px; line-height: 20px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 10px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 10px;"><strong>FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN & A NEW SOCIAL CONTRACT</strong></div><div style="color: #565656; font-family: arial; font-size: 12px; line-height: 20px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 10px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 10px;">Most important and motivating is the strong belief of these besieged citizens in the Federation of Pakistan. Majority are dismissive of Talibanisation. Over 90% appreciate the presence of the Military and Frontier Corps in the region for law, order and development. This indicates the mistrust of the people in the present bureaucratic and political set up. It is also an indicator that these suffering masses just like other Pakistanis yearn for a new social contract. The single largest majority of 26.50 % wish to see Pakistan Tehreek e Insaf in power trailed by 10.10% for Pakistan Muslim League (N). PPP and ANP seem to have fallen from grace while MQM appears to be more popular than Taliban and Al Qaeda. Religious parties retain their influence of over 13%.</div><div style="color: #565656; font-family: arial; font-size: 12px; line-height: 20px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 10px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 10px;">Like most analysts and thinkers in Pakistan, these people are progressive, dreamers and yearn for a new social contract. These are all winds of change that Pakistan needs.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh_yMTOnaM7pNIAXk1TJXkGa0y4YnhllZgCDn3KSQgT8zGHvT9ymAJJfx-TwjyZfGUY6aJ9Gz1kFJaBwioFSY-3wCTdXOntVF3Ly4aUgDre5jtxlGkwivlEN2uS38b3WBg9EDCUjRz_j48/s1600/Brig-Samson-Sharf1-150x150.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh_yMTOnaM7pNIAXk1TJXkGa0y4YnhllZgCDn3KSQgT8zGHvT9ymAJJfx-TwjyZfGUY6aJ9Gz1kFJaBwioFSY-3wCTdXOntVF3Ly4aUgDre5jtxlGkwivlEN2uS38b3WBg9EDCUjRz_j48/s1600/Brig-Samson-Sharf1-150x150.jpg" /></a></div><div style="color: #565656; font-family: arial; font-size: 12px; line-height: 20px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 10px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 10px;">(The writer is a retired Brigadier from the Pakistan Army.<i>).</i><br />
<i>NOTE:This is a cross post from THE NATION.</i></div>YASMEEN ALIhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10748945833762147296noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1664474623650181692.post-4458948995377059592010-10-09T23:39:00.000-07:002010-10-09T23:39:42.064-07:00Towards reopening Tourkhum Route: Yes or No?<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"></div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #333333; font-family: Georgia, 'Bitstream Charter', serif; font-size: 16px; line-height: 24px;">By: Yasmeen Ali </span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #333333; font-family: Georgia, 'Bitstream Charter', serif; font-size: 16px; line-height: 24px;"></span><br />
<div style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: transparent; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; margin-bottom: 24px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">On October 7 the United States and its North Atlantic Treaty Organization military allies began the tenth year of their war in Afghanistan, over 3,000 miles from NATO Headquarters in Brussels. As the U.S. delivered its 20th deadly drone missile attack of the month inside Pakistan on the 27th, five times the amount launched in August and the most in any month since they were started in 2004, NATO conducted a series of attacks with helicopter gunships in Northwest Pakistan. Claiming the “right of self-defense” and in “hot pursuit” of insurgents that had reportedly attacked a NATO camp, Combat Outpost Narizah, in Afghanistan’s Khost province near the Pakistani border, this past weekend NATO attack helicopters conducted two forays into the Federally Administered Tribal Areas where U.S. drone strikes have killed a record number of people this month.</div><div style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: transparent; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; margin-bottom: 24px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Estimates of those killed, dutifully referred to in the Western press as insurgents, militants or terrorists, were 30, then 50, afterward 60, 70 and later “82 or higher.” The death toll in Pakistan this month is well over 200 and for this year to date over 2,000. The justification for this carnage offered by the U.S. and NATO is that it is intended to extend the policy of Barack Obama to “disrupt, dismantle and defeat” insurgent networks in Afghanistan into Pakistan, supposedly the sooner to end the war.</div><div style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: transparent; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; margin-bottom: 24px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">However, should situation be reversed, will the USA allow Pakistan or any other country for that matter to take the same action and launch attacks, killing thousands of men, women And children, not to speak of Armed Force personnel in the name of” collateral damage”?</div><div style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: transparent; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; margin-bottom: 24px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Rehman Malik, the Interior Minister for Pakistan, was forced to denounce the attacks in face of mounting public rage against these gross violations and anger at a weak government unable to defend the borders of the sovereign state.</div><div style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: transparent; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; margin-bottom: 24px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Most of the time, the government has turned a blind eye to the atrocities, in spite of repeated news by the media of damage done by the drones on Pakistan soil. Not any more. Public anger mounts at both the attackers and the inept and corrupt government of Zardari which has failed on all fronts to deliver on it’s promise at elections.</div><div style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: transparent; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; margin-bottom: 24px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">As a result of this anger, NATO trucks have been torched and burnt to ashes by angry gunmen- who see the government failing to register a complaint with the relevant authorities and for once, see justice done.</div><div style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: transparent; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; margin-bottom: 24px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Gareth Porter, renowned historical investigative journalist, in his article, published by IPS News, states,” The crisis in U.S.-Pakistani relations was the result of a decision by the Obama administration – which press reports suggest was on the basis of a strong recommendation from Petraeus – to act much more aggressively and unilaterally if the Pakistani military did not do more to attack militant groups in North Waziristan, especially the Haqqani group, which dominates the successful insurgency in eastern Afghanistan.”.</div><div style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: transparent; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; margin-bottom: 24px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">He further states,” One element of the decision was to increase drone strikes in Waziristan dramatically to an unprecedented 22 in September – more than four times the average number in the previous six months. In the past, the United States had gotten permission from the Pakistani government for specific geographic “boxes” in which drone strikes could be carried out, as revealed in “Obama’s War” by Bob Woodward.</div><div style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: transparent; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; margin-bottom: 24px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Evidently that was not done, however, before the sudden dramatic increase in drone strikes in September.</div><div style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: transparent; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; margin-bottom: 24px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The second element was to carry out at a series of cross- border helicopter gunship attacks in Pakistan that were not cleared in advance with the Pakistani military.” UNQUOTE.</div><div style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: transparent; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; margin-bottom: 24px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">US forces pursued the Taliban into Pakistan “after following the proper rules of engagement under inherent right of self defense,” Master Sergeant Matthew Summers, an ISAF spokesman, told <em style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: transparent; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; font-style: italic; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Long War Journal</em> on Sept. 26.</div><div style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: transparent; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; margin-bottom: 24px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">But a spokesman at Pakistan’s Foreign Office rejected reports that such an agreement between ISAF and Pakistan exists, and said the incursions are a violation ISAF’s mandate.</div><div style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: transparent; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; margin-bottom: 24px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">DAWN Newspaper, reported on 9<sup style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: transparent; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; bottom: 1ex; font-size: 10px; height: 0px; line-height: 1; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;">th</sup> October 2010 that a principled stand has been taken by the Pakistan Government to reopen the Torkhum route.</div><div style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: transparent; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; margin-bottom: 24px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Note that roughly 80% of NATO supplies pass through the Pakistan route and is vital for strategic interests of the NATO forces in Afghanistan.</div><div style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: transparent; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; margin-bottom: 24px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Nonetheless, the Pakistan Government has kept the Chaman, linking Baluchistan and Kandahar route open for the NATO supplies and has not completely closed off the supply line.</div><div style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: transparent; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; margin-bottom: 24px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">U.S. Ambassador to Pakistan Anne W. Patterson has apologized on behalf of the American people for killing of Pakistani paratroopers in a cross-border raid by NATO helicopters on September 30th. But is that enough? If USA can send Dr Afia Siddiqi to jail for 86 years owing to the alleged attempt on the lives of US soldiers, should those directly responsible for the death of Pakistani paratroopers get off scot free after rendering a grudging apology? USA would do well to understand the anger by the Pakistanis on this show of double standards and injustice. <a href="http://pakpotpourri2.files.wordpress.com/2010/10/nato-trucks2.jpg" style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: transparent; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; color: #0066cc; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><img alt="" class="alignleft size-full wp-image-391" height="184" src="http://pakpotpourri2.files.wordpress.com/2010/10/nato-trucks2.jpg?w=274&h=184" style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: transparent; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; border-bottom-style: none; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-color: initial; border-left-style: none; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-style: none; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-style: none; border-top-width: 0px; border-width: initial; display: inline; float: left; height: auto; margin-bottom: 12px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 24px; margin-top: 4px; max-width: 100%; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: auto;" title="NATO TRUCKS2" width="274" /></a></div><div style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: transparent; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; margin-bottom: 24px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Unless and until, NATO takes a firm action on ground against those responsible, public anger in Pakistan shall not be appeased. Worse attacks on NATO trucks can be expected. According to Reuters, up to 40 trucks of supplies have been burnt by angry gunmen. Can the unpopular government of Asif Ali Zardari sustain the onslaught of public anger? Can Zardari’s government convince NATO to take a firm action against those responsible?</div><div style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: transparent; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; margin-bottom: 24px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">USA’s policies are clearly destabilizing Pakistan. A destabilized Pakistan will destabilize the Region. Can the USA afford this in face of their aim to vacate Afghanistan soon? The Think Tanks in USA must reevaluate their strategies for this part of the world. The United States must also take into account the diplomatic repercussions of such ill advised actions besides the dramatic increase in anti American sentiments in Pakistanis.</div><div style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: transparent; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; margin-bottom: 24px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><br />
</div><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #333333; font-family: Georgia, 'Bitstream Charter', serif; font-size: 16px; line-height: 24px;"><br />
</span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #333333; font-family: Georgia, 'Bitstream Charter', serif; font-size: 16px; line-height: 24px;"><br />
</span>YASMEEN ALIhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10748945833762147296noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1664474623650181692.post-36608238229461542102010-10-08T03:46:00.000-07:002010-10-08T03:49:23.751-07:00The Fiction that India has created about Kashmir<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjPPfgboWeDKjpOClF6-rQvbxU6AS18Ewp1l7zIrsP6wD6_4ie5JXsTN52QD55RZSEhfkmz3Wcy3vsz71WvjL_zL4vI26mDuSL3CrFIz8AClCpGPV0pCr4Dxf641_Xk4_qRotMzzQ9KQBA/s1600/KASMIR.bmp"><img style="float:right; margin:0 0 10px 10px;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 200px; height: 136px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjPPfgboWeDKjpOClF6-rQvbxU6AS18Ewp1l7zIrsP6wD6_4ie5JXsTN52QD55RZSEhfkmz3Wcy3vsz71WvjL_zL4vI26mDuSL3CrFIz8AClCpGPV0pCr4Dxf641_Xk4_qRotMzzQ9KQBA/s200/KASMIR.bmp" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5525625144212327330" /></a><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; border-collapse: collapse; line-height: 20px; ">By Murtaza Shibli </span><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; border-collapse: collapse; line-height: 20px; "><br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; border-collapse: collapse; line-height: 20px; "><p>"Despite creating this self-deluding fiction and despite the armed soldiers garrisoned at every corner, the relationship between India and Kashmir remains on the edge. This fiction and the heavy Indian military presence are symptoms of Indian denial of any Kashmiri right to choose their political future. The present and ongoing Kashmiri intifada has so far claimed more than 100 civilian lives with thousands more injured, mainly due to the fire arms of the occupying Indian soldiers. Despite such a heavy price there is no end in sight."</p><p>Since January 2009 The Economist has been banned or censored in 12 countries including Saudi Arabia, Libya and China. India is the ‘only democracy on the list’; having censored 31 issues of the weekly, it is on the top. The main reason for this censorship is the publication of a map of Kashmir that does not comply with the Indian version. As a result, the Indian authorities stamp “Illegal” across it. In a twisted world of virtual realities, what is ‘illegal’ is in fact an accurate cartographic depiction of Jammu and Kashmir, with due appreciation of Pakistani and Chinese controlled territories.</p><p>A cursory look at the map of India shows Kashmir sitting atop a vast landmass. Despite being the site of endless misery and violence, Kashmir enjoys pride of place; secular Indian politicians and Hindu fundamentalists alike celebrate the possession, and describe Kashmir as taj or crown of India. Amid such triumphalistic clamour, the sufferings of Kashmiris are drowned out. However, at times, when Kashmiris rise to full scale rebellion and the brutal state response results in much innocent blood spilt, the world takes momentary notice. On such occasions, with its usual dismissive demeanour, India almost always attributes Kashmiri public dissent to Pakistan, Islam or terrorism. For some time now, the Lashkar-e-Taibba is providing a more convenient disguise; the Indian authorities have been blaming it for orchestrating stone throwing Kashmiri youth who are out on the streets protesting daily murder by the Indian forces.</p><p>The Indian version of the map that is named as ‘Jammu and Kashmir’ is a cartographic illusion, embodying the fantasy of Jawaharlal Nehru, the first Indian Prime Minister and a Kashmiri by descent, who was instrumental in effecting its questionable accession to India. The taj that is shown spread across a vast geography in all four directions is in reality much smaller; only 48 percent of the area depicted. Discard the exaggerations, from top and the sides, and the taj, that coveted crown, looks more like a misshapen wig created by a concoction of coercion and deceit.</p><p>The Kingdom of Jammu and Kashmir was cobbled out of disparate cultural, ethnic and linguistic geographies, when the British sold it to a local Hindu chieftain, who had aided them against the Sikhs. Gulab Singh, the ‘buyer’ of the Kingdom had no regard for the sufferings of its inhabitants, a majority of whom were Muslims. This continued when a century later, in 1947, the borders of Jammu and Kashmir were redrawn, and India and Pakistan took over. An intractable dispute was born that has cursed the region ever since.</p><p>Long before, China had never accepted the border arrangements between the British Empire, Afghanistan and Russia in the northern area of Kashmir. This position was maintained even after the communist takeover in 1949 and led to the only Sino-Indian war in 1962. This ended with the Chinese taking control of a large north-eastern portion known as Aksai Chin.</p><p>At present, Kashmir is divided between India, Pakistan and China – India controls the majority of the territory with central and southern parts totalling 141,338 square kilometres. This is followed by Pakistan with the northwest portion, known as Azad Kashmir and Gilgit-Baltistan consisting of 85,846 km2. The area under Chinese control consists of 37,555 km2 of mainly deserted territory, but with much needed water resources thanks to its close proximity to Karakoram.</p><p>The ‘legal’ map that is depicted everywhere, from government stationary to administrative reports and postal stamps to surveys, is based on an elaborate hoax, whereby the whole of Kashmir ‘belongs’ to India. This provokes a political rhetoric which serves an inflated sense of grandeur that has animated Indian politics for too long. This deliberate hyperbole is emblematic of India’s relationship with Kashmir and its emergence as an object of desire and dispute. There are no signs or demarcation lines that distinguish between those parts administered by Pakistan or under Chinese control. The map is taught in schools often with fundamentalist religious zeal, creating a whole generation of ignorant, and often very militant, Indians who are unwilling to entertain any view other than what is drilled through official or religious channels. This has frozen Indian political reason.</p><p><br /></p><p>In his piece, ‘China and India: the great game's new players’ (The Guardian, 25 September), Jaswant Singh, former Indian Foreign Minister extends this sterile mindset when he blames China for ‘promoting bogus Pakistani claims that undermine India’s territorial integrity’. He calls it ‘verbal trickery’, forgetting that he is the one who is employing trickery by pursuing what I call the Great Indian Fiction on Kashmir. That Kashmir is an internationally accepted dispute, in which the land is occupied by more than half a million ruthless Indian Army soldiers fails to impress Singh. It is ironic that Singh should peddle such fictions. Last year, he lost his political position for challenging another great Indian fabrication about Pakistan. In his book, Jinnah, Partition and Independence, Singh sought to correct popular Hindu/Indian historiography of the Partition and blamed the Congress and Jawaharlal Nehru and not Mohammad Ali Jinnah for the divide. He also praised Jinnah, the founding father of Pakistan, as a great nationalist who had been demonised in Indian history. Singh’s book challenged the very myths that form the foundations of modern India. It provoked angry reactions across the Indian political spectrum with the secular Congress party accusing him of ‘denigrating India’s first Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru’. The publication resulted in the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) that describes itself as the ‘Hindu nationalist party’ expelling Singh from its ranks saying that the party will not "compromise on matters of ideology or discipline". The book was also banned in Gujarat, the Indian state run by the BJP and notorious for the state-sponsored pogrom of 2002 that resulted in deaths of thousands of Muslim civilians.</p><p>As a Kashmiri born under Indian occupation, I have been taught the same ‘Indian geography’ in relation to Kashmir. It was much later that I realised the exactness of the illegitimacy of Indian claims. This geographical delusion represents an elaborate denial of history – the unfulfilled Indian promises of holding a plebiscite to allow Kashmiris to determine their future. This colonial mapping has led to the effacement of the democratic rights of Kashmiris. Whenever Kashmiris rise for their right of self-determination, India, instead of addressing the democratic demands, ruthlessly clamps down on them. By continuously advancing myths about geography and re-writing history, India portrays Kashmiri demands for justice as a grave threat, not only to India’s integrity as a nation-state, but also against the Bharat Mata, the Hindu concept of India as a sacred religious space. In an abominable effort to garner some moral justification for its brutal occupation, it also invokes its claims over ‘Pakistan occupied Kashmir’.</p><p>In early 1994, at the height of the Kashmiri resistance, when the demand for Kashmir’s independence was at its strongest, the Indian Parliament, the law making assembly of the world’s largest democracy, in a blatant refusal to appreciate popular Kashmiri sentiment, unanimously passed a Special Resolution that reiterated that the whole of Jammu and Kashmir belonged to India. The Resolution also demanded: “Pakistan must vacate the areas of the Indian State of Jammu and Kashmir, which they have occupied through aggression”. This is a timeless trick in the Indian strategy. Last week, after months of slumber, when the Pakistani government, forced by growing public anger against Kashmiri deaths, finally made public pronouncements calling on India to "review the practice of describing Jammu and Kashmir as its integral part", the Indian reaction was unequivocal. S M Krishna, the External Affairs Minister, responded by ‘pointing out’ that Pakistan is in "illegal occupation of some parts of Jammu and Kashmir". With brazen effrontery, he further said, "It is desirable that they vacate that [the Pakistani part] and then start advising India as to how to go about doing things in Kashmir."</p><p>It is extremely intriguing that India often talks about ‘Pakistani occupied Kashmir’ but never mentions Aksai Chin, the area under Chinese control since 1962. Significantly, there is no mention of China or the Chinese part of Jammu and Kashmir in the Indian Parliament’s 1994 Special Resolution, which demands Pakistan to vacate its part. In fact, such demands are never made to the Chinese. Kashmiris see this as a duplicitous and cowardly Indian position that avoids facing China but gleefully seeks confrontation with Pakistan, a smaller and poorer country, with a less significant military power.</p><p>Despite creating this self-deluding fiction and despite the armed soldiers garrisoned at every corner, the relationship between India and Kashmir remains on the edge. This fiction and the heavy Indian military presence are symptoms of Indian denial of any Kashmiri right to choose their political future. The present and ongoing Kashmiri intifada has so far claimed more than 100 civilian lives with thousands more injured, mainly due to the fire arms of the occupying Indian soldiers. Despite such a heavy price there is no end in sight. Indian intransigence is characteristic – much like the demon king Ravana from the famous Hindu epic, the Rāmāyaṇa. In a region that is surrounded by three nuclear powers and contains nearly half the world’s population, where extremism both Hindu and Muslim is on the rise, such obduracy threatens calamitous consequences. As a growing power, which seeks to display its muscle so brazenly, India must exert its might with a sense of responsibility both towards Kashmiris and the whole region. To exorcise the morbid ghosts that India has raised in the region, it must undo its own fable that has compromised its conscience and morality. An honest lesson in geography can be just a start for a hopeful and possibly peaceful future. The Great Indian Fiction on Kashmir by Murtaza Shibli, (Tuesday, October 5, 2010).</p><p>NOTE:This is a cross post from RUPPEE NEWS.</p></span></div>Yasmeenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03738869583776491936noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1664474623650181692.post-17277776593166919922010-09-24T21:23:00.000-07:002010-09-24T21:23:14.254-07:00Maybe Muslims Did It?By: Gordon Duff<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh5hC2xAlBSVgD6MTqycd8WeVwfXH-UI3mcC5LFYaJriWKY8f_WI02bedIUGIbK7008qsngT0C8DdcPjm7hm-I0LHJ_1TsGkEJBJrWHCbd3VCmLoPJ5a3YYtrTPPVm5BBL4Gomjy5Ivl6I/s1600/NYCSmokeCollapse2.gif" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh5hC2xAlBSVgD6MTqycd8WeVwfXH-UI3mcC5LFYaJriWKY8f_WI02bedIUGIbK7008qsngT0C8DdcPjm7hm-I0LHJ_1TsGkEJBJrWHCbd3VCmLoPJ5a3YYtrTPPVm5BBL4Gomjy5Ivl6I/s400/NYCSmokeCollapse2.gif" width="400" /></a></div><br />
<div style="border-collapse: collapse; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; text-align: justify;"><b><span style="color: black; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS'; font-size: medium;"><span style="font-size: 14pt; font-weight: bold;"><strong><b><span style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS';"><span>"</span></span></b></strong></span></span></b><span style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS'; font-size: medium;"><span style="font-size: 14pt;"><a href="http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/" style="color: #0065cc;" target="_blank"><strong><b><span style="color: black; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS';"><span style="color: black;">Information Clearing House</span></span></b></strong></a><strong><b><span style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS';"><span>" </span></span></b></strong>-- When President Ahmadinejad announced, before the United Nations that most people in the world believe that the U.S. government was involved in the planning and execution of the 9/11 attacks, he told the truth. In America, groups have been popping up for years, not “fringe” types, but military and professional organizations, architects, engineers, pilots, intelligence officers.</span></span><span style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS'; font-size: medium;"><span style="font-size: 14pt;"></span></span></div><div style="border-collapse: collapse; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; text-align: justify;"><span style="color: black; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS'; font-size: medium;"><span style="font-size: 14pt;">There is a vast underground that is never reported, never spoken of in the news and continually threatened. The FBI and Homeland Security have infiltrated these groups, illegal surveillance has been on a massive scale and, as the groups have grown and their reach has touched millions of Americans, the government, in the usual whispers, is talking about mass arrests, “unplugging” the internet, all those things the militia movements of the 90′s said would happen.</span></span><span style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS'; font-size: medium;"><span style="font-size: 14pt;"></span></span></div><div style="border-collapse: collapse; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; text-align: justify;"><span style="color: black; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS'; font-size: medium;"><span style="font-size: 14pt;">Outside the United States, not in the Middle East, but Canada, Europe, Latin America and the Far East, finding people who accept the Bush and Obama administration’s “party line” about “box cutters and hijackers” is difficult. No one wants to risk the public scorn of seeming like an imbecile.</span></span><span style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS'; font-size: medium;"><span style="font-size: 14pt;"></span></span></div><div style="border-collapse: collapse; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; text-align: justify;"><span style="color: black; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS'; font-size: medium;"><span style="font-size: 14pt;">However, back here in the “good ole’ USA,” even comedian Jon Stewart, normally an outspoken critic of government insanity, has agreed to lead a march on Washinton to quell “rumors” about 9/11, rumors of wrongdoing by people he despises.</span></span><span style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS'; font-size: medium;"><span style="font-size: 14pt;"></span></span></div><div style="border-collapse: collapse; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; text-align: justify;"><span style="color: black; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS'; font-size: medium;"><span style="font-size: 14pt;">What is the difference? Why do those outside the United States see things do differently? The answer is freedom of press, the first of the hasty additions to the constitution, a guarantee provided for in the 1st Amendment. There had been assaults on freedom of the press before, particularly during wartime but never anything on the scale seen after 9/11. Across the board, not just the news but even movies and television shows, fiction, censored, propaganda, peddling ignorance, fear and screaming “conspiracy theory” at anyone trying to get word out.</span></span><span style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS'; font-size: medium;"><span style="font-size: 14pt;"></span></span></div><div style="border-collapse: collapse; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; text-align: justify;"><span style="color: black; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS'; font-size: medium;"><span style="font-size: 14pt;">America is a dictatorship.</span></span><span style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS'; font-size: medium;"><span style="font-size: 14pt;"></span></span></div><div style="border-collapse: collapse; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; text-align: justify;"><span style="color: black; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS'; font-size: medium;"><span style="font-size: 14pt;">It isn’t just corporate lobbyists or two broken political parties. Elections are rigged, government agencies meant to provide for national security are now doing little but spying on Americans, our military is spread across the planet, tasked with everything but serving the United States. All the while, the “news” is everything but. Americans, to a one, know something is terribly wrong, totally out of control and, even their attempts to get at some semblance of truth are turned against them. The news is censored. With the country embroiled in two failed wars, obviously illegal, proof of war crimes piling up, financial collapse, citizen’s rights trampled on, nary a word is said about any of it.</span></span><span style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS'; font-size: medium;"><span style="font-size: 14pt;"></span></span></div><div style="border-collapse: collapse; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; text-align: justify;"><span style="color: black; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS'; font-size: medium;"><span style="font-size: 14pt;">“The president is a Muslim.” “Healthcare is socialism.” “The rich need their tax breaks, the same ones that pushed the country into 13.5 trillion in debt.”</span></span><span style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS'; font-size: medium;"><span style="font-size: 14pt;"></span></span></div><div style="border-collapse: collapse; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; text-align: justify;"><span style="color: black; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS'; font-size: medium;"><span style="font-size: 14pt;">The real message is always the same if you listen carefully, “be afraid, trust in government.” What are they really saying? “Greed is good.” How is that working out for you?</span></span><span style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS'; font-size: medium;"><span style="font-size: 14pt;"></span></span></div><div style="border-collapse: collapse; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; text-align: justify;"><span style="color: black; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS'; font-size: medium;"><span style="font-size: 14pt;">Ahmadinejad, as of the count yesterday, had 950 stories condemning his “outrageous” statements at the United Nations. Please note that a total of 27 nations walked out, not the people of those nations but representatives of the governments.</span></span><span style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS'; font-size: medium;"><span style="font-size: 14pt;"></span></span></div><div style="border-collapse: collapse; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; text-align: justify;"><span style="color: black; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS'; font-size: medium;"><span style="font-size: 14pt;">What we fail to note is that 163 nations stayed.</span></span><span style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS'; font-size: medium;"><span style="font-size: 14pt;"></span></span></div><div style="border-collapse: collapse; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; text-align: justify;"><span style="color: black; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS'; font-size: medium;"><span style="font-size: 14pt;">A few years ago, Ahmadinejad had a conference to discuss the holocaust. Scholars from around the world came, some openly hostile to Israel, some because they were scholars. It was called “outrageous” and Israel threatened to break up the meeting with a nuclear attack. What happened there, what were the findings? We will never know. Censorship in the American press, the same censorship that prevented evidence proving Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction from reaching the public, the same censorship that should have told Americans that Osama bin Laden had nothing to do with 9/11, was imposed.</span></span><span style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS'; font-size: medium;"><span style="font-size: 14pt;"></span></span></div><div style="border-collapse: collapse; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; text-align: justify;"><span style="color: black; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS'; font-size: medium;"><span style="font-size: 14pt;">The truth never benefits from censorship. Censorship is dictatorship. Dictatorship is when those in power no longer trust the people. A government that doesn’t trust its own people can’t serve its people, its people serve it. This is the America of today.</span></span><span style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS'; font-size: medium;"><span style="font-size: 14pt;"></span></span></div><div style="border-collapse: collapse; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; text-align: justify;"><span style="color: black; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS'; font-size: medium;"><span style="font-size: 14pt;">9 years of censorship now clouds 9/11.</span></span><span style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS'; font-size: medium;"><span style="font-size: 14pt;"></span></span></div><div style="border-collapse: collapse; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; text-align: justify;"><span style="color: black; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS'; font-size: medium;"><span style="font-size: 14pt;">When President Bush announced that he saw the first plane crash into the World Trade Center, live TV, it was shown once and hidden away. TV never showed that, not real TV, not the kind the public sees. Bush may have watched it, but if he is telling the truth, it means he knew in advance. Does this explain why he simply sat there? When Larry Silverstein said that he ordered one of the World Trade Center buildings, number 7, “pulled,” meaning “blown up” did it mean that explosives had been planted in all the buildings? It sure looked like it to me.</span></span><span style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS'; font-size: medium;"><span style="font-size: 14pt;"></span></span></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"></div><div style="border-collapse: collapse; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #c00000; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS'; font-size: x-large;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 19px;"><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QQyb159mdfs&p=2FE061371BA24B52&playnext=1&index=16">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QQyb159mdfs&p=2FE061371BA24B52&playnext=1&index=16</a></span></span></div><div style="border-collapse: collapse; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; text-align: justify;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #c00000; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS'; font-size: x-large;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: black; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;"></span></span></div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #c00000; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS'; font-size: x-large;"><div style="text-align: justify;"><span style="color: black; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS'; font-size: medium;"><span style="font-size: 14pt;">How about when Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense, said a missile hit the Pentagon? Oh, did he say that? Well, yes he did, live television, you can find the statement on video all over the internet, any normal person can.</span></span><span style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS'; font-size: medium;"><span style="font-size: 14pt;"></span></span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span style="color: black; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS'; font-size: medium;"><span style="font-size: 14pt;">The 9/11 Commission couldn’t, however.</span></span><span style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS'; font-size: medium;"><span style="font-size: 14pt;"></span></span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span style="color: black; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS'; font-size: medium;"><span style="font-size: 14pt;">Same with Rumsfeld telling us that Flight 93 was shot down. Did he say that? Yes he did, live TV, all over the internet. They couldn’t find that either.</span></span><span style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS'; font-size: medium;"><span style="font-size: 14pt;"></span></span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span style="color: black; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS'; font-size: medium;"><span style="font-size: 14pt;">Nobody told the 9/11 Commission anything about Building 7. It is as though it escaped into another dimension.</span></span><span style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS'; font-size: medium;"><span style="font-size: 14pt;"></span></span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span style="color: black; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS'; font-size: medium;"><span style="font-size: 14pt;">It isn’t just these statements or Vice President Cheney’s orders to allow the planes to go unhindered, testified to on the video above, that make Ahmadinejad much less than “outrageous.” It is the hard science, the witness testimony and years of intelligence reports that prove conclusively that “no Muslims were involved in the making of this picture.”</span></span><span style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS'; font-size: medium;"><span style="font-size: 14pt;"></span></span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span style="color: black; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS'; font-size: medium;"><span style="font-size: 14pt;">What have we proven “conclusively?” One thing for sure, one thing a vast majority of Americans will now consider, that America is a dictatorship.</span></span><span style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS'; font-size: medium;"><span style="font-size: 14pt;"></span></span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span style="color: black; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS'; font-size: medium;"><span style="font-size: 14pt;">What they don’t know is how it happened or who is running things. The propaganda machine has 200 million people chasing their own tails, blaming each other.</span></span><span style="font-family: 'Trebuchet MS'; font-size: medium;"><span style="font-size: 14pt;"></span></span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span style="color: black; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS'; font-size: medium;"><span style="font-size: 14pt;">Maybe Muslims did it.</span></span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span style="color: black; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS'; font-size: medium;"><span style="font-size: 14pt;">(</span></span><i><span style="color: black; font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: small;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-style: italic;">Gordon Duff is a Marine Vietnam veteran, and Senior Editor at Veterans Today. His career has included extensive experience in international banking along with such diverse areas as consulting on counter insurgency, defense technologies or acting as diplomatic officer of UN humanitarian groups. Gordon Duff's articles are published around the world and translated into a number of languages. He is a regularly on radio and tv).</span></span></i></div></span>YASMEEN ALIhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10748945833762147296noreply@blogger.com12tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1664474623650181692.post-15824681441877983092010-09-20T03:29:00.000-07:002010-09-20T03:29:44.781-07:00What Kind Of Top-Secret Assassination Tech Does $58 Billion Buy?<span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: collapse; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;"><span style="border-collapse: collapse; font-size: 13px; white-space: pre-wrap;"><b><span style="font-family: verdana, sans-serif;">Not since the end of the Cold War has the Pentagon spent so much to develop and deploy secret weapons. But now military researchers have turned their attention from mass destruction to a far more precise challenge: finding, tracking, and killing individuals</span></b><span style="font-family: verdana, sans-serif;"> </span></span></span><br />
<div style="border-collapse: collapse; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;"><span style="border-collapse: collapse; font-size: 13px; white-space: pre-wrap;"><span style="font-family: verdana, sans-serif;">By Sharon Weinberger</span></span></div><div style="border-collapse: collapse; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;"><span style="border-collapse: collapse; font-size: 13px; white-space: pre-wrap;"><span style="font-family: verdana, sans-serif;"><br />
</span></span></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhJ6at44AJGcqBFwzhvFVWr2IER7iYknG8uJtvtkIRDOuSygg8MWH2d44n7At0EZolBQGTL0SgPt2X-4aXxOwSTSHoDZU6QI9F8sDSTjIVoz5pe69Y36gHML04Smdh3P4g_kiN3eeZql6w/s1600/anyone1.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhJ6at44AJGcqBFwzhvFVWr2IER7iYknG8uJtvtkIRDOuSygg8MWH2d44n7At0EZolBQGTL0SgPt2X-4aXxOwSTSHoDZU6QI9F8sDSTjIVoz5pe69Y36gHML04Smdh3P4g_kiN3eeZql6w/s320/anyone1.jpg" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: collapse; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; font-weight: bold;"><span style="border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; font-weight: inherit; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px;"><span style="font-family: verdana, sans-serif;">Under Cover</span></span><span style="border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; font-weight: normal; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px;"><span style="font-family: verdana, sans-serif;"> The Lockheed Martin RQ-170 Sentinel, an unmanned reconnaissance drone, is the most recent aircraft to emerge from the military's "black" budget.</span></span><span style="font-family: verdana, sans-serif;"> </span><span style="border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; font-weight: normal; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px;"><span style="font-family: verdana, sans-serif;">Nick Kaloterakis</span></span></span></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: collapse; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; font-weight: bold;"><span style="border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; font-weight: normal; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px;"><span style="font-family: verdana, sans-serif;"><br />
</span></span></span></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: collapse; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; font-weight: bold;"><span style="border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; font-weight: normal; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px;"><span style="font-family: verdana, sans-serif;"><br />
</span></span></span></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: collapse; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; font-weight: bold;"><span style="border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; font-weight: normal; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px;"><span style="font-family: verdana, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: separate; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12px;"></span></span></span></span></div><span style="font-family: verdana, sans-serif;"><div style="border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; font-weight: inherit; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px;"><span style="font-family: verdana, sans-serif;">Every year, tens of billions of Pentagon dollars go missing. The money vanishes not because of fraud, waste or abuse, but because U.S. military planners have appropriated it to secretly develop advanced weapons and fund clandestine operations. Next year, this so-called black budget will be even larger than it was in the Cold War days of1987, when the leading black-budget watchdog, the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments (CSBA), began gathering reliable estimates. The current total is staggering: $58 billion—enough to pay for two complete Manhattan Projects.</span></div><div style="border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; font-weight: inherit; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px;"><span style="font-family: verdana, sans-serif;">Where does the money go? Tracking the black budget has always been a challenge. Constantly shifting project names that seem to be randomly generated by computers—Tractor Cage, Tractor Card, Tractor Dirt, Tractor Hike and Tractor Hip are all real examples—make linking dollar amounts to technologies impossible for outsiders. But there are clues.</span></div><div style="border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; font-weight: inherit; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px;"><span style="font-family: verdana, sans-serif;">According to Todd Harrison, an analyst at the CSBA, the allocations for classified operations in the 2011 federal budget include $19.4 billion for research and development across all four branches of the military (funding for the CIA, including its drone strikes in Afghanistan and Pakistan, is contained within the Defense Department black budget), another $16.9 billion for procurement, and $14.6 billion for “operations and maintenance.” This latter category, Harrison notes, has been expanding quickly. This may suggest that many classified technologies are now moving from the laboratory to the battlefield.</span></div><div style="border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; font-weight: inherit; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px;"><span style="font-family: verdana, sans-serif;">In fact, the rise in classified defense spending accompanies a fundamental change in American military strategy. After the attacks of September 11, the Pentagon began a shift away from its late Cold War–era “two-war strategy,” premised on maintaining the ability to conduct two major military operations simultaneously, and began to focus instead on irregular warfare against individuals and groups. That strategic shift most likely coincides with an investment shift, away from technology that enables large-scale, possibly nuclear, war against superpower states and toward technology that helps military planners hunt and kill individuals. Each branch of the military uses different language to describe this process. Pentagon officials have spoken openly about their desire to use advanced technology to “reduce sensor-to-shooter time” in situations involving “time-sensitive targets.” The head of U.S. Special Operations Command talks about “high-tech manhunting,” while Air Force officials describe plans to compress the “kill chain.”</span></div><div style="border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; font-weight: inherit; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px;"><span style="font-family: verdana, sans-serif;">Even inside the Pentagon, few people know the precise details of the black budget. But by combining what is known about Pentagon goals and what is known about the most recent advances in military technology, we can begin to sketch its general contours.</span></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiGivUxli-9T3vUDNsNdRMOHKNY74vxLlJvDT5j3kC6VUbSlkJHgFSwz0CO-OgOeC-CbWDe80zjJ3p44JMLoCu_xtHdhK2N3L45cbHNQdbxoJnw3ZWKeQHtaxh4EKT4OLgEPM6_WxEJxLE/s1600/anyone2.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiGivUxli-9T3vUDNsNdRMOHKNY74vxLlJvDT5j3kC6VUbSlkJHgFSwz0CO-OgOeC-CbWDe80zjJ3p44JMLoCu_xtHdhK2N3L45cbHNQdbxoJnw3ZWKeQHtaxh4EKT4OLgEPM6_WxEJxLE/s320/anyone2.jpg" /></a></div><div style="border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; font-weight: inherit; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px;"><span style="font-family: verdana, sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div></span><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: collapse; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; font-weight: bold;"><span style="border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; font-weight: inherit; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px;"><span style="font-family: verdana, sans-serif;">Satellites On Demand:</span></span><span style="font-family: verdana, sans-serif;"> </span><span style="border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; font-weight: normal; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px;"><span style="font-family: verdana, sans-serif;">The Pentagon’s desire for pervasive battlefield surveillance doesn’t end with drones. Another goal is reconnaissance satellites that can be launched within a few days of a request, a drastic abbreviation of a process that today takes one to two years. Satellites have at least two significant advantages over drones: They can stay in the air 365 days a year, and they’re exempt from concerns about international airspace. Conducting drone-quality surveillance from a satellite requires advanced imaging technology like that found on an experimental satellite the Air Force launched last year, TacSat-3. TacSat-3 is equipped with hyperspectral sensors, which capture electromagnetic radiation across such a wide spectrum that they can detect the disturbed earth covering a buried roadside bomb. It’s an early step toward satellites that could find and identify individual people.</span></span><span style="font-family: verdana, sans-serif;"> </span><span style="border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; font-weight: normal; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px;"><span style="font-family: verdana, sans-serif;"> Jon Proctor</span></span></span></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: collapse; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; font-weight: bold;"><span style="border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; font-weight: normal; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px;"><span style="font-family: verdana, sans-serif;"><br />
</span></span></span></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: collapse; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; font-weight: bold;"><span style="border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; font-weight: normal; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px;"><span style="font-family: verdana, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: separate; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12px;"></span></span></span></span></div><span style="font-family: verdana, sans-serif;"><div style="border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; font-weight: inherit; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px;"><span style="font-family: verdana, sans-serif;">The first link in the kill chain: finding the person to hunt. Particularly in Afghanistan and Pakistan, this type of intelligence gathering is increasingly done using unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs). According to the New America Foundation, a nonprofit think tank, the U.S. conducted 45 drone strikes in Pakistan in the first six months of this year. The centrality of unmanned aircraft to such missions suggests that the black budget is almost certainly already funding next-generation drones.</span></div><div style="border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; font-weight: inherit; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px;"><span style="font-family: verdana, sans-serif;">In April 2009, a French magazine published a photograph of one recent product of that funding—a slender-winged aircraft that had previously been spotted in southern Afghanistan and that aerospace experts had begun calling the Beast of Kandahar. After another photograph surfaced, this one a clear shot of the craft on the runway in Kandahar, the Air Force issued a statement that finally gave the Beast a formal identity: the RQ-170 Sentinel.</span></div><div style="border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; font-weight: inherit; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px;"><span style="font-family: verdana, sans-serif;">Manufactured by Lockheed Martin, the RQ-170 is a tailless flying wing with the telltale shape and surface contours of a stealth aircraft. Black-plane watchers immediately noticed similarities between the RQ-170 and Lockheed’s unmanned Polecat aircraft, which UAV observers had long speculated was being developed in secret and which was finally made public at the Farnborough International Airshow in England in 2006. The Air Force says that the Sentinel is a reconnaissance drone, a claim supported by the aircraft’s lack of visible armaments, by the sensors that appear to be embedded in its wings, and by its “RQ” designation.</span></div><div style="border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; font-weight: inherit; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px;"><span style="font-family: verdana, sans-serif;">But much about the RQ-170 is puzzling. Why would the Air Force need a stealth aircraft in Afghanistan, a country with no radar defense system? It wouldn’t, according to those familiar with the drone. The RQ-170 was developed with a more sophisticated enemy, perhaps China, in mind. That doesn’t mean it couldn’t be adapted for current conflicts, however. Unlike the relatively easy-to-spot Predator and Reaper drones, the RQ-170’s stealth could allow it to conduct missions that those aircraft cannot, such as clandestine tracking, or slipping unnoticed across Afghanistan’s border into Iran or Pakistan to spy on their nuclear programs.</span></div><div style="border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; font-weight: inherit; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px;"><span style="font-family: verdana, sans-serif;">Aircraft like the RQ-170, the Predator and the Reaper can get only so close to their targets, of course, which is why the Pentagon is developing micro-drones designed to investigate dangerous terrain undetected. In April the Washington Post reported that the CIA was using pizza-platter-size micro-drones to find insurgents in Pakistan. And the 2010 Pentagon budget contains a brief unclassified reference to Project Anubis, a micro-drone developed by the Air Force Research Laboratory. The Air Force won’t talk about that specific vehicle, but a more general 2008 marketing video released by the lab did suggest that future micro-UAVs might be equipped with “incapacitating chemicals, combustible payloads, or even explosives for precision targeting capability.” The video depicts an explosives-laden drone dive-bombing and killing a sniper. Budget documents indicate that Project Anubis (named for the ancient Egyptian god of the dead) is now complete, which means a lethal micro-drone could already be in the field.</span></div><div style="border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; font-weight: inherit; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px;"><span style="font-family: verdana, sans-serif;"></span></div><div style="border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; font-weight: inherit; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px;"><span style="font-family: verdana, sans-serif;">The Pentagon is forging the next link in the kill chain—following an individual—with at least one high-priority research program. The Clandestine Tagging, Tracking and Locating initiative (abbreviated both as CTTL and TTL), which was conceived in 2003, is slated to get about $210 million in unclassified funding between 2008 and 2013 and may receive more than that from the black budget. “The global war on terrorism cannot be won without a Manhattan Project–like TTL program,” was how officials from the Defense Science Board, a civilian committee that advises the Pentagon, described the situation in a 2004 presentation, adding that “cost is not the issue.”</span></div><div style="border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; font-weight: inherit; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px;"><span style="font-family: verdana, sans-serif;">In a 2007 briefing, Doug Richardson, an official working in the Special Reconnaissance, Surveillance, and Exploitation program in Special Operations Command, said that the Pentagon wanted to use 14 different technologies for tagging and tracking targets such as people and vehicles. Tagging could involve marking targets with invisible biological paints or micromechanical sensors; tracking would mean monitoring those markers from a distance. Other schemes entailed capturing a person’s “thermal fingerprint” and then tracking him or her, perhaps from aircraft equipped with infrared sensors.</span></div><div style="border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; font-weight: inherit; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px;"><span style="font-family: verdana, sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjFd5mmIHzqA_hBBFqTWGW55r5_fxms-LcHqkkVl78Kv-VSgpewHE6d-vujyXkyJbcPjMG9BPUVglKeMpSk8bipGsEypRkJYuQQonxkyQRdU7eGqxXhuvOCgV2hAtUPpnUMTQ4qOaUeWOY/s1600/anyone3.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjFd5mmIHzqA_hBBFqTWGW55r5_fxms-LcHqkkVl78Kv-VSgpewHE6d-vujyXkyJbcPjMG9BPUVglKeMpSk8bipGsEypRkJYuQQonxkyQRdU7eGqxXhuvOCgV2hAtUPpnUMTQ4qOaUeWOY/s320/anyone3.jpg" /></a></div><div style="border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; font-weight: inherit; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px;"><span style="font-family: verdana, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: collapse; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; font-weight: bold;"><span style="border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; font-weight: inherit; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px;"><span style="font-family: verdana, sans-serif;">Tagging and Tracking:</span></span><span style="font-family: verdana, sans-serif;"> </span><span style="border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; font-weight: normal; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px;"><span style="font-family: verdana, sans-serif;">The U.S. military may already be surreptitiously “tagging” enemies in Afghanistan and Pakistan with chemicals, sensors or bioreactive agents and then tracking them from a distance. It may also be using wireless-enabled sensors smaller than a grain of rice, each complete with a minuscule computer chip, to do the same thing. Kris Pister, a researcher who conducted early work on “smart dust”—tiny tracking devices that can be showered onto people or vehicles—says that scattering sensors onto targets from drones is “straightforward.” </span></span><span style="border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; font-weight: normal; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px;"><span style="font-family: verdana, sans-serif;"> Jon Proctor</span></span></span></span></div><div style="border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; font-weight: inherit; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px;"><span style="font-family: verdana, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: collapse; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; font-weight: bold;"><span style="border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; font-weight: normal; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px;"><span style="font-family: verdana, sans-serif;"><br />
</span></span></span></span></div><div style="border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; font-weight: inherit; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px;"><span style="font-family: verdana, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: collapse; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; font-weight: bold;"><span style="border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; font-weight: normal; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px;"><span style="font-family: verdana, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: separate; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12px;"><span style="font-family: verdana, sans-serif;">More details can be found in proposals from companies and scientists seeking Pentagon contracts. One such proposal, from a University of Florida researcher, uses insect pheromones encoded with unique identifiers that could be tracked from miles away. Other plans employ biodegradable fluorescent “taggants” that can be scattered by UAVs. Voxtel, a private firm in Oregon, has already made available a product called NightMarks, a nanocrystal that can be seen through night-vision goggles and can be hidden in anything from glass cleaner to petroleum jelly.</span></span></span></span></span></span></div><span style="font-family: verdana, sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: verdana, sans-serif;"><div style="border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; font-weight: inherit; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px;"></div><div style="border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; font-weight: inherit; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px;"><span style="font-family: verdana, sans-serif;">Perhaps the most advanced tagging concept is “smart dust,” clouds of “motes,” tiny micro-electromechanical sensors that can attach themselves to people or vehicles. Thousands of these sensors would be scattered at a time to increase the chance of at least one of them reaching its target. Kris Pister, a professor at the University of California at Berkeley, was sponsored by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (Darpa), the Pentagon’s R&D branch, more than a decade ago to work on smart dust and was able to create sensors the size of rice grains. In the beginning, he now says, he and his colleagues imagined “smart burrs” that could attach to a target’s clothing as he or she brushed by, or “smart fleas” that could jump onto their targets. Pister says that this kind of autonomous microsensor is probably still not feasible. In 2001, however, his group succeeded in scattering more-primitive smart-dust motes from a small aerial drone and using them to track vehicles. A single UAV could easily carry thousands of tags, he says.</span></div><div style="border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; font-weight: inherit; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px;"><span style="font-family: verdana, sans-serif;">Citing security concerns, the Pentagon declined to elaborate on its research on clandestine tracking. (When I asked Zachary Lemnios, the agency’s chief technology officer, about advances in tagging, tracking and locating, he mentioned only “recent successes” and “state-of-the-art results.”) Yet in the same 2007 briefing in which Richardson delivered the Pentagon’s wish list of tagging technologies, he said he expected some or all of them to go into service by 2009. Shortly before 2009 arrived, the Los Angeles Times reported that soldiers in Pakistan were using sensors mounted on Predator drones that could track individual combatants even inside buildings—a report that, if accurate, suggests that tagging technologies may now be deployed overseas.</span></div><div style="border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; font-weight: inherit; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px;"><span style="font-family: verdana, sans-serif;">It’s possible that intelligence officials were exaggerating capabilities in order to intimidate insurgents. But there are other clues that the Pentagon may have deployed more-advanced tracking technology than it has disclosed. Last year, the U.K. Guardian reported that the CIA had given Pakistani tribesmen “chips” to plant in the homes of insurgents, who would later be killed by CIA drone strikes. A subsequent report by NBC News revealed a videotaped confession of one tribesman who claimed to have placed the tiny chips in exchange for cash payments from the U.S.</span></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiPW0nbI9LGcJRqFYBRfrEICB0GFKjV-guuqfcgmtwlQLZNx96dAbwDmZhCRtzCgNYMV2gkHxlKjjT_lsV2-KxFS3rpA4Z4tx2JkmGo4jQ0Qfny2CCnN07m9rfRNRqvjMc4FlTOgs0GoWo/s1600/anyone4.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiPW0nbI9LGcJRqFYBRfrEICB0GFKjV-guuqfcgmtwlQLZNx96dAbwDmZhCRtzCgNYMV2gkHxlKjjT_lsV2-KxFS3rpA4Z4tx2JkmGo4jQ0Qfny2CCnN07m9rfRNRqvjMc4FlTOgs0GoWo/s320/anyone4.jpg" /></a></div><div style="border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; font-weight: inherit; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px;"><span style="font-family: verdana, sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div></span></span></span><br />
<div style="border-collapse: collapse; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;"><span style="border-collapse: collapse; font-size: 13px; white-space: pre-wrap;"><span style="font-family: verdana, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: separate; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12px; font-weight: bold; white-space: normal;"><span style="border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; font-weight: inherit; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px;"><span style="font-family: verdana, sans-serif;">Microwave Weapons:</span></span><span style="font-family: verdana, sans-serif;"> </span><span style="border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; font-weight: normal; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px;"><span style="font-family: verdana, sans-serif;">The Pentagon has spent billions of dollars developing directed-energy weapons that can disarm or disable individuals, including the Counter-Electronics High Power Microwave Advanced Missile Project (CHAMP), an effort (unclassified but based on research conducted in secret) to develop a UAV-mounted microwave weapon to fry enemy electronics. Another example is the Active Denial System, a truck-mounted less-than-lethal weapon that uses microwaves to heat the top layer of a person’s skin. These programs are almost certainly just the beginning. In late spring, Pentagon officials told USA Today that the U.S. was attempting to deploy an energy-beam weapon in Afghanistan that could detonate hidden explosives from a distance. An industry source who has worked for years on counter-IED technology says it’s probably a system called Max Power, which blasts microwaves to mimic the electromagnetic pulse released by a nuclear explosion.</span></span><span style="font-family: verdana, sans-serif;"> </span><span style="border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; font-weight: normal; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px;"><span style="font-family: verdana, sans-serif;"> Jon Proctor</span></span></span></span></span></div><div style="border-collapse: collapse; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;"><span style="border-collapse: collapse; font-size: 13px; white-space: pre-wrap;"><span style="font-family: verdana, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: separate; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12px; font-weight: bold; white-space: normal;"><span style="border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; font-weight: normal; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px;"><span style="font-family: verdana, sans-serif;"><br />
</span></span></span></span></span></div><div style="border-collapse: collapse; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;"><span style="border-collapse: collapse; font-size: 13px; white-space: pre-wrap;"><span style="font-family: verdana, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: separate; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12px; font-weight: bold; white-space: normal;"><span style="border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; font-weight: normal; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px;"><span style="font-family: verdana, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: arial, sans-serif;"><div style="border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; font-weight: inherit; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px;"><span style="font-family: verdana, sans-serif;">In 1998, U.S. Navy ships in the Arabian Sea fired Tomahawk cruise missiles at a number of training camps in Afghanistan where Osama bin Laden was believed to be hiding. The missiles travel at about 550 mph, roughly the same speed as a commercial jetliner. They took more than an hour to reach their targets. If bin Laden had been in one of those camps, he had left by the time the missiles hit.</span></div><div style="border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; font-weight: inherit; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px;"><span style="font-family: verdana, sans-serif;">Such failures have inspired Pentagon planners to examine options that would allow them to strike precisely anywhere in the world in less than an hour, even if no drones, bombers, ships or troops were anywhere near the target. The Pentagon calls the initiative Prompt Global Strike, and in an April interview on Meet the Press, Defense Secretary Robert Gates may have admitted that the U.S. already possessed this capability. “We have, in addition to the nuclear deterrent today, a couple of things we didn’t have in the Soviet days,” he said. In addition to missile defense, he continued, “we have Prompt Global Strike, affording us some conventional alternatives on long-range missiles that we didn’t have before.” The Pentagon answered follow-up questions with silence.</span></div><div style="border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; font-weight: inherit; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px;"><span style="font-family: verdana, sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgw3YXz2zunqPd9ICBzlLhxzuiF_3DPPKjawIOAka84E_j881wubdpxsBX8SFvnwiBNNVYKb-lxVRhiwhmREEQzwoOSKi8eVvOpKwdL-wXKGP-COH4-Bio2xVdlf64WZWQ85gGoHBn2b_4/s1600/anyone5.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgw3YXz2zunqPd9ICBzlLhxzuiF_3DPPKjawIOAka84E_j881wubdpxsBX8SFvnwiBNNVYKb-lxVRhiwhmREEQzwoOSKi8eVvOpKwdL-wXKGP-COH4-Bio2xVdlf64WZWQ85gGoHBn2b_4/s320/anyone5.jpg" /></a></div><div style="border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; font-weight: inherit; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px;"><span style="font-family: verdana, sans-serif;"> </span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: collapse; font-size: 13px; font-weight: bold;"><span style="border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; font-weight: inherit; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px;"><span style="font-family: verdana, sans-serif;">Prompt Global Strike:</span></span><span style="font-family: verdana, sans-serif;"> </span><span style="border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; font-weight: normal; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px;"><span style="font-family: verdana, sans-serif;">The intercontinental ballistic missile is the only publicly acknowledged weapon capable of striking any point on the planet in less than an hour. Yet because Russia possesses defenses that would perceive the launch of an ICBM as the beginning of a nuclear war, launching even a non-nuclear ICBM is inadvisable. An alternative: hypersonic cruise missiles, which could travel at several times the speed of sound without appearing on radar as an existential threat. The Pentagon has at least five active hypersonic programs today. One of them, the rocket-launched HTV-2, is designed to break Mach 20; it was test-launched in April.</span></span><span style="font-family: verdana, sans-serif;"> </span><span style="border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; font-weight: normal; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px;"><span style="font-family: verdana, sans-serif;"> Jon Proctor</span></span></span></div><div style="border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; font-weight: inherit; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: collapse; font-size: 13px; font-weight: bold;"><span style="border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; font-weight: normal; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px;"><span style="font-family: verdana, sans-serif;"><br />
</span></span></span></div><div style="border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; font-weight: inherit; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: collapse; font-size: 13px; font-weight: bold;"><span style="border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; font-weight: normal; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px;"><span style="font-family: verdana, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: separate; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12px;"><span style="font-family: verdana, sans-serif;">Technologically, the precise, one-hour capability is not inconceivable. By leaving the Earth’s atmosphere and traveling at 15,000 mph, an intercontinental ballistic missile can reach any point in the world within 30 minutes. Take the nuclear warhead off, and it becomes a conventionally armed Prompt Global Strike weapon. But it’s not that simple. This solution places the Pentagon’s current emphasis on killing individuals in direct conflict with its previous emphasis on fighting large military powers: Russian defense systems are designed to immediately detect the launch of an ICBM anywhere in the world; the government must then decide within minutes whether to retaliate. As a result, until Washington and Moscow find a way to distinguish conventionally armed ICBMs from nuclear ones, firing an ICBM at Afghanistan with the intention of killing even just one person could trigger a nuclear war.</span></span></span></span></span></div><span style="font-family: verdana, sans-serif;"><div style="border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; font-weight: inherit; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px;"></div><div style="border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; font-weight: inherit; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px;"><span style="font-family: verdana, sans-serif;">To counter concerns that such an ICBM is heading for Russia, Pentagon officials have said that these weapons could be launched from California, where there are no nuclear-tipped missiles. (Since the placement of ICBMs is regulated by treaty and subject to inspection and verification, this system would, in theory, ensure that Moscow knows whether a missile is armed with a conventional warhead or a nuclear one. But this plan relies on Russia’s trust.)</span></div><div style="border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; font-weight: inherit; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px;"><span style="font-family: verdana, sans-serif;">An alternative to the conventionally armed land-based ICBM is a hypersonic weapon, essentially a cruise missile capable of traveling at many times the speed of sound—faster than anything in today’s conventional arsenal. These missiles would not have to leave the Earth’s atmosphere and would have very different trajectories from ICBMs, so Russia would be less likely to mistake them for nuclear weapons.</span></div><div style="border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; font-weight: inherit; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px;"><span style="font-family: verdana, sans-serif;">The Pentagon has mentioned two non-ICBM candidates for Prompt Global Strike, one from the Army and one from Darpa. Both of these weapons would be boosted into the atmosphere by rockets and then glide back to Earth at hypersonic speeds. In addition to these official Prompt Global Strike options, the Pentagon is conducting at least three other hypersonic or near-hypersonic research efforts: the Air Force’s X-51 WaveRider, which used a scramjet engine to accelerate to Mach 6 in May; the Navy’s Revolutionary Approach to Time-Critical Long-Range Strike project, known as RATTLRS; and the Darpa-sponsored HyFly, a dual-combustion ramjet. (Ramjets and scramjets achieve rocket-like speeds without the heavy burden of liquid oxygen by mixing jet fuel with compressed air that enters the engine from the atmosphere.)</span></div><div style="border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; font-weight: inherit; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px;"><span style="font-family: verdana, sans-serif;">The proliferation of hypersonic research may mean that the Pentagon has faith in the technology. But it also makes black-budget watchers like John Pike, the director of the military information Web site GlobalSecurity.org, suspicious. Pike believes the military’s hypersonic programs may just be a cover for yet another black project. What kind, though, he has no idea.</span></div><div style="border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; font-weight: inherit; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px;"><span style="font-family: verdana, sans-serif;">“Have you ever tried to get to the bottom of the American hypersonics program?” Pike asked me rhetorically. “You know, I tried to about five years ago, and it made no sense. There were just too many programs.” Although this could just be typical Pentagon duplication, Pike sees something more suspicious. “If I was building a cover for something, I would either reduce the signal or increase the noise,” he says. “I think they’re increasing the noise.”</span></div><div style="border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; font-weight: inherit; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px;"><span style="font-family: verdana, sans-serif;"><br />
</span></div><div style="border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; font-weight: inherit; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px;"></div><div style="border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; font-weight: inherit; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px;"><i><span style="font-family: verdana, sans-serif;">(Sharon Weinberger is a national-security reporter in Washington, D.C.)</span></i></div><div style="border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; font-weight: inherit; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: verdana, sans-serif;"><i>NOTE:This is a cross post</i></span></div></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana, sans-serif;"></span></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana, sans-serif;"></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana, sans-serif;"><br />
<div style="border-bottom-width: 0px; border-color: initial; border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-top-width: 0px; font-weight: inherit; outline-color: initial; outline-style: initial; outline-width: 0px;"><span style="font-family: verdana, sans-serif;"> </span></div></span></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana, sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: verdana, sans-serif;"></span></span></div>YASMEEN ALIhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10748945833762147296noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1664474623650181692.post-73441641280557506602010-09-16T19:53:00.000-07:002010-09-16T19:53:33.149-07:009/11. THE MOTHER OF ALL COINCIDENCES.<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEixfZ3MvIAlWGmPOy5RJ4gsjDEMOK52WwSHWo1xW-n-JIQxvZFUs6JdtaevDTT83K777zv4vNTe3TWtXcbowB6dOkUySD1IuNCNdXyo9Bn1JunFdS2U0_m71ekg2ekulMHhegtJIMv-nBU/s1600/NYCSmokeCollapse2.gif" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEixfZ3MvIAlWGmPOy5RJ4gsjDEMOK52WwSHWo1xW-n-JIQxvZFUs6JdtaevDTT83K777zv4vNTe3TWtXcbowB6dOkUySD1IuNCNdXyo9Bn1JunFdS2U0_m71ekg2ekulMHhegtJIMv-nBU/s400/NYCSmokeCollapse2.gif" width="400" /></a></div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'times new roman', 'new york', times, serif;"><i><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 14pt;">Eric Margolis </span></i></span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'times new roman', 'new york', times, serif;"><i><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 14pt;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: #c00000; font-family: 'times new roman', 'new york', times, serif; font-size: medium; font-style: normal;"></span></span></i></span><br />
<i><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt;"><span style="color: black;">“America’s strategic and economic interests in the Mideast and Muslim world are being threatened by the agony in Palestine, which inevitably invites terrorist attacks against US citizens and property.” Eric Margolis. Sun Media. 2 September, 2001. Ever since 9/11, readers keep asking me my views on these attacks. I have been barraged with emails until my head spins with engineering studi.</span></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt;">One of the most colorful theories comes from Gen. Hamid Gul, former director of Pakistan’s intelligence agency, ISI. He insists that 9/11 was staged by Israel’s Mossad and a cabal of rightwing US Air Force generals.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt;">I inspected the ruins of the New York’s Twin Towers, atop which I often dined, right after the attack. Downtown Manhattan was enveloped by a hideous, stinking miasma from the attack. I have never smelled anything so awful. It took me days to scrub the foul odor off my body. As a native New Yorker, I was shaken to the core by 9/11 – but hardly surprised, as I had predicted a major attack on the US nine days earlier.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt;">While visiting the Pentagon to consult on the Mideast, I also inspected its outside wall hit by the third hijacked aircraft. </span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt;">I saw photos of the impact site and could not understand what had happened to all the aircraft wreckage. There was almost none.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt;">In 1993, I was hijacked over Germany on a Lufthansa flight bound for Cairo. The Ethiopian hijacker took us all the way back to New York City. The hijacker was threatening to crash our A310 jumbo jet into Wall Street.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt;">Our flight was shadowed by US F-15 fighters that had orders to shoot, if necessary. Where, then, was US air defense on 11 Sept. 2001? </span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt;">A day after 9/11, I was asked on CNN if Osama bin Laden was behind the attack. `We have yet to see the evidence,’ I replied. I maintain this position today. </span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt;">Bin Laden denied he or al-Qaida was behind 9/11 and the death’s of nearly 3,000 people. The plot was hatched in Hamburg, Germany and Madrid, Spain, not in Afghanistan. A Pakistani, Khaled Sheik Mohammed, claimed he was the mastermind – after being tortured by near-drowning 183 times by the CIA. </span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt;">While denying involvement, Osama bin Laden did say he believed the attack on New York was in part motivated by Israel’s destruction of downtown Beirut during its 1982 invasion of Lebanon that inflicted some 18,000 civilian deaths.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt;">Tapes that appeared to confirm bin Laden’s guilt were clumsy fakes. They were supposedly “found” in Afghanistan by the anti-Taliban Afghan Northern Alliance, which was created and funded by Russian intelligence. </span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt;">I had met Osama bin Laden in Afghanistan and told CNN viewers that he was not the man in the tapes. </span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt;">After 9/11, Secretary of State Colin Powell promised Americans the State Department would issue a White Paper detailing bin Laden’s guilt. Afghanistan’s Taliban government asked for this document before it would extradite bin Laden, as the US was demanding. The White Paper was never produced, and the US ignored proper legal procedure and invaded Afghanistan. We still wait for evidence.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt;">I remain uncertain that Osama bin Laden was really behind the attacks. Much circumstantial evidence points to him and al-Qaida, but conclusive proof still lacks. One thing is certain: the attacks were planned and mounted from Germany, not Afghanistan. Of the 19 hijackers, 15 were Saudis, two from the United Arab Emirates, one an Egyptian and a Lebanese.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt;">By the way, I’ve said ever since 9/11 that the danger and size of al-Qaida has been vastly exaggerated – as an explosive report this week by the London’s esteemed International Institute for Strategic Studies has just confirmed. Al-Qaida, dedicated to fighting the Afghan Communists, never had more than 300 members at its peak. </span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt;">Today, according to CIA chief Leon Panetta, there are no more than 50 al-Qaida men in Afghanistan. Yet President Barack Obama has tripled the number of US troops in Afghanistan to 120,000 because of what to calls the al-Qaida threat. What is going on? </span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt;">Many people abroad believe al-Qaida is an American invention used to justify foreign military operations. I do not share this view. Osama bin Laden was never a US agent, though his group indirectly received funds from CIA to fight the Communists. </span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt;">Back to 9/11. I still cannot understand how amateur pilots could manage to maneuver in low to hit the World Trade Center and Pentagon. As a Pakistani intelligence agent told me, “if they were really amateur Arab pilots, they would have crashed into one another, not the World Trade Center!”</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt;">The arrest of Israeli “movers” filming the attack and dancing with joy, and the subsequent arrest of groups of Israeli “students” supposedly tracking the would-be hijackers remains a deep mystery. So does the immobilization of US air defenses. </span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt;">The US 9/11 Commission was a whitewash, as are all such government commissions. They are designed to obscure, not reveal, the truth. </span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt;">A 2006, a Scripps Howard/Washington Post poll found that 36% of the 1,000 Americans sampled believed the US government was behind 9/11. Many Americans still do not believe the official version of 9/11.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt;">Neither do many Europeans. The entire Muslim world believes 9/11 was the work of Israel and far right American neocons, led by Dick Cheney. </span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt;">If the official story about 9/11 is true, the attacks caught the Bush administration asleep on guard duty. Bush’s incompetent national security advisor, Condoleeza Rice, brushed off serious warnings of the impending attack and actually cut spending on anti-terrorism just before 9/11.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt;">The White House and media were quick to blame Muslims who hated America’s lifestyle and values, launching the concept of “Islamic terrorism” – i.e. that the Muslim faith, not political issues, prompted the attacks. </span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt;">This dangerous canard has infected America, leading to a rising tide of Islamophobia. This week’s continued uproar over a Muslim community center in downtown New York, and a Florida preacher’s threat to burn Korans, are the latest doleful example of cultivated religious hatred.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt;">The suicide team that attacked New York and Washington made clear its aim was: a. to punish the US for backing Israel’s repression of Palestinians; and b. what they called US “occupation” of Saudi Arabia. Though they were all Muslims, religion was not the motivating factor.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt;">As the CIA’s former bin Laden expert Michael Scheuer rightly observed, the Muslim world was furious at the US for what it was doing in their region, not because of America’s values, liberties or religion. </span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt;">These motives for the 9/11 attack have been largely obscured by the whipping up hysteria over “Islamic terrorism.” The planting of anthrax in New York, Florida and Washington soon after 9/11 was clearly designed to promote further anti-Muslim furor. The perpetrators of this red herring remain unknown. But the anthrax attack hastened passage of the semi-totalitarian Patriot Act that sharply limited the personal freedoms of Americans and imposed draconian new laws.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt;">Faked bin Laden videos and audio tapes. Planted anthrax. An intact Koran implausibly found at ground zero. Evidence in a hijacker’s bag that had somehow failed to make his ill-fated flight. Immediate claims that al-Qaida was behind the attacks. Those amateur kamikaze pilots and collapsing towers. </span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt;">Perhaps most damning, tapes taken in London of meetings between President George Bush and PM Tony Blair revealed a sinister proposal by the US president to provoke war with Iraq by painting US aircraft in UN colors, then buzzing Iraqi air defenses until they fired on them, thus providing a “casus belli.” Bush also reportedly told Blair that after Iraq, he would “go on” to attack Saudi Arabia, Syria and Pakistan.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt;">In 1939, Nazi Germany dressed up soldiers in Polish uniforms to provoke a border fire-fight to justify Berlin’s ensuing invasion of Poland. Bush’s plan was of the same ilk. A president who would contemplate such a criminal operation might go a lot further to achieve his imperial dreams. </span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt;">As a veteran journalist, to me, all this smells to high heaven. There are just too many unanswered questions, too many suspicions, and that old Roman legal question, “cui bono” – “to whose benefit?”</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt;">On 28 February, 1933, fire, set by a Dutch Jew, ravaged the Germany’s parliament, the Reichstag. While the Reichstag’s ruins were still smoking, Adolf Hitler’s government declared a war against “terrorism.” A “Decree for the Protection of People and State” was promulgated suspending all legal protections of speech, assembly, property, and personal liberties. The Reichstag fire allowed the government to round up “terrorism” suspects without due process of law and made police powers near absolute.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt;">Sound familiar? Here’s another startling coincidence. Two years before 9/11, a series of mysterious apartment building bombings in Russia killed over 200 people. “Islamic terrorists” from Chechnya were blamed. </span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt;">Panic swept Russia and boosted former KGB agent Vladimir Putin into full power. Russian security agents of FSB were caught red-handed planting explosives in another building, but the story was hushed up. A former FSB agent, Alexander Litvinenko, who tried to reveal this story, was murdered in London by radioactive polonium.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt;">Similarly, the Bush administration’s neocons shamelessly used 9/11 to promote the invasion of Iraq. Just before the attack, polls showed 80% of Americans erroneously believed Saddam Hussein was behind 9/11. Dr. Goebbels would have been proud.</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt;">So what, in the end, can we conclude? 1. We still do not know the real story about 9/11. 2. The official version is not credible. 3. 9/11 was used to justify invading strategic Afghanistan and oil-rich Iraq. 4. The attacks plunged America into wars against the Muslim world and enriched the US arms industry. 5. 9/11 boosted pro-Israel neoconservatives, formerly a fringe group, into power, and with them America’s totalitarian far right. 6. Bush’s unprovoked war against Iraq destroyed one of Israel’s two main enemies. 7. 9/11 put America in what may turn out to be a permanent state of war with the Muslim world – a key goal of the neoconservatives .</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt;">But I’ve seen no hard evidence to date that 9/11 was a plot by America’s far right or by Israel or a giant cover-up. Just, perhaps, the Mother of All Coincidences. In the end, it may just have been 19 angry Arabs and a bumbling Bush administration looking for someone else to blame. </span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><br />
</div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt;"> (Eric Margolis is a senior journalist and also writes for the Toronto Sun).</span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt;">NOTE: This is a cross post.</span></div></i>YASMEEN ALIhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10748945833762147296noreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1664474623650181692.post-70692314076768376342010-09-16T19:17:00.000-07:002010-09-16T19:17:46.010-07:00The Bravest Nation in the World<h2 style="border-collapse: collapse; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">In an unending crisis, there is hope and salvation yet for Pakistan.</h2><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjtougxtFUUuutcpp7BYOGsT4qgcLr2srlYnqt3vMelSNKBRlfLliIvo6jmOpoXYCezkw0R8HjXDoITDiRPv_697RtXYoQKQDFPc8kaje3G4v3wxYhjB2K-BAdTXGbMknToeXI2t2xAX1c/s1600/t1larg.pakistan.cart.afp.gi.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjtougxtFUUuutcpp7BYOGsT4qgcLr2srlYnqt3vMelSNKBRlfLliIvo6jmOpoXYCezkw0R8HjXDoITDiRPv_697RtXYoQKQDFPc8kaje3G4v3wxYhjB2K-BAdTXGbMknToeXI2t2xAX1c/s320/t1larg.pakistan.cart.afp.gi.jpg" /></a></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: collapse; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">Paula Bronstein</span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: collapse; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;"><a href="http://www.newsweek.com/2010/09/16/despite-crises-pakistan-is-the-bravest-nation.html" style="color: #0065cc;" target="_blank">Despite Crises, Pakistan Is the Bravest Nation</a></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: collapse; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;"><br />
</span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: collapse; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;"><div style="display: block;"><div><div style="display: block;">In <a href="http://www.newsweek.com/tag/pakistan.html" style="color: #0065cc;" target="_blank">Pakistan</a> there is the anguished introspection and self-comforting, posturing, and handholding that only natural disasters on the scale of the recent floods can inspire. In makeshift camps that have come up in the middle of roadway medians, at air bases flying impossible rescue missions, at corner shops, and on television, God seems to be on everyone’s mind.</div></div></div><div style="display: block;"><div><div style="display: block;">While the country’s volatility, militancy, and nuclear capacity certainly pose a geopolitical risk, a lot has changed since NEWSWEEK called Pakistan the world’s most dangerous nation three years ago. The qualities of mercy, forgiveness, and grit—those staples of the God-fearing—have risen above other longstanding, even pathological, problems and come to define the nation of late. The seemingly inexhaustible capacity of Pakistanis to forgive themselves, and each other, gives them the sense of purpose and selflessness to journey on—and provides the country with its little-understood strength.</div></div></div><div style="display: block;"><div><div style="display: block;">No one knows forgiveness quite like President Asif Ali Zardari. After the assassination of his wife, former prime minister Benazir Bhutto, he shouted down angry supporters who demanded the secession of Sindh province, Zardari and Bhutto’s home, from Pakistan. He has kept intact his rancorous but ultimately peaceful relationship with Nawaz Sharif, another twice-elected prime minister, who in the 1990s had ordered Zardari’s arrest and torture. For a brief period two years ago, Zardari was the country’s most popular man, and he was overwhelmingly elected president. He has now returned to being one of the country’s most reviled, especially after his tone-deaf tour of France and England while Pakistan was being devastated by floodwaters. Zardari is now compensating with aggressive compassion, touring affected areas dressed in a dark <i>shalwar kameez</i> with a Sindhi cap and somber expression, instead of the suit and smile he normally wears.</div><div style="display: block;"></div><div><div style="display: block;"><div><div style="display: block;">Because of their numbers and capacity for withstanding abuse, Zardari and his Pakistan Peoples Party are in alliance with every major political party—including Sharif’s Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz—in all elected assemblies in the country. This big-tent approach has helped calm tensions in the smaller provinces, where alienation often manifests as violence toward the state. The rancorous coalition predicated on forgiveness has yielded some big wins for Pakistan’s democracy. In April the near-unanimous passage by Parliament of the 18th Amendment to the Constitution, which weakened the president’s powers—notably, nullifying that office’s right to dissolve Parliament—coupled with an unexpected national revenue-sharing agreement among the country’s four provinces, led Zardari to remark, “There is acceptance of everybody’s political position and rights, and it shows a great maturity that I feel the democratic forces in Pakistan have achieved.”</div></div></div><div style="display: block;"><div><div style="display: block;">More than two years after their return to greater national relevance, Zardari’s and Sharif’s parties seem to have broken the claw-and-kill cycle that once marked their relations. The old tensions still simmer just below the surface, but the parties have come together when it’s mattered most, like they did for passage of the 18th Amendment. Neither Zardari nor Sharif has ever been accused of caring too much for the country or being unimpeachably honest. Sharif has come close on several occasions but always stopped short of calling for the ouster of the ruling party. Last year Zardari dismissed Sharif’s government in the Punjab, and Sharif was also briefly detained.</div></div></div><div style="display: block;"><div><div style="display: block;">The overthrow of any government is impossible without the endorsement of the Army, which continues to call the shots on foreign policy and national security. The Army runs Pakistan’s largest corporate empire. It is in every line of business, including hairdressing. And while it is the country’s only truly egalitarian organization, where pluck ensures social advancement and the fulfillment of the Pakistani dream, its growth has come entirely at the expense of other institutions and has starved public-sector development. Each time it has assumed power, the country has lost ground—literally and metaphorically—starting with the handing over to China of a part of Kashmir in 1963. The petrodollar- and U.S.-funded Afghan jihad brought down the Soviet Union but left Pakistan awash with the militancy the Army once fostered, and is battling today partly as atonement.</div></div></div><div style="display: block;"><div><div style="display: block;">Under Gen. Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, the Army has consciously been working to redeem itself by overt displays of professional, apolitical conduct. It’s been given a fillip by its operations against the Taliban in Swat and South Waziristan, its handling of the refugee crisis from Swat, and the rescue and relief efforts after the floods. But by its outré patriotic outrage last year over U.S. aid—and the behind-the-scenes pressure on the Zardari’s government to restore the unconstitutionally dismissed Iftikhar Chaudhry as the country’s chief justice—it remains engaged in politics, if only to protect its own interests (which it sees as interchangeable with national interests).</div></div></div><div style="display: block;"><div><div style="display: block;">Military and civilian autocrats have always been able to bend the judiciary to suit their wishes. This changed in 2007 when Pervez Musharraf, the last of the country’s four military rulers, tried to fire Chaudhry because of his growing independence. When Chaudhry, who had sworn an oath of allegiance to the Musharraf administration in 2000, refused to back down, the lawyers’ movement was born. The movement—an unprecedented, largely peaceful nationwide mobilization of lawyers, civil-society activists, and political parties—was fueled by Chaudhry’s everyman heroism and permanently weakened Musharraf. Chaudhry was reinstated by his Supreme Court peers in July 2007 but put under house arrest four months later when Musharraf imposed emergency rule. The chief justice was restored to office again in March 2009. Today the Supreme Court under Chaudhry is an equal-opportunity offender, and in reclaiming its jurisdiction, its zeal has sometimes been misplaced. (For instance, the court struck down the amnesty order issued by Musharraf that led to the return of both Bhutto and Sharif. In the detailed judgment, the court excoriates corrupt, self-loathing elites as well as the Army. The court is currently hearing cases that could bring down Zardari. But Chaudhry knows that removing Zardari will be messy and that the ensuing confusion could destroy the court.)</div></div></div><div style="display: block;"><div><div style="display: block;">The lawyers’ movement inspired by Chaudhry’s defiance would not have been possible without the activism of the press. Pakistan has more than 60 cable channels and, despite an occasional kerfuffle with the government, the fiercely vocal media remain sufficiently powerful to prevent any meaningful defamation laws from being legislated. Absent such laws, claims of freedom of expression by the media will continue to be an excuse for their excesses. Even if they are sometimes selective and hysterical, the media’s scrutiny of politicians—who were previously accountable only to the Army—is good for Pakistani democracy. A television commentator excoriated Sharif’s government in Punjab for providing taxpayer money to the philanthropic arm of the local Qaeda affiliate Lashkar-e-Taiba. Pakistani TV channels are not perfect—until recently, many networks glorified terrorists, even referring to killed militants with honorifics—but they are helping to modernize the nation’s politics.</div></div></div><div style="display: block;"><div><div style="display: block;">What’s more, tolerance for violence is abating. National revulsion at the assassination of Bhutto; the Taliban’s overreach in the Swat Valley and their merciless public flogging of a 16-year-old girl (caught on video); and the spate of suicide bombings in urban centers turned 80 percent of Pakistanis strongly against suicide attacks, according to a recent poll by the Pew Research Center. The limited aid work being done by front organizations for militant groups in flood-affected areas will, at least temporarily, help restore their public image, but the poll is a clear sign that Pakistanis are fed up with militancy.</div></div></div><div style="display: block;"><div><div style="display: block;">Pakistanis have a been-there, done-that wariness of political experimentation, and they’ve settled on representative democracy as the solution. Citizens have repeatedly rejected the artificial strictures placed by military rulers on political figures like Bhutto and Sharif by voting them in. The political resurrections of Zardari and Sharif are not for lack of options; these are just who the people want to govern them.</div></div></div><div style="display: block;"><div><div style="display: block;">Tensions among the government, Army, judiciary, and media are new and healthy for Pakistan. Each institution tests boundaries now and then, but they tend to back down when overstepping might cause civil strife. Each institution sometimes commits overreach in order to achieve the acceptable middle ground that it had quietly and actually always sought. (For instance, allies of the Army first said Pakistan should reject all American aid conditioned on civilian control of the military, but once politicians had promised the generals considerable autonomy, they backed down and Pakistan got its cash.) From these tensions, an uneasy equilibrium of tolerance and forgiveness has emerged. This equilibrium should last, and be preserved, at least until 2013, when Zardari, Chaudhry, and Kayani all complete their terms in office.</div></div></div><div style="display: block;"><div><div style="display: block;">Social and political activism, discouraged under military rule, is back, fueled by modern platforms like Facebook. Unlike protests in the U.S. and Europe against the Iraq War, street demonstrations in Pakistan tend to yield results, as they did with Judge Chaudhry’s restoration. This sense of empowerment is amplified and assisted by the press—and it is not limited to politics: students and civil-society activists undertook one of the largest humanitarian relief operations in Pakistan’s history after the 2005 earthquake. Similar fervor is on display as Pakistan faces the aftermath of the floods.</div></div></div><div style="display: block;"><div><div style="display: block;">Politicians will make mistakes. But regret, says Zardari, is an indulgence. “Life has so many regrets, you can’t even start,” he told NEWSWEEK PAKISTAN. “But then you forgive yourself, accept the fact that you were wrong, and go on.” That’s a lesson Pakistan knows well.</div></div></div><div style="display: block;"><div><div style="display: block;"><i> NOTE: Ahmed is the editor of NEWSWEEK PAKISTAN. This is adapted from his cover story for the magazine’s first issue.</i></div></div></div></div><br />
</div></div></span></div>YASMEEN ALIhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10748945833762147296noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1664474623650181692.post-29797958393497430392010-09-05T20:30:00.000-07:002010-09-05T20:30:10.900-07:00Army Vs Liberals<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjsaEMXa1ieNuF6kXi7YrTDPThmoj_5ckLOPOgB-v7s6Z7WLif_XVPMVDEruGpkCBcAdk96DJSuy65NqAPKNKiWZytslQL38O62riPllZqr9Ws_uVQRGsYkKnPcGlWzuBbdLpRNbdoVf8Q/s1600/VOTING.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjsaEMXa1ieNuF6kXi7YrTDPThmoj_5ckLOPOgB-v7s6Z7WLif_XVPMVDEruGpkCBcAdk96DJSuy65NqAPKNKiWZytslQL38O62riPllZqr9Ws_uVQRGsYkKnPcGlWzuBbdLpRNbdoVf8Q/s320/VOTING.jpg" width="242" /></a></div>This is an uncensored version of the article by Zafar Hilalay <br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<h1><b><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: medium;">As a nation we like democracy, it suits our psyche. We like variety because we get bored easily; we love yapping and the opportunity democracy provides is endless and we excel in criticism which is also what democracy jealousy guards.</span></span></b></h1><h1><b><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: medium;">However, there are attributes of democracy that do not gibe with our outlook. For example, there is the notion in democracy that all men are created equal, which is manifestly untrue. Take a look around any room and you will see that it is not so, and attempts to fly in the face of this fact has led to all sorts of absurdities. And, anyway, even if they are born equal quite a few eventually get over it.</span></span></b></h1><h1><b><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: medium;">Then again, in a democracy the people are supposed to be the repository of wisdom. In the last century literate electorates have chosen the biggest mass murderer in modern history, Adolf Hitler, to lead them and so too the founder of fascism, Mussolini. Indeed, had Stalin stood for re election in 1945, one is confident that he too would have been returned to office, by a worshipful electorate, notwithstanding his genocidal antics. Even Churchill, who presided over the British Empire during the great Bengal famine of 1942, and was responsible for several million Bengalis starving to death on account of neglect, was re elected in 1951.</span></span></b></h1><h1><b><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: medium;">Pakistan too is reverberating from the consequences of the people’s choice of leaders. Proponents of democracy today were rewarded for the faith reposed in the wisdom of the people by their selection of Mr Zardari and, lest some feel that that was a one off aberration and won’t be repeated, the people ensured that the Sharif and Chaudhry brothers gave him a close run for his money, thereby, suggesting that when it comes to a choice between the jackass and the jackals, it is a toss up. Of course, that is not to say that the dictators were any better but at least no proponent of dictatorship has ever claimed that it is the best system of government, barring none.</span></span></b></h1><h1><b><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: medium;">Some feel that we must give democracy a chance and that a few more elections will wash away the slime and thereafter democracy will emerge in its full lustre. They, therefore, counsel patience and hope. They say hope is a good thing and that it “springs eternal.” But Benjamin Franklin, picking up the metaphor from Pope two centuries later, felt the opposite saying that ‘he that lives on hope will die fasting’. For in the end hope must be satisfied otherwise hope is worthless. ‘In fact, it already is,’ said a friend the other day, announcing for all to hear, ‘since I gave up hope I feel much better.’</span></span></b></h1><h1><b><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: medium;">What the people want of any system, democracy, autocracy, or what have you, is that it should ‘deliver’. And delivery is basically a question of management. It is a skill that can be found in an unexpected source and in an elected as much as an unelected leader; nor does one need to be a boffin. Lenin, for example felt that ‘Any cook should be able to run the country.’ Presumably the cook Lenin had in mind had a lot of practical abilities that he could bring to bear on the business of government. Politicians on the other hand are less versed in the practical skills of management and administration; drama and dramatics are their forte, hence they prefer masquerading as over promoted managers with a delusional view of their own effectiveness. Instead of motivating people one of them, often pictured in water which never magically exceeds the top of his ‘wellingtons,’ makes it difficult for them to work.</span></span></b></h1><h1><b><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: medium;">Bureaucrats are no better. Mostly products of an abysmal public educational system their purpose in office is to find a problem for every solution. Their talent for creativity and innovation is confined to evolving measures to enrich themselves. They can count schools which do not exist and claim maintenance costs for bridges that were never built. They keep ‘minutes’ and waste hours; ‘defend the status quo long past the time that the status quo has lost its status’; write memos not of what was said but what should have been said and generally are excellent in communicating how NOT to do things. Of course, democracy is not responsible for their malfeasance, not by any means, but that they flourish in democracy understandably gives democracy a bad name.</span></span></b></h1><h1><b><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: medium;">So glaringly obvious has been the lack of delivery </span></span></b><b><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: medium;">of a democratic government in almost every sphere of life that we have reached a pass today that the public will willingly forego all their democratic rights in return for someone, anyone and any system that will deliver.</span></span></b></h1><h1><b><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: medium;">One had thought that the Flood would be the game changer, given the enormity of the challenge and, what will certainly be, the matching inability of the government to meet it. Alas, that does not seem likely anymore and the reason is not that the anticipated failure of the government does not warrant a convulsive change of the system and the way things are done but because those mostly affected happen to be the poorest of the poor.</span></span></b></h1><h1><b><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: medium;">One can see it on the screens, millions of the hitherto invisible and unwashed emerging from the waters bedraggled, bereft and lost. It is that segment of the population, referred to as our ‘brothers’ and ‘sisters’ in the speeches of politicians, who are rarely seen, seldom heard and who never count. These millions of unwanted exist only in statistics. Moreover, to be poor and influential in Pakistan is impossible; to be simple and politically savvy even more so, hence, their pitiable condition won’t be addressed. They will return, in due course, to their hovels, still unwanted, still unheard, a confused, miscellaneous rabble still clutching little more than their soiled vestments and half worthless notes given by the State, if they are lucky. Their crime is to be poor.</span></span></b></h1><h1><b><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: medium;">CUSINS: Do you call poverty a crime?</span></span></b></h1><h1><b><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: medium;">UNDERSHAFT: The worst of all crimes. All the other crimes are virtues behind it.</span></span></b><b><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: medium;"> (Shaw: Major Barbara)</span></span></b></h1><h1><b><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: medium;">Witho</span></span></b><b><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: medium;">ut equality of opportunity, an acceptable standard of living and work for those who can and, above all, a modicum of security and justice-- all missing in today’s Pakistan--- no system is safe, democracy most of all.</span></span></b></h1><div><b><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: medium;">(The writor is former Ambassador of Pakistan)</span></span></b></div>YASMEEN ALIhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10748945833762147296noreply@blogger.com15tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1664474623650181692.post-91774210218969931952010-09-04T21:03:00.000-07:002010-09-04T21:30:29.911-07:00Is Israel Running The Pakistani Taliban?By Gordon Duff<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgodDfj4dG-y-olyYH_K_0pis9Uu3tlMQuTG9GOVMJVFKmvhc_2O_m4M7JwWx9VOim7yPfW12fdp2KwJxGkQzo12GOMOrhIRNeoPa10B6IAMr9DKByumURLuTJs0LG2VaMS92wUdW1djvk/s1600/Israel.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="301" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgodDfj4dG-y-olyYH_K_0pis9Uu3tlMQuTG9GOVMJVFKmvhc_2O_m4M7JwWx9VOim7yPfW12fdp2KwJxGkQzo12GOMOrhIRNeoPa10B6IAMr9DKByumURLuTJs0LG2VaMS92wUdW1djvk/s400/Israel.jpg" width="400" /></a></div><br />
<div style="font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-left: 0.5in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in;"><span style="color: red; font-family: Symbol;"><span style="font-size: small;">·</span><span style="font: normal normal normal 7pt/normal 'Times New Roman';"> </span></span><span dir="ltr"></span><b><span style="color: red; font-family: Cambria, serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">TODAY’S SUICIDE BOMBING IN QUETTA, PAKISTAN LEAVES A TRAIL TO TEL AVIV</span></span></b></div><div style="font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-left: 0.5in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in;"><span style="color: red; font-family: Symbol;"><span style="font-size: small;">·</span><span style="font: normal normal normal 7pt/normal 'Times New Roman';"> </span></span><span dir="ltr"></span><b><span style="color: red; font-family: Cambria, serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">Junudullah, TTP get support from Washington, Tel Aviv and New Delhi, PKK used to be sponsored by Israel</span></span></b></div><div style="font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-left: 0.5in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in;"><span style="color: red; font-family: Symbol;"><span style="font-size: small;">·</span><span style="font: normal normal normal 7pt/normal 'Times New Roman';"> </span></span><span dir="ltr"></span><b><span style="color: red; font-family: Cambria, serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">Is US military and CIA using air strips in Pakistan’s Balochistan to transport Afghan heroin?</span></span></b></div><div style="font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in;"><br />
</div><div style="font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></div><div style="font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 13px;"></span></span></div><span style="font-size: small;"></span><br />
<span style="font-size: small;"></span><br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><div style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in;"><strong><span style="color: black; font-size: 10pt;">Pakistan is important. For years, the “CIA” and other intelligence organizations have been in Balochistan sneaking in and out of Iran blowing things up. How much of that is CIA and how much is Mossad, nobody knows for sure. This is another terrorist organization, called the “Jundullah.” Like the PKK in Turkey and the Tehrik-i-Taliban, the terrorist group making life in Pakistan a living hell, the Jundullah get all the money, weapons, training, transportation and maybe more, much more, they need to fight covert wars against the targets of Tel Aviv.</span></strong></div><div style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in;"><br />
</div><div style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in;"><span style="font-size: small;">NOTE:This is a cross post from Veterans Today. This Extracted version was printed by PakNationalists.com</span></div><div style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br />
</span></div><div style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 13px;"></span></span></div><span style="font-size: small;"></span><br />
<span style="font-size: small;"></span><br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><div style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in;"><span style="font-size: small;">QUETTA, Pakistan—Today, 43 Pakistanis were killed in a terror attack, killed for supporting Palestinians in Gaza. The signs had been there, the Wikileaks attempt to put responsibility for the Taliban on Veterans Today editor General Hamid Gul. This was debunked in a heartbeat. This attack was vicious and clearly the work of Israel. This was a terror attack meant as a message to the people of the world telling them that if they rally in support of those imprisoned in Gaza, they will be murdered.</span></div><div style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in;"><br />
</div><div style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in;"><span style="font-size: small;">Is it a gift for the Jewish people of Israel, another revenge attack, seemingly in response to the shooting of 4 Israeli Jews in Hebron, an attack curiously timed to disrupt peace talks between Jewish and Muslim Palestinians in Washington?</span></div><div style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in;"><br />
</div><div style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in;"><span style="font-size: small;">This is far from the first time Israel has been caught. The PKK, the Kurdish terrorist group, communists, who have been attacking Turkey from their mountain “caves” in Iraq for over 40 years have long been trained, funded and even recruited by Israel’s Mossad. Now the partnership between India and Israel, helped along, not only by the CIA, the Kazrai brothers “corporation” and MI -6 is becoming difficult to ignore.</span></div><div style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in;"><br />
</div><div style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in;"><span style="font-size: small;">With continual terror attacks a daily part of life in Pakistan, several in Lahore this week, there is no ignoring the real culprits. Nearly every contracting firm the United States uses in not only Afghanistan but Pakistan as well is filled to the brim with Israeli operatives. Working with them is the massive CIA assisted drug cartel and its worldwide network of private airlines for shipping heroin and cash and a dozen nations that take part.</span></div><div style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in;"><br />
</div><div style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in;"><span style="font-size: small;">All of this is only window dressing for the real show. In 2003, Israel got America to destroy Iraq, well, and itself also. Iraq was suicide for America. It wasn’t until 2007 that America had discovered its own corpse.</span></div><div style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in;"><br />
</div><div style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in;"><span style="font-size: small;">The war in Afghanistan is destroying not only that country but Pakistan as well. </span></div><div style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in;"><br />
</div><div style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in;"><span style="font-size: small;">Pakistan is important. For years, the “CIA” and other intelligence organizations have been in Balochistan sneaking in and out of Iran blowing things up. How much of that is CIA and how much is Mossad, nobody knows for sure. This is another terrorist organization, called the “Jundallah.” Like the PKK in Turkey and the Tehrik-i-Taliban, the terrorist group making life in Pakistan a living hell, the Jundallah get all the money, weapons, training, transportation and maybe more, much more, they need to fight covert wars against the targets of Tel Aviv.</span></div><div style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in;"><br />
</div><div style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in;"><span style="font-size: small;">Baluchistan also has several small airports where heroin can be loaded and flown out. American contracting firms control those facilities and have for years. Narcotics are delivered there from Afghanistan and leave on aircraft meant to supply America’s “black ops” against, well, whoever it is that Israel is angry at.</span></div><div style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in;"><br />
</div><div style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in;"><span style="font-size: small;">For Americans, the real question, if Israel is funding terrorist organizations attacking, not only Iran but America’s NATO partner Turkey and longtime ally Pakistan, facts long in evidence everywhere but in the American press, are there also terrorist attacks against American forces and America itself being planned? Have any been carried out and if so, how many?</span></div><div style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in;"><br />
</div><div style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in;"><span style="font-size: small;">Does Israel gain when America marches to war against her perceived enemies? </span></div><div style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in;"><br />
</div><div style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in;"><span style="font-size: small;">What was obvious today is that the terror attack in Pakistan had nothing to do with Afghan Taliban of any kind. It had only one goal, to punish the people of Pakistan for supporting the Palestinian cause and supporting a two-state solution during the current peace initiative sponsored by President Obama. We know Israel goes after anyone who stands up for Palestine but killing dozens of civilians at a rally in Quetta, Baluchistan is an escalation, even for Israel. </span></div><div style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in;"><br />
</div><div style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in;"><span style="font-size: small;">Perhaps the worst part of it is that nobody will say a word about this. Pakistan is broke, even by American standards. They survive off American foreign aid, money they continue to receive as long as they never say a word about Israel of publicly attribute the wave of terrorism they have been subjected to where the real blame belongs. I have seen the head of Pakistan’s intelligence agency, the current Director General of the ISI, hint at Osama bin Laden being dead. I have interviewed him about it personally.</span></div><div style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in;"><br />
</div><div style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in;"><span style="font-size: small;">I was sworn to keep the discussion private and confidential. I will keep my word.</span></div><div style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in;"><br />
</div><div style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in;"><span style="font-size: small;">Pakistan is being held hostage. Mrs. Clinton continually chastises them about failing to find long dead Osama bin Laden, the imaginary planner of 9/11. Former ISI Director General Hamid Gul, now retired and known for his outspoken honesty, places the blame for 9/11 exactly where it belongs, where he placed on the day it happened. With the Israeli lobby in control of Washington and Washington’s money in control of Pakistan, this won’t be the last terror attack.</span></div><div style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in;"><br />
</div><div style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in;"><span style="font-size: small;">The next time anyone anywhere tries to aid Palestinians or to get the truth about Israel’s apartheid policies and ethnic cleansing past the corporate controlled press, expect another suicide bombing. Look at the way the press handled Israeli murder and piracy with the Freedom Flotilla? Less than 5% of Americans know that Israel was caught back in 1967 knowingly attacking an American ship, the USS Liberty. It wasn’t the first Israeli terror attack on Americans and there have been dozens since. You will never read a word about them.</span></div><div style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in;"><br />
</div><div style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in;"><span style="font-size: small;">With another 9/11 anniversary coming up, Palestine peace talks going on and Israel doing everything in its power to force America to attack Iran, security forces throughout the United States are on high alert for Islamic terrorists.</span></div><div style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in;"><br />
</div><div style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in;"><span style="font-size: small;">Everyone ‘in the know” understand that the warning is really for Israeli terrorists. Will the United States Air Force be there if needed, unlike during 9/11? Will terrorists all show up with fresh student visas courtesy of the State Department like during 9/11? </span></div><div style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in;"><br />
</div><div style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in;"><span style="font-size: small;">Are we past the time when America is willing to look the other way when a thousand strange coincidences bring about that “perfect storm,” exactly when and where needed, a “storm” to eclipse 9/11 in horror, enough to send a war weary people, long lied to, no longer trusting their government, down the road to war for Israel again?</span></div><div style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in;"><br />
</div><div style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in;"><span style="font-size: small;">Four dead Israelis in Hebron was a clue. The 43 dead in Quetta is another. The imaginary Amsterdam hijackers were meant to be one also. More will come with each day, more clues, more planted news stories, more staging, more preparing the minds to expect what so many of us know is coming.</span></div><div style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in;"><br />
</div><div style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in;"><span style="font-size: small;">Who do you think recruits terror cells? Who has been doing it forever? Who can travel freely, use passports of any nation and has endless money? You think there really is an Al Qaeda?</span></div><div style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in;"><br />
</div><div style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in;"><span style="font-size: small;">Why does everything Al Quade do only help Israel?</span></div><div style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in;"><br />
</div><div style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in;"><span style="font-size: small;">Is Al Qaeda another Mossad front?</span></div><div style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in;"><br />
</div><div style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in;"><br />
</div><div style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-left: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-top: 0in;"><i><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">Gordon Duff is Senior Editor at VeteransToday.com, a website focused on American military veterans. This is an extracted version of the original column published at<span style="color: #0000de;"><span style="color: #0000de;"><a href="http://www.veteranstoday.com/2010/09/03/gordon-duff-is-israel-running-the-taliban" rel="nofollow" style="color: #0000cc;">VeteransToday.com</a></span></span></span></span></i><br />
<i><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="color: #0000de;">published in PakNationalists.com</span></span></span></i></div></span></span>YASMEEN ALIhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10748945833762147296noreply@blogger.com4