The Punch: An antidote to the common pabulum. Views with a punch

India's Saffron Brigade Terrorists

2011-01-11T13:27:00.001-05:00

: Syama Prasad Mookerjee Founder of Bharatiya Jana Sangh

Bharat has been stonewalling since 2007. Bharat is trying to clam up on the Indian terrorist who blew up 42 Pakistanis aboard the Samjhota Express.It is now very clear that the RSS was behind the bombing with clear links to the BJP and the Bharati Army. The bombing of innocent civilians by Hindu terrorists is not an isolated incident.

Mr. Jatin Chatterjee (Aseemanand), is part of the Hindu network as defined by the RSS-affiliated Vanvasi Kalyan Parishad (VKP) in Gujarat. Mr. Chatterjee has confessed in front of an Indian magistrate that Hindutva terrorists were involved in the Samjhauta blast and the 2007 bombing in Ajmer Sharif in which three people died. Mr. Chatterjee has also confessed to the 2008 Malegaon bombings that killed 37 people and the Hyderabad Mecca Masjid bombing in May 2007.

The RSS is a radical organization that murdered Mohandas Gandhi and has planted bombs at Ajmer Sharif, Malegaon and Mecca Masjid. Karkore was investigating the links of Colonel Prohit to the Bharati Army when he was killed during the siege of Mumbai.

Bharat is stonewalling on Samjhota Express and has been trying to hush up the affair for years. It then acts holier than thou and pontificates to Pakistan on terror.

Islamabad has to take a tough stand on the murderers of the innocent civilians who were aboard the Samjhota Express. The kith and kin of the 42 Pakistanis were not carrots and radish vegetables. They were human beings and they demand their the terrorist be brought to justice.

Vice President Biden should be taken to a memorial that commemorates the victims of Samjhota Express and the victims of the 30,000 Pakistanis who have died because of this senseless war in Afghanistan.

Bharat is claiming that it is "premature" to share the information. Why is it premature? Why can't Bharat be open and honest about it? Does it have something to hide?

It is pedagogical to note that initially Bharat has blamed Pakistan for the train bombing. Irrietable evidence now exists, proving that the RSS and by association the BJP is responsible for the bombing in Panipat in 2007. the bombing killed 68 innocent civilians, fort two of which were Pakistani.

'At this stage we cannot share the probe details as it is too premature. The investigation is still on and is at a preliminary stage. We will take an appropriate decision when the investigations are concluded,' an Indian Home Ministry official has confided in IANS (a Bharati news agency) about the message to the external affairs ministry.

Pakistan has rightly insisted on getting the information on Mr. Jatin Chatterjee's (aka Aseemanand) confession, and the RSS link to the explosion which led to the murder of the Pakistanis. This week Pakistan's Foreign Ministry summoned India's acting Deputy High Commissioner G.V. Srinivas and demanded that Delhi provide information 'at the earliest' on the progress of the investigation into the terror bombing.

Bharati investigators had earlier blamed the terror acts on the Pakistan-based Lashkar-e-Tayaba and the Bangladesh-based Harkat-ul-Jihadi Islami (HuJI). Scores of innocent Indian Muslim youth were arrested and brutally tortured by the Bharati establishment. To make things worse, the RSS and the Hindu Mahasabah rioted in Malegaon, Ajmer and Panipat, beat up Mulim youth, set Muslim businesses on fire, and looted the homes of Muslims.

Here is an interesting video clip which shows the deep embarrassment of Bharat.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wctjgxEDM-E&feature=player_embedded

If Bharat does not cooperate in the RSS and Hindu Mahasabah investigations, Pakistan should not provide any information to Bharat in the ongoing investigation on the Mumbai culprits.

The silence from Washington is deafening.

Samjhota Exp: Pakistan demands action on Indian Terrorists (rupeenews.net)

Indian RSS terrorists should be handed over to Pakistan (rupeenews.net)

RSS terrorists should be extradited to Pakistan (rupeenews.net)

Bharati bluster in Kabul (rupeenews.net)

Karzai rebuffs India under 'Doctrine of Necessity' (rupeenews.net)

When will Delhi hand over RSS terrorists to Pakistan? (pakistanakhbar.com)

Indians don't understand Darri or Afghans (timesofislamabad.com)

You: RSS chief confesses to Samjhota, other bombings (nation.com.pk)

The reality that is India (timesofislamabad.com)

You: Islamabad asks Delhi not to squander opportunity (nation.com.pk)

Delhi cannot understand an Eviction Notice (pakpunch.com)

Darri and Pushto is alien to Indians (newpakistantimes.com)

Karzai rebuffs India - again (pakistanakhbar.com)

The last Indian in Afghanistan (pakistanakhbar.com)

India's packed Bags (newpakistantimes.com)

Hosting the India flag in Srinagar no acceptable (kashmirpunch.com)

Kashmir and Hyderabad still on UN dispute list (kashmirpunch.com)

Bharat's broken promies (kashmirpunch.com)

Scuttling Bharat's UNSC bid (kashmirpunch.com)

1971: Why the surrender? (kashmirpunch.com)

Stakes in India-Pakistan Dispute: China's Kashmir policy (azadkashmirtimes.com)

China' growing influence in Turkey and Pakistan (azadkashmirtimes.com)

Most India Pakistan disputes still on UN list (azadkashmirtimes.com)

1971: Why the surrender? (azadkashmirtimes.com)

Hindutva terror and the Indian Army (indianmilitarynews.wordpress.com)

Is the PPP party over

2011-01-02T20:33:00.000-05:00

: The PPP led minority coalition government is now hanging by a thin thread

Premier Gilani will be left with the support of only 160 members — 12 less than the required number to maintain his position as leader of the National Assembly in the 342-member lower house.

The PPP has only 125 seats of its own in a house of 342.

The MQMs decision to sit on the opposition benches in parliament, leaves PM Yousuf Raza Gilani as Leader of the House without a majority.

JUI-F chief Maulana Fazlur Rehman has asked President Asif Zardari to replace Mr Gilani with another PPP leader.

The Leader of Opposition in the National Assembly and PML-N Chaudhry Nisar has declared that his party would not support PPPs ‘corrupt’ set-up.

Mr. Zardari is camped out in Karachi hopeful that the MQM would come back to the coalition.

The PML-Q, with over 50 seats in the Lower House, can help the government stay afloat even if all other allies of the PPP leave the treasury benches and decide to sit in the opposition.

The MQM sees itself as a King Maker. Today they can surely exact the price from the PPP.

The PPP led coalition government is now hanging by a thin thread. The PPP did not acquiesce to the demands of the MQM for the removal of the Sindh Home Minister Dr Zulfiqar Mirza and the Urban Sindhis wanted the interior ministry of Sindh. Mr. Zardari camped out in Karachi was unable to give in to the demands of the MQM. The MQM's Damocles sword is hanging over the government of Mr. Gilani.

The MQM’s decision puts moral pressure upon the Prime Minister to seek a vote of confidence. At present the Premier has no justification continue as the Prime Minister.

The government's missteps have created a crisis for Mr. Zardari and the PPP. The coalition government finds itself in a precarious situation. As a minority government it can last on the goodwill of the opposition. Henceforth Mr Gilani will not be able to weather the storm of a No-Confidence motion. In fact as of Monday the opposition will have votes than the government in power.

The downfall of the compliant government in Islamabad will have regional and international repercussions. A coalition led by the PMLN, PMLQ will inherently be more nationalistic and would not tolerate drone bombings and open access to the CIA in Pakistan.

Pakistan leader in 'crisis talks' (bbc.co.uk)

Pressure on Pak PM to quit (thehimalayantimes.com)

You: Political manoeuvring heats up (nation.com.pk)

Pakistan's Ruling Coalition Hit By More Defections (waronterrornews.typepad.com)

You: MQM, PML-Q hold the sway (nation.com.pk)

The Indus people of Pakistan and the Himalayan water

2010-12-31T18:25:00.000-05:00

: Image via Wikipedia

Pakistan is at the vortex of three towering and magnificent mountain ranges-- the Grand Himalayas, the majestic Karakorum and the ruthless and bloody Hidukush. This confluence of the highest mountains in the world "creates space for shared economic development and security and stability in the adjacent regions."

"Dams being built in the Himalayan region can produce energy, sustain agriculture, conserve water, promote fisheries, and sustain communities": Ambassador Masood Khan speaking at a seminar titled "Stability and Development of Himalayan Areas" at Southwestern University of Political Science and Law.

The Indus brings water, and silt which is instrumental in crop growth. The Glaciers also bring floods and misery to the people. The Indus joins Pakistan and China in friendship and divides Pakistan ad Bharat in perpetual Hydro Wars.

The Himalyas have been the fountainhead, and the lifeblood of the people of the Indus. World experts gather together periodically to discover the potential and unmask the mysteries. "Ms. Sujata Koirala, Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister of Nepal was the Chief Guest on the occasion. Zhang Guolin Secretary General of CPC, Southwest University of Political Science and Law and Professor Li Xiguang, Director Chinese Academy of World Agendas were also present."

Ambassador Masood Khan said that we can use the abundant resources of Himalayas to reduce poverty, adding it is also our collective responsibility to preserve the biodiversity, ethnic richness, and cultural heritage of the Himalayas.

Pakistan has welcomed China's investment in hydropower sector, Khan said adding "with the support of Chinese Government's concessional credit lines as well as credit insurance, we have been able to attract top Chinese companies to invest in Pakistan's hydel sector".

The major Chinese companies, which include CWE, Gezhouba, DEC have been working on small and large projects. Our collaboration on Kohala and Neelam-Jhelum projects has been successful. Now, we are looking at even bigger projects like Bunji, Diamar-Bhasha, and Dasu, said Ambassador Khan.

He said that the "Abode of Snow", as the Himalayas are literally called, are the most glaciated region outside the North and South Poles. The glaciers and waters of the Himalayas are a source of life, livelihoods, and sustenance in our region. Hydro World.

The Himalayas present mountains of opportunities to overcome the loads of issues that are presented to the South Asians. The Himalayas have been the life line for the people of the Indus for thousands of years. Pakistanis five thousand years ago were drinking the water from the Himalayas, using the glacier water for trade, and harnessing the energy in terms of small "pan chakkis" or water dams. Bharat at the peak of the Indus valley was jungle and and Ganges Valley did not have a civilization. That came later--centuries later.

"At least 1.3 billion people are directly and half of humanity is indirectly dependent on them. Such is the importance of the Himalayas

which is the backbone of multiple adjoining regions," Ambassador Khan observed.

He pointed out that 14 of the highest peaks in the world are located

in these diverse mountain ranges spreading from the Karakorum all the way to the Tibetan Plateau. They inspire people and lift their spirits. For many the Himalayas have sacred and religious value.

The Himalayas, he said are truly a global heritage, as they have been over the centuries overseeing the interchange of civilizations from the Indus Valley to the Tibetan Plateau to the Brahmaputra Basin.

"The Himalayas Mountains do not divide but unite South Asia, China and South East Asia. The 2,400-km long arc of the Himalayas thus constitutes a "trans-border", not a border".

The Indus and Sutlej rivers, for instance, originate from the Himalayas, but run through the lands of Pakistan. Similarly, the Mahakali, the Ganges, and the Brahmaputra start from the Himalayas, pass through South Asian lands and flow into the oceans and seas.

The Himalayas join at least six countries "Afghanistan, Pakistan, China, India, Nepal, and Bhutan" and many regions as common eco-systems with shared geography and topography, he added.

It is therefore our collective responsibility to preserve biodiversity, ethnic richness, and cultural heritage of the Himalayas, he said, adding we can use the abundant resources of the Himalayas to reduce poverty. Hydro World.

Kashmir Life reports that "Pakistan had earlier raised objections over the 240 MW Uri-II project being constructed on Jhelum River in Jammu and Kashmir and the 44 MW Chutak plant being built on Suru, a tributary of Indus River in Kargil district. This was, perhaps for the first time that Pakistan has accepted the designs of power projects at the level of Permanent Indus Commission. Earlier, it took a ministerial meeting to make Pakistan agree to Salal Power Project.".

Through subterfuge and lies, Bharat has been able to get control of water that flows down through Kashmir. While Bharat's Aqua wars continue unabated, Pakistan has to deal with the new realities. Internal consensus and an army of engineers is needed to overcome some of the impediments faced by the nation.

It can also become the most visible and the massive project for environmental protection. We must work together to reduce the impact of climate change on this precious network of ecosystems, Khan noted.

Recently, Ambassador Khan said, Premier Wen Jiabao paid a successful visit to Pakistan.

During the visit, the two sides affirmed that Pakistan-China relations have gone beyond bilateral dimensions and acquired broader regional and international ramifications.

We also said that friendship between Pakistan and China serve the fundamental interests of the two countries and the peoples, and contribute to peace, stability and development in the region and beyond.

Pakistan and China would explore the feasibility of establishing joint programmes on environmental studies, in particular research and exchange of information on shared ecosystems.

"We have decided to set up an Energy Cooperation Mechanism to push forward cooperation in conventional, renewable, and civil nuclear energy" he observed.

South Asia and China are water stressed regions. It is important for us to develop a regional approach on waters, glacier melting, water conservation and watershed management.

We also need to use the Himalayas and the related mountain chains for enhancing connectivity through more road and rail links.

"If centuries ago, Fa Xian and Xuan Zang could cross mountains, we can do so much more easily by using modern technology for the good of humanity" Khan stressed. Hydro World.

Hydro world reports that the water resources are a rich means of hydroelectric energy and described the launching of Institute of Himalyas Studies in Chongqing city.

He expressed the confidence that the Institute of the Himalayas will help us realize this dream by means of precise and well targeted research and deeper understanding of the Himalayan region.

"I am sure the Institute, under the guidance of its leadership and in the supportive environment of Chongqing, will conduct very valuable studies on Himalayan glaciers, judicious use of water resources, climate change, and flora and fauna. But, most importantly, the Institute can emerge as a vehicle for dialogue on the Himalayas to promote stability, security and stability in the region" he said.

China, he said is an active observer of the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC). The Himalayas can become a catalyst for even closer relations between the two regions. Hydro World.

The Indus Water Treaty is a colossal bone of contention between the two South Asian giants. Prime Minister Syed Jammat has finally fired Ali Shah. He had been Indus Water Treaty Commissioner for more than a decade. According to news reports he was unceremoniously removed by Islamabad last week.

Kashmir Life reports that "The development came at a juncture when Pakistan had moved the International Court of Justice (ICJ) over the 330 MW Kishanganga project coming up in Bandipora district in scenic Gurez Valley. Pakistan’s objections are that diversion of waters from Kishanganga rivulet (also called Neelam) would leave almost a 100 km stretch of Neelam Valley across the LoC barren. Pakistani sources say, he was replaced because of “his persistent differences with Assistant Advisor to Prime Minister on Water, Kamal Majidullah on some sensitive issues.".

Commissioner Shah had been the target of intense criticism and was much despised by nationalists who claimed that mr. Shah had not properly represented Pakistan's case in front of the Bharatis. Commissioner Shah was replaced by Sheraz Memon, an official of Sindh Irrigation Department.

The Himalayan Indus still offers opportunity to the people of South Asia. It is up to the people of South Asia who need to harness it for the collective good of the people of the region.

Sources: The Tsinghua International Center for Communication Studies, the Chinese Academy of World Agendas, and Southwest University of Political Science and Law on the inauguration of the Institute of the Himalayas Studies Published by HT Syndication with permission from Right Vision News. For any query with respect to this article or any other content requirement, please contact Editor at htsyndication@hindustantimes.com. Pakistan: Himalyas water resources rich of hydroelectric power generation: Pak envoy. Right Vision News, December 30, 2010

China' growing influence in Turkey and Pakistan (azadkashmirtimes.com)

Bharat's broken promies (kashmirpunch.com)

China: 'Pakistan is our Israel' (rupeenews.com)

The destroyer of roads - US: The re-builder China (newpakistantimes.com)

Bharat's promises are always broken (pakistanakhbar.com)

How many promises has Bharat kept? (newpakistantimes.com)

Why doesn't India keep its promises? (pakistanindependent.com)

Pakistan and China accept Kashmir as disputed (timesofsrinagar.com)

Delhi speaks with forked tongue: Broken promises (azadkashmirtimes.com)

Delhi's broken promises (timesofsrinagar.com)

USAID Study Says Climate Impact on Himalayas Remains Unknown, but Worrisome (nytimes.com)

WikiLeaks: Dalai Lama Told US Officials Saving Himalayas Even More Important than Tibet's Political Future (grantlawrence.blogspot.com)

Pollution in the Himalayas: Time to call the sweep? (economist.com)

China Pakistan to 'deepen strategic cooperation' during PM Jibao's trip in Dec (timesofislamabad.com)

Tit-for-Tat: Chinese PM to visit Pakistan in Dec. (pakistanakhbar.com)

Pakistan to move closer to China during PMs visit in Dec (pakistanindependent.com)

Pakistan counters Obama trip with China PMs trip to Islamabad (viewstimes.com)

China PM to visit Islamabad in Dec to 'deepen strategic cooperation' (pakpunch.com)

Chinese PM Jibao to 'deepen strategic cooperation' during Dec trip to Islamabad (newpakistantimes.com)

When will the occupation of Kashmir end? (pakistanindependent.com)

Why Pakistanis dont want MFN to India

2010-11-23T22:31:00.000-05:00

Dumping means dropping goods below cost so that the industry of the local industry can be destroyed. Then the foreign entity can have a monopoly for decades to come.

There is tremendous pressure on Pakistan to open up its markets to Bharat so that it can begin dumping its shoddy goods on the Pakistani market. Pakistani industries already hurt by load-shedding and other external factors. Many analysts believe that many of the TTP attacks on Pakistan are Bharati inspired.

Islamabad has opened up the Pakistani market to Bharti films. However Bharat does not import Pakistani movies or TV dramas. A similar situation will occur if MFN status is given to Bharat. The increase is trade would in fact be a burden on the Pakistanis, as the $10 billion would be to Bharat's advantage. This has been resisted for the past sixty years. There is no reason to allow commercial encroachment by Bharat. The Bhrati IT industry is worth $50 billion but it does not use Pakistan talent either in Pakistan or overseas.

Bharati companies will begin dumping shoddy Bharati goods on the Paksitani consumer. Large Bharati companies will target Pakistani companies and industries that are vulnerable--thus destroying them. Japan started with steel and them moved up the pacman chain and took over a large section of the US market.

Pakistan cannot allow this Bharati terror to encroach into Pakistan.

New Delhi, Nov 24: Even as ties between India and Pakistan remain frosty, India Wednesday told a visiting 12-member Pakistani trade delegation that Islamabad should grant New Delhi Most Favoured Nation (MFN) status and called for a five-fold increase in bilateral trade.

Foreign Secretary Nirupama Rao said India hoped that the Pakistan government would implement the recommendations of the Panel of Economists appointed by the Pakistan Planning Commission and urged Islamabad to accord MFN status to India.

Rao also asked Pakistan to shift from a positive list of imports to a negative list regime to achieve a five-fold increase in bilateral trade from $2 billion to $10 billion.

Rao was inaugurating a FICCI conference on 'India-Pakistan Economic Relations: Prospects & Challenges'.

Rao assured business leaders of India's commitment to facilitating greater economic cooperation and integration between India and Pakistan and the South Asia region.

Rao said that to improve infrastructure and streamline and harmonise customs procedures at the land borders, India was setting up a modern integrated check post at the India-Pakistan border at Attari for trade facilitation. This is expected to be ready by April 2011.

She pressed for the opening up of more rail and road routes and expanding the existing capacities on operational routes. 'As things stand, Pakistan allows only the import of about 110 items from India through the land route, while it allows the export of only one item, cement, to India by the road route.'

Pakistan should permit all permissible items for trade via the Attari-Wagah route, she added.

The Pakistani delegation, led by Sultan Ahmed Chawla, president, Federation of Pakistan Chambers of Commerce and Industry (FPCCI), interacted with top Indian businessmen and pressed for escalating bilateral trade between the two countries.

Chawla called for removal of non-trade barriers by India and facilitation of movement of people across borders. 'We would request that instead of raising issues related to NTBs (non-tariff barriers) in a generalized manner, it would be more useful if specific instances can be brought to our notice, which are found to be specifically discriminatory for Pakistani exports to India,' said Rao.

'There is no discrimination against Pakistani exports because the same standards are being applied for imports from any other country,' she pointed out.

Rao stressed that India and Pakistan have complementarities in their economies which can create a 'win-win' situation for all sides. Listing out areas of mutually beneficial cooperation, Rao said: 'We only have to seize them by rising above our political differences for the welfare of our two people.'

The Pakistani delegation called on Commerce and Industry Minister Anand Sharma Tuesday. The delegation informed Sharma of the 'existing lacunae in the two-way trade and suggested some measures for improvement', said a statement from the Pakistan high commission Wednesday.

'The minister assured the delegation of removing the impediments in the smooth running of trade activity between the two countries and expressed the hope that the bilateral trade will substantially increase in the years to come,' said the high commission.

The delegation felt that the trade between India and Pakistan could be balanced if the tariff and non-tariff barriers are removed by the Indian side.

They also met Pakistan's High Commissioner Shahid Malik Tuesday.

This is the first visit by a Pakistani business delegation since the July 15 talks between the foreign ministers of the two countries broke down over a host of issues, including terrorism and Kashmir. Trade diplomacy: India presses Pakistan for MFN status. 2010-11-24 20:40:00. Masters in Diplomacy. Earn a Masters in Diplomacy Online at Norwich University. www.Norwich.Edu/Diplomacy. (IANS)

It is not in Pakistan's strategic interests to allow Bharati imports. It is not in Pakistan's industrial or commercial interests to allow shoddy Bharati imports.

Clinton's Pakistanphobic rhetoric creates Anti-Americanism in Pakistan (thedawn.com.pk)

The destruction of Caste in Pakistan (pakpunch.com)

Sarmila Bose destroys Indian propoganda about 1971 (viewstimes.com)

Why many want Musharraf back (rupeenews.com)

Azad Kashmir and Pakistan (azadkashmirtimes.com)

Unbiased scrutiny of 1971 absolves Paksitan Army or mass rape charges (newpakistantimes.com)

Italy's ENI to build Iran-Pakistan pipeline (rupeenews.com)

Italians to build Iran-Pakistan pipline (azadkashmirtimes.com)

Indian unable to keep Kashmir, Hyderabad, 71 agression off UN dispute list (pakpunch.com)

Indian role in Afghanistan: US must limit it. David Pollock (pakistanindependent.com)

Most India Pakistan disputes still on UN list (azadkashmirtimes.com)

Our Sister Asia Bibi must be protected (rupeenews.com)

Hyderabad and Kashmir still on UN dispute list (timesofsrinagar.com)

APTTA trade remains a Bad deal for Pakistan (pakistanindependent.com)

UN: Pakistan keeps disputes with India alive (pakistanakhbar.com)

Revise or Revoke bad APTTA (pakistanledger.com)

Kashmir, Hyderabad, 1971 agression is alive on UN agenda (rupeenews.com)

APTTA remains a Bad deal for Pakistan (pakistanakhbar.com)

Kashmir and Hyderabad still on UN dispute list (kashmirpunch.com)

List of UN diputes includes Hyderabad, Kashmir, 1971 agression (pakistanledger.com)

Bharati Civil War on Kashmir (pakistanindependent.com)

UN dispute list: Kashmir, Hyderabad, 1971 agression (pakistanindependent.com)

Kashmir creates friction between secular and extremist Indians (rupeenews.com)

So Obama can boost US economy with $12 billion in sales? (pakistanledger.com)

Bundu's Biryani bedeviled by bungled Bharati Bureaucracy (rupeenews.com)

Pakistan's national nightmare over: Obama leaves Delhi (rupeenews.com)

The 'cornerstone' that America likes today (rupeenews.com)

Obama's $12 billion sales trip to India (militarystrat.wordpress.com)

Oklahoma racism faces wrath of US Constituton

2010-11-16T19:00:00.001-05:00

: The Bill of Rights of the US Constitution allows freedom of religion, even in OK. Bigotry against minorities is rampant in Oklahoma Wikipedia

Oklahoma voters overwhelmingly passed an amendment to their state constitution prohibiting state courts from considering international or Islamic law, also known as Sharia, when deciding cases.

But on Monday, U.S. District Judge Vicki Miles-LaGrange issued a temporary restraining preventing the state's election board from certifying the results of the vote.

According to the Associated Press, the measure's sponsor, Rep. Rex Duncan, said the amendment was not an attack on Muslims but an effort to prevent activist judges from relying on international law or Islamic law in deciding cases.

But Muneer Awad, executive director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations in Oklahoma and filer of the lawsuit before Miles-LaGrange, said the measure transforms the state constitution into "an enduring condemnation" of Islam.

About 20,000 to 30,000 Muslims live in the state, according to the AP.

Is Oklahoma out of line with such an amendment or is the federal judge erring by delaying, for now, its implementation? And, briefly, why?

MOHAMED ELIBIARY, President & CEO, Freedom and Justice Foundation

Reports now show that a dozen states are looking at similar legislation to Oklahoma's Rep. Duncan. Some will view that as proof that the anti-Sharia movement is mainstream, or why would 70% of voters support it? I will concede that it is mainstream, especially in conservative states; but I would respectfully diagnose it as a crisis among Christian Americans and not a Muslim problem. The number of Muslims in Oklahoma or around the country is not driving this, because in the 230-year plus history of documented Muslim settlement in America not a single Muslim, much less a group, has ever advocated for changing the Constitution.

Putting this development in historical context would show us that we had 11 states during the civil rights movement that passed legislation banning the NAACP as subversive. More than a century ago we had the zenith of an anti-Catholicism movement called the 'know nothings" that similarly passed ordinances targeting non-Protestantism. These movements of the past were all rolled back with time and with the upholding of the 1st Amendment's establishment clause that there is no class-ism amongst religions in America.

The federal judge was correct to pause this ballot measure, otherwise our system would suffer from the tyranny of the masses. I expect the federal court system to eventually rule it unconstitutional. Judging from the Anti-Defamation League's recent press release here in Dallas, other religious minorities who've practiced their own religious laws under the supervision of our civil court system's arbitration and mediation framework have rightly begun to speak out condemning the xenophobia behind this measure.

KATIE SHERROD, Independent writer/producer, Fort Worth

Yes, Oklahoma is out of line. It doesn't matter whether 30,000 or three Muslims live in Oklahoma. This law not only is based in sheer unadulterated fear-mongering, but it also blatantly violates our constitutionally guaranteed freedom of religion, in that it singles out only sharia law, not all religious codes. And if it is extended to all religious codes to make it meet the constitutional test, would it outlaw reference to the Ten Commandments?

The unintended consequences of outlawing any reference to international law haven't begun to be explored. What would this law do to contracts Oklahoma-based oil companies have with those based in other countries? Or to any international corporation that might consider moving its headquarters to Oklahoma? One legal scholar suggested it might also outlaw references to English common law, upon which much of our own legal code is based.

The xenophobia apparent in all this would be frightening if it weren't so clear that this is all rank political posturing by Republican conservatives who want to impose their own narrow fundamentalist world view on the rest of us. The irony is that their actions are in line with those of religious fundamentalists around the world, including the Islamic fundamentalists they claim to fear the most.

Thank God for prudent judges. But of course, such judges also are targets of the right-wing Republicans, who define an "activist" judge as one who disagrees with them.

JOE CLIFFORD, Pastor, Head of Staff, First Presbyterian Church of Dallas

Demagoguery is defined as "the practice of a leader who obtains power by means of impassioned appeals to the emotions and prejudices of the populace." Oklahoma Rep. Rex Duncan's proposed measure is a great example of this practice. When it was proposed, Sen. Anthony Sykes, a co-author, dubbed it the "Save Our State," amendment saying, "Sharia law coming to the U.S. is a scary concept." Given Muslims represent about a half of one percent of Oklahoma's population, the chances of Sharia deciding court cases in Oklahoma are slim to none, and Slim just left town. As Joseph Thai, a professor at the University of Oklahoma College of law said, "It's an answer in search of a problem." Tragically it makes a segment of the population the problem, demonizing Muslims in order to mobilize votes. The district judge is doing her job by protecting a vulnerable minority from the tyranny of the majority. Leaders should cast vision that inspires, not manufacture threats to manipulate the masses.

JAMES DENISON, Theologian-in-Residence, Baptist General Convention of Texas, President, Center for Informed Faith

"Sharia" means "path" in Arabic. Sharia, or Islamic law, guides every aspect of Muslim life.

Britain now allows Sharia tribunals governing marriage, divorce and inheritance. This is similar to Anglican and Jewish mediation in that country; criminal law remains under the existing legal system. Sharia-compliant banking is growing 15% a year in Europe as well. Since riba (charging or paying of interest) is banned under Islamic law, banks such as Citigroup, HSBC and Deutsche Bank are developing Islamic sectors. Sharia-compliant investments are also growing, avoiding transactions related to weapons, alcohol, tobacco, gambling, pornography and pork.

I understand the Muslim desire to live under Islamic law. America, however, is governed by a secular constitution in which the word "God" nowhere appears. Unlike the U.K., we have no precedent for suspending our governance in favor of alternative religious authorities. To do so would violate the First Amendment's instruction that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion."

It seems understandable, then, that Oklahoma's voters would pass a referendum which "forbids courts from considering or using international law ... or Sharia Law." However, constitutional experts see problems with the wording of the new measure. They state that it could harm businesses which engage in international commerce and singles out one religion for exclusion.

Whatever comes of the legal battles to be waged in Oklahoma, it is clear to me that "a free church in a free state" is the American ideal. The Founders wanted a country where people of all faiths and those of none could follow their religious beliefs without government entanglement. Jesus taught the same: "Give to Caesar what is Caesar's, and to God what is God's" (Matthew 22:21).

MIKE GHOUSE, President, Foundation for Pluralism, Dallas

The Oklahoma referendum on Sharia is simply gratuitous and one of the best examples of politicians duping the public.

Getting the public to be riled up against something that ain't there is the ploy the politicians have been using. Many a times they succeed and the responsibility falls on our shoulders to wake the public up to such abuses.

The reason the Oklahoma law is gratuitous is because Muslims in America value the laws of our nation. They strongly feel that the American laws serve the very justice they seek, and they do not seek or ask for sharia law in America. Even if a few ask for it, statistically they are insignificant.

WILLIAM LAWRENCE, Dean, Professor of American Church History, Perkins School of Theology, Southern Methodist University

To the extent that Shaira is understood as religious law for adherents to Islam, the Oklahoma amendment appears strangely irrelevant on the one hand and oddly threatening on the other. It is clear that religious law does not triumph over civil or criminal law, let alone the Constitution, in the United States. Some practitioner of a religion that mandates obedience to Leviticus, for example, could insist on the religious right to practice slavery, but no such thing would be permissible under the U.S. Constitution or laws. A quasi-Mormon sect operated its own cult, but eventually had to surrender to the reality that its endorsements of polygamy and marriages of male adults to female adolescents were unlawful. The Oklahoma amendment is irrelevant because religious law (in this case, sharia) cannot supplant civil or criminal law.

However, to suggest that a court could not consider Islamic law is actually a threatening proposition for all religions. Roman Catholic Canon Law clearly specifies that only men can be ordained priests. But, if a court in the United States were presented with a sexual discrimination complaint from someone who wanted to be ordained to the priesthood but was barred from it by her gender, the court would have to "consider" the Canon Law of the church--since membership in the Roman Catholic Church is strictly voluntary and anyone who becomes a Catholic knows (or should know) that ordination is reserved for men.

The same gender "discrimination" likewise is practiced in most Baptist congregations, so a court must "consider" Baptist polity when dealing with a complaint about gender discrimination in the hiring of a pastor. Some Americans, apparently including a significant majority of voters in Oklahoma recently, allow their prejudices against Muslims and their ignorance of Islam to take precedence over their knowledge of American justice and freedom.

The judge is correct. The majority of the voters in Oklahoma were wrong. In a democracy, a majority may win an election and still be wrong!

GEORGE MASON, Senior Pastor, Wilshire Baptist Church, Dallas

Aside from the Constitutional question of whether the vote was legal, or even the matter of whether it is culturally wise to make laws preemptively to protect against the influence of international or sharia law in Oklahoma courts, a larger religious question must be posed: When in the history of the world has a religious aim been permanently advanced by the use of secular law? Religion by its nature requires that people be persuaded of its truth. Any time legal measures are employed to secure its privilege, the coercion inherent in such an approach undermines the persuasion of people's hearts and minds. A battle may be won, but the war will be lost because it is being fought on the wrong field.

It doesn't take much insight to see that fear of the loss of Christian social hegemony is being used by politicians to advance their own ends. Any time religion is used for personal or political advantage, it both denigrates that religion and diminishes the richness of our diverse public life.

LARRY BETHUNE, Senior Pastor, University Baptist Church, Austin

I am no expert in jurisprudence, which I will leave to the lawyers. But the Oklahoma amendment has the feel of fear-based political grandstanding designed to score points with constituents rather than respond to a genuine danger. Has Oklahoma had a single incident of a judge basing decisions on Sharia? Is the U.S. constitutional separation of religion and state insufficient to cover that contingency?

I have to agree with Mr. Awad that the amendment transforms the state constitution into an "enduring condemnation of Islam," the background of which is religious (predominantly Christian) bigotry. Like Christianity, Islam is an ancient and diverse faith tradition. It is as unjust to judge all Muslims on the beliefs and actions of extremist Muslims as it would be to judge all Christians on the beliefs and actions of the KKK.

When will we learn that protecting the religious freedom of minority faiths protects our own religious freedom? The continuing anti-Islamic rhetoric betrays the spirit of American democracy, endangers the lives of Americans abroad (especially our military), oppresses peace-loving American Muslims, and feeds the lie of terrorists seeking to frame our war on terrorism as a cosmic war between Christianity and Islam. Shall we base our laws on fear and ignorance or intelligence and truth?

TEXAS FAITH: Was Oklahoma out of line with Sharia amendment? 3:15 PM Tue, Nov 16, 2010 |Sam Hodges/Reporter

US: Sharia Law commands 'conformance to law of the land' (rupeenews.com)

US: Sharia Law commands 'conformance to law of the land' (musalmantimes.com)

Sharia Law commands 'obedience of law of the land' (ajma.org)

Judge blocks OK's Racist Anti-Islam amendment (musalmantimes.com)

Okla Duncan's inane law not OK: Bigotry will affect business (musalmantimes.com)

Oklahoma's absurd Anti-Shariah Law may have profound implications (rupeenews.com)

Mujib's fascism returns to Bangladesh

2010-11-14T10:40:00.001-05:00

: Image via Wikipedia

Police and protesters have fought pitched battles across cities in Bangladesh as a nationwide strike called by the main opposition party brought the country to a standstill. Dozens were injured as police fired rubber bullets and used batons on Sunday to disperse activists of the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP), who were protesting against the eviction of their leader and two-time prime minister, Begum Khaleda Zia, from her home. Businesses and schools across the country were closed as a result of the shutdown. The strike halted almost all transportation in Dhaka, a city of about 12 million people, just as the majority-Muslim country begins to celebrate the Eid al-Adha holiday.

A former commerce minister was among a dozen injured in Chittagong, the country's main port city, while a police inspector was hit by a small bomb in northern Mymensingh city, local police told the AFP news agency. A police van was burnt by a petrol bomb in Dhaka, where security was tight with at least 10,000 heavily armed policemen and 2,000 members of an elite Rapid Action Battalion out in force, police spokesman Walid Hossain said. Hossain said police swung into action at several sites in the capital, using rubber bullets, tear gas and batons after opposition activists became violent. Eviction BNP supporters have accused the government of harassing Zia following her eviction from the residence she has occupied at army headquarters for around 30 years. Zia's residence in the sprawling compound was leased to her by the government in 1982, after her husband and ex-president, General Ziaur Rahman, was killed in an abortive coup. They had lived in the house for several years.

The current government of Sheikh Hasina Wajed, the prime minister, who leads the centre-left, secular Awami League party, cancelled Zia's lease last year. They intend to build multi-storey buildings for families of army officers killed in a mutiny in a paramilitary unit headquarters in Dhaka. Several thousand protesters skirmished with police close to Zia's residence in the garrison area on Friday as the deadline for the expiration of her lease approached. As Zia was driven from the compound, witnesses and security officials said up to 4,000 protesters armed with sticks and stones set fire to vehicles and attacked officers near the headquarters.

"They broke the front door, cut the grilles and then broke open my bedroom door. They dragged me out and pushed me into a car," Zia said during a live television broadcast, wiping tears from her eyes. "I was forced out with only one clothing. I was humiliated. They evicted me from my house breaking all rules and regulations. They also hit my family members," she said. Zia and her centre-right BNP ran the Bangladeshi government from 1991 to 1996 and again from 2001 to 2006. She was the first female prime minister in Bangladesh's history. After Zia's most recent term expired in 2006, an army-backed caretaker government took countrol under emergency law, which was ended in 2008 with Hasina's election. Hasina had been elected once previously, in 1996.

Suicide bomb in Bangladesh kills three as opposition leader Begum Khaleda Zia evicted from her house (telegraph.co.uk)

Khaleda Zia evicted from home (topinews.com)

Obam's major blunders in Delhi

2010-11-11T12:23:00.000-05:00

: Image via Wikipedia

The Pakistani National Assembly has unanimously condemned President Obama's qualified and guarded support for India's candidacy (some time in the future). Almost all major political parties in Pakistan see it as an affront to Pakistan. Mr. Obama's surprise announcement has riled up Anti-US sentiment in Pakistan leading to a stern demarche to the new US Ambassador. One of the best articles written on the subject has been penned by Mr. Ejaz Haider--an article that was prominently highlighted by Bharat's best newspaper, and possibly the only "less biased" (could not really get myself to classify it as "unbiased") portal called The Hindu. Mr. Haider correctly points out that Mr. Obama has done nothing to improve Indo-Pakistani relations. In fact he has exacerbated the relations. Buoyed by Mr. Obama's tacit and futuristic promise of possible support in the UNSC, Mr. Singh immediately, actually instantly, hardened his position for talks with Pakistan. Mr. Obama ostensibly is encouraging talks between Islamabad and Pakistan--however his trip has put the dialogue in reverse gear. Mr. Obama seem to be schizophrenic. He has to make up his mind. Does he want the US relations with Pakistan and Bharat hyphenated, or does he want them hyphenated. If he wants to develop an independent course with Bharat--that is fine, but then he should not mention Pakistan in Delhi. If he has to re-hyphenate the relations per the wishes of Delhi, then he should accord parity to both Nuclear Armed states. Mr. Haider questions Mr. Obama's motives. The attack on Mr. Obama coming from the Friday Times (TFT) is especially poignant, because TFT has always been a bedrock of Pro-Americanism in Islamabad. Mr. Najam Sethi used to be the editor of TFT and has ubiquitously branded as a CIA agent.

Statistically, Pakistan is the largest contributor to U.N. peacekeeping missions followed by Bangladesh and then India, thank you.

India's long history also includes blocking U.N. resolutions and having disputes with almost every neighbor on its periphery.

Mr. Obama tried to de-hyphenate Pakistan and India by not including Pakistan on this visit.

He had to re-hyphenate the relationship on the insistence of the Bharatis (Government and media) who displayed an unhealthy obsession with Pakistan.

Let us assume, in a simple model, that the U.S. President Barack Obama wants Pakistan and India to talk and make peace because, in a broader sense, this would lead to stability in South and West Asia which, in turn, would serve both the core and peripheral interests of the United States and, by extension, of the world. Please note the sub-clauses even simplicity can generate in this part of the world. But leaving that aside, and for now even the details where the clichéd devil resides, did he actually serve this cause through his India visit? No. The de-hyphenation Behind all the nice talk about setting the world right through a Lockean cooperative framework lurks Mr. Hobbes. First, Mr. Obama tried to de-hyphenate Pakistan and India by not including Pakistan on this visit even as Pakistan is supposed to be a vital strategic partner and a state that is, presumably, going to determine, by his own admission, not only the future of this region but of the entire world. This would be amusing if it did not indicate a deep policy flaw. Then there is the irony of it, palpable, when we saw India re-hyphenating itself with Pakistan by almost pestering Mr. Obama to please call Pakistan a terrorist state! In the end he did talk about “insist[ing] to Pakistan's leaders that terrorist safe-havens within their borders are unacceptable.” Today's speeches may not be Periclean but neither should they entirely lose nuance, especially if the thrust is to change rather than perpetuate the past and the present. Positing it as he did, it might have placated India a little but drew sneers from Pakistan. Then, speaking at the Lok Sabha, Mr. Obama saluted “India's long history as a leading contributor to United Nations peacekeeping missions” and welcomed “India as it prepares to take its seat on the United Nations Security Council.” Pakistan and peacekeeping Right! Statistically, Pakistan is the largest contributor to U.N. peacekeeping missions followed by Bangladesh and then India, thank you. India's long history also includes blocking U.N. resolutions and having disputes with almost every neighbour on its periphery. But let's move away from facts to the good story. It makes eminent sense, from Mr. Hobbes' perspective, to try and get India in. It's realpolitik. And realpolitik is protean. Pakistan created the coffee club at the U.N. and it will, as it has, use every alliance at the U.N. and work the procedures to frustrate every attempt to get India in. It also knows that the working groups on U.N. reform, including that of the Security Council, require a process infested with procedural rigmaroles. So, the UNSC seat for India is not about to happen. But what this enunciation has done, and it doesn't appear too useful in the overall game, is to get Islamabad to issue a stern demarche to Washington. From Pakistan's perspective, the U.S. is catering to India's interests without regard to Pakistan's concerns about India. For an actor that wants Pakistan to appreciate its interests in West Asia and help it achieve them, this approach violates even the basics of an incentives structure model. Add to this de-listing the Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) and the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) from what Mr. Obama described as the “so-called ‘entity list'” and indicating facilitating India's entry into Club de Londres and other bodies that form the decision-making super-structure of nuclear- and non-proliferation-related activities and there's another red rag for Pakistan. All of this will go through many hurdles, a discussion of which is not possible here; much of it may not even be free lunch for India given that it is enhancing its nuclear capabilities. But the symbolism of it is more important than the substance. And the minus side is that it keeps Pakistan outside instead of pulling it in, even as Mr. Obama wants to influence Pakistan's choices. C, P and K-factors The important point here is not that the United States should not help India emerge. Nor is it that India should not enjoy the dividends of its impressive efforts. In a minus-Pakistan scenario, Mr. Obama's policy could even be hailed on multiple counts including, as some commentators in India pointed out, for the C-factor. The problem is that there are the P and K factors and they cannot be wished away. Given that India and Pakistan are conflictual states, both are bound to rely on their comparative advantage at any given point to frustrate the other. India wants to capitalise on its increasing ability to interest the world; Pakistan would on its ability to worry the world. On the sidelines of the many positives India can offer to the world, Pakistanis fear that India is simultaneously marshalling the world against Pakistan; Islamabad claims too that it is covertly leveraging groups against it, the evidence of which has been shared with both New Delhi and Washington. In theory, the policy of covert ops offers plausible deniability and India can, to its great advantage, use the same groups that have now turned on Pakistan. A smart strategy this, but there is nothing cooperative and Lockean about it! India's Prime Minister Dr. Manmohan Singh, during the joint press conference, said: “We are committed to engage Pakistan ... But it is our request that you cannot simultaneously be talking and at the same time the terror machine is as active as ever before. Once Pakistan moves away from this terror-induced coercion, we will be very happy to engage productively with Pakistan to resolve all outstanding issues.” Well said. Once again, without contextualising things, we get into this chicken and egg problem in terms of cause and effect. But the words of Salvador de Madariaga, once chairman of the League of Nations Disarmament Commission, may form good advice in terms of direction of causality in most affairs, not just disarmament: “The trouble with disarmament was (and still is) that the problem of war is tackled upside down and at the wrong end ... Nations don't distrust each other because they are armed; they are armed because they distrust each other. And therefore to want disarmament before a minimum of common agreement on fundamentals is as absurd as to want people to go undressed in winter. Let the weather be warm, and they will undress readily enough without committees to tell them so.” Let the weather be warm and we can all enjoy the sunny beach. Ejaz Haider. The Hindu. (The writer is Contributing Editor, The Friday Times.) What is Mr. Obama's worst mistake? He went to Delhi and made a major announcement, and failed to bring Islamabad into confidence during the so called "Strategic Dialogue". Most Pakistanis fell let down, and the Foreign Office felt a sense of betrayal. The betrayal was of course doubled because Mr. Obama had skipped Pakistan. President Obama's visit did nothing to improve relations between India and Pakistan. Mr. Obama got the applause in the Lok Sabha that he was craving for--in an otherwise lackluster trip, but his ephemeral promise will go down in a long list of broken promises made to rivals and friends , especially the Indians (pun intended!). "White Man speaks with forked tongue" applies to a black man who acts white. Keywords: Obama India visit, Indo-Pak relations, UNSC permanent seat

India's UNSC seat 'a pie in the sky': The Hindu (rupeenews.com)

Obama's visit to India and Pakistan (pakistanledger.com)

'US support for India's UNSC seat aimed against Pakistan': PML-N (pakistanakhbar.com)

'US support for India's UNSC seat aimed against Pakistan': PML-N (timesofsrinagar.com)

'US support for India's UNSC seat aimed against Pakistan': PML-N (azadkashmirtimes.com)

'US support for India's UNSC seat is AntiPakistan move': PML-N (rupeenews.com)

Pakistanis want to claim UNSC seat (pakistanindependent.com)

UNSC seat for Pakistan is a fair and just demand (timesofislamabad.com)

Pakistanis want to claim thier right to UNSC seat (newpakistantimes.com)

Damanding the UNSC seat: Its Pakistan's right (pakistanakhbar.com)

Obama's Refueling stop in Islamabad: The politics (timesofislamabad.com)

Justice and Fair Play: UNSC seat for Pakistan (pakistanledger.com)

Brief stop-over in Rawalpindi: Theatrics in Delhi (newpakistantimes.com)

Pakistanis want their right to UNSC seat (thedawn.com.pk)

When Fuel stops may be more significant than State visits (pakistanindependent.com)

Pakistan must get UNSC seat in Non-Muslim Club (rupeenews.com)

Pakistan informs UN of concerns on US's UNSC support for India (pakistanakhbar.com)

Italy, Pakistan resurrect CfC to oppose Delhi's UNSC hopes (rupeenews.com)

Pakistan's national nightmare over: Obama leaves Delhi (rupeenews.com)

Uphill battle for India on UNSC seat

2010-11-10T00:50:00.000-05:00

: Image via Wikipedia

Sanguine and wise analysts in Bharat and the world know that the "Lollipop" given to Bharat on the 3rd day day of the trip--was to salvage an otherwise failed trip. It was inevitable that the ephemeral promise would draw Pakistan and China together and pitch Beijing versus Delhi.

DNA India has put forth the thesis that Mr. Zardari will ask China to stop Bharat's entry into the UNSC. Actually that logic is flawed and sets up false expectations for Pakistanis. China has a mature leadership and understands its profit and loss statement. Italy is a fellow member of the EU with Germany, yet it opposes the Germany candidacy. China would not want its neighbor to the South to become a UNSC member because that would run contrary to its interests.

Pakistan president Asif Ali Zardari is expected to persuade his Chinese counterpart to oppose India’s bid for a permanent seat in the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) during his visit to Beijing.

Zardari will be in China to attend the opening ceremony of the 16th Asian Games in Guangzhou, besides meeting Chinese president Hu Jintao.

On the surface, Pakistani and Chinese leaders will discuss the plan for a fifth Chinese-built nuclear reactor in Pakistan. However, the emphasis will be on new moves on the chessboard of South Asia, especially the Indian bid for UN Security Council membership.DNA India.

Reverberations from Obama's announcement have reached the four corners of the globe. Japan, Germany, and Brazil who were supposedly partners with Bharat have reacted sharply to the Obama Administration's support for Bharat for the UNSC seat. Pakistan had just completed the Strategic dialogue with the US in Washington. None of this was brought up. Before the Obama trip he had informed the press that the UNSC seat "was complicated". Then on the last day, President Obama announced to the Bharati parliament that he would support Bharat's candidacy to the UNSC provided Bharat resolve its problems with the neighbors (read Kashmir).

The promise was called "Probation" the Bharat's leading daily called the "Hindu".

NEW DELHI: With India having got the US's coveted backing for a permanent seat in the United Nations Security Council, two major aspirants to the high table are fuming. Both Germany and Japan went public with their annoyance at their claims being overlooked and made their displeasure known to the US.

In an interview to a TV channel, US ambassador to India Tim Roemer admitted as much. He said the two nations had asked why India had been accorded special treatment and the reasons US saw it as a valued partner. The ambassador indicated that the resistance pointed to the distance that needed to be travelled for UN reform to become a reality.

He also suggested that US backing for India's case showed Washington's determination to pursue its ties with India that president Barack Obama outlined during his visit.

While India has managed to wrest an important pledge from president Obama that may take some time to be realized, it is still crucial. So far, Washington had only supported Japan for a permanent seat at the UNSC even though it opposed the G4 (a group that included Japan, Germany, Brazil and India).

With Obamas announcement on Monday, the US has shifted its own stance to accommodate India. But that doesn't mean the G4 to which India has tacked its own aspirations is in the clear yet.

Security Council reform is not only about putting India into the body. The issues at stake are what should be the ideal size of a new UNSC; whether the new members would have veto rights, the number of permanent and non-permanent members, its relations with the UN General Assembly, whether there should be regional representation.

Officials said the UN's body debating the inter-governmental negotiations will restart their deliberations soon. The US show of support will make a difference to India and Japan. Not to Germany, which is opposed by Italy and by many other countries who say giving a permanent seat to Germany would put a third seat in Europe (fourth, if you count Russia as a European power), at a time when European power is in decline. Besides, EU was asking for a separate status for itself in the UNGA, they argue.

Africa is a problem too. There is general consensus that Africa should have two seats in the UNSC, but which two countries? Even the African Union is divided on that. There can't be UNSC reform without the Africans because then the world runs the risk of all 53 African countries boycotting.

Then there is China. The Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson on Tuesday, when questioned, said, China values India's status in international affairs and understands India's aspirations to play a greater role in the United Nations and is ready to keep contact and consultations with India and other member states on the issues of Security Council reform.

But even if China can be made to digest an Indian membership, as at the NSG, its not going to be so easy for Japan, which even has South Korea opposing it. Brazil is opposed by Mexico and Argentina (since its the only Portuguese-speaking country in a Spanish-speaking continent), and of course, Pakistan opposes India. These countries had formed the Coffee Club, later renamed United for Consensus, and will most likely be resurrected again, perhaps with tacit Chinese support.

How many permanent members should the new UNSC have? The US wants around 19 members (in both categories). The G4 position is more sensible that's India, Brazil, Japan and Germany, two African countries and three added to the non-permanent list. There are other ideas floating around UK, France and Liechtenstein proposed an interim arrangement for 10 years and a review thereafter. The Chinese are more non-specific and have just said they want more seats for developing countries.

Veto? India will fight to the end for the veto. But many countries say they can live without it, because the veto is not used anymore and lobbying for support is the way to go in the Council. But veto, like nuclear weapons, is a currency of power. That battle, therefore, will continue.

Justice and Fair Play: UNSC seat for Pakistan (pakistanledger.com)

Pakistanis want their right to UNSC seat (thedawn.com.pk)

Pakistan must get UNSC seat in Non-Muslim Club (rupeenews.com)

Obama should not have supported India for UNSC seat (pakistanindependent.com)

Obama ignored Kashmir suffering while supporting UNSC seat for India (timesofislamabad.com)

Can India digest bitter pill on Kashmir to get UNSC seat (pakistanledger.com)

Obama ties UNSC seat to Kashmir solution without using 'K' word (rupeenews.com)

What Obama realy said about the UNSC seat (thedawn.com.pk)

In supportin UNSC seat Obama ignored Kashmir suffering (pakistanakhbar.com)

India on probation: UNSC bait used to get Delhi in line (pakistanledger.com)

UNSC seat for Pakistan is a fair and just demand (timesofislamabad.com)

Pakistanis want to claim thier right to UNSC seat (newpakistantimes.com)

Damanding the UNSC seat: Its Pakistan's right (pakistanakhbar.com)

Pakistanis want to claim UNSC seat (pakistanindependent.com)

UNSC bait puts India on probation: Toe US line (rupeenews.com)

India in UNSC is 'incomprehensible': Delhi shouldn't hold its breath (rupeenews.com)

Pakistan must get UNSC seat in Non-Muslim Club (rupeenews.com)

Pakistan slams US 'politics of expediency' on UNSC (rupeenews.com)

'US support for India's UNSC seat is AntiPakistan move': PML-N (rupeenews.com)

India in UNSC is 'incomprehensible': Delhi shouldn't hold its breath (rupeenews.com)

Eliminating Washington's migraine: Exiting India from Afghanistan

2010-11-08T01:06:00.000-05:00

: Image via Wikipedia

President Obama's trip to India offers a crucial, and counterintuitive, opportunity missing in all the talk about Afghanistan: how to accommodate Pakistan's interests in that country. Unless we find a way to do that, Pakistan will not stop its tolerance of or support for the Afghan Taliban or other extremists on its border with Afghanistan - nor will it let us eradicate them. While serious analysts agree that such a shift is necessary for any U.S. success in Afghanistan, many fail to follow this logic to its conclusion: that we must persuade Pakistan it can crack down on Afghan extremists without jeopardizing its cross-border interests.

What are those interests? First and foremost, to minimize the presence and influence in Afghanistan of Pakistan's own archrival, India. Yet somehow this point is absent from most American debates about these issues, probably because of our narrow focus on terrorism and Islamic fundamentalism. In fact, the United States has stoked Pakistani paranoia by encouraging India to become the region's major economic player in Afghanistan, to train Afghan officials, and exercise other influence on the Afghan government and people.

To Pakistani perceptions, this raises the threat of foreign influence in Afghanistan, and increases Pakistani determination to hang on to the Taliban, the Haqqani group and other insurgent networks to both counter Indian influence and protect Pakistani interests in Afghanistan. This in turn makes it impossible for the United States to succeed in its declared goals of stabilizing Afghanistan and securing it against violent extremism while safely reducing the American military presence.

India, of course, is an increasingly important regional and global partner for U.S. foreign policy. But it is in India's self-interest to contain extremist pressures in Afghanistan and Pakistan - and one paradoxically clever way to do that is to lower India's profile in Afghanistan. During his visit, Obama should drive home the point that such self-restraint would best serve our common interest in stabilizing the region.

Pakistan's other major interest is to promote a friendly regime in Kabul. This is hardly as simple as it sounds. Afghans are famously proud and prickly about their independence, and some are still not fully reconciled to Pakistani rule over some 30 million Pashtuns across the border. In fact, Afghanistan has never recognized that border along the Durand Line, drawn by the British raj in 1893 to mark the limits of Afghan rule.

Recently, however, and entirely apart from, or even against American advice, the Afghan and Pakistan governments have moved to resolve some of their differences. Afghan President Hamid Karzai abruptly removed the chief of his National Security Directorate, Amrullah Saleh, who was widely viewed as anti-corruption but also anti-Pakistan (a point that received much less attention in the U.S. media). In return, Islamabad stopped blocking Afghan trucks from using Pakistani roads and negotiated an Afghanistan-Pakistan Transit Trade Agreement allowing Afghan traffic all the way to India.

There is much the United States should do to capitalize on this momentum. Most urgent is to start working closely with Pakistan on our Afghan reconciliation and reintegration policies, instead of ignoring Pakistan's expressions of interest in these plans. We should also tell Islamabad that we are encouraging Kabul to send security personnel for Pakistani (rather than Indian) training - and then do so. We should encourage Kabul to pursue reasonable confidence-building measures, such as letting Pakistan know about pending Afghan government appointments in the border provinces. We should advise Pakistan that the United States recognizes the Durand Line and will work with the Afghan government to lay this ancient issue to rest.

All these small steps will help convince Pakistan that it can work more confidently with us and with the Afghan government, without playing the old double game of keeping insurgents and extremists in reserve. While we cannot buy or bully Pakistanis into abandoning their interests in Afghanistan, we can show them new ways to secure those interests. Properly understood, this is no longer a zero-sum "great game" in the region.

Adjusting our policies to accommodate Pakistani interests is essential to U.S. national interests in Afghanistan. And contrary to conventional wisdom, it is consistent with the long-term interests of our friends in the Afghan and Indian governments in countering the violent extremists who threaten us all.

David Pollock, a senior fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, was a senior State Department adviser for the broader Middle East from 2002 to 2007 and served on the secretary's policy planning staff from 1996 to 1999 and again in 2001.WP. Our Indian problem in Afghanistan By David Pollock, Monday, November 8, 2010;

Revise or Revoke bad APTTA (pakistanledger.com)

APTTA remains a Bad deal for Pakistan (pakistanakhbar.com)

APTTA trade remains a Bad deal for Pakistan (pakistanindependent.com)

Revoke or Revise APTTA: Bad for Pakistan (rupeenews.com)

Islamabad to Washington: 'Its not our war' (pakistanindependent.com)

US-Taliban talks vindicates Pakistani position (pakistanledger.com)

Why build a $500 Million Embassy in Kabul? (rupeenews.com)

The $500 million US Embassy: An exercise in futility (timesofislamabad.com)

Obama doesn't mention any political role for Delhi in Afghanistan (rupeenews.com)

Why build a $500 million embassy if the US is withdrawing (greenviewsusa.blogspot.com)

US-Taliban talks vindicates Pakistani position (teabreak.pk)

Insight Kabul: No peace without Pakistan (rupeenews.com)

The Punch: An antidote to the common pabulum. Views with a punch: Obama's hard stand on oursourcing

2010-11-06T12:05:00.000-04:00

The Punch: An antidote to the common pabulum. Views with a punch: Obama's hard stand on oursourcing

Obama's hard stand on oursourcing

2010-11-06T12:03:00.000-04:00

[caption id="" align="alignright" width="214" caption="Image by jmtimages via Flickr"][/caption]

Days ahead of his visit to India, President Barack Obama has signaled he will take a tough stance on prickly issues such as outsourcing, and limits on exports of sensitive technology.

Indian news agency Press Trust of India (PTI), which interviewed Obama on Wednesday, quoted him as saying it was "very difficult and complicated" to meet key Indian expectations such as ending a ban on U.S. exports of dual-use technology to India.

New Delhi wants the United States to allow exports of dual-use technology, which can be used for both civilian and military purposes and which was banned after India carried out nuclear tests in 1998.

"Our teams continue to work hard to reach an agreement that strengthens the international non-proliferation system while treating India in a manner that is consistent with our strategic partnership," Obama told PTI news agency.

Obama's visit will come days after his Democrats were punished in mid-term elections over the sluggish economic recovery and high domestic unemployment. These problems have heightened tensions over the outsourcing of American jobs to low-cost countries like India.

The visit puts the spotlight on India's $60 billion IT sector, which argues it is a creator of jobs in the United States and should not be blamed for high unemployment.

An increase in U.S. visa fees, a ban on offshoring by the state of Ohio and the industry's portrayal in campaign publicity as a drain on U.S. jobs has set a frosty tone in India ahead of the visit, which begins on Saturday.

Calling on India to further open its markets to U.S. companies, Obama said: "Our market is open to products, services and investment from around the world. We believe other countries, including India, should give U.S. companies the same access to their markets that we give."

U.S. firms like General Electric and Westinghouse Electric are unhappy about an Indian civil nuclear law that will see suppliers like them liable for damages in case of a nuclear accident.

Obama said there were concerns over the law, but the two nations were working to resolve them.

Obama said he expected "big items on the agenda" which would help further broaden ties between the two countries.

New Delhi would welcome a show of support by Washington for India's long-standing bid for a permanent place on the U.N. Security Council, but Obama said the issue was difficult.

"I do also expect to discuss India's role as an actor on the global stage during my visit," he said, describing India as the "cornerstone" of American engagement in Asia. (Reuters) -(Reporting by C.J. Kuncheria; Editing by Krittivas Mukherjee and Daniel Magnowski)

Obama's Delhi trip: More style than substance (rupeenews.com)

Outsource Obama if he takes more jobs to India (viewstimes.com)

A tepid reception for Obama in Delhi spells failure (rupeenews.com)

Obama to get a friendly but subdued welcome in Delhi (thedawn.com.pk)

Delhi dilemma of President Obama (pakistanakhbar.com)

Muted reception for Obama in India (thedawn.com.pk)

India sees itself as a Republican 'Red state' nostalgic for Bush era (rupeenews.com)

Running to India for a $12 billion sale? (pakistanindependent.com)

Delhi: Obama won't talk bad about Outsourcing, Pakistan, China (thedawn.com.pk)

A word of caution: Don’t use the “P” word

2010-01-19T09:43:00.001-05:00

Many Pakistani Americans do not know the negative connotations of the “P” word. I was astonished to see many youngsters in New York proudly calling themselves Paki—during the Pakistan Day Parade. The 2nd and third generation Pakistanis in America who have not lived in Britain see no harm in suing the short form of Pakistani. While the word equates to the “N” word in England—it has no significance in the USA. Stupid Bigoted Bharatis (aka Indians) don’t know that the “P” word refers to all South Asians including the Indians. Many Bharatis on the internet use the word in front of unsuspecting Pakistanis—and think that they have gotten away with murder. In fact when one minority denigrates another, all minorities suffer. While Indians are facing severe problems in Australia, they continue to use the “P” word to denigrate Pakistanis. As one Australian said same sh**, different bucket. For the racist bigot, there is no difference between on brown man or another.

Earlier this year, a homemade video of Prince Harry, the impish grandson of the British Queen whose colourful exploits have earned him tabloid darling status, was leaked to a delighted UK press. Training to be a soldier in Her Majesty’s Army, Prince Harry is shown referring to a British Pakistani Muslim colleague as ‘our little Paki friend,’ amongst other questionable remarks. Headlines exploded, the Pakistani community went on the offensive, and race relations experts came out of the woodwork in force to attack the prince.

Prince Harry unreservedly apologised for his comments, and Clarence House, the prince’s representatives, issued a statement explaining that he had used the term without malice. Still, columnists across the political spectrum criticised the prince and even the Daily Mail, the usually contrary voice of conservative Middle England, said the prince ‘had shown incredible crassness… and he can expect no more chances.’

Within the British blogosphere and on newspaper website comment sections, the row blazed on for weeks. Some commentators dismissed the criticism against the prince, claiming it was symptomatic of the prevailing political correctness in society. Others downplayed the prince’s comments and simply equated ‘Paki’ with other jocular terms denoting British regional identities, such as ‘Scot’ (someone from Scotland) or ‘Geordie’ (someone from Newcastle). Former army officers boldly said Prince Harry was just following the grand military tradition of endowing his colleagues with nicknames so that his colleague, Lieutenant Ahmad Khan, was simply ‘Paki,’ just as Sir Henry Havelock, who recaptured Kanpur during the Indian rebellion in 1857 was ‘Gravedigger’ and Philip Chetwode, the Commander in Chief in India in the 1930s, was nicknamed ‘The Bart.’

What the episode outlined – apart from Prince Harry having inherited the gaffe-prone gene of the Windsor dynasty (grandfather Prince Phillip to British students in China during a state visit in 1986: ‘If you stay here for much longer, you’ll go slitty eyed.’) – was that the contention surrounding the word ‘Paki’ was very much alive. Its connotations, context, and usage remain unclear even to desis themselves. The question is, why does the word continue to cause such offense?

For the Pakistani ensconced back home or visiting the UK, the word seems no more than a jovial contraction. Of course, it’s more than that. The word ‘Paki’ is loaded with the UK’s precarious and somewhat violent record of race relations in the late 1960s and 1970s, when immigration from the Indian subcontinent reached its apogee.
The first sensationalist and press-endorsed flogging of Pakistanis came in the early 1960s, during a reported smallpox outbreak in Bradford, where many Pakistanis had settled. A few unvaccinated Pakistanis did fall ill, but, according to Dr. Derrick Tovey, a practicing physician at the time, the press exaggerated the situation. Reportage was ‘often irresponsible,’ with headlines such as ‘City in Fear’ or ‘Keep Out Pakistanis.’ The public response reasserted essentialist – though disproved – colonial ideas about the ‘non-white’ embedded in the national psyche by Victorian science during the height of the British Empire.

Resistance to South Asian immigration materialised more coherently in the 1970s with the rise of nationalist parties and militant outfits like the British National Party and the National Front. These groups pamphleteered in white communities where immigrants had settled, urging Britons to support policies on repatriation and even accusing South Asian communities of stealing jobs and state-funded housing.

While the 1965 Race Relations Act made racial discrimination illegal in public on ‘grounds of colour, race, or ethnic or national origins,’ the Conservative MP Enoch Powell compared such legislation to ‘throwing a match on to gunpowder.’ He actively encouraged the repatriation of settled immigrants, even if they were UK citizens, inflaming national sentiment even further.

Despite race legislation supporting immigrants, many Pakistanis in the UK at the time, will recall the term ‘Paki-bashing,’ used to describe the sordid pastime of working-class white youths, or ‘skinheads,’ who would attack unsuspecting individuals from South Asian communities.

These racial tensions came to a head in 1979, when a teacher died of head injuries during a confrontation with the police in a protest by thousands of anti-racist campaigners. The protestors had assembled against a National Front meeting, which controversially took place in a town hall in Southall, a suburb in south-west London with one of the UK’s largest Asian communities.

Over the years, though, British Asians have moved into the mainstream. They are well represented in professional fields and in the media, and no doubt pleased by a declaration in 2001 by Robin Cook, the erstwhile Foreign Secretary under Tony Blair, that chicken tikka masala is the national dish of the UK. Such developments make it apparent that desis are here to stay and indeed add significant cultural and material value to British society.

Still, the usage of the word ‘Paki’ is as offensive as ever. Last year, on a rather staid UK reality show, Strictly Come Ballroom, where couples contest in ballroom dancing, slick-haired contestant Anton du Beke was accused of racism for dropping the P word. He said that his fellow dance partner, the actress Laila Rouass, who is herself of Indian and Moroccan extraction, ‘looked like a Paki.’ Heavily criticised by the press, Du Beke’s comments were shocking and reprehensible in twenty-first century multicultural Britain. And in July last year, white supremacist Neil Lewington was convicted of preparing for acts of terrorism, and was widely quoted as saying, ‘the only good Paki is a dead Paki.’

But we shouldn’t forget that the use of ‘Paki’ was once fair game on mainstream British television in the 1970s and early 1980s. Take a 1981 episode of Only Fools and Horses, which some critics say was among the best UK television comedies shows ever made. In the offending episode, a white, working class, and slightly befuddled character Uncle Albert says, ‘The Paki shop won't let us have nothing on tick (credit)! Says it’s part of his culture!’ His nephew Rodney replies, ‘Don't think it's got anything to do with the 46 quid we already owe 'em, do you?’

Some may argue that Rodney’s response illustrated the burgeoning resistance to racist syntax prevalent in the 1980s by demystifying Uncle Albert’s flawed assumptions of ‘Paki’ culture. Yet in a period of difficult race relations, in which the use of Paki was commonplace, it is hard to discern an altruistic purpose in the scriptwriter’s decision to use the word ‘Paki,’ whether comically or not.

It’s obvious to say that ‘Paki’ is an offensive, catch-all racist term that seeks to attack, offend, and alienate those of South Asian extraction in the UK. Yet in a post-9/11 – or post-7/7 world with regards to the UK – the term is beginning to connote a new prejudice in which Islamophobia takes centre-stage.

In November 2009, The Guardian reported the launch of a police investigation into a series of attacks on Muslim students at City University in London. According to the Federation of Student Islamic Societies, the gang responsible for the attacks comprised about 30 white and black youths and shouted ‘get those Muslims’ and ‘Pakis.’ Meanwhile, a BBC Panorama documentary aired in November followed two South Asian reporters who had gone undercover being abused in terms such as ‘Paki’ and ‘Taliban’ by the residents of an estate in Bristol.

It is clear that ‘Paki’ in these instances is interchangeable with derogatory anti-Muslim jibes and encompasses religious affiliation as well as ethnic origin. This will be increasingly true in a society facing down Islamist terrorism and inundated with examples of fanatic, semtex-clad British Pakistanis. Shakespeare asked, ‘What’s in a name? That which we call a rose, by any other name would smell as sweet.’ Change a few things around and you have the Bard hitting it on the nail.

Of course, this isn’t to say its all doom and gloom. Attempts to reclaim and appropriate ‘Paki’ as a positive, even fashionable term have gained ground amongst South Asian youths in the UK, in the same way ‘nigger’ was reclaimed by black hip hop artists and filmmakers in the US. At cricket matches featuring Pakistan, one can regularly see banners by Pakistani youths proclaiming ‘Paki-Power.’ Indeed, ‘Paki’ now encompasses a range of meanings, though that doesn’t lessen the offense the word can still cause

That said, there are few examples within the cultural output of British Asians to suggest a consensus has been reached as to what Paki could mean. In 2005, British Asian artist Aki Nawaz, of the band Fun-da-Mental, agreed to be interviewed for a BBC documentary titled British, Paki and Proud. Once the film was completed, he said, ‘I'm disappointed with the title. I was told [about it] last week. If I had known the title in advance I would have said, 'I will not do it under that title.' The term being endorsed I have a real problem with, it is absolutely unacceptable.’

When it comes down to it, the legitimate use of Paki really depends on who says it or not. It may be acceptable for one South Asian to call another a ‘Paki.’ But change the colour of the speaker and you have racism, it seems. The UK has arrived at the point where there is a sufficient understanding of how ‘Paki’ could be offensive and few are oblivious enough to use the term without an awareness of the ensuing impact.

It’s also worth noting that the term ‘Paki’ is part of a mix of more subtle and sinister forms of racial prejudice that are prevalent in the UK today. Take the race scandal in which Jade Goody, the late contestant on British reality show Big Brother, referred to Bollywood actress Shilpa Shetty as ‘Shilpa Poppadom.’ Though not outwardly racist, the culinary reference (a popular appetizer for the British at curry houses) was intended to highlight Shetty’s ethnic origin and, in the malicious context of Goody’s bullying campaign, was no doubt racist.

Of course, as keen as some may be to highlight racist attitudes in the West, our native shores are hardly unfamiliar with prejudice that peppers everyday behaviour and language. They say that charity begins at home and we should look to the mirror for how we view the world. It’s a two-way road. The P Word By Khuroum Ali Bukhari Sunday, 17 Jan, 2010

Why China ignored India’s new ‘military doctrine’

2010-01-14T17:30:00.000-05:00

Defense Analysts and political scientists and students of international relations experts are watching the rhetoric out of Delhi with keep interests. The three capitals—are looking for small nuances to decipher what was said, when it was said and by whom

Here is the chronology of events. General Kapoor in what would be considered a highly provocative statement said that Bharat (aka India) was ready a two pronged war with Pakistan and China.

Reports on India's revision of its defence doctrine to meet the challenges of a 'two front war' with Pakistan and China have of late received media focus. Pakistan has been prompt in its response, describing India's reported move as 'betraying hostile intent' and reflecting a 'hegemonic and jingoistic mindset'. D S Rajan in Rediff News

As expected there was an explosion in Pakistan. Political leaders, as well as the head of the army and major politicians and the National Assembly decried General Kapoor’s statements and called it an act of grave provocation.

If some analyst had expect an equally robust and angry response from Beijing, they were disappointed. The Chinese response to the Bharati general’s speech was stone silence.

The Chinese leadership saw through the Bharati “strategy” and looked at it for what it was—bluster. The Chinese leadership correctly weighed the Bharti actions and were prepared for it. Deng Xiao Peng had taught them well—Confucius says “keep a low profile, “don’t over react” and “build yourself up”, “avoid conflict” and project “soft power”. There is hard work of nation building to be done—empty chatter resolves nothing and produces nothing.

The Chinese response to Bharati provocation was decided upon decades ago. It does not nee to be reiterated.

Keep a cool head and maintain a low profile. Never take the lead - but aim to do something big. Deng Xiao Peng

Beijing sees Delhi’s bluster as an attempt to raise the stature of Delhi. What better way to raise the stature than to challenge an emerging superpower? One would think that Delhi is some way or form could ever compete with Beijing in anything> If Beijing had responded to General Kapoor’s juvenile delinquency, it would have reduced itself to Delhi’s level. By taking the high road and ignoring Delhi, Beijing reduced Delhi to what it was, a regional bully that can’t even compete with Pakistan.

Pakistan’s Nuclear prowess had reduced Bharati plans. Delhi hegemony hits a brick wall on its Western front. It cannot go one inch forward. The boundary has become sacrosanct, and all the huffing and puffing and paper exercises do nothing to intimidate Islamabad.

The sagacious Maleeha Lodhi, the former Pakistani Ambassador to the US and the UK is one of the most talented political scientist around. she also clearly saw through Delhi’s game and clearly identified the source of entire passages, and the origins of the vocabulary of the Delhi’s new “doctrine”. Delhi had clearly plagiarized it from the American Doctrine of war.

Even more interesting is the fact that Beijing analysts seem to have pre-empted what Delhi was trying to do, and already seem to have written about it. Here is D.S. Rajan on the subject again.

The People's Republic of China does not appear to have come out so far with any official reaction on the subject; interesting however is that the same theme of India's 'two front war', worded a bit differently as 'two front mobile warfare' has figured in an in-depth authoritative Chinese evaluation of India's defence strategy, done as early as November 2009; it raises a question whether or not Beijing [ Images ] already knew about India's reported revision of its defence strategy. This apart, it would be important to have a close look at what has been said in that analysis, for drawing meaningful conclusions. What follows is an attempt in that direction.

Titled 'Great Changes in India's Defence Strategy -- War objective shifts to giving China importance, while treating Pakistan as lightweight', the analysis contributed by Hao Ding, a researcher of the Chinese Academy of Military Sciences, published in the Party-affiliated Chinese language organ, China Youth Daily, on November 27, 2009, identifies following five shifts that have taken place in India's defence strategy:

The Chinese have figured out Delhi’s strategy. Its Marketing 101. When Kia says its just as good as Samsung, it doesn’t increase its stature—but when it says it has better features than a Toyota, the strategy to make people think that its in the same league as a Toyota. Of course the strategy doesn’t work. No matter how many time GM, (with its billions of Dollars of marketing clout) said that its J cars, or K cars, or Saturns were better than Mercedes, or lately better than Toyota—the people didn’t really buy that line—and continue to buy Toyota, Nissan, and Mercedes—placing GM in bankruptcy.

Similarly Bharat’s goals are an over reach which cannot be sustained. A A Lada cannot go out and conquer the world—it lived and died in East Germany. Till Bharat gets its own house in order, and mends its fences with all her neighbors. Having an angry Nepal, a dissatisfied Bangladesh, a mad Sikkim, a seething Bhutan, a cold China, a fearful Maldives, and a belligerent Pakistan on its borders can never allow Bharat to achieve its full potential in world affairs.

'In terms of goals, India now aims at becoming a global military power in contrast to its earlier objective to acquire a regional military power status.' (The author's comments say in this connection that prior to end of the cold war, India followed an expansionist and hegemonic policy in South Asia, dismembered Pakistan, annexed Sikkim kingdom and dispatched troops to Sri Lanka [ Images ] and Maldives [ Images ].

Bharat canot become a world power, unless it fixes its painful penury. Instead of purchasing a $3 Billion Aircraft Carrier, it needs to eliminate “Grabibabad” the largest slum in the world which is really a huge trash can where people live. Slumdog India can not be shining India just because a TV commercial calls it ‘shining’.

According to loft goals, Bharat wants to be a South Asia, power, a Central Asian giant and an Asia-Pacific Hercules. Loft goals for a country where 75% of the people eek out a living at less than $2 per day. Bharat wants to project itself as a Eurasian giant. Amazing goals for a country where 450 million Dalits and invisiable Untouchables don’t have the right to live. Amazingly most Indians cannot see their existence and ignore their poverty through tokenism (appointing one highly visible person in a high position).

India always was hegemonic. Its calim that it ever had “passive defense” as its policy is belies the facts on the ground—it bullied 560 states into joing the “Indian Unio” in 1948. Nehru declared that any state that would not join the union would be considered an enemy state. It blatantly and illegally took over Hyderabad which did not want to join the Union.

It was a regional bully. Now it wants to be a global bully—without the allies or the money to get there. Bharat’s ‘and aggressive defense’ is something that the Israelis use. Its planner face a Gordian knot. Delhi seems to be in a time warp. It feels that it is in 1972. It has failed to recognize the new nuclear realities of South Asia. It cannot comprehend that mutually assured destruction means just that. It wants to somehow find a sliver of hope to strangulate Pakistan that way it has a choke hold on Sikkim. When Islamabad doesn’t get in its hold—it cries foul and tries to destabilize it—using the Mukti Bahni and Lanka model. While exporting terror does, work, Bharat is unable to achieve its objectives, because its forces cannot cross its Western border—held at bay by Nuclear powered missiles, and tactical Nuclear weapons that will destroy only a moving army.

According to the Chinese analysts, Bharat faces security threats form”the low intensity conflict with Pakistan over Kashmir [ Images ] which can trigger a large scale conflict, the risk of a nuclear confrontation among the two nations and terrorism in South Asia.”

Though accurate, this threat perception is not actually accurate. Bharat faces three major threats to its existence. According to Indian Analyst, Bharat Verma, Bharat faces the biggest threat in Kashmir, the 2nd threat in the Northeast Seven Sister States in Assam and 89 insurgencies raging in almost every Indian state—including the lethal Naxal-Maoist threat that engulfs a huge swathe of land starting from the foot of the Himalayas in the North to the deep South in Andhra Pradesh. The recent issue of Talangana shoed the entire worked the fragile nature of the Indian Union. The people want more than 50 states—in varying degrees of secessionist tendencies. Denial of right willl further exacerbate linguistic, ethnic and religious tensions in Bharat—leading to a USSR type of implosion or a Yugoslavia type of implosion.

The Indian defence strategy has been revised in such circumstances; The 'active defence' concept has replaced the old line of passive defence, the basic 'regional deterrence' principle has been given a new meaning with 'punishment deterrence' concept taking place of the old principle of 'only deterrence'. India is stressing on taking initiatives so as to be able to conduct a hi-tech 'limited conventional war' against the enemy 'under conditions of nuclear deterrence'. D. S. Rajan

In accordance with the GM strategy (mentioned earlier), the Chinese analyst says 'Looking from the angle of war objectives, India is now laying emphasis to giving China importance while treating Pakistan as lightweight, as compared to the past equal emphasis to China and Pakistan.'

The Chinese have repeatedly said that they are fully aware of the Indian thinking.

China, there is stable political situation, a fast developing economy, a continuously accelerating military modernisation drive and growing comprehensive national strength. India thinks that therefore, the potentials of 'China threat' to it are on the rise. It wants to correctly treat the dialectic relation between the changes that have occurred in military threats posed by Pakistan and China and prepare for all types of military struggles. Based on such reasoning, India has proposed the doctrine of 'two front mobile warfare'.

Bharat has done a lot of rearranging of the chairs on the deck of the Titanic. It thinks that the new pattern of the deck chairs will prevent the looming strategy. Instead of changing course and avoiding the iceberg, it spends all its time on the color scheme of the chairs. Bharat may be in an illusion

'In matters of strategic deployment, India has shifted to a strategy of stabilising the western front and strengthening the northern front as well as giving equal emphasis to land and sea warfare, in contrast to the earlier stress only on land warfare.'

(1) in recent years, India has carried out adjustments in its defence system to suit to the new needs. 'Stabilising the western front and strengthening the northern front' is a step in this direction. India has already made plans to dispatch additional forces- two mountain divisions- to the Sino-Indian border and deploy Su-30 fighter aircraft as well as missiles there in order to further strengthen its 'partial military superiority' vis-à-vis China, sufficient to fight a 'middle or small-scale partial border war under hi-tech conditions',

(2) India is increasing its deployment of mobile warfare-capable troops. Some units, on 'double combat missions', can launch mobile operations in both China and Pakistan fronts and

(3) India's past attention only to land warfare is now getting shifted in the direction of the Indian Ocean, creating a deployment position capable of paying importance to both land and sea. A part of Indian troops so far located in the rear of the borders is being diverted for coastal defence purposes and a new naval fleet has come up in the south to increase strength in respect of the Indian Ocean.

China is not a superpower, nor will she ever seek to be one. If one day China should change her color and turn into a superpower, if she too should play the tyrant in the world, and everywhere subject others to her bullying, aggression and exploitation, the people of the world should identify her as social-imperialism, expose it, oppose it and work together with the Chinese people to overthrow it. Deng Xiaoping

We quote D. S. Rajan again.

'India is making efforts to create long-range mobile operational strength and gain capacity to launch cross-combat missions.' The Chinese military expert comments that structural adjustment of the Indian military is in progress with focus on building Indian Navy and Air Force as well as rapid action troops, leading to building up of global combat capability of Indian armed forces. The expert cites in this connection the war doctrines of the Indian Army [ Images ] (2004), Indian Navy (2005) and Indian Air Force (2007).

The analysis above needs to be examined together with a very recent Chinese assessment. Given under the title 'Panoramic View of International Military Situation in 2009', the analysis contributed by Ma Kang, deputy director, Institute of Strategic Studies, National Defence University, Liberation Army Daily, December 29 highlights the defence budget increases in the US, Russia [ Images ] and India. It points to India's '24 percent defence budget increase' in 2009 as compared to previous year as well as efforts to build an aircraft carrier of its own, launch of first home made submarine Arihant and goals set towards possessing 'three dimensional nuclear strategic capability.'

What stand out are the unmistakable adversarial tones with which the two highly placed Chinese experts have talked about India. Especially, the evaluation of Hao Ding runs contrary to the officially declared perceptions of India and China that each nation is not a threat to other. Observers in India have reasons to raise their eyebrows on the reappearance of the terminology 'partial border war' after some gap, more so in a contribution made by an academician close to Chinese hierarchy (the last such reference figured in an unofficial strategic affairs website in November 2008).

Also odd is the timing of such comments when India-China bilateral defence, political and economic ties are progressing steadily -- senior Chinese military officers including the Tibet [ Images ] commander have visited India recently, the Indian defence secretary is scheduled to visit Beijing for talks, both India and China have coordinated their actions in the conference at Copenhagen on climatic change, preparations are being made by both sides for the scheduled visit this year to China by the Indian President and lastly, India-China trade volume is slated to touch $60 billion by this year.

Not to place a break on Mr. Rajan’s rhetoric, and burst his bubble, but the Bharati Naval Chief says the following about China:

“In military terms, both conventional and non-conventional, we neither have the capability nor the intention to match China, force for force. These are indeed sobering thoughts and therefore our strategy to deal with China would need to be in consonance with these realities,” Indian Navy Chief, Admiral Suresh Mehta

The coming war between India and China

A basic question would therefore be what is the real meaning of the latest Chinese assessment of Indian defence strategy as above, which, judging from the affiliation of the analyst concerned, can definitely be considered as reflecting official views, especially that of the military. First comes the apparent dichotomy in the thinking of the civilian and military apparatus in China on relationship with India. However, when looked carefully, the reality looks different.

China has always been encouraging expression of strategic opinions and treating them as inputs for decision making at appropriate times. It has at the same time been taking care to see that the required diplomatic options, whether relating to India or other countries, are not prejudiced by such opinions. Specifically, this premise explains the rationale behind China's support to holding diplomatic initiatives, like talks between special representatives, to solve the boundary issue with India, while at the same time allowing hostile articulations on the subject by its strategists.

Beijing's such two-track mindset may also be seen as setting a context for understanding the opinion expressed by the Indian Prime Minister Dr Manmohan Singh [ Images ] during his recent visit to the US regarding China's 'assertiveness' vis-a-vis India of late.

Secondly, it is probable that the analysis clearly bringing out the 'India threat' theory, albeit after a gap, has something to do with the US factor. No doubt, it makes no mention of the US, but its appearance subsequent to the issuing of US-China Joint Declaration of November 17, 2009, may have its own meaning. Undeniably, reasons seem to have arisen for Beijing to feel that a qualitative change in its favour has occurred in the triangular China-US-India relations consequent to the opening of a new foreign policy course based on a 'smart power' concept (said to be a mix of hard and soft power) by the Barack Obama [ Images ] administration.

The US imperative towards China has undergone a shift to encompass a wider vision -- from one seeking China's emergence as a responsible stake holder in the international system to that aiming to establish a 'positive, cooperative and comprehensive relationship' in the 21st century. In addition, the US has chosen to adopt a 'pragmatic' approach on human rights issue in China. If China thinks that it has as such come to occupy a superior position in the Sino-US equation at this juncture in the background of it having emerged as America's biggest creditor, the same may not be misplaced.

The simple fact that the Bush policy of building Bharat as a counterweight to China is no longer feasible or part of the Obama Doctrine. Washington cannot afford to anger its biggest creditor. Bharati policy makers are still under the illusion of Condaleeza Rice when she promised the Bharatis that the USA would make Bharat a Superpower.

For Beijing, the same reason may hold good in believing that the US will be inclined to tone down its support to India on sensitive issues like the boundary problem and that the time is opportune to intensify its strategic pressure on India.

Its readiness to agree with Washington to 'cooperate' on India-Pakistan issues, which touched Indian sensitivities, may relate to such thinking. It may at the same time be not wrong to assume that some Chinese pronouncements (official journal Liaowang, December 1, 2009) considering China-US and China-India relations not as a zero sum game, are only for public consumption.

China does not see a huge threat from Bharat. It is did, it would simply open the technology spigot to Pakistan, and Myanmar—and cut down Bharat to size. Already there are rumors that Burma wants to acquire Nuclear weapons. Lanka has allowed a port to China right on the Bharati border

Lastly, China can be expected to factor the latest views of experts in formulation of its own defence strategy vis-a-vis India. The assessment that China, not Pakistan, is India's priority military target is not going to be missed by the defence policy planners in China. But China may not need to make fresh responses. It has already consolidated its troop strength in the border, established firm defence ties with Indian ocean littorals and stepped up military help to Pakistan; On the last mentioned, Beijing's recent justification of its military aid to Pakistan as a response to India's getting arms from the US and Russia, unveils what could be in store for future.

China's occasional talks on partial border war with India need close attention of New Delhi [ Images ] as they could be in conformity with the need expressed by China to 'win local wars under conditions of informatisation' (China's latest Defence White Paper). In a broader sense, trends in China towards enhancing its extended range force projection capabilities and establishing overseas naval bases, may have implications for the entire region, especially for countries like Japan [ Images], India and South China sea littorals, all having territorial problems with China.

One has only to take note of the US position that China's military modernisation is changing the balance of power in East Asia.

China is giving mixed signals, but it would be in India's interests to continue 'engaging' China. It should at the same time take all necessary steps to protect its strategic interests; India's revised defence strategy proves that it is prepared to do the same. D S Rajan is director, Chennai Centre for China Studies. China experts feel Indian defence strategy treats China, not Pakistan, as priority target, which they also believe provides for a partial border war, writes D S Rajan.

The pace of Chinese development in the past 60 years is one of the wonders of the world. Not long ago the entire Chinese nation was kept in bondage by the East India Company which forced the country to continue to import opium. When the patriots revolted, Britain forced two wars on them. Finally Mao Ze Dung led the country to freedom from the machinations of Imperial Japan, Colonial Britain and a US which was supporting others in the civil war. In the past century the Chinese have walked softly and hidden the Big stick. It has whispered where others have shouted. The leadership in Beiing has bitten its lip on Taiwan and Arunchal Pradesh. It has kept quiet on the boundary line South of Tibet and kept quiet on international issues that it felt strongly about. Now the results are evident for all to see.

National Security: As China announces yet another double-digit increase in its military budget, and as this and other threats continue to grow, President Obama plans to spend just 3% of GDP on defense by 2016.

Almost unnoticed in January was the presence of Chinese warships deployed in the Gulf of Aden, south of the Saudi peninsula, to assist in the international anti-piracy mission. The deployment of naval vessels 4,000 miles from home is significant and historic. It demonstrates that China now has a blue-water navy.

China has announced in advance of the annual meeting of the National People’s Congress that it intends to increase its 2009 defense budget by 14.9%. This follows increases of 17.8% in 2007 and 17.6% in 2008. The actual increase may be higher, as China has traditionally kept many things, including major arms purchases, off budget.

China’s military budget has grown at an average rate of 16% the past decade. China’s military buildup is clearly aimed at acquiring the ability to overwhelm the defenses of, and successfully attack, U.S. carrier battle groups that might come to the aid of Taiwan in a crisis. Investors dot com

Haiti Earthquake: Why isn’t Pakistani ERRA there?

2010-01-14T15:00:00.000-05:00

When ERRA was created by President Pervez Musharraf, tall claims were made about developing indigenous expertise for disasters. Claims were also made that ERRA would help other nations in distress. There have been several disasters in countries—in China, Turkey, Iran and now in Haiti—and ERRA is absent.

ERRA should send Sniffing dogs, and a band of men and women who can help the people of Haiti. Where is the OIC—they should be funding a disaster relief effort anywhere and everywhere. Edhi is always one of the first to reach disasters—he was there in the USA during Hurricane Katrina and in Bangladesh and Lanka etc.

Whats wrong with this picture? ERRA the government agency with literally billions under its disposal is absent—and Edhi a private enterprise send volunteers and goods to disaster affected areas of the world.

Pakistan also has a huge database of volunteers—good natured students who want to help. Here is a cause—help the people of Haiti. Haiti has a sizable “Indian” population. There are many Muslims there also.

Mr. Zardari has more than $1.5 billion to his name. How about a donation to assist Haiti. Mr. Bilawal Bhutto is prancing around Oxford. How about taking up a cause and assisting human beings that need our help today

President Zardari is right about Kashmir: UN Resolutions should be upheld

2010-01-07T11:51:00.001-05:00

IT is heartening to note that the President has clearly and unambiguously come out in favour of the Kashmiris' right to decide about their future in accordance with Indian commitments and UN resolutions. Thus, he put to rest the impression, which had gained ground since the PPP-led government came into power, that he was not so enthusiastic about Pakistan's traditional stand on the issue and under US pressure was somehow keen to put the dispute out of the way. There can be little doubt that such a course would work against Pakistan's vital interests. Besides, the quest for peace cannot blind us to the plight of the people of Kashmir under the brutal and illegal occupation of India. President Zardari's emphatic expression of the stand on what he termed as Pakistan's "jugular vein", recalling the words the Quaid-i-Azam used was, therefore, in order and timely.

The country's rivers flow from Held Kashmir for one thing, and the people across the Line of Control have family ties, for another.

Addressing the Azad Kashmir Assembly on January 5, the day in 1949 when the UN Security Council passed a resolution to acknowledge the Kashmiris' right to self-determination under the UN auspices, he did not mince his words about the inextricable connection that peace in the region had with the resolution of the disputed state through that course. He was right that New Delhi would have to sit on the negotiating table with Pakistan to sort out the nitty-gritty of holding the plebiscite. India's persistent refusal to resume composite dialogue with Islamabad and efforts to engage Kashmiri leaders to work out a modus vivendi under the Indian Constitution instead, would not help matters. Neither Pakistan, which is a party to the dispute and has deep interest in its just solution, could be sidetracked, nor genuine Kashmiri leaders would go along with such a formula. The crucial question of durable peace would continue to persist. Peace is possible only when the Indians drop their hegemonic intentions and acknowledge the fact that unless they adopt a policy of having good neighbourly relations with the smaller states of South Asia, there would not be much hope for their own country to live in peace and harmony. And that is what President Zardari meant when he said that it was not possible to change one's neighbours.

Mr Zardari was hopeful that the international community would soon realise the imperative need for bringing the dispute to a close in a fair and acceptable manner. However, considering India's present state of unreasonableness and its aggressive attitude, it is necessary for the government to become active at the diplomatic level. Relying on public statements would not bring the subcontinent any nearer to a political solution.

Senator McCain is wrong again: Illegal Drone attacks only create more militants

2010-01-07T11:50:00.001-05:00

The drones attacks are illegal, a total violation of the UN Charter. As such they are a war crime. The murder of civilians in a sovereign country is barbaric which does not conform to the high ideals on which this great country was formed.

The is what Senator McCain said.

The use of drone strikes against suspected Islamist militants in Pakistan is an effective part of US strategy and should continue, Republican Senator John McCain said Thursday.

His comments came after Al-Qaeda reportedly said an attack on a US base in eastern Afghanistan which killed seven CIA agents was to avenge drone strikes that have killed prominent militants.

"The drone strikes are part of an overall set of tactics which make up the strategy for victory and they have been very effective," McCain told reporters during a brief trip to Afghanistan.

Drones had "knocked Al-Qaeda and other extremist groups off balance and they have been successful, and we are working more closely with the Afghan government as well as the Pakistan government to make those operations more efficient and less damaging to the civilian population," McCain said.

"I think it should continue, I think it's an important tool in our overall strategy and we can claim measurable success in carrying out those operations."

The US is a nation of laws, not men. The illegal operations have caused more than a 1000 civilian deaths, five time that number of casualties, and affected a hundred times that number. Drones only create more Anti-Americanism. Terrorists can be nabbed by means other than drones.

Refuting Mr. M.J. Akbar’s Pakistanphobia

2010-01-05T22:48:00.001-05:00

There are many types of attacks against Pakistan. There are the Bharati (aka Indian) sponsored and armed TTP mercenaries who blow up innocent civilians and attack the Pakistan Army. The bloody attacks attempt to create pessimism and despair.

The other attacks are direct and veiled threats that come from Bharati (aka Indian) military leadres like General Kapoor and from Bharati politicians like Mr. Modi, Adhvani etc.

However the most insidious attacks on Pakistan come from so called "journalists" who are paid to assassinate the Pakistani ideology, tarnish the Pakistani icons, and put a bad spin on any and every event that happens in Pakistan.

Mr. Akbar's writings stink of Pakistanphobia, and the stake stench affects young minds who grow up in India--with Mr. Akbars distorted view of Pakistan. This patronizing Akbarist groupthink is what keeps South Asia in penury.

M. J. Akbar is one of those pugnacious Indians who makes his living berating Pakistan. All his columns, wheter discussing Kashmir or global warming end up in a rhetorical diatribe against Pakistan, its leaders and its "raison de etre". Propagandists like Mr. Akbar live in their own cacoon world, in their own fake sense of reality. These Indian Orientalists have learened well from their British master the Orientlaists. Their typical weapon is to first demonize Pakistan, paint them in a certain manner, and then proffer a solution based on the false image.

This is what we wrote about him several years ago when he was fired from Asia Tribune:

"Individuals have options. They can either succumb to commercial interests, or become opinion makers and a change agents. Some sign Faustian deals to rise the ladder of success. Others do not. Some can use the power of the pen to reduce bigotry, and international tensions. He could have been an international writer and columnist. He has chosen to be critic-extraordinaire of Pakistan. Mr. M. J. Akbar is not that visionary. His agenda is simple–make money, on the backs of a perceived enemy.

He doesn’t care, that his animus creates hatred and is responsible for lives lost. Mr. Akbar could have created unbiased reporting in Indian journalism. He did not. He jumped on the bandwagon of chauvinism, contemptuousness and xenophobia. As a result most of the “Indian” media ports more views and news, the main theme—impending doom for Pakistan.

One can imagine his obituary—”known for his anti-Pakistan rhetoric” and “below the belt hits on Muslim separatism.”

Astonishingly, he discusses “democracy” as a theme in all his writings but does not respect the Muslim electorate that created Pakistan. His bias is so clear on Kashmir, Siachin, Sir Creek and every illegal act committed by his government. He calls Pakistan a “theocracy” without understanding the facts and figures of Pakistani politics. Amazingly he either doesn’t know about the lack of support for Islamic parties in Pakistan, or doesn’t mention is to score points with his Hinduvata buddies which help him sell his books.

M.J. Akbar aka, Mobashar Jawed Akbar is one of the idle hands that can type. This does not make him worth reading, unless of course one is into self flagellation. Mr. Akbar, congratulations on getting fired from the Asia Tribune. Now two other firings are waiting for you.

Your 15 minutes of fame are over. It is only so long that your anti-Pakistani rhetoric can sell. After a while it becomes stale. It is a rarity when Mr. Akbar does not berate Pakistan in any of his articles. Whether he is discussing the internal happenings of the Indian elections, or a discussion of religion, Mr. Akbar makes it a point to unleash his venomous tirade against Pakistan. Mostly without reason.

He does indulge in some verity in his book on Gandhi, quoted on this site, but he quickly slips into his comfort zone—lambasting Pakistan, Jinnah, and everything Pakistani.

I guess he wants to be more Catholic than the Pope and prove his “Indian-ness” to his readers. Why would authors sell their souls to be commercially viable.

It is sad coming from a person whose name is Akbar, but one is not surprised he writes what sells in “Indian” papers.

He is acerbic, has peripheral knowledge about the Muslim point of view in the history of the Subcontinent, and is not balanced. He does not even have the decency to respond to letters written to him."

Mr. Akbar has been writing his nonsense for decades. Anti-Pakistanism is his passport to corporate--which in 1971 was hungry for "Hindu mind with a Muslim name". While Mr. Mobashar Jawed Akabar has a Muslim name he hides the Muslim names under the initials M.J. His thoughts and his actions might as well be those coming from Nehru. An apologist for the Nehru dynasty he cherry picks quotes and doles them out to Indians as fact. His most notable misquote is about Iqbal. While ignoring Israr e Khudi, Bal e Jibreel, Shikwa and Jawab Shikwa and Dr. Iqbal's entire body of knowledge in favor of a Muslim nationhood, Mr. Akbar chooses to portray the impression that Iqbal somehow was an Indian.

Mr. Akbar is typical of the RSS and BJP viewpoint on Pakistan--it should not have been, it should not be, and it is going away. The likes of Mr. Akbar have never reocgnized the existence of Pakistan--they never will--only a casket will shut down his racist Pakistanphobia (may he live long and prosper).

There is still time for Mr. Akbar, but experience has shown that people like him do not change. Hubris, ego and a false sense of righteousness stand in the way of humility, humbleness and the right path.

Let us take his current article on Kashmir--which also ended up his his usual claptrap against Pakistan.

His tall claim of "India has accepted the fact of Pakistan" flies in the face of six years of Indian belligerence, war, and sabotage against Pakistan which goes on as we read this article. Of course the statements of Indira Gandhi "NWFP belongs to India and Punjab is along the way" narrated by Henry Kissinger destroy the credibility of of MR. M.J. Akbar.

In his current artilce on Kashmir, India, Pakistan and peace he attempts to place the "Two Nation Theory in the lap of Quaid e Azam Mohammad Ali Jinnah--forgetting the Hindu (Haldiram, Sarawarkar, and Golwalkar) origins of the Two Nation Theory as espoused by the Shuddi (conversion of all Muslims) and Shangram (expulsion of all Muslim) movements of the 40s.

As an Indian apologist, he tries to gloss over the fact that India now claims that the "Article of Accession" of Kashmir is now lost, if it ever existed. He also does not mention the fact that Indian forces had already gone to Kashmir, before the Raja of Kashmir left Srinagar.

Balakanizing Pakistan is an ideal of not only the blatant Pakistanphobes like Bharat Verma. Self-hating Islamphobes like M.J. Akbar wants to push Kashmir and the rest of Pakistani provinces into the fate of Sikkim. Instead of making Pakistan stronger, this non-practicing non-religious man has spent a lifetime trying to weaken the "Qila of Islam" (Islam's fortress. Mr. M.J. Akbar is doing the work of Lord Clive and Mir Sadiq and Mir Jaffar. He thus promotes a three nation, a four nation and five nation theory for Pakistan--but does not shed any linght on the more than 100 nations that have been subjugated by Delhi and who yearn for liberty and freedom.

Mr. Akbar focuses on terror but forgets to recall Bharat's role in the creation of, arming of, training of more than 80,000 Hindu soldiers for the Mukti Bahni (Source General Manekshaw). Mr. M.J. Akbar also forgets to mention the fact that Bharat was behind the creation of the most cruel terror group on the planet-- the LETTE--unleashed on the Sinhalese Buddhists of Lanka. Mr. Akbar also glosses of Indian support for the TTP terrorists, and the murderers of the BLA.

Mr. Akbar mention the "idea" of Pakistan, but does not mention that Bharati RAW is behind the battering, and his writings are in the forefront. He doesn't mention that the demand for 50 states is just an excuse to seek independence from Delhi. He does not mention the fact that there are 89 insurgencies raging in almost every state of Bharat. How well do Bharatis get along with each other?

Bharat is a failed state by any measure--75% of the population lives under $2 er day. 450 million Dalits are untouchable. 10 million baby girls are murdered before and right after birth because they are not male. Half the population of Mumbia, Delhi, Lucknow, Hyderabad, Benaras, Kolkota etc live, procreate, are born on and die on the sidewalks. To add insult to injury the cities have institutionalized the renting of asphalt and the city charges rent to generations of Bharatis who have been raised on the footpaths. All this while Delhi purchases an obsolete rusty Aircraft carrier for $2 Billion and hundreds of Flying Coffins worth billions of Dollars. Some democracy and some country!

Mr. Akbar discusses the origins of the word India from the Indus, and forgets to mention the absurdity of naming a country after a river in another country. If Dlehi had any sense it would name the country Ghanghia (after the Ganges).

Mr. Akbar's most laughable claim is when he says that it took five decades os struggle to grant Indians their independence, and it took only 7 years to create Pakistan. Nonsensical circular logic. Mr. Akbar also forgets to mention that it was a joint Hindu-Muslim struggle against the British. One would have to show him the charter of the Indian national Congress when it was formed 125 years ago--it was a British Club to perpetuate the empire.. One would have to remind Mr. Akbar that Mr. Gandhi was "the recrutier in Chief" for the British Empire--sending youth from South Asia as cannon fodder in defense of the empire.

If Mr. Akbar can quote anyone, it should be Prophet Mohmmad, the Caliphs, or Mohammad Ali Jinnah.

Come forward as servants of Islam, organise the people economically, socially, educationally and politically and I am sure that you will be a power that will be accepted by everybody. Muhammad Ali Jinnah

Pakistan not only means freedom and independence but the Muslim Ideology which has to be preserved, which has come to us as a precious gift and treasure and which, we hope other will share with us.
Muhammad Ali Jinnah

"Our object should be peace within, and peace without. We want to live peacefully and maintain cordial friendly relations with our immediate neighbours and with the world at large." Lahore, August 15th, 1947

“My message to you all is of hope, courage and confidence. Let us mobilize all our resources in a systematic and organized way and tackle the grave issues that confront us with grim determination and discipline worthy of a great nation.” Eid-ul-Azha Message to the Nation, October 24, 1947

“You have to stand guard over the development and maintenance of Islamic democracy, Islamic social justice and the equality of manhood in your own native soil. With faith, discipline and selfless devotion to duty, there is nothing worthwhile that you cannot achieve.” Address to the officers and men of the 5th Heavy Ack Ack and 6th Light Ack Ack Regiments in Malir, Karachi, February 21, 1948

“That freedom can never be attained by a nation without suffering and sacrifice has been amply borne out by the recent tragic happenings in this subcontinent. We are in the midst of unparalleled difficulties and untold sufferings; we have been through dark days of apprehension and anguish; but I can say with confidence that with courage and self-reliance and by the Grace of God we shall emerge triumphant.”
Speech at a Mammoth Rally at the University Stadium, Lahore, October 30, 1947
“We should have a State in which we could live and breathe as free men and which we could develop according to our own lights and culture and where principles of Islamicsocial justice could find free play.”
Address to Civil, Naval, Military and Air Force Officers of Pakistan Government, Karachi
October 11, 1947

“We must work our destiny in our own way and present to the world an economic system based on true Islamic concept of equality of manhood and social justice. We will thereby be fulfilling our mission as Muslims and giving to humanity the message of peace which alone can save it and secure the welfare, happiness and prosperity of mankind” Speech at the opening ceremony of State Bank of Pakistan, Karachi
July 1, 1948

Gandhi was condemned by the 109th Congress of the United States of America for his racist bigotry. This was just a few years ago–they took into account his entire life.

Gandhi was criticize by the Nobel Peace Prize Committee and refused a Nobel Peace Prize which it thought Mr. Gandhi did not deserve. It was a few weeks before his death. They scrutinized his life.

Gandhi achieved nothing–the British were going to leave South Asia anyway–just like they left Iraq, Afghanistan, Burma, and Lanka (no Gandhis there!!!).

Dalits don’t hate Gandhi because of his stick–they hate him for many many reasons–the one most important to them is that he did not outlaw the Caste system and kept them enslaved and Untouchable. That is why they never call themselves “Harijans”.

Gandhi like Akbar was wrong on many counts—on Dalits, brining religious symbols to Bharat, drumming out Muslims from INC, brining in bigots like Patel into the INC, allowing Patel to take over Hyderabad, killing 29,000 Indian National Army soldiers, assassinating Bose, asking Indian government to wage war on Pakistan, etc etc

Dr. Ambedkar, who told him: “Gandhi is the greatest enemy the untouchables have ever had in India.”

Subhash Chandra Bose’s Daughter about Gandhi: Very often Gandhi is portrayed as a saint, which he was not at all. In my opinion he was a very shrewd politician. He was a lawyer who really knew how to work the system and manipulate people in a positive sense. He certainly made my father resign as Congress president

It was not the fifty year old struggle hedonism in the Ashrams, or Gandhi's salt antics that convinced the British to leave South Asia it was Direct Action, and the Indian National Army of Subash Chandra Bose. The countrywide opposition to British rule in which the Indian personnel of the three armies participated, crowned by the naval mutiny, was the direct cause of the decision to transfer power. ”

This is the condition of Akbar's India.

The 1991 census figures show there were 3.45 percent dalits in the household sector, 7.11 percent in non-household industry (meaning factories), and 3.12 percent in the construction industry.http://ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=32667

The reports by Indian Committees are usually do not depict the horrid conditions on the ground. Even the meagre gains are being opposed by the Bigoted racists who want to keep the malichs out of the mainstream

Khandwa, Dec 25 (PTI) Vishwa Hindu Parishad has said they would launch a country-wide agitation if the Centre implements the Ranganath Mishra Commission report, which has recommended reservation for minorities.

VHP will strongly oppose the implementation of Ranganath Mishra Commission, which has recommended 10 per cent reservation for Muslims and five per cent for Christians, International General Secretary of VHP, Pravin Togadia, told reporters here last evening.

“If this was done, an agitation would be launched on the issue throughout the country,” he saidhttp://www.ptinews.com/news/440319_VHP-will-oppose-Ranganath-Commission-report-s-implementation

The 450 million Dalits are not allowed into homes–read the international and Arundhati Roy’s reports on the matter.

Indians evicted out their only military base outside India in of Ayini-Tajiksitan: Can they return?

2010-01-05T20:08:00.001-05:00

Regular readers of Rupee News are fully aware that we have been tracking the Ayini base since its inception. Indian terror base in Farkhor Tajikistan exports sabotage to China, Iran and Pakistan. This article not only traces the history, it also tracks the current situation.

On July 30th, 2009, we wrote this.

President Zardari made a trip to Dushambe and discussed many issues with the Tajik president. Most of it was reported in the press. One issues that was not mentioned by the press is the Bharati presence in Tajikistan. This has been identified as a huge issue for Pakistan. Bharati jets can take off from Farkhor and reach Pakistan within minutes. The base offers Bharat a bird-eye view of Northern Pakistan and the Migs that are stationed at the base are a direct threat to China and Pakistan. Ambassador Bhadrakumar actually reported that Bharat has two bases in Tajikistan. India’s two bases in Tajikistan major threat to Pakistan & China!

These Bharati bases are a clear and present danger to China and Pakistan and must be shut down forthwith.

Our fortuitous warning was apparently heeded. Now Peter Lee reports that in September of last year, India’s Ayini base was shut down.

For some years after the demise of the USSR, Delhi was allowed a field hospital in Farkhor in Tajikistan. In typical “give them a foot and they will take a mile” Bharat tried to over reach and set up a base at Ayini. They fixed the runaway and hoped to build a full fledged base—as if it was a Superpower or something. Ayini was much heralded as “India’s first foreign Airbase”. There were dreams that Migs would charge down, from the Ferghana Valley and have the ability to swoop down to Islamabad within minutes. Indian “Defense Analysts” wrote reams about the “Ayini Air Force base”, and how it had strategically altered India’s reach to Central Asia. Almost no security column was written in India without mentioning the great Ayini base.On Christmas Day 2005, Shashank Joshi was chest thumping about India’s bases in Tajiksitan. Little did he know about the eviction notice.

In July, reportedly at the behest of a seemingly "displeased" Moscow, Tajik Foreign Minister Hamrahon Zaripov declared that Dushanbe was not negotiating with New Delhi about permitting India a military base at Ayni.
Tajikistan, responding to some combination of Russian resentment, Chinese objections, and insufficient bribery, decided to evict 150 Indian military engineers, support staff, and trainers from Ayni
In a classic case of overreach, Delhi has tried to set up a base in Mongolia

The eviction of India from Tajikistan is a seminal event for Central Asia—because it cuts Bharat down to size.. It could be pure coincidence but the eviction occurred right after the Russians, Pakistanis and Tajiks announced a Karachi to Dushambe road and rail link. The increased cooperation between Tajikistan and Pakistan was announced during a trip made by President Zardari. It is poignant to note that President Patil of India made a trip soon aft wards in September---but was handed the eviction papers by the president of Tajikistan. Peter Lee in a fascinating article published in Asia Times reveals that the Indians have been evicted from Ayini—this time for good.

In 2006, Hree is the Defence of India on a historical perspective as seen as Mr. Lee:

Up to a point, Russia has been able to enlist India - now firmly committed to the civilization-versus-terror narrative courtesy of its burgeoning partnership with the US - in endorsing this world view.
Russia and India share a convergence of strategic interests in Afghanistan, one that conflicts with China's desire to let the Pashtuns sort things out in their own bloody fashion under the watchful eye of Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence.

Russia hopes to leverage the Afghan crisis into an acceptance of Moscow's security leadership by Stans vulnerable to Taliban-inspired Islamic militancy. India recognizes any victory by pro-Pakistan Pashtun factions, Taliban or otherwise, in Afghanistan as a defeat for its efforts to distract and bedevil Pakistan.
This shared interest was reflected in the joint statement of Manmohan and President Dmitry Medvedev, which used the rhetoric of terrorism to preclude negotiating with the Taliban insurgency - the unacknowledged centerpiece of the US strategy to cobble together a political settlement and depart the benighted region.
The communique stated:"[Russia and India] agree that the fight against terrorism cannot be selective, and drawing false distinctions between 'good' and 'bad' Taliban would be counter-productive."
But a meaningful alliance between Russia and India appears to founder on the collision between Moscow's crude anti-diplomacy and India's ineffectual and opportunistic outreach. Their divergence of interests is neatly illustrated in the determined dance of the two powers with the tiny republic of Tajikistan.

Tajikistan borders Afghanistan to the north. The Tajik ethnic group disregards the artificial border and dominates northwestern Afghanistan, including the Ferghana Valley, the legendary bulwark of the anti-Pashtun, anti-Taliban Tajik leader and Russian asset, Ahmad Shah Massoud.

Russia relied on Tajikistan to provide a logistical rear area for its support of the Northern Alliance during the period of Taliban domination. India pitched in by constructing a military hospital at the town of Farkhor in Tajikistan territory a scant two kilometers from the Afghan border. Massoud, mortally wounded by an al-Qaeda hit squad, died at the hospital two days before the September 11, 2001 attacks.

Now, Tajikistan is the new hotspot in the global "war on terror" as it forms the centerpiece of US Central Command commander General David Petraeus' efforts to support the Afghan surge with a new supply route - the Northern Distribution Network (NDN) - bypassing Pakistan - and bringing an ocean of cash, development, graft and trouble to the impoverished mountain republic.
Tajikistan security has deteriorated markedly as militants fleeing the Pakistan government crackdown in Waziristan have found refuge in Tajikistan's vulnerable border regions. Tajikistan's Taliban problems have also been exacerbated by the movement of militants to Afghanistan's previously peaceful northern border districts to attack the NDN.
In addition to the US and NATO, Russia and India sense opportunity in Tajikistan, giving the local boss, Emomali Rahmon, a chance to play off one interested party against the other and settle old scores - and reveal the fragility of the strategic partnership between Russia and India in Central Asia.

After the US-led invasion, India maintained its presence at Farkhor and, in a virtually unreported development, quietly negotiated terms in 2002 for its first significant military base outside India, at the Ayni airport on the outskirts of Tajikistan's capital of Dushanbe.

India's ubiquitous quasi-military Border Roads Organization - which increasingly finds itself operating beyond India's borders in places like Afghanistan - went to work expanding Ayni's runway. Stories were floated to anxious observers in Beijing and Islamabad that India would station helicopters or even MiG fighters at Ayni in order to project its power into the remote corners of Central Asia.
The catch was that Ayni would be operated in rotation by Russia, India and Tajikistan, and the Indian Air Force would be reliant on Russia's good offices and logistical support to maintain its presence.

In 2007, an Indian defense website reported:

The Russians have given India the option of sending a squadron of Mi-17 helicopters to Ayni, with a detachment of pilots and support personnel. With Russia and Uzbekistan just next door, logistics support has been assured. Russia has also offered to build fighter maintenance infrastructure at Ayni with India. The option will be made available to India to base a squadron of MiG-29 fighters at the base, but this will not be in the near future, though the implications of this are huge - Indian fighters can be scrambled at a moment's notice for operations anywhere in the area. With mid-air refuelling support promised by the Russians, their reach will be immense.

But what Russia giveth, it taketh away.

Russia has been eyeing India's rapprochement with the US with considerable jealousy and anxiety. It apparently also covets Ayni (and the runway improved by India) as a platform for its own aircraft, so the Russian-backed security collective, the CSTO, can make a statement of its importance in the suddenly significant northern Afghan theater.
Last September, India apparently tried to bypass its putative partner, Russia, and play its own bilateral hand in Tajikistan. India's President Pratihba Patil paid an unprecedented visit to Tajikistan to talk up potential economic, aid, security links and India's interest in Ayni.

However, reports indicate that Tajikistan, responding to some combination of Russian resentment, Chinese objections, and insufficient bribery, decided to evict 150 Indian military engineers, support staff, and trainers from Ayni.

Russia's desire to demonstrate its leverage over its putative strategic partner seems to have been decisive.
An Indian defense website picked up a report from the News Post India:

"This [Russian pressure] appears to be a ploy for more concessions and indulgence from India," a senior military officer associated with the Central Asian Region said. Its Moscow's way of telling New Delhi not to "stray" into the American military hardware camp, the official told IANS.
India annually conducts defense business of over $1.5 billion [...] with Russia, and since the 1960s has acquired Soviet and Russian military equipment worth over $30 billion.
Over the next decade, military planners anticipate purchases of over $40 billion to replace or upgrade India's predominantly Soviet and Russian defense equipment that have reached collective obsolescence.

Moscow is understandably anxious to encash this potential and is wary of competition from other suppliers, particularly the US, in support of IAF's latest requirement of 126 multi-role combat aircraft.

Alongside, India is deadlocked in delicate discussions with Russia wanting to renegotiate its $85 billion Sukhoi 30MkI multi-role fighter deal by demanding a higher price for the timely delivery of the combat aircraft with the agreed specifications.

In July, reportedly at the behest of a seemingly "displeased" Moscow, Tajik Foreign Minister Hamrahon Zaripov declared that Dushanbe was not negotiating with New Delhi about permitting India amilitary base at Ayni.

As the US demonstrated in its convoluted but ultimately successful (and expensive) efforts to forestall eviction from its airbase at Manas Airport in Kyrgyzstan, even apparently hopeless situations can be turned around through the right combination of concessions to Russia and payoffs to the local potentate.

So India might still find a precarious foothold for its air force in Tajikistan, but it will remain beholden to the support of its unpopular Russian patron for its continued presence.
It is not surprising that Russia's heavy-handed approach to Central Asia security, India's aspirations, and military sales has forestalled a genuine strategic partnership between Moscow and New Delhi that will counter the "soft power" outreach of Beijing through the SCO.

While acknowledging seemingly every international organization that engages India - or, like the SCO, resists India's determined efforts to engage with it - the December Russia-India communique made no mention of Russia's pet geopolitical projects: the European Security Treaty or the CTSO.

However, for the time being New Delhi seems bereft of its own strategy and resources for advancing its independent interests inCentral Asia.
As long as India continues to rely on its equivocal relationship as an auxiliary to Russia and, increasingly, the US in their great power machinations in Central Asia, it is likely that India and Russia will keep spinning their gears as China and the SCO continue to move ahead. Russia-India ties sour in Central Asia By Peter Lee. Peter Lee writes on East and South Asian affairs and their intersection with US foreign policy.

In 2007, Bharat faced certain eviction as reported by Defense of India

India is likely to be evicted from its sole, albeit fledgling, overseas military facility at Ayni air base near Tajikistan's capital Dushanbe under pressure from Russia, which is concerned over New Delhi's burgeoning ties with Washington.

Senior military officials said the emerging possibility of India looking to Washington and other Western suppliers for military hardware was responsible for Russia "leveraging" its considerable influence with Tajikistan to try and terminate New Delhi's "loose arrangement" regarding Ayni if it declined to be "co-operative".

In 2007, Delhi was able to assuage the fears of the Russian, and gotten itself a stay order. Can it do the same again?

What Lee does not mention are the other important events that are happening in Central Asia.

1) China rail integrates Afghanistan, Tajikistan, & Pakistan. China is known for walking silently and brandishing a big stick. This is a seminal event in the history of their region. This news item did not make a headline in the New York Times or the Washington Post. Very quietly China is beginning to encroach upon Afghanist and and ensuring that it is integrated with the economies of Tajikisan, Western China and Pakistan. Linking Tajikistan and Afghanistan to Gwader is a very strategic step that will pay dividends in the long run. The US has ostensibly spent $15 Billion in Afghanistan, but it has nothing to show for it. The reason is that by US law half of the aid stays in America, and 25% is spent on logistics.

2) Tajikistan-Pakistan relations to be bound by energy road & rail ties. Zardari said rail and road links between the two countries through Afghanistan would open Pakistani seaports giving Tajikistan access to the sea, adding that opening of road links was critical to bringing the countries in the region together and for increasing people-to-people contacts, which would benefit the countries’ economically and socially.A pre-feasibility study of the 1,300-kilometer long road connecting Pakistan with Tajikistan and central Asia through the Durrah Pass had already been undertaken, the president was quoted as saying.Transmission line: President Zardari also emphasized early implementation of the 1,000-kilometre-long power transmission line from Tajikistan to Pakistan, known as the Central Asia-South Asia 1000.

3) Kyrgyzstan Pakistan road link integrates OIC & ECO. Kashgar is no longer a mythical land in some ephemeral country–brought to us by Alama Iqbal’s dream and Chaudhry Rehmat Ali’s vision. Kashgar is the end point of the Karakoram Highway on the Chinese side of the border. It is linked to Pakistan by culture, language, and religion, now in Chinese friendship.Pakistan and China are linked by road and are planning to link up by rail. The road and rail link is being extended to Tajikistan. Now the Kyrgyz government wants to link up with Pakistan. The Pakistan and China link would be extended to Kyrgyzstan and then loop down to hook up with Tajikistan and Pakistan (through the narrow strip of land of Afghanistan). Looping upward it would hook up to the other countries of the ECO and the SCO–the future of Pakistan. Kyrgyzstan is working to establish direct road links with Pakistan through Karakoram Highway to further improve bilateral trade and economic relations between the two countries.

These events bring Pakistan closer to Russia, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, and China and integrates their economies like bees in a honeycomb. Bound by geography, culture and hsitory that extends beyond the founder of the Mughal and Muslim dynasties, the countries of the ECO are coming together in ways that were unimaginable a few decades ago. However Chaudhry Rehmat Ali.

Movements across the world are brining the Muslim world together. Some misguided ones are using violent means. Other non-violent ones are threatening others. Pakistani leadership has to grab the mantle and take the ECO to the next level.

Fareed Zakaria’s “Shining ‘India’ “

2010-01-05T09:24:00.001-05:00

What most of the world today perceives through the lens of the Indian and western media about Hindustan (Republic of India) is indeed very disturbing. The west befooled by the Indian opinion-makers, like Fareed Zakaria, refers to India as "the emerging powerhouse of the 21st century." In his recent treatise, The Post American World, Fareed Zakaria (true to his Indian roots) has described the great story of our times as 'Rise of the Rest' - the growth of countries like China, India, Brazil, Russia, South Africa and Kenya...and we in Pakistan (courtesy some of our own media channels) think that India is the biggest democracy and the star of South Asia. The media of the West and India, which is being referred as Windia, has become the spin-doctor trying to convince the rest of the world that India should be included in countries that can save the world from the current global economic mess and scourge of terrorism. But the million dollar question is, how is it possible for a country to save the world when it has a population of a billion plus of which 400 to 500 million live below poverty line, when it has more than 100 active insurgencies, when its hundreds of thousands die due to pollution and starvation annually, and when it has militarily intervened directly or indirectly in almost every country in its neighbourhood?

Nevertheless, it is important to mention here that there is a huge difference between poverty in an average country like Pakistan and India. India's poor live in subhuman conditions. Whether it is food or basic shelter, the Indian poor don't have that; almost an estimated one million die due to starvation and malnutrition every year. The people in the poor neighbourhoods of Mumbai and Delhi sleep on footpaths. Moreover, there are timings for this facility; you have to share the footpath space as per the prescribed timings. That is the reason why the poor in India live and die on the roads and footpaths; if in doubt, watch Slum Dog Millionaire. In the same vein, there is severe shortage of basic public facilities (toilets).

Furthermore, the Dalits or untouchables in India were and are treated like animals. The Hindu stratification enshrined in The Dharma is turning the poor in India against its own state. Undoubtedly, the world's biggest insurgencies are active in India. Here, I am mainly referring to the Naxal Republic, the three Ks of Khalistan, Kerala and Kashmir, Gurkhaland and the seven sisters adjacent to and including Assam. Other than Kashmir, the most effective insurgency is the Naxalite movement. As per Wikipedia: "Naxalite or Naxalvadis (name from the village of Naxalbari in the Indian State of West Bengal where the movement originated), are a group of far-left radical communists, supportive of Maoist political sentiment and ideology. In recent years, they have spread into less developed areas of rural central and eastern India, such as Chhattisgarh and Andhra Pradesh through the activities of underground groups like the Communist Party of India (Maoist).

"As of 2009, Naxalites are active across approximately 220 districts in 20 states of India accounting for about 40 percent of India's geographical area, they are especially concentrated in an area known as the 'Red Corridor', where they control 92,000 square kilometres. According to India's intelligence agency, the Research and Analysis Wing, 20,000 armed cadre Naxalites were operating apart from 50,000 regular cadres working in their various mass organisations and millions of sympathisers, and their growing influence prompted Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh to declare them as the most serious internal threat to India's national security ".

At the same time, India treats its minorities ruthlessly by violating religious and human rights. Kashmir, Babri Mosque, Golden Temple and burning of churches in Orissa by extremist Hindus are a few examples. The non-Hindus are being forced to accept pagan traditions in the name of their practicality and logic. Mysterious rituals, where people are forced to marry frogs and dogs to remove evil curses, are common. In a number of Indian cities there are thousands of monkeys allowed to freely roam and pollute streets, causing solid waste problems and harm to the citizens, all in the name of divinity of Hanuman. Drinking cow urine was religiously followed in the country side, it is now becoming fashionable in Indian elite and their night clubs, a re birth of novo Morar Ji Desaies in the name of Pavitarta and divinity of the holy cow.
Then again, India has another problem of managing its water resources. Indian rivers are the most acidic rivers in the world. As per Lifestyle india.com: "Water pollution is a serious problem in India as almost 70 percent of surface water resources have serious pollution problem and a growing number of ground water resources are already contaminated by various pollutants. Though River Ganga's water has not polluted totally, its pollution has reached a critical point since its water is not fit for bathing or drinking. Over the years, of the 3000 aqua creatures found in the Ganga, only 205 have survived." Surely, the basic reason is their belief of throwing ashes of the dead in the river Ganges.

The major deception being played in projecting Shining India is through the media - Windia. This media projects India as the 'Golden State' and ultimate redeemer of the world. Channels like Zee, Star Plus, BBC, National Geographic, Discovery and Bollywood project the themes of milk and honey flowing through the Ganges River. Some of our Pakistani channels (with the big slogan of 'live and let live'), are dying to project India as the ultimate success story of South Asia, despite all of what happens in India, 80 percent of the news about India appears to be from Bollywood or Indian Cricket. They need to be more objective on India.

Windia's India is like a city with its walls painted with pictures of heaven, but once you enter its gates you realise that you have entered hell. Three cheers for Incredible India, the boggy of Windia. UMAR WAQAR. Not so 'Shining India', Published: January 5, 2010, The writer is a freelance columnist.

Ruling “India” by breaking it up into more pieces

2010-01-01T22:45:00.000-05:00

In mid-October 1952, an acolyte of Mahatma Gandhi named Potti Sriramulu invoked the tactics of his teacher and went on a hunger strike. The nation of India — at the time just five years old — was still finding shape after centuries of division and colonial rule, with many of its diverse regions clamoring for greater political recognition. Sriramulu's fast came on behalf of tens of millions who, like him, spoke Telugu, a prominent south Indian language, and wanted their own state within the country.

Yet his protest went unheeded for weeks by New Delhi and, 58 days after it began, Sriramulu died, a sacrifice that triggered widespread rioting and eventually forced the government into forming the Telugu-speaking state of Andhra Pradesh in 1953, as well as other new states organized on linguistic lines. No small irony then, that, almost 60 years later, another hunger strike threatens to dismember the state Sriramulu first won, and revive a fierce debate about the nature of the federal Indian nation-state.(See a pictorial history of the tempestuous Nehru dynasty of India.)

Late Wednesday, the Indian government announced it would approve the carving out of a separate state known as Telangana from Andhra Pradesh. The movement for Telangana secession is virtually as old as the Indian republic itself, but it gained traction this month after its main political leader, K. Chandrashekar Rao, commenced a week-long fast. Rao's deteriorating health as well as coordinated protests — some violent — across the 10 districts of Andhra Pradhesh's 23 that comprise Telangana, including the influential high-tech capital of Hyderabad, seemed to force New Delhi's hand. But it could open a whole series of controversies for the Indian government as many other regional movements have now stepped up their own demands for statehood.(See a story about the death that may have precipitated the Andhra Pradesh controversy.)

Though Telugu-speaking as well, Telangana had once been part of a separate kingdom ruled from Hyderabad, which recognized British suzerainty during the colonial period but was not administratively part of British India. It was subsumed into the territory of Andhra Pradesh only in 1956, after a further dismemberment of the once independent Hyderabad kingdom. Though the city of Hyderabad was made the capital of the united Andhra Pradesh state, calls for greater autonomy have lingered, with many in Telangana complaining of marginalization at the hands of the coastal Andhra population.

But if New Delhi imagined it would calm tensions with its nod toward accepting a new state, the move backfired. Dozens of local legislators in Andhra Pradesh have resigned their posts and strikes by those opposing Telangana's secession have paralyzed much of the state. Trains have been blocked, businesses shut down. According to news reports on Saturday, two activists in favor of a "united Andhra" took their lives in protest of the state's splitting. The turmoil has also plunged Hyderabad, a booming, cosmopolitan I.T. hub, into panic as politicians and business leaders fret over the costs of the current instability. "This will be a total flop as investors will flee," says Amruthraj Padmanabhundi, a 27-year-old I.T. professional in Hyderabad. "I am very worried [about] my prospects slipping."

The prospect of Telangana's creation has buoyed similar causes elsewhere as calls for secession echo in nearly a dozen states in India. A four-day strike is under way among the picturesque hills and tea estates of Darjeeling, in northern West Bengal, with protesters intensifying demands for a new state of Gorkhaland that would better address the needs of the area's ethnic Nepalese population. More than 100 activists have begun what they call a "fast-unto-death." On the other side of the country, in the vast desert state of Rajasthan, a caravan of some 5,000 demonstrators and 500 camels paraded into the capital of Jaipur on Friday, agitating for the formation of Maru Pradesh, a state that would be carved out of some of Rajasthan's poorest districts. "Rajasthan is huge. It is not easy to keep track of all the villages, of the development or the lack of it," says Jaiveer Godara, the leading voice of the movement. "The person who lives in the last village of Maru Pradesh has to wait for three days to get supply of water from outside ... [And] there are no roads that lead to his village."(See a story about the 1937 silver jubilee of the ruler of Hyderabad, reputedly the world's richest man, from TIME's archives.)

At the root of this looming crisis lies the still unresolved question of how the world's largest democracy ought best to govern itself. Independent India was at first a patchwork of former British provinces and princely states threaded together into a federal republic. Some of its states remain huge and unwieldy — for example, the north Indian state of Uttar Pradesh, with its estimated 190 million people, would be virtually tied with Brazil as the fifth most populous country on earth but it would also possess 8% of the world's population under the global poverty line. With a country of India's size and diversity — as well as poverty — there is logic in having smaller states. "It will in fact strengthen [governance] through economic and administrative convenience," says Delhi-based political analyst Paranjoy Guha Thakurta. "India can survive and prosper by breaking up."

The Indian government last fashioned new states in 2000, when three largely remote and impoverished regions were elevated in status. At least two of them — Chhattisgarh and Uttarakhand — have shown marked progress since their inception. Small states like Kerala in the south and Haryana in the north, both with populations under 30 million, boast some of India's highest development indicators. Backers of further decentralization even point to the original, idealistic Gandhian vision for India — of a republic brought together not by a strong central government, but an "ocean" of egalitarian and self-sufficient villages.

Of course, that sort of utopianism has little place in the current hurly-burly of Indian politics. Experts worry that new states may simply mean more jockeying for power and expanded bureaucracy in a country already notorious for its spools of red tape as well as its perpetual political horse-trading. "Ultimately, fragmentation is not a substitute for good governance," says C.V. Madhukar, director of PRS Legislative Research, a Delhi nonprofit which advises the government.

Hoping to dampen a few of calls for new and smaller states ignited by the Andhra controversy, New Delhi has dialed back its support for Telangana, insisting that the matter now find a resolution through a vote in the Andhra Pradesh legislature. Given the current tumult, it's unclear when or how such a motion may go through. The political party headed by Rao, the Telangana separatist leader, was trounced both in recent state and national polls. His hunger strike — now ended — and the disturbances organized around it were likely an act of desperation of a movement shorn of much of its real political capital. "Having the government buckle to this kind moral blackmail is not a healthy way to go about things," says Madhukar. "There shouldn't be this sword of Damocles hanging over peoples' heads." A young India may have come of age through such dramatic acts of Gandhian sacrifice, but a more mature nation needs more measured habits. —With reporting by Nilanjana Bhowmick/New Delhi. How to Rule India: Break It Into More Pieces? By Ishaan Tharoor Sunday, Dec. 13, 2009

See a pictorial timeline of events that shaped modern India.

Read "The Insurgency Threatening India's Schools."

Foreign Office overrides Mr. Haqqani. Visas refused to Blackwater

2009-12-24T19:09:00.000-05:00

ISLAMABAD – Pakistan has refused visas to as many as 137 US citizens because of incorrect information that the applicants provided to authorities through Pakistan Embassy in Washington, well placed sources told TheNation on Wednesday. According to the official sources, as many as 137 US citizens had applied for Pakistani visas during the last couple of months. After assessing their information, the authorities found the applications incomplete. In some cases bogus information was provided that led to the refusal of visas.

When contacted, spokesperson of Foreign Office did not confirm it. However, when this correspondent shared the details, he did not deny it also.

It is pertinent to note here that Pakistan Embassy in Washington had issued scores of visas to American nationals from different walks of life after Hussein Haqqani joined the embassy as ambassador about nine months ago.

The higher authorities of Ministry of Foreign Affairs began thorough checking of the visa applications of US nationals after it was found that some of the visa seekers had provided misinformation. During assessment of the documents, the authorities found the applications of 137 visa seekers incomplete and rejected their cases.
The authorities rejected the impression that the visas refusal is a reaction to the widespread anti-American sentiments in the country saying it was purely on merit.
“Had the visa seekers provided accurate information, there applications would not have been rejected,” one of the officials of the Ministry told this correspondent requesting not to be named.

The report of visa refusal surfaced at a time when a high-ranking official of Obama Administration, Chairman US Joint Chief of Staff Admiral Mike Mullen, is busy meeting higher government authorities in Islamabad.

Sources in US Embassy in Islamabad, quoting American diplomats, said that refusal of visas seems to be a reaction to the widespread anti-American sentiments in Pakistan.

This correspondent has repeatedly attempted to get official version of the US Embassy over the issue, however, no body attended the phone call.

Sean Paul Kelley on Reflections on India

2009-12-23T19:59:00.000-05:00

Reflections on India By Sean Paul Kelley

If you are Indian, or of Indian descent, I must preface this post with a clear warning: you are not going to like what I have to say. My criticisms may be very hard to stomach. But consider them as the hard words and loving advice of a good friend. Someone who's being honest with you and wants nothing from you. These criticisms apply to all of India except Kerala and the places I didn't visit, except that I have a feeling it applies to all of India, except as I mentioned before, Kerala. Lastly, before anyone accuses me of Western Cultural Imperialism, let me say this: if this is what India and Indians want, then hey, who am I to tell them differently. Take what you like and leave the rest. In the end it doesn't really matter, as I get the sense that Indians, at least many upper class Indians, don't seem to care and the lower classes just don't know any better, what with Indian culture being so intense and pervasive on the sub-continent. But here goes, nonetheless.

India is a mess. It's that simple, but it's also quite complicated. I'll start with what I think are India's four major problems--the four most preventing India from becoming a developing nation--and then move to some of the ancillary ones.

First, pollution. In my opinion the filth, squalor and all around pollution indicates a marked lack of respect for India by Indians. I don't know how cultural the filth is, but it's really beyond anything I have ever encountered. At times the smells, trash, refuse and excrement are like a garbage dump. Right next door to the Taj Mahal was a pile of trash that smelled so bad, was so foul as to almost ruin the entire Taj experience. Delhi, Bangalore and Chennai to a lesser degree were so very polluted as to make me physically ill. Sinus infections, ear infection, bowels churning was an all to common experience in India. Dung, be it goat, cow or human fecal matter was common on the streets. In major tourist areas filth was everywhere, littering the sidewalks, the roadways, you name it. Toilets in the middle of the road, men urinating and defecating anywhere, in broad daylight. Whole villages are plastic bag wastelands. Roadsides are choked by it. Air quality that can hardly be called quality. Far too much coal and far to few unleaded vehicles on the road. The measure should be how dangerous the air is for one's health, not how good it is. People casually throw trash in the streets, on the roads. The only two cities that could be considered sanitary in my journey were Trivandrum--the capital of Kerala--and Calicut. I don't know why this is. But I can assure you that at some point this pollution will cut into India's productivity, if it already hasn't. The pollution will hobble India's growth path, if that indeed is what the country wants. (Which I personally doubt, as India is far too conservative a country, in the small 'c' sense.)
More after the jump.

The second issue, infrastructure, can be divided into four subcategories: roads, rails and ports and the electrical grid. The electrical grid is a joke. Load shedding is all too common, everywhere in India. Wide swaths of the country spend much of the day without the electricity they actually pay for. With out regular electricity, productivity, again, falls. The ports are a joke. Antiquated, out of date, hardly even appropriate for the mechanized world of container ports, more in line with the days of longshoremen and the like. Roads are an equal disaster. I only saw one elevated highway that would be considered decent in Thailand, much less Western Europe or America. And I covered fully two thirds of the country during my visit. There are so few dual carriage way roads as to be laughable. There are no traffic laws to speak of, and if there are, they are rarely obeyed, much less enforced. A drive that should take an hour takes three. A drive that should take three takes nine. The buses are at least thirty years old, if not older. Everyone in India, or who travels in India raves about the railway system. Rubbish. It's awful. Now, when I was there in 2003 and then late 2004 it was decent. But in the last five years the traffic on the rails has grown so quickly that once again, it is threatening productivity. Waiting in line just to ask a question now takes thirty minutes. Routes are routinely sold out three and four days in advance now, leaving travelers stranded with little option except to take the decrepit and dangerous buses. At least fifty million people use the trains a day in India. 50 million people! Not surprising that waitlists of 500 or more people are common now. The rails are affordable and comprehensive but they are overcrowded and what with budget airlines popping up in India like Sadhus in an ashram the middle and lowers classes are left to deal with the overutilized rails and quality suffers. No one seems to give a shit. Seriously, I just never have the impression that the Indian government really cares. Too interested in buying weapons from Russia, Israel and the US I guess.

The last major problem in India is an old problem and can be divided into two parts that've been two sides of the same coin since government was invented: bureaucracy and corruption. It take triplicates to register into a hotel. To get a SIM card for one's phone is like wading into a jungle of red-tape and photocopies one is not likely to emerge from in a good mood, much less satisfied with customer service. Getting train tickets is a terrible ordeal, first you have to find the train number, which takes 30 minutes, then you have to fill in the form, which is far from easy, then you have to wait in line to try and make a reservation, which takes 30 minutes at least and if you made a single mistake on the form back you go to the end of the queue, or what passes for a queue in India. The government is notoriously uninterested in the problems of the commoners, too busy fleecing the rich, or trying to get rich themselves in some way shape or form. Take the trash for example, civil rubbish collection authorities are too busy taking kickbacks from the wealthy to keep their areas clean that they don't have the time, manpower, money or interest in doing their job. Rural hospitals are perennially understaffed as doctors pocket the fees the government pays them, never show up at the rural hospitals and practice in the cities instead.

I could go on for quite some time about my perception of India and its problems, but in all seriousness, I don't think anyone in India really cares. And that, to me, is the biggest problem. India is too conservative a society to want to change in any way. Mumbai, India's financial capital is about as filthy, polluted and poor as the worst city imaginable in Vietnam, or Indonesia--and being more polluted than Medan, in Sumatra is no easy task. The biggest rats I have ever seen were in Medan!

One would expect a certain amount of, yes, I am going to use this word, backwardness, in a country that hasn't produced so many Nobel Laureates, nuclear physicists, imminent economists and entrepreneurs. But India has all these things and what have they brought back to India with them? Nothing. The rich still have their servants, the lower castes are still there to do the dirty work and so the country remains in stasis. It's a shame. Indians and India have many wonderful things to offer the world, but I'm far from sanguine that India will amount to much in my lifetime.

Now, have at it, call me a cultural imperialist, a spoiled child of the West and all that. But remember, I've been there. I've done it. And I've seen 50 other countries on this planet and none, not even Ethiopia, have as long and gargantuan a laundry list of problems as India does. And the bottom line is, I don't think India really cares. Too complacent and too conservative.

Kangaroo court—Bogus Indian case implodes: Cook Kasab denies any terror links: Indian Policy obtained confession using torture

2009-12-22T19:57:00.001-05:00

The Confession that Mr. Kasab suppsedly signed was in Marhati language. Mr. Kasab is a resident of Punjab and does not know the Marhati or any other Indian languages. He claims that his confession was coerced through Torture. Ms. Kasab also claimed that he was a cook in Pakistan and came to India on Samjhota Express for sight-seeing. The Police arrested him because he looked like the gunman in the pictures.

Mr. Kasab further clamed that the eye witnesses had been shown his pictures before the identification. He had complained about the false case, but no one paid any attention to him

Kasab told the court, which was recording the gunman's final statement on the prosecution evidence, he was a cook with a catering company in "Saarayee-Alamghir" near Jhelum in Pakistan.
The gunman further alleged that all the witnesses were briefed by the police.
"One witness had in the identification parade identified me as the one in Hotel Taj. That witness was not brought to court during the trial," Kasab said.
"I have never seen the boat; crime branch and FBI had showed me pictures of Kuber and my clothes and articles seized from the boat. These articles must belong to either fishermen or smugglers. The AK 47 rifle may belong to the police and it is not mine."
Kasab also alleged that even when he was in jail custody, three crime branch officials were guarding him and used to threaten him to give the statement before the magistrate.
"I had given this complaint in writing to the magistrate on February 18, when I was produced for recording my confession. But when nothing was done on it, I kept mum and did not complain again," Kasab said.

Lone surviving Pakistani gunman Ajmal Kasab on Tuesday said he was not a "Jihadi" and had not undergone any training at the Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) camp in Pakistan.
Kasab told the court, which was recording the gunman's final statement on the prosecution evidence, he was a cook with a catering company in "Saarayee-Alamghir" near Jhelum in Pakistan.

Denying any involvement with terror outfits LeT and Jamat-ul-Dawa (JUD), Kasab declined meeting Hafiz Sayed, Zaki-ur-Lakhvi, Abu Kahfa and Abu Hamza--all wanted accused and alleged LeT operatives.

"I heard the names of Lash-e-Taliban and JUD from the police in Mumbai. Crime Branch officials had shown the photograph of Lakhvi," Kasab said.
Asked by the court if he was introduced to one Major General Saab at the training camp, Kasab said, "This is absolutely wrong."

The judge, M L Tahaliyani, was putting questions to Kasab on the basis of his confession before magistrate in February; however Kasab disowned the confession, saying it was given under duress. Kasab says he was a cook, denies undergoing LeT training. Press Trust Of India, Mumbai, December 22, 2009, First Published: 19:53 IST(22/12/2009), Last Updated: 20:13 IST(22/12/2009)

The judge, M L Tahaliyani, was putting questions to Kasab on the basis of his confession before magistrate in February; however Kasab disowned the confession, saying it was given under duress.

When special Judge M L Tahaliyani referred to his statement in the confession that Hafeez Sayed had told 30 boys at the LeT training camp that they would have to lay down their lives for liberating Kashmir, Kasab said: "This is absolutely wrong".

Alleging that the police had threatened to administer electric shocks to him if he did not give a statement to the magistrate, Kasab said the police had prepared the confession and forced him to recite it.

Asked by the court, if he was told in the training that they would go to heaven if they attacked India, Kasab replied in the negative saying he did not attend the training.

Kasab also denied having told the police anything about Kuber boat and a dead body found on the boat.

According to the prosecution, the group of ten terrorists had highjacked Kuber on their way to Mumbai from Karachi in Pakistan.

"I have never seen the boat; crime branch and FBI had showed me pictures of Kuber and my clothes and articles seized from the boat. These articles must belong to either fishermen or smugglers. The AK 47 rifle may belong to the police and it is not mine."

An I-card recovered from his trouser pocket was shown to Kasab in the court today, but he refused to identify himself. "It's not me. Trousers are not mine, I was wearing leather pants," he stated.

Similarly, about the money seized from him, he said that it was not his.

"The police had taken Rs 2,400 from me on November 25, which I had kept for my return ticket. Those currency notes did not have any marks on them. These notes have something written on them," Kasab said when he was shown the Rs 100-note.

The gunman further alleged that all the witnesses were briefed by the police.

"One witness had in the identification parade identified me as the one in Hotel Taj. That witness was not brought to court during the trial," Kasab said.

He further said all the witnesses were shown his photograph prior to the parade and thus they could identify him and witnesses were prompted by the police.

Kasab also alleged that even when he was in jail custody, three crime branch officials were guarding him and used to threaten him to give the statement before the magistrate.

"I had given this complaint in writing to the magistrate on February 18, when I was produced for recording my confession. But when nothing was done on it, I kept mum and did not complain again," Kasab said.

Kasab and two Indians- Faheem Ansari and Sabaudding Ahmed are facing trial for their involvement in the 26/11 terror attacks.

Keywords: Ajmal Kasab, Kasab trial, Mumbai attacks, Crime Branch

Sagacious Virtuosity: Dump the elite--Pakistanis are not going to take it anymore

2009-12-21T23:22:00.001-05:00

First of all, let me clearly explain the title of this article: the dictionary meaning of the word “sagacious” is “having practical wisdom, showing wisdom of a plan, acute-minded, shrewd.” The other word in the title is “virtuosity,” which has its origins in Italian, literally meaning “learned, skilful.” This expression is used specifically in reference to “a person highly skilled in the technique of a fine art, especially music – displaying the skills of a virtuoso.”

Hence, the title of this article is using these two words metaphorically and symbolically calling to the attention of Pakistani political decision-makers and managers the need to show practical wisdom and skilful political techniques, as well as insightfulness – to an extent of a practical level of an artist’s proficiency, competence and finesse (savoir-faire) – in dealing with the vestiges and fallouts of the ongoing so-called “war on terror” and its fundamental covert links to the US-Western-geo-political-economic-military agenda in this region, involving a destructive “war on its own people” in Pakistan.

It is about time that the Pakistani leadership, in and out of actual governance, undertake the ultimate acts of sagacious virtuosity to save this country and its kind, honest, gracious, hospitable, warm, poetic, gentle and God-fearing people from impending total destruction and their present abominable sufferings.

Has the entire Pakistani leadership (save for Imran Khan, a few political analysts and the electronic media) gone blind not to notice that the proxy war (the so-called “war on terror”) on behalf of the US is being unleashed on its own people, its own citizens, on its own soil, against its own kith and kin? Why has the word “kill” become part of the establishment’s daily vocabulary and a common usage in our ruling elite’s regular political discourse? Why are we bombing our own villages and human dwellings? Why are we not pursuing peace negotiations? Why are we engaging our military at such a level of war footing?

The present ruling elite in Pakistan cannot turn this country into a “Hira Mundi” – the “Brothel House” where the highest “bidder” gets the rights of the rules of engagement.

Nor will this nation now allow the political ruling pundits to bring this country to a political abyss where “begging” becomes the national modus-operandi for survival. Let it be understood, this nation is not for sale, nor will it compromise its dignity and self-respect. This warning is equally directed at the ruling class in Pakistan as well as at their patrons, the US and the Western Europe’s political establishments.

First, let us be absolutely clear on this one: the insurgency in Afghanistan and Pakistan is a direct result of US-NATO occupation of Afghanistan.

Second, the fundamental question that needs to be asked and responded to with absolute clarity by the US-NATO is: why are they in Afghanistan? Why are drone attacks being carried out in Pakistani territory?

Third, we need to separate fiction from reality: not a single Afghani, Pakistani, Pathan, Punjabi, Sindhi, Balochi, or for that matter Muslim political outfit, was involved in the 9/11 attack on New York. Then why are Afghani and Pakistani people militarily and politically targeted by the US-NATO alliance?

Fourth, 9/11 was an inside job disguised as a pretext to attack Iraq and Afghanistan. George W. Bush had planned a military invasion of Iraq months ahead of 9/11.

Fifth, the US lied (along with Western collaboration) to the entire international community (Gen. Powell’s speech in the UN) about Iraq’s WMDs prior to its military invasion. We must also be mindful that it was not the first time that the US lied to invade a foreign country. US foreign policy history offers plenty of evidence elucidating disinformation campaigns, covert political-military actions, demonizing other nations, media manipulations and outright lying to invade other countries for its neo-imperialist agendas.

Sixth, the entire US-Western perspective that the so-called “terrorists” in Afghanistan and Pakistan can or will manage terrorist attacks against their countries is pure myth. It has been deliberately created, planned and planted to extend the US-NATO military occupation of other countries for the purpose of its neo-con imperialist plans for capitalistic expansion – that makes the US-NATO nations rich.

Seventh, Osama Bin Laden is also a myth, kept alive as a symbolic slogan to make the American people remain on war footing and hate the entire Muslim world. Every Muslim is a terrorist; this script is reinforced everyday and plays regularly in the ignorant minds of the American public.

Eighth, Barack Obama is a warmonger and will continue to be so. His “peace credentials” are also a myth – a contradiction to the fundamentals of American foreign policy goals of neo-con imperialism and dreams (that won’t come true) of an “American 21^st Century.”

Ninth, the American-Western political establishments are full of hopeless contradictions, hypocrisy, self-justifications and self-aggrandizements in their inter-state political discourse with non-white nations in global politics.

Tenth, the US-Western leadership is hopelessly irrational, unfair, deceptive and decisively selfish and ego-centric in its geo-political relationships with the Third World in general and the Muslim world in particular. The superiority patronizing complex has a devious and decisive impact on their political behaviour and global conduct.

It is about time that the Pakistani leadership wakes up to the grim realities in which it, in itself, haspushed the nation. It is not possible (or even fair) to blame the external actors exclusively for the state of affairs for which our existence and survival are at stake. Indeed, our own leadership, for the last five decades, has been responsible for the conditions in which we find ourselves today.

Ironically, the present democratic dispensation in the country has failed the nation as much as the past dictatorships and by a fair estimation, even more so.

Now it is time that we recognize that we have arrived at a crucial crossroads: now is the time for us to undertake the ultimate acts of sagacious virtuosity to pull this nation out of its dismal past experience and its present “ha lat-e nazza” (to be in the throes of death.)

This will only be possible if Pakistani leadership understands that our enemies are vicious, uncompromising, determined, violent, powerful and above all, blindly selfish and self-serving.

We will have to confront them, oppose them, expose them, refuse their interference and interventions, yet act with dignity, offer them sound alternatives in global political conduct and show them humanitarian strategies in inter-state political engagements.

The Pakistani leadership will have to learn to deal with the political behaviour of its adversaries with long-range planning rather than to react to political events randomly.

Pakistan will have to undergo a revolutionary change in the nature of its alliance with the US-West, India, and Iran, the rest of the Islamic world and with the emerging progressive political movements all over the global spectrum. We will also have to further strengthen our global partnership in diplomacy, trade and politics with China and Russia. Pakistan will have to alter the totality of its rules of engagement in international diplomacy and its strategic priorities. We will have to redefine and re-invent our entire foreign policy and strategic dimensions of our domestic politics as well.

The Pakistani leadership needs to do the following urgently:

An unequivocal demand to end the US-NATO-India occupation of Afghanistan. Once the occupation ends, the insurgency will end.
An end to the present status-quo of Pakistan-US-Western political-economic-military alliance including the fundamentals of military engagement on the so-called “war on terrorism.”
An urgent need to give “peace a chance” – peace dialogue with estranged groups in Swat and the rest of the country.

But foremost and above all, the ultimate acts of sagacious virtuosity to save the nation will come only by a serious, deep, concentrated, selfless and in-depth reflection of their own political behaviour by the Pakistani ruling elite and making necessary changes in their narcotic opiate mindsets!

They have no other choice: the Pakistani people are not going to take it anymore. Period. The Ultimate Acts of Sagacious Virtuosity! 01, Nov, 2009, Dr Haider Mehdi

India entrapped the US in Afghanistan

2009-12-21T22:57:00.001-05:00

OBAMA DO NOT PLAY IN THE HANDS OF OTHERS: TRUST YOUR PEOPLE

Although the US President Obama has announced that he will send an extra 30,000 US troops to fight the war in Afghanistan, yet his revised strategy also includes exit strategy as he has indicated that withdrawal of forces will start in July 2011. In this context, on November 15, US Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton had already revealed, “We’re not interested in staying in Afghanistan” for a long time, and set a start date for military withdrawal.

Frustrated in achieving their goals, the US-led NATO countries have seriously been considering withdrawal of their troops from Afghanistan in future owing to growing domestic pressure coupled with daily casualties of their personal and rising cost of war.

Particularly, America has been bearing huge losses, amounting seven trillion dollars in the total cost of war against terrorism, increase in defence budget and acute financial crisis inside the US homeland.

On the other side, India wants to entrap the US permanently in Afghanistan in order to achieve its secret designs against Pakistan and China—in the Indian-held Kashmir by damaging American global and regional interests.

It is basis of Indian shrewd diplomacy to engage the US-led NATO troops in Afghanistan for unlimited period. In this regard, prior to his visit to the US for getting sophisticated technology including American support for a permanent seat for New Delhi in the UN Security Council, Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh already exposed his cunning diplomacy by showing his illogical approach during his interview to the Washington Post and Newsweek. He remarked that India “wants to resolve all outstanding issues with Pakistan”, while accusing the latter of “sponsoring terrorism…planning another Mumbai-type attack in India.” He called for the US pressure on Islamabad to rein in extremists. He also said that he would encourage the American leadership to stay in Afghanistan. Besides, Singh warned that Afghanistan could fall into a civil war if the US exited, while saying: “It is very important that both the US and the global community stay engaged in Afghanistan.”

During his trip, Singh who was warmly welcomed by the American president and other high officials left no stone unturned in convincing Washington raising alleged concerns regarding Pakistan and Afghanistan in connection with militancy, while emphasing a strategic partnership and common values of democracy. Under the pretext of common goals, his insistence was that both US and India which can collectively resolve global and regional issues like hunger, security and nuclear disarmament in wake of a common menace of terrorism—a sustained commitment to continue assisting Afghanistan.

Indian PM Singh was frustrated when on November 25, 2009, President Obama in the joint press conference made it clear that Washington wanted “encouraging ways in which both India and Pakistan can feel secure and focus on the development of their own countries and their own people…our core goal is to achieve peace and security for all the peoples in the region, not just one country or the other.” Obama also praised Pakistan’s military operations in Swat and South Waziristan by explaining that Islamabad had made progress in fighting terrorists—hoping for anti-terrorism cooperation between all regional parties for the benefit of the people of Pakistan and India.

However, Manmohan Singh who repeatedly indicated that Pakistan has nothing to fear from India created a sense of fear for Americans in order to ensure presence of their troops in Afghanistan. In this context, confused in his objectives, in his meetings at Washington, DC, the Council on Foreign Relations and the Woodrow Wilson Centre, he re-iterated, if insurgency “succeeds in Afghanistan and Pakistan, it shall be catastrophic” not only for India and the US but also for whole the region. He again urged the needs of greater American pressure on Pakistan to curb terrorism.

Nevertheless, by setting aside Islamabad’s perennial offers for resumption of dialogue, the major aim of Singh’s American trip was to indoctrinate the US high officials through Indian false propaganda that Pakistan has been sponsoring terrorism in both Afghanistan and India. In fact, India wants to entrap America permanently in Afghanistan which has become a most conducive place for Indians to fulfill their covert aims.

Under the pretext of Talibinisation of Afghanistan and Pakistan, Indian secret agency, RAW with the support of Israeli Mossad has well-established its networks. Particularly, India has been running secret operations against Pakistan from its consulates in Mazar-i-Sharif, Jalalabad, Kandhar and other sensitive parts of the Pak-Afghan border. It has spent millions of dollars in Afghanistan to strengthen its grip. And from there, Indian RAW has been sending well-trained militants along with arms to Pakistan in order to attack the security personnel including western nationals. New Delhi which wants to get strategic depth against Pakistan has not only increased its military troops in the counry, but has also decided to set up cantonments. In this respect, puppet regeme of Hamid Karzai encouraged India in using the Border Roads Organisation in constructing the ring roads by employing Indo-Tibeten police force for security.

Regarding Indian activities in Afghanistan, on September 20, NATO commander, Gen. McChrystal in his report on the Afghan war admitted: “Indian political and economic influence is increasing in Afghanistan including significant development efforts…is likely to exacerbate regional tensions.”

Worried about withdrawal of the US-led allies from Afghanistan, India with the cladestine support of Indo-Israeli lobbies has already started a propaganda campaign in the West to implicate Islamabad. Even in an interview with the CNN, Singh remarked “Pakistan’s objectives in Afghanistan are not necessarily in harmony with the American objectives…the Pakistan government and the Army are not moving to remove the Afghan Taliban” and that “Pakistan has not done enough with regard to pursuing the perpetrators of the Mumbai terror attacks,” while, he presumed that Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal could fall into the wrong hands.

While showing realistic approach by rejecting Indian blame game against Pakistan, the US, UK and some other western countries have already refused official involvement of Islamabad in the Mumbai carnage of last year. Besides, in the recent past, a team of Indian intelligence officials left the US disappointed after a week-long stay as they were not allowed interrogating a Pakistan-born American national David Coleman Headley, arrested by the FBI on charges of plotting a major terror attack in India.

Now, American officials and media have started focusing on Hindu fundamentalism in face of recent leakage of the Justice Liberation Commission, admitting the official involvement of the BJP leadership in the destruction of the Babri Masjid (Mosque)—and over other developments like human violations in the Indian-held Kashmir including violence against the Muslim and the Christian communities.

However, if US-led NATO forces withdraw from Afghanistan, Karzai regime will fall like a palace of cards due to the growing Taliban militancy. Even New Delhi will not be in a position to maintain its network in wake of the successful guerrilla warfare of the Taliban. Therefore, India is doing its utmost to convince Washington to have a long stay in Afghanistan. Failed in this objevtive, it can even act upon dirty ticks to get the foreign forces entangled in Afghanistan.

In this context, first, with help of some so-called Indian Muslims, Indian RAW will increase attacks inside Afghanistan, targeting especially American soldiers with the sole aim to revive old blame game of the west against Islamabad for cross-border-terrorism. Second, RAW is likely to arrange another Mumbai type terror-carnage in India to get the sympathies of America and Europe, and to further distort the image of Islamabad.

Third, with the help of Indian army officers and RAW, Hindu terrorists can overcome the obstacles in the acquisition of the weapons of mass destruction (WMDs). As regards the acquisition of WMDs, some Indian army officers and RAW could already be in cooperation with the Hindu fundamentalist organizations. They could also get or produce dirty nuclear bombs. While, western apprehensions are still found that some extremist Muslim militant, based in Pakistan’s tribal areas are in pursuit of WMDs to use them in America and any European country. India has intensified its propaganda campaign regarding the insecurity of Pakistan’s atomic assets. In this context, as a last option, India could use these fatal devices in the West, especially the US homeland not only to ensure NATO troops in Afghanistan, but also to incite them to attack Pakistan. Indians could also implement this most dangerous scheme so that the major western powers could demand Islamabad to roll back its nuclear programme.

AFGHAN WAR: India Entraps the US in Afghanistan, 02, Dec, 2009, Sajjad Shaukat

Sajjad Shaukat is a regular writer for Opinion Maker. He writes on international affairs and is author of the book: US vs Islamic Militants, Invisible Balance of Power: Dangerous Shift in International Relations

RAW operates against Pakistan using Mukti Bahni model

2009-12-21T22:26:00.001-05:00

India today is trying to blindly follow the policies of her military Guru Chankiya, where she is frantically driving for fulfillment of her eventual trance of Greater India and emergence of a sole regional power of South East Asia. India has long-standing policies and strategies to make and keep Pakistan as a lame duck and now taking advantage of the current situation she wants to destabilize a sole nuke Muslim power. Perception is there that India in collaborations with USA and Israel is imposing pressure and polices on Pakistan. Manomohan Singh is visiting USA now. Thus, Obama if serious in fighting war against terror has to chain his Asian watchdog (India). He should ask Indian Prime Minister to stop interfering in Pakistan’s domestic affairs.

Following the same motive of “Greater India” RAW has gone all out in destabilizing Pakistan. A Multi pronged strategy is executed through planned combination of overt and covert inventiveness thus shifting the battlefield to Pakistan from Afghanistan. RAW is operating both from Afghanistan and Iran to encircle Pakistan.

A major objective of India in Afghanistan is to use Afghanistan as launching pad to attack Pakistanis by sponsoring dissident / militants. It is on record that India has spent immense amounts over the years to make the Northern Alliance into its stooges. There is the Indian strategy of the encirclement of Pakistan by making Afghanistan into a vocal anti-Pakistan client state, with five very active Indian consulates there. Unfortunately the crooked Afghan government has also fallen pray to RAW policies by providing shelter to Brahamdag Bugti and allowing RAW to operate in Balochistan in collaboration with newly established Afghan intelligence agency RAAM (earlier name KHAD). RAW has organized a network of training schools/ Centres throughout Afghanistan. Some of these training centres are operating in Kabul, Jalalabad, Khawaja Ghar (Takhar Province), Khost, Paktia, Urgun, Khandar, Spin Boldak and Dranj (Badakhshan Province).

All these training centres are being used for indoctrinating minds of innocent people of FATA and Balochistan to work against Pakistan. Refugee camps for Balochistan dissidents have been established in bordering towns of Kandahar, Spin, Bodlak, Helmond and Nirmoz where RAW has been given free access to interact for spotting / cultivating them. Raw with the help of local Officials is providing financial support to Brahamdagh Bughti for undertaking terrorist’s activities in Balochistan. Some weeks ago Barahamdag reportedly met Amarullah Saleh and asked for additional money to undertake sabotage activities in Pakistan. He was promised a handsome amount and Commander Raziq Achakzai of Spin Boldak was made instrumental. Funds and explosives have been supplied by a man namely Abdul Sattar. The money is even transferred to such elements in Pakistan through Afghan based militant leaders/”Hawala Business. A number of Afghan officials are facilitating Indian agents in crossing the border. Earlier this year, two border police personnel and one political figure were arrested while crossing the border without documents. Spin Boldak is said to be the main hub of anti-Pakistan activities and the town is being used as a launching pad. RAW-RAAM used to providing weapons via Bajaur, Dir, Pewchar (ex-headquarters for Fazlullah). In order to subvert loyalties of Young Generation, Young Baloch Students are spotted / cultivated through senior Balochistan Student Orginastion (BSO) hardliners, taken to Kabul for indoctrination, issued with Afghan passports and selected individuals then dispatched to training centres in various countries.

According to resources, financial assistance is provided by RAW for publication of propaganda material against Pakistan in Balochi Language, which is later distributed in Quetta, Khuzdar, Turbat, Gawader and Dera Bugti.

In this context, Premier Gillani handed over these proofs to his Indian counterpart in Sharm el-Sheikh and provided pictures of Brahamdag and other terrorists showing them meeting with Indian agents in Afghanistan as well as in India. This was the proof of Indian involvement in recruiting, training, financing and arming terrorists being infiltrated into Pakistan.

It is worth mentioning here that Indians are also operating in Iran through their embassy at Tehran and two consulates at Zahidan and Bandar Abbas. The interesting point to note is the establishment of Indian consulate at Zahidan where Indian population is limited to only few houses (21 x Sikh families).Obviously it is the proximity of Zahidan to Pak-Iran border that is of interest to the Indians. The consulate is a special RAW outpost and is always headed by a RAW officer and is operating freely against Pakistan. RAW is using every possible means to gain her objectives by exploiting Pakistan- Iran border population ethnic, cultural and sectarian bond.

Indian propaganda which has a connected strategy of stating, again and again, that Pakistan is a terrorist state and needs to be rebuked by USA rather than promoting it . India’s clients in Afghanistan and some in Pakistan, USA and elsewhere also echo these “sentiments”. Moreover, New Delhi while staying all along eastern and western border is almost controlling the terror activities in Pakistan. New Delhi must realize this fact that there are a lot of ethnic, linguistic, religious and territorial separatist movements inside India, instead of destabilizing her neighbouring countries. She must focus her attention in resolving her internal turbulence. By terrorizing the neighboring country neither she can hide her weakness nor can she gain any advantages. So my advice to Indian’s top brass is to refrain from using terrorism as a state tool and come on the table and work for establishing permanent regional peace. Obama must convince Manomohan Singh to stop Indian terrorism in Pakistan. it is the only way that the world can be successful in war against terrorism.

Obama to Chain Asian Watchdog –India. 23, Nov, 2009, Zain Syed

Target Pakistan: India RAWs subsidiary Afghan RAMA spread terror in Pakistan

2009-12-21T22:05:00.001-05:00

On November 2, 2009 Suicidal bomber entered in National Bank building in Rawalpindi and blasted him. According to the media reports 35 individuals died and many injured. Reportedly, most of the individuals present in the banks to draw their monthly salaries .It may be mentioned here that during last few weeks suspected foreign sponsored militants have struck Pakistan several times , killing about 250 people. In the evening again near Babu Saboo Interchange two suicidal bombers came in the car and blasted them once they were stopped by the police personals on duty located In this blast 15 police personals have sustained injuries. The current blasts reveal that foreign hand have hijacked the Pakistani Taliban militant movement and speeded up their intrigues against Pakistan. An army offensive in a Taliban stronghold area is progressing well and determined security forces under the government direction have decided to continue with the operation to defeat foreign sponsored terrorism. The recent terrorists’ attacks in Lahore, Rawalpindi, Peshawar, and Islamabad and on GHQ are the continuation of series of planned commandos’ actions against security forces and innocent people. These commandos are also known as Indian Black Cats and American Black Water terrorists’ organization.

The Taliban fighting in Afghanistan have already refused to help militants operating in Pakistan. It is worth mentioning here that nation is fully supporting army in elimination of terrorism. Anti Pakistan forces are not digesting security forces success, since win over militants would bring stability in the country which is against their set design. There are reports that recently established “Indio Israeli Intelligence Agency “(Triple IIIA) has infiltrated their agents through RAAM (Afghan Intelligence Organization) in Pakistan, Iran and China. The agency has hired Afghan citizen and local criminal elements for launching sabotage acts in the said countries.

There is a general perception here in Pakistan that USA is not serious in elimination of terrorism in the region. Pakistan time and again asked American to pressurize Indian for storming terrorism but unfortunately Washington’s government deliberately closing her eyes over Indian interference. According to media reports, on October 31, 2009 Sectary of State Hillary Clinton has said that USA does not have any evidence of Indian involvement in Balochistan. Mrs. Clinton without going into details said that she has not seen any evidence from Pakistan about India’s involvement in Balochistan. She has probably forgotten her General McChrystal argues. The General said that growing Indian political and economic influence in Afghanistan is likely to “exacerbate regional tensions”, and accuses Pakistan’s intelligence agency, the ISI, and Iran of helping the Taliban. His view would appear to be that Pakistan and Iran can counter India’s growing influence in Afghanistan only by assisting those Afghans who are not favourably inclined towards India, and this potpourri is making his job difficult. Gen Stanley McChrystal suggests that Indian influence is “jeopardising US efforts to defeat the Taliban and al Qa’eda extremists.

In fact India is funding and providing support to so called Baloch leaders to foment terrorism in Balochistan and rest of the country. Some Baloch leaders on their master’s directive are asking government to stop operation and are against the establishment of cantonments in the province. Actually there is no military operation is going on. The purpose of opposing the presence of own army in establishing the posts in own country could be, (1) to carry out sabotage activities in the country with our adversary help freely (2) stopping government in developing Gawadar Port (3) leveling grounds for USA and Indian interference in the region (4) obstructing in development programmes in Balochistan since progress might lose sardars’ hold over the general public.

The fact of Indian involvement in Balochistan and Pakistan’s tribal areas is no longer a covert plot. The prevailing security environment has provided a chance to our adversary to carry out clandestine operations covertly and openly with a view to create instability our country. Pakistan Army has deployed over 50,000 troops to South Waziristan to take on an estimated 12,000 militants, including up to 1,500 foreign fighters, among them Uzbeks and Arabs. The soldiers captured the hometown of the country's Taliban chief on November 01, 2009. Pakistan Air Chief is also ensuring determined air support to the ground forces too. Pakistan army Spokes man Major General Athar Abbas also very rightly claimed that Taliban are in disarray due to their continue depletion in the current operation. He also said that our enemy country is directly involved in spreading terrorism and ongoing blasts wave. Pakistan Information also mentioned in a joint press conference that Nation will keep on supporting her forces in elimination of terrorism form the country. On November 2, 2009 Major General Athar Abbas also said huge quantity of Indian made ammunition and medical equipment has been recovered during on going operation. At this moment Pakistan Information minister stated that matter would be taken with India on diplomatic front too.

Moreover it is also a known fact that India has a desire to keep world community away from her Maoist’s movement and prevailing communal violence in so called secular country. The investigations of Mumbai Drama and Samjhota Express and blasts at Margao in Gao has reveled that wife of state transport minister has a link with Sanatan Sanstha, a right –wing Hindu Group is involved in the blast. Reportedly Lt col Prohit nominated accused of Samhjota Express has also illicit relations with wife of the minister too. The relationship forced wife of the minister to join Hindu terrorist organization. Triple III Agency Targeting Pakistan, 03, Nov, 2009, Zaheerul Hassan

Rebuild Gaza Now: Jimmy Carter

2009-12-21T20:24:00.001-05:00

It is generally recognised that the Middle East peace process is in the doldrums, almost moribund. Israeli settlement expansion within Palestine continues, and PLO leaders refuse to join in renewed peace talks without a settlement freeze, knowing that no Arab or Islamic nation will accept any comprehensive agreement while Israel retains control of East Jerusalem.

US objections have impeded Egyptian efforts to resolve differences between Hamas and Fatah that could lead to 2010 elections. With this stalemate, PLO leaders have decided that President Mahmoud Abbas will continue in power until elections can be held - a decision condemned by many Palestinians.

Even though Syria and Israel under the Olmert government had almost reached an agreement with Turkey's help, the current prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, rejects Turkey as a mediator on the Golan Heights. No apparent alternative is in the offing.

The UN general assembly approved a report issued by its human rights council that called on Israel and the Palestinians to investigate charges of war crimes during the recent Gaza war, but positive responses seem unlikely.

In summary: UN resolutions, Geneva conventions, previous agreements between Israelis and Palestinians, the Arab peace initiative, and official policies of the US and other nations are all being ignored. In the meantime, the demolition of Arab houses, expansion of Israeli settlements in East Jerusalem and the West Bank, and Palestinian recalcitrance threaten any real prospect for peace.

Of more immediate concern, those under siege in Gaza face another winter of intense personal suffering. I visited Gaza after the devastating January war and observed homeless people huddling in makeshift tents, under plastic sheets, or in caves dug into the debris of their former homes. Despite offers by Palestinian leaders and international agencies to guarantee no use of imported materials for even defensive military purposes, cement, lumber, and panes of glass are not being permitted to pass entry points into Gaza. The US and other nations have accepted this abhorrent situation without forceful corrective action.

I have discussed ways to assist the citizens of Gaza with a number of Arab and European leaders and their common response is that the Israeli blockade makes any assistance impossible. Donors point out that they have provided enormous aid funds to build schools, hospitals and factories, only to see them destroyed in a few hours by precision bombs and missiles. Without international guarantees, why risk similar losses in the future?

It is time to face the fact that, for the past 30 years, no one nation has been able or willing to break the impasse and induce the disputing parties to comply with international law. We cannot wait any longer. Israel has long argued that it cannot negotiate with terrorists, yet has had an entire year without terrorism and still could not negotiate. President Obama has promised active involvement of the US government, but no formal peace talks have begun and no comprehensive framework for peace has been proposed. Individually and collectively, the world powers must act.

One recent glimmer of life has been the 8 December decision of EU foreign ministers to restate the long-standing basic requirements for peace commonly accepted within the international community, including that Israel's pre-1967 boundaries will prevail unless modified by a negotiated agreement with the Palestinians. A week later the new EU foreign policy chief, Baroness Catherine Ashton, reiterated this statement in even stronger terms and called for the international Quartet to be "reinvigorated". This is a promising prospect.

President Obama was right to insist on a two-state solution and a complete settlement freeze as the basis for negotiations. Since Israel has rejected the freeze and the Palestinians won't negotiate without it, a logical step is for all Quartet members (the US, EU, Russia and UN) to support the Obama proposal by declaring any further expansion of settlements illegal and refusing to veto UN security council decisions to condemn such settlements. This might restrain Israel and also bring Palestinians to the negotiating table.

At the same time, the Quartet should join with Turkey and invite Syria and Israel to negotiate a solution to the Golan Heights dispute.

Without ascribing blame to any of the disputing parties, the Quartet also should begin rebuilding Gaza by organising relief efforts under the supervision of an active special envoy, overseeing a ceasefire between Israel and Hamas, and mediating an opening of the crossings. The cries of homeless and freezing people demand immediate relief.

Gaza Must Be Rebuilt Now, By Jimmy Carter, 21 December, 2009, The Guardian

This is a time for bold action, and the season for forgiveness, reconciliation and peace. News and Media Limited 2009

Islamabad should dump “transit trade deal” with Afghanistan

2009-12-21T20:13:00.001-05:00

The US is forcing and chaperoning the transit trade deal with Afghanistan. According to the deal Tata trucks will rumble from Delhi through Kabul and then on to Central Asia. At its best, Indian goods will compete with Pakistani goods in Kabul, Dushambe, Ferghana and beyond. At its worst, Delhi will be able to send arms and equipment to the mercenaries that cause murder and mayhem in Pakistan.

All around, the transit trade deal is a bad deal for Pakistan, and Islamabad should never have agreed to it. The old agreement has worked for the past six decades. Let it stay in place.

Military vehicles are seen standing in gridlock along the Chaman Pakistan-Afghanistan border. -Reuters File Photo

KABUL: The final round of technical level talks between Pakistan-Afghanistan for new transit trade agreement were attempted as Pakistan wants assurance that the new agreement would not be misused for terror financing, drug trafficking and arms trade.

The two sides couldn’t reach on an agreement in the three day round and decided to hold another session in early January.
It was the final round of technical level talks between Pakistan and Afghanistan to finalize the modalities of the Pak-Afghan Transit Trade Agreement.

But the US monitored talks hit snags after Islamabad’s proposal of attaching tough security related strings.

Afghanistan wants Pakistan to allow Afghan trucks to transport goods through Pakistan’s territory from Chaman and Torkhum border to Wagha border and Karachi and Gawadar port without being unloaded and checked.

Whereas Pakistan wants authority to inspect the trucks so that any illegal goods couldn’t be transport.

Pakistan also wants to know that whether the trucks would return empty from Wagha border or would have something load in them. -DawnNews

This transit trade agreement is a backhanded attempt to give access to Bharat. It will allow Bharati goods to flood Kabul. This transit deal is bad for business, bad for trade, and bad for Pakistani foreign policy.

Pakistanis blame the current bloody wave of bombings in their nation on U.S. mercenaries from Xe and old foe India

2009-12-21T20:02:00.001-05:00

On my office wall hang photos of yours truly with Pakistan's last four leaders. Two -- Zia ul Haq and Benazir Bhutto -- were murdered. Former prime minister Nawaz Sharif was ousted in a military coup led by photo number four, Gen. Pervez Musharraf, who was deposed by Pakistan's military in a slow-motion coup.

Either I'm a jinx, or leading Pakistan is a job with poor career prospects.

Now, Washington is finally getting the democracy it has been calling for in Pakistan -- and it's the mother of all backfires.

I've not met Pakistan's current president, Asif Ali Zardari, the widower of Benazir Bhutto. But I've written for decades about corruption charges that relentlessly follow him. Zardari, known as "Mr. 10%" from when he was in his wife's government, was in charge of approving government contracts.

In 2008, Washington sought to rescue Musharraf's foundering dictatorship by convincing the popular but exiled Benazir Bhutto to front as democratic window-dressing for continued military rule. Her price: Amnesty for a long list of corruption charges against her and her husband.

The U.S. and Britain quietly arranged the amnesty for the Bhuttos and thousands of their indicted supporters (and other political figures).

But just before Benazir's assassination, she told me jealous associates of Musharraf were gunning for her.

Asif Zardari then inherited Benazir's People's Party, Pakistan's largest. He became president, thanks to strong U.S. political and financial support.

In return, Zardari supported the U.S. war in Afghanistan and allowed the Pentagon to keep using Pakistan's bases and military personnel. Washington promised at least $8 billion.

That sleazy deal has now come unstuck as Pakistan's newest, rather improbable democratic hero, Supreme Court Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry, enforced the law by reinstating the corruption charges.

Zardari has presidential immunity against criminal charges. But his chief lieutenants face prosecution, notably regime strongman, Interior Minister Rehman Malik, and Defence Minister Ahmed Mukhtar. Both are key supporters and facilitators of U.S. military operations in Afghanistan, America's use of Pakistani bases and Pakistan's war against its Pashtun tribesmen.

Opposition parties are demanding Zardari and senior aides resign. Islamabad is in an uproar just when Washington needs Pakistan's government to intensify the war against the so-called Pakistani Taliban and support growing U.S. military efforts in Afghanistan and intensifying drone attacks inside Pakistan.

Skeletons are dancing out of Zardari's closets: $63 million in illegal kickbacks and commissions allegedly hidden in Swiss bank accounts by the Bhuttos; Zardari's estimated personal fortune of $2 billion; luxurious properties in the U.S., France, Spain and Britain, and on it goes. Zardari spent 11 years in jail in Pakistan on corruption charges -- which Benazir claimed were politically motivated. He avoided trial in Switzerland by claiming mental illness.

The Bhuttos remain one of the largest feudal landowners in a desperately poor nation where annual income is $1,027 US and illiteracy is over 50%. Pakistan has been ruled since its creation in 1947 by either callous feudal landlords, who bought and sold politicians like bags of basmati rice, or by generals.

The Zardari's days as Washington's man in Islamabad are numbered. Anti-American fury is surging with popular claims that Pakistan has been "occupied" by the U.S., treated like a third-rate banana republic and is run by corrupt, U.S.-installed stooges.

Many Pakistanis blame the current bloody wave of bombings in their nation on U.S. mercenaries from Xe (formerly Blackwater) and old foe India staging revenge attacks.

Most Pakistanis believe Washington is bent on tearing apart their unstable nation to seize its nuclear weapons.

Washington is almost back to square one in turbulent Pakistan. […]

As we enter 2010, the ugly acronym, "Afpak," will bedevil, befuddle and consume the Obama White House that so unwisely and rashly ignored Gen. Douglas MacArthur's wise warning to avoid land wars in Asia. US Turbulence Buffets Pakistan, Corruption and anti-American fury unravels troubled country, by Eric Margolis

Nepal’s just struggle against Indian hegemony: Maoists lead charge against Delhi puppets

2009-12-21T18:41:00.001-05:00

Nepal Crippled as Strike Enters Second Day

Narenda Shrestha/European Pressphoto Agency

Maoist party supporters chanted anti-government slogans as they faced Nepalese security forces during a second day of three day nationwide general strike in Kathmandu on Monday.

NEW DELHI — Thousands of Maoist protesters in Nepal enforced the second day of their nationwide general strike on Monday, shouting anti-government slogans and paralyzing much of the country as businesses remained shuttered and vehicle traffic was almost nonexistent in the capital, Katmandu.

The quieter protests Monday contrasted with the violent clashes that erupted a day earlier between the police and demonstrators in Katmandu. On Sunday, the police arrested at least 70 people as officers used batons and tear gas to break up protesters, who were blocking roads and preventing Nepal’s prime minister from reaching his residence after returning from the international climate change talks in Copenhagen.

“The situation is quite normal compared to yesterday,” said Jaya Mukunda Khanal, spokesman for the Nepal Home Ministry. “People are in the streets. There is no transportation, but people can walk around.”

The general strike is the latest development in Nepal’s mounting political crisis. Three years after Maoist rebels agreed to end their decade-old armed revolt and participate in politics, the peace process is under a severe strain. In the streets of Katmandu on Monday, thousands of Maoists blocked intersections near ministerial buildings, shouting slogans and demanding the resignation of the current government.

Last year, the Maoists won enough seats in national elections to lead a coalition government and elect their leader, Pushpa Kamal Dahal, also known as Prachanda, as prime minister. But Prachanda resigned in May to protest a constitutional dispute with the president over the Nepalese military. Since then, the Maoists have staged demonstrations and even declared certain areas, including Katmandu, as symbolic “autonomous zones” beyond governmental authority.

The clash on Sunday occurred around 2:30 p.m. Bigyan Sharma, deputy inspector general of the Nepal police, said officers approached protesters, who were blocking a main road leading from the airport into the city. He said officers wanted to clear the road to allow the prime minister, Madhav Kumar Nepal, to reach his residence after returning from the talks in Copenhagen.

Officer Sharma said the protesters refused to move and then hurled stones at officers, badly injuring a police commander, who was taken to the hospital. Officer Sharma said the police then turned water cannons on the demonstrators while other officers used batons and tear gas. Ultimately, the authorities transported the prime minister by an alternate route, Officer Sharma said.

“The police were not too aggressive,” said Mr. Khanal, the home ministry spokesman. “The police had to clear the road.”

But Dinanath Sharma, a spokesman for the Maoists, disputed that account and accused the police of overzealousness. He said officers attacked peaceful protesters and that two Maoist parliamentarians were badly injured. “Our protest program is peaceful,” Mr. Sharma said. “It was not from our side. The police forcefully tried to suppress us.”

On Monday, a relative calm settled over Katmandu, witnesses said. Demonstrators were holding sit-down protests in groups of 100 or 200, according to the police, calling for the “people’s supremacy.”

The strike is schedule to end Tuesday. The police estimated that 4,000 protesters were on the streets of the capital, while other demonstrations were underway in other cities in Nepal.

By JIM YARDLEY Published: December 21, 2009

Kiyani says no to action in North Waziristan

2009-12-20T18:40:00.000-05:00

(CBS/AP)

When President Barack Obama announced his decision to send an additional 30,000 U.S. troops to Afghanistan, he stressed that success in that region was "inextricably linked to our partnership with Pakistan."
But despite the rhetoric of increased cooperation on counter-terrorism, relations between the two nations appear to be frayed.
Pakistan has refused U.S. demands that it crack down on Siraj Haqqani, an Afghan Taliban militant leading insurgents against American forces but who also serves as an asset for Pakistani intelligence, according to a New York Times report Tuesday.
Haqqani uses the restive Pakistani region of North Waziristan as a safe haven and has been linked to senior al Qaeda leaders, including Osama bin Laden, according to the report.
The U.S. has pressed the Pakistani military to turn on Haqqani, both in State Department messages and a follow-up meeting by Gen. David Petraeus. Pakistan's failure to cooperate could mean increased American drone attacks within their border, U.S. officials have reportedly told them.
According to the report, Pakistani officials are privately fuming over the increasing burden of their U.S. alliance and view Mr. Obama's new surge strategy with skepticism. In refusing to go after Haqqani, Pakistan may be preparing for a post-America Afghanistan – one in which regional powers like China, Russia and, especially, India will jockey for influence. In short, Pakistan may need Haqqani to shore up support among locals.

Gen. Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, the head of Pakistan's military, has argued against going after Haqqani for short-term reasons: Pakistan has its hands full fighting its own Taliban in South Waziristan and can't afford to wage a second offensive against the Afghan Taliban, which moves in and out of North Waziristan.

Pakistani officials also say that because Haqqani spends so much time in Afghanistan, the U.S. could eliminate him there, without help from Pakistan, according to the report. December 15, 2009 11:15 AM, Pakistan, U.S. at Odds over Posted by Daniel Carty Taliban Leader

There is hardly any doubt regarding the critical importance of the military operation in Pakistan’s troubled South Waziristan tribal agency, which is considered to be the epicenter of jihad and the nerve center of the Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) and their allies. The latest military operation started in mid-October and has been widely described as successful in capturing most of the TTP bases in the difficult terrain along the Afghanistan border. After years of setbacks and failures in containing the rising power of the militants, Pakistan’s military has finally managed to dismantle militant bases in this critically important region, famous for its rebel movements and legendary tales of resistance. To encourage his soldiers, Pakistan’s military chief, General Ashfaq Pervez Kayani, went in person to advanced positions in Waziristan. Pakistan’s western allies, who have long been critical of its military performance against Taliban militants, have also shown appreciation for Pakistan’s military performance. Even President Obama mentioned the Waziristan military offensive in his much talked about December 1 speech on America’s Afghanistan policy at the U.S. military academy at West Point, in which he referred to extremist militants as a “common threat” to both the United States and Pakistan.
Pakistan recently announced that its military has completed the offensive in the tribal region of South Waziristan and that military operations may now be expanded to the Orakzai Tribal Agency, where many Taliban commanders are thought to be hiding. However, Pakistan Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani quickly backed away from this announcement, describing the operations as “ongoing” (BBC, December 12).
The success achieved by Pakistani forces in South Waziristan is vitally important to the country’s lingering war against terrorism. The Waziristan counterterrorism model could be applied to other areas where the Taliban have strongholds and wreak havoc on the lives of innocent people. However, the latest wave of terror attacks clearly demonstrate that merely disrupting the Taliban bases does not mean that the strategy has worked. In fact, it seems the Taliban have successfully expanded their war beyond the mountains of South Waziristan. They are claiming responsibility for many of the latest attacks, most notably the attack targeting senior officers in the Pakistan Army while they were praying in a highly secure mosque in the garrison city of Rawalpindi. This attack revealed that the fight against Taliban militants is far from won, and the Taliban suicide squad is still intact (Dawn [Karachi], December 5).
“The Path to Salvation”
While highlighting the importance of this offensive, Pakistani officials said that the military operation in Waziristan is a war for the country’s existence and will continue to a logical end: the complete elimination of militants (The News [Islamabad], October 21). Code-named Rah-e-Nejat (Path to Salvation), the operation was launched on October 17 after months of preparation that involved amassing nearly 30,000 troops near the South Waziristan agency and shelling of the Mahsud tribes in order to weaken the Taliban position. In the full-fledged offensive, Pakistani forces not only started using heavy weaponry, but also fighter jets and helicopter gunships. Initial reports suggested that the government’s 30,000 soldiers were taking part in the operation against what officials described as 10,000 hardcore militants. This number included between 1,000 to 1,500 foreign fighters, mostly Uzbeks (Dawn, October 18). Military officials have said that more than 600 militants and 70 security personnel have been killed in the six-week long military operation (The News, November 30).

Many analysts quickly described this much-awaited operation as the “mother of all battles,” saying tough resistance from the militant side would provide the army with its greatest challenge yet (Daily Times [Islamabad] October 8). Many also referred to the setbacks faced by Pakistani forces in this region since the start of the current insurgency in 2003-2004. Besides dozens of minor clashes and skirmishes, the three major previous operations in the South Waziristan tribal agency in 2004, 2005 and 2008 all ended in embarrassment for the Pakistani forces, leading the government to resort to controversial “peace deals.” Unfortunately, all these so-called peace deals not only provided the militants with a respite, but also helped them in strengthening and re-organizing themselves (Dawn, October 18).

Several events paved the way for the Pakistani Army’s operation in South Waziristan. First was the successful military offensive earlier this year in the Swat Valley against militants led by a local radical cleric, Maulana Fazlullah, which served as a morale booster for the military and inspired confidence in the people. The Swat Valley was taken over by Fazlullah’s forces and they implemented a strict version of Shari’a based on the Afghan Taliban government of the mid-90s. Second, the killing of Baitullah Mahsud in an August 5 American drone attack led officials to believe the time would be ripe for a military offensive while the TTP were mourning the death of their leader. A final catalyst was the spectacular attack on the Army’s headquarters in Rawalpindi in October that left 20 people dead. The Pakistani Taliban took responsibility for the attack on the GHQ, Pakistan’s Pentagon, in which ten gunmen disguised as soldiers infiltrated the heavily guarded building (Daily Times [Lahore], October 13).The attack left the civilian and military leadership with no choice but to go after the TTP and target their main hub in South Waziristan (The News [Islamabad] October 20).

As was the case in the Swat military operation, there was again strong public support for the offensive in South Waziristan. For the first time, the Swat military operation was seen by the local people as Pakistan’s own offensive, not something done at the behest of the United States. A day before the launching of the Waziristan operation, the military leadership received significant political support from all of the mainstream political parties - ruling as well as opposition – except the pro-Taliban religious parties.

The Waziristan offensive was a much more difficult campaign with many more casualties than the Swat operation earlier this year. Surprisingly, Pakistani forces easily captured some important places like Makeen, Sararogha, Laddah, Kunigaram and Kotkai in four weeks without any tough resistance. These areas once made up the stronghold of the slain TTP commander, Baitullah Mahsud.

TTP Leadership Has Survived
Few military operations have received as much advance “publicity” as the South Waziristan offensive. Military strategists usually want to capture the enemy off guard. In South Waziristan’s case, the first formal, well-publicized statement came in June from the governor of the North-West Frontier Province, Owais Ghani, when he announced the government had finally decided to go all out against the Pakistani Taliban and its leader. There were warnings from many different quarters that a delay in the operation could provide the opportunity for militants, particularly the TTP leadership, to leave for Afghanistan or slip into other areas of Pakistan. In fact, there were strong voices in favor of a quick military operation while the Taliban were on the run after the military’s success in Swat.

Now that the first phase of the military operation in Waziristan is almost complete, with the major towns captured and officials claiming to dismantle militant’s bases, it is clear that top TTP leaders have survived and successfully managed to escape to other secure regions. This includes the movement’s current leader, Hakimullah Mahsud, and his top lieutenant, Wali-ur-Rahman. It is not obvious where they have gone, but it is quite clear that they have unleashed a fresh wave of terror by sending their suicide squads across the country.

The official story is that the three-month operation was meant to blockade the Mahsud tribal territory to stop the flow of TTP supplies and to provide an opportunity for the local civilian population to leave the region. Since the Army was still maintaining order in parts of the Swat Valley with a troop presence of 20,000 soldiers, the government did not want to open another front immediately and delayed the Waziristan operation (Daily Times, July 21). The Waziristan operation may not ensure peace in the region because the TTP leadership is still at large. It is likely that militants retreated to their hideouts in secure regions where they can easily regroup and launch a guerilla war with terrorist attacks across the country (Daily Times, November 8).

Conclusion
The mountainous border region of South Waziristan is of critical importance not only to Pakistan’s struggle against militancy, but also for the U.S-led war on terror in the region, soon to be reinforced by 30,000 more U.S troops in Afghanistan. It was South Waziristan where the current insurgency began in 2003-2004, and it was this same region which gave birth to the Pakistani Taliban phenomenon that later expanded to other parts of the tribal region, finally culminating in the formation of the TTP in December 2007 under the leadership of Baitullah Mahsud. The region has been under the control of militants who have used this space not only for terrorist acts inside Pakistan but also for staging attacks across the border in Afghanistan. Terrorists were openly trained here and suicide bombers, mostly teenage boys, were trained and indoctrinated in these mountains. At times, South Waziristan also served as a nerve center for the militants’ poisonous propaganda against the Pakistani state and the United States and its allies (The News, Islamabad, October 23).
All this makes the physical occupation of South Waziristan by the Pakistani forces a major success, particularly after years of setbacks and embarrassments which included losing military posts, the surrender of troops to the TTP and failed peace deals with the militants. The jihadis have lost control of Waziristan, but they have successfully taken the war into the more secure urban areas of Pakistan, where they have been able to carry out terrorist strikes on the civilian population. The South Waziristan operation could be just the beginning of a long and difficult war.

Military Victory in South Waziristan or the Beginning of a Long War? Publication: Terrorism Monitor Volume: 7 Issue: 38, December 15, 2009 09:57 AM Age: By: Imtiaz Ali

India’s Nuclear Fizzle: Nuclear scientists still bickering over failure

2009-12-19T21:05:00.000-05:00

K Santhanam, a retired DRDO scientist, on Monday accused former AEC chief Anil Kakodkar of “ignoring facts” about the yield of the nuclear tests done at Pokhran in May 1998, calling him “a liar” motivated by institutional loyalties.

“Figures don’t lie, but liars will figure. He chose to ignore facts for his own reasons,” Mr. Santhanam told PTI when his comments were sought on remarks made by Mr. Kakodkar in a TV interview.

Mr. Kakodkar had said yesterday that DRDO scientists had provided only “logistic support” to the nuclear test and that it would not be correct to assume Mr. Santhanam knew everything, as information was given only on a need-to-know basis.

“There are several inaccuracies in his (Kakodkar’s) statement. The DRDO was a major partner in the 1998 tests and not what Kakodkar has claimed...that we only provided logistical support. That is very far away from truth,” Mr. Santhanam said.

“He (Kakodkar) is motivated by institutional loyalties,” he said when asked about the former AEC chief’s assertion that the nuclear tests were a success and had yielded more than 45 kilo tons.

“We (DRDO scientists) were there as those responsible for the explosive trigger and measuring chain reaction in the core. We were responsible for full-fledged high-end explosive development and production without which the atom bomb is naked,” Mr. Santhanam, a key scientist involved in the 1998 nuclear tests, said.
Mr. Santhanam said the Centre had entrusted DRDO with the responsibility of “site instrumentation” to measure the yield of the (nuclear) devise tested.

“These instruments were of international class and standards. There can be no two opinions on the quality of the instruments,” he said, on Mr. Kakodkar’s remarks that these had not worked during the nuclear tests.

“Obviously the work done by DRDO is way beyond just logistics support,” Mr. Santhanam added.
On Kakodkar’s assurances to the armed forces on the quality of the arsenal, the former DRDO scientist said assurances were alright, but “at a deeper scientific level, one should not toy with scientific data.”

Accusing Kakodkar of a personal attack on him, Mr. Santhanam said the former’s comments were in very poor taste.
“Go after the player and not the ball, seems the policy -- attack the individual and not his arguments,” he said.
Mr. Santhanam said 11 years ago, in 1998, soon after the yield of the tests were collated, he had raised the issue. “I think much more work needs to be done by the Trombay boys,” he added.
Demanding an examination of the tests data by an independent panel of experts, who could later recommend future course to the government, the former DRDO scientists said most scientific nations would have done it, adding only in religion, no questions or doubts could be raised against preachings.
“In science, you question all the time till truth prevails,” he said

Failed Warrior “diplomacy” of India

2009-12-19T21:02:00.000-05:00

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's recent state visit to Washington represented another milestone in India's growing cooperation with the sole super power. However, in the absence of a major breakthrough in their multi-dimensional relationship, attention quickly shifted to Indo-US divergences on various facets of their cooperation. The visit also became Pakistan-centric because of Indian pressure on US hosts to lean on Pakistan for curbing militancy targeting India. President Obama and his aides, politely listened to Indian lament but counseled recognition of Pakistan's on-going operations to defeat the terrorists. As if feeling somewhat irritated by India's one-point agenda, the American side did not hesitate to publicly acknowledge Pakistan's vital role in regional peace and stability.

We, in Pakistan know full well that the India of the 21st century has come a long way from the Nehruvian era of nationalism, state enterprise and non-alignment. The United States now occupies the premier place in India's calculus of economic and strategic partnerships. Conversely, the US, which was closely linked to Pakistan, feels free to enhance her cooperation with India to a level where it would count as a factor in the power structure. It was, therefore, disconcerting to see a big country like India indulging in propaganda against her smaller neighbour during a bilateral visit.

Pakistan had to accept the growing Indo-US partnership as a fact of life in the post-cold war period. But two parallel developments after 9/11 came to have a profound impact on the triangular character of the relations linking the US with India and Pakistan. America's pressing need to get Pakistan's maximum cooperation in the fight against Al Qaeda and the Taliban had visibly upset India, and her friends in the administration supported by the Indian-American lobby and the US industry. It succeeded in promoting an extraordinary package of strategic cooperation for India that included the ambitious plan for civil nuclear cooperation. Criticism by the non-proliferation lobby and Pakistan's protest were cast aside as the Bush administration proceeded to develop "a unique relationship with a unique country."

The Bush team further justified the India package as a way of helping India to become a great power in the 21st century as a counter-weight to China. However, this imaginary plank of the strategic partnership with India has crumbled with President Obama embarking on building a close partnership with China as a major determinant of global power play. To put it candidly, the unique relationship carved for India is now passing through turbulent waters and nobody seems to be sure about its future.

Pakistan meanwhile has to cope with the multiplier effect of Indo-US calls for removing terrorist safe havens from its soil. It is hard to imagine that the world's two major democracies are unaware of the genesis of […] militancy. Or that they are unmindful of the difficulties in achieving that objective. Soon after 9/11, Argentina's veteran statesman and one-time foreign minister, Guido di Tella had compared terrorism to organised crime, concluding that the goal of its eradication would be as daunting as that of eliminating drug trafficking. Expecting Pakistan to eradicate quickly and effectively the militant groups who are determined to create chaos and warfare borders somewhere between wishful thinking and naivete.

In the months that followed 9/11, it was not unusual to hear politicians and scholars linking the rise of jihadist organisations to the oppression of people in Palestine and Kashmir. Today, any such argument would be dismissed in the name of zero tolerance to terrorism as if it was a ghastly phenomenon occurring on its own. We are facing a situation where India takes offence to Barack Obama's suggestion to resolve the Kashmir dispute. More recently, India showed knee-jerk annoyance over the US seeking China's cooperation in helping peace and security in South Asia.

There is no direct link between the situation in Palestine and Kashmir but it so happens that Israel too is unhappy over Obama's initiatives to kick-start the Middle East peace process. Yet, the Nobel Peace Committee had the vision to recognise the merit of a leader who brings hope to the dispossessed that have become second-rate citizens in their own homelands. Pakistan can only regret the Indian riposte to a perfectly reasonable US-China interest in helping India and Pakistan resolve their outstanding disputes in the interest of regional and global peace. New Delhi went on the offensive first by ruling out any third-party role in contentious issues with Pakistan, and secondly by making relations with Pakistan contingent upon prosecution of Mumbai suspects.

The hard-line stance adopted by Mr Singh was followed by threats of limited war if another attack like Mumbai takes place. India's self-professed coercive diplomacy has now metamorphosed into warrior diplomacy used as a hand-maiden of militarist designs. As a result, diplomacy is conducted like war, using propaganda as its main weapon. The adversary is pursued relentlessly and efforts made to cut off its supplies. Threats of war are used as manoeuvres to convince the other side of its vulnerability. The offer of peace is made at the cost of capitulation. No effort is spared to corner enemy. In warrior diplomacy, the preparations for a visit to the US are undertaken along the lines of planning for another war operation.

The warrior brand of diplomacy has become a convenient vehicle for India to rule out resumption of the composite dialogue process, which India feels has run its course. It is inclined to use the option of a limited dialogue as it suits her domestic considerations. Alongside, New Delhi has unleashed a propaganda campaign through public diplomacy at the highest levels. This desire to become both the prosecutor and the judge should not be lost on the outside world.

Pakistan has reasons to be frustrated with India's demands for tough action against the militants while putting off the dialogue. Surprisingly, the Pakistani media which gives generous coverage to Indian accusations, seems to have forgotten that action against the perpetrators of the Samjhota carnage is pending in India. The leadership here thinks that by suspending the dialogue, India is not countering the militants' design of heightening mistrust between the two neighbours.
The prevailing Indian stance mirrors views in certain circles, contending that the security establishment has not abandoned its optic of good and bad Taliban. They argue that by exerting pressure on Pakistan through the US, Islamabad may take some decisive action against the movements targeting India. Washington is not in a position to persuade India to revive the dialogue because it has no carrot to offer in return.

While India's propaganda receives coverage in the international media, including our own, Pakistan's calls for resuming the talks does not receive proper coverage in India and elsewhere. Even if Pakistan goes an extra mile to placate Indian concerns, the most likely outcome would be: do more. Time has come for a major review of ways of countering the warrior diplomacy being pursued by India. This does not mean that we should not consider taking steps that may be conducive to blunt the charge that India could be targeted by some jihadi attack, which in turn could be used as a pretext for retaliation. India too should recognise that she can gain Pakistan's confidence and cooperation by returning to a framework of negotiations rather than continuing public diplomacy with all guns blazing.
The writer is Pakistan's former ambassador to the European Union.

Reflections on India By Sean Paul Kelley

2009-12-19T20:00:00.000-05:00

Reflections on India By Sean Paul Kelley

The two power centers in Pakistan

2009-12-18T18:43:00.000-05:00

Among politicians, only Z.A. Bhutto was a strong ruler, preceded by Liaquat Ali by a generation. The middle-class public officials have been generally more powerful than those from the political class, ranging from Ghulam Mohammad and Iskandar Mirza to Ayub, Yahya, Zia, Ghulam Ishaq and Musharraf.

In Pakistan, two dominant classes compete with each other for influence and privilege. One is the middle class, which provides the catchment area for the civil bureaucracy, technocrats, the military’s officer cadre and the business community.

The other can be called, for lack of a better term, the political class that includes political entrepreneurs of various kinds at various levels, led by the landed and tribal elite.

These two classes represent the two power centres in the country. The middle class operates as the most stable, influential and status quo-oriented segment of society. The institutional expression of this class is realised through the state apparatus. The process of post-recruitment socialisation in the form of the training of the bureaucracy and army officers aims at merging their individual ambitions with an all-pervasive institutional ethos.

The middle class has a near-monopoly over higher education, professional expertise and the cultural universe of the nation. Very few on top and at the bottom level of society make it to these fields. The three metropolitan centres of Karachi, Lahore and Islamabad, followed by Faisalabad, Multan, Rawalpindi, Peshawar, Hyderabad, Sialkot, Gujranwala, Sukkur, Quetta, Sargodha and a host of other cities represent a sprinkling of the middle class in varying degrees.

More than any other section of society, the middle class is ideologically oriented in the two domains of religion and nationalism. It adheres to scriptural Islam as opposed to syncretic Islam. It supports the madressah-oriented written tradition as opposed to the shrine-based oral tradition of Islam. It is pan-Islamic in its vision. It seeks the unity of the Muslim world and upholds a dichotomous worldview based on conflict between Islam and the West. Secondly, the middle class supersedes all other classes in its nationalist framework of thought, which operates essentially in negative terms. In six decades, it has projected nationalism in the context of the perceived enemies of the nation. It has been all along anti-Indian, anti-Soviet Union in the first four decades and anti-American in the last two decades. It is also anti-communist and anti-secular.

The composition of the middle class has changed in two generations. Previously, it came from the impoverished aristocracy, politicians, the intelligentsia, lawyers, judges and public careerists of various kinds.

In recent decades, the professional middle classes — doctors, engineers, architects, accountants, corporate managers and information technologists among others — have been the descendants of military officers and bureaucrats in increasingly larger numbers. Their political outlook reflects their social background.

The middle class, most typically if not universally, hates democracy. Partition shaped the social, cultural, political and economic views of the emergent middle class along security-oriented lines and a state-centred rather than society-oriented policy framework.

This class lacks a social reformist vision and a public conscience. It distrusts the capacity and thus the right of what it considers the uneducated, irresponsible, superstitious and ‘primitive’ masses to exercise their vote and elect governments.

An absolute majority of the middle class is rightist in its collective thrust for policy and ideology. This includes: the moneyed right, i.e. the commercial elite committed to the preservation of the current privileged structures; the moral right, as the upholder of a conservative code of ethics; and the religious right, with its increasingly radical Islamic worldview. The rightist middle class, or parts of it, often served as a constituency of army rule in Pakistan.

At the other end, the political class comprises electoral heavyweights vying for power. Politicians are strong in the locality but weak in terms of institutions such as political parties or parliament. They are more pragmatic than visionary. While the middle class vows to serve the ‘national interest’ conceived in an idealised form, the political class pledges to serve ‘the public interest’ understood in terms of the distribution of resources on the ground.

Instead of mosque and madressah, the political class adheres to pir and shrine. The vast rural hinterland of Pakistan is studded with a number of devotional sites belonging to Sufi orders. The political class reflects the social structure based on caste and tribe. Partisanship rather than consensus is the hallmark of its political imagination. Ultimately, it depends on the civil bureaucracy for the articulation of its interest.

The political class considers nationalism as the outermost expression of collective life, not as a mission-mantled agenda. It adheres to various sub-national identities based on ethno-linguistic ties, and seeks to build alliances across communities and regions. If ideology is at the heart of the middle class ethos, identity is the rallying point of the political class in pursuit of electoral victory or a popular movement.

The middle class has enhanced awareness about the issue of corruption. It finds it extremely difficult to understand why people vote for ‘corrupt’ politicians. It fails to appreciate that the state structure, run by an administrative elite rooted in the middle class, bars people’s access to the system of governance. People seek to break open the gates of the remote, impersonal ruling mechanism with the help of politicians, corrupt or otherwise.

The middle-class public officials have been generally more powerful than those from the political class, ranging from Ghulam Mohammad and Iskandar Mirza to Ayub, Yahya, Zia, Ghulam Ishaq and Musharraf. Among politicians, only Z.A. Bhutto was a strong ruler, preceded by Liaquat Ali by a generation.

However, it is the less visible and more powerful bureaucrats, generals, judges and ulema from the middle class who wield real power in the administrative, legal, economic, security, cultural and ideological spheres of public activity. Their stock-in-trade is: democracy is hijacked by ‘feudals’; politicians are corrupt and inefficient; society is not yet fit for democracy.

Of course, there are liberal, progressive and public-spirited intellectuals, lawyers, civil society activists, trade unionists, poets, writers, playwrights and media persons, all from the middle class, who uphold the cause of democracy. They speak, write, demonstrate, sing, strike, organise, and perform, all for democracy. Unfortunately, they are only a fraction of the middle class.

A tale of two classes By Mohammad Waseem, Tuesday, 15 Dec, 2009,

Tags: middle class,political class,democracy

Manufacturing Windmill Turbines In Pakistan

2009-12-18T18:38:00.000-05:00

Government has finally come out with directives to to the State Engineering Corporation to explore manufacturing of windmills turbines locally. The ministry of industries is currently evaluating international tenders for the installation of wind mills in the coastal areas of Sindh, which have been termed as potential source of wind energy by the donor community.

Federal Minister for Industries and Production Mian Manzur Wattoo asked the chairman of State Engineering to explore the possibility of manufacturing windmill turbines at the Pakistan Machine Tool Factory in Karachi for power generation through windmills.

While the ministry was examining the technical and financial aspects of the windmill projects, Mr Wattoo directed the officials to complete review of the project expeditiously as the government was serious to promote low-cost windmill power generation in the country.

Pakistan has considerable potential of wind energy in the coastal belt of Sindh and Balochistan as well as in the desert areas of Punjab and Sindh. In view of the existing potential and the anticipated future energy needs, the government had set a target of at least five per cent of the total national power generation through renewable energy, especially wind by the year 2030.

The wind data has been collected from Pakistan Metrological Department and analysed by Alternative Energy Development Board (AEDB).

The data provides that the coastal belt of Pakistan wind corridor is 60km wide (Gharo-Keti Bandar) and 180km long up to Hyderabad. This corridor has the exploitable potential of 50,000MW of electricity generation through windmills.

According to a report of Asian Development Bank on Energy Security, wind power has been a very successful technology, growing rapidly worldwide. Since 2001, installed capacity has grown by 20 to 30 per cent a year. In 2007 alone, $31 billion worth was added, bringing global capacity to 94 GW.

Today, most of the world’s wind power capacity is land-based. The size of onshore wind turbines has increased steadily over the last 25 years. Large turbines can usually deliver electricity at a lower average cost than smaller ones.

December 15th, 2009

Did CIA really fire Blackwater workers in Pakistan? or is it PR exercise?

2009-12-17T23:30:00.000-05:00

After the explosive report of the New York Times which blew the top off the CIA covert operations in Balochistan—the CIA has come out with a public statement about firing Blackwater in Pakistan. US RQ-170 Sentinel, “Beast of Kandhar” spy drone violating Pakistani air space. This is the first time there is solid evidence, and acceptance of the fact that Balckwater was present in Paksitan. This makes a liar out of US secretary of State, Hillary Clinton and US Ambassador Ann Peterson—both of which had blatantly denied the presence of Blackwater/Xe in Pakistan. Interior Minister Rehman Malik had gone to the extent of claiming that if Blackwater presence was proved in Pakistan he would resign. Proof of Blackwater presence in Pakistan: Mr. Rehmsn resign like you promised

PM Gilani, & Minister Rehman accuse India of instigating terrorism in Pakistan

The Central Intelligence Agency has terminated a contract with the security company formerly called Blackwater Worldwide that allowed the company to load bombs on C.I.A. drones in Pakistan and Afghanistan, intelligence officials said Friday.

The contract gave employees with the company an operational role in one of the Central Intelligence Agency’s most significant covert programs, which has killed dozens of militants with Predator and Reaper drones. The company’s involvement highlighted the extent to which the C.I.A. had outsourced critical jobs to private companies since the 9/11 attacks. The contract with the company, now called Xe Services, was canceled this year by Leon E. Panetta, the C.I.A. director, according to a C.I.A. spokesman. In August, The New York Times first revealed the existence of the contract, which was run by a division of the company called Blackwater Select, which handles classified contracts. George Little, the C.I.A. spokesman, said that Mr. Panetta had ordered that the agency’s employees take over the jobs from Xe employees at the remote drone bases in Pakistan and Afghanistan, and that Mr. Panetta had also ordered a review of all contracts with the company.

“At this time, Blackwater is not involved in any C.I.A. operations other than in a security or support role,” Mr. Little said. The disclosure about the terminated contract comes a day after The Times reported that Blackwater employees had joined C.I.A. operatives in secret “snatch and grab” operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Blackwater’s role in the raids grew out of contracts that the company had with the spy agency to provide security for the C.I.A. in Kabul and Baghdad. The company had a dual role in the drone program, said current and former employees and intelligence officials. Contractors on the secret bases assembled and loaded Hellfire missiles and 500-pound laser-guided bombs onto drones, and they also provided security at the C.I.A. bases. The C.I.A. did not allow contractors to select targets for the drone attacks or pull the trigger on the strikes. That work was done at the C.I.A.’s headquarters in Langley, Va.
But Blackwater’s direct role in the drone operations sometimes led to disputes between the contractors and C.I.A. employees, as the spy agency sometimes accused Blackwater employees of poor weapon assembly if the missile or bomb missed a target. In one instance last year, a 500-pound bomb dropped off a Predator before the drone had launched its payload, leading to a frenzied search along the Afghan-Pakistani border. A company employee said the bomb was eventually found not far from the intended target. (NYT)

US Apologist Talat Masood on Anti-Americanism:

2009-12-17T18:45:00.000-05:00

Talat Masood Uncle—nothing personal—but your ideas are not in the best interest of Pakistan. You make some good points, but the “defense at any costs” is unwarranted and does not help either America or Islamabad. You paint a rosy picture—but don’t condemn the occupation or the bombing of Pakistan. Obama’s arguments were no different from Bushs’:–Fidel Castro Ruz. Many claim that you are on foreign payrolls—others say that you represent everything that is wrong with Pakistan. Some even claim that you are a Fifth Column deprecating Pakistan at every forum. You have served the nation well. Your uniform and your work has to be appreciated—but you are just plain wrong on most issues of concern to Pakistanis. Have you ever spoken up against foreign bases. Shutting down the bases.

Why don’t you speak up against Bharat (aka India)? “India behind terrorist attacks” FM Qureshi. Your discussion of Blackwater has been stated, as if it was only a misunderstanding and a communication issue. While many Americans are questioning the war in Afghanistan, there is a cabal in Pakistan that wants perpetual US occupation of Afghanistan. Why are you in that group? Defeating Al-Qaeda by not fighting Taliban

You wrote reams against Musharraf for his alleged obsequious attitude towards America. Why are you silent about the complaint PPP government which you support.Why did Rehman Malik release arrested Blackwater spies?

Anti-Americanism continues to rise unabated in Pakistan. It is not confined to fringe elements alone but is spreading in the mainstream. A few recently retired military officers and politicians have gone as far as accusing US for abetting and supporting acts of terror that have engulfed the country. This is despite the fact that President Obama and the administration has made serious efforts clearing up misunderstandings and reducing the inherent tensions not only with Pakistan but with the Muslim world in general.

Washington has tried to redress the past policy mistakes of abandoning Pakistan by developing a long-term strategic relationship. It has expanded, in scope and depth, Pakistan’s economic assistance threefold and doubled military assistance, totaling $2.2 billion annually. The Enhanced Partnership Act, notwithstanding its intrusive clauses and abrasive wording, is a clear manifestation of breaking from the past. The United States has also been highly supportive of Pakistan at the World Bank, IMF and other multilateral forums to ease its financial crisis.

Furthermore, on a larger canvas, President Obama has tried to reach out to the Muslims and expressed as a matter of policy his desire to develop a relationship on the basis of mutual respect. He has repeatedly emphasised his close personal links with Muslims and frequently reflects warmly on his experiences in Muslim countries during the early part of his life. His speech at the University of Cairo and prior to that in Turkey was a clear indication of this shift. The immediate withdrawal of some of the draconian measures like water boarding and his plans to close Guantanamo Bay, although as yet to be implemented, are all signs that were meant to reduce the cleavage with the Muslim world and an assurance that the US is not at war with Islam but is only fighting those radical Muslim elements that have taken arms against them. The Nobel Peace Prize award to Obama was an acknowledgement of the transformational changes that he was aspiring to bring in American policy.
But nothing seems to work. Even when the US administration or the military leadership makes a statement that the resolution of the Kashmir dispute would contribute towards regional stability, it is viewed with great scepticism. Similarly, when top US military and government officials publicly acknowledge that Pakistan’s nuclear assets are safe it fails to resonate.

In short, cynicism and dislike for America has reached a point of no return among a certain class in Pakistan, and from their point of view nothing that US does can possibly be good for the country. And they cling to the mantra, despite repeated assurances, that Washington’s interest only lies in taking out our nuclear assets.
What then are the reasons for this distrust and how far are these allegations of the US wanting to destabilise Pakistan, with the help of India, credible?

Any major power, when it adopts a security or foreign policy, always weighs the flip side of everything. If Washington were to destabilise Pakistan as a deliberate policy, then the ensuing chaos will create a vacuum that would surely be filled by the Taliban and jihadi forces, posing a far greater danger to the US, India and the rest of the world. It would be absurd for the US to simultaneously fight the militants, be it the Taliban or Al Qaeda, and support them.

The fact, however, is that the internal and external policies Pakistan has pursued in the last three decades to advance its perceived national interests were flawed and have come to roost. Regrettably, we are in a state of denial and not prepared to accept that militancy is not home grown, and has taken root with the people. There is no doubt that American policies along with Indian designs have accentuated Pakistan’s regional problems. But the answer to our insurgency and the expanding frontiers of terrorism lies primarily with us. It is the responsibility of our leaders to give clarity in defining the nature of threat and mobilising the nation’s resources, both human and material, to combat it successfully. Failure to do so has resulted in the spread of endless rumours generally to the advantage of the militants. We are also failing to optimise the exceptional support that the international community is willing to extend in these difficult times.

This is also true that the legacy of betrayal is so strong and deep-seated that the US will have to work very hard to overcome the prevailing suspicions. The US administration will have to make a categorical assertion that Blackwater or its associates are not operating in Pakistan if confidence in the public of its sincerity is to be restored. The policy of employing drones needs also to be reviewed so that Pakistan military’s involvement at the intelligence and operational levels is fully integrated.

Otherwise every drone attack fuels anti-Americanism and exposes the contradiction in our relations, neutralising the tactical advantage that its employment accrues.
It is equally important to realise that, while we are passing through the worst of times, not everything is lost. There are many positive elements that are emerging as we wade through the present crisis. Despite all odds, a democratic system however fragile has been put in place. Institutions have started functioning, the judiciary is asserting itself, and media is robust debating every facet of our political, economic and social life and acting as a watchdog on our leaders. Parliament has yet to energise but is under public pressure to assume its responsibilities of legislating and assisting in the formulation of national policies. The civil society is emerging, albeit somewhat gradually.

Tragically, the nation is paying a heavy price in blood and sweat in combating militancy. It is forcing us to reform or face the consequences of an existential threat. The cumulative impact of these developments whether it is pressure of media, civil society or the violent acts of militants is bringing about fundamental changes in the society. Feudalism and tribal hierarchy is on its way out and politicians canot fool the people, and the military is in no position to capture power. Militancy is now compelling the government to act and reach out to the tribal people whom they neglected for 62 years. Similarly, the insurgency in Baluchistan is forcing the government to take political and economic measures that it denied to them. The military is acting against the proxies that at one time it patronised. The society is in flux and anarchic but there are several positive happenings as well. Anti-Americanism, Monday, December 14, 2009, Talat Masood, The writer is a retired lieutenant-general. Email: talat@comsats.net.pk

India formed terror group “Zarqawi” to bomb Peshawar

2009-12-17T00:34:00.000-05:00

PESHAWAR – A militant group ‘Zarqawi’ has confessed that Indian agents are providing them arms, explosive material and money for conducting terrorist activities in Peshawar.

A police official on condition of anonymity, while talking about the car bomb blast which occurred on October 9, 2009 here at Sukarno Chowk and claimed lives of more than 40 people, told The Nation that police arrested a terror suspect named Ismail after the blast.
During investigations, Ismail disclosed that one Shakeel had asked him to deliver an explosive-laden car from Bara, Khyber Agency, to Peshawar and offered Rs 40,000 for the purpose. He added that he gave him Rs 20,000 in advance and promised to pay the rest of the amount once the job was done.
The police official told that later Shakeel was also arrested and both the terrorists admitted that Saeed Anwar and Saifur Rehman Saifur, both from Bara, have formed a terrorist group named Zarqawi. They revealed that Indian agents under the guise of Sikhs were providing them arms, ammunition and money for terrorist attacks. This group includes Wahid, Rafiq and Adnan and their job is to find people who can drive the explosive-laden cars from Bara to Peshawar for the sake of just a few thousands rupees.

It is further informed that the group is also involved in kidnapping small children who are prepared for suicidal attacks through brainwashing and threats.
A senior police official from Peshawar also confirmed that Zarqawi group is involved in car bomb blasts. He added that an operation was underway in Bara for the arrest Zarqawi group’s leader Saifur Rehman Saifur.

ISLAMABAD – Pakistan, Monday, conveyed serious concerns to the US with regard to the growing Indian involvement in destabilising Pakistan through Afghanistan.

These concerns were raised with the US Central Command Chief General David Petraeus during his separate meetings with political and military leaders of the country.

Online adds: US General David Petraeus again assured that new Afghan policy will not affect national interests of the country at any cost urging undoubtedly US respects Pakistan’s sovereignty and integrity. US General David Petraeus on Monday met Chief of the Army Staff General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani at the GHQ. US Assistant Secretary of Defence Vicker was also present on the occasion.

According to the military sources, a host of issues including Pak-US defence and Army relations, security in the entire South Asia, war against terrorism, US policy concerning drone attacks in the country, new US Policy and others in depth came under discussion during the meeting.
Sources said during the hour-long meeting, Gen Petraeus highly acclaimed the sacrifices and role of the Pakistan Army, adding “we will not leave Pakistan alone in dire consequences.”

He took into confidence Gen Kayani on a host of issues including that of sending 30,000 forces in Afghanistan by the US administration. He went on to say that there is an ample work to do if long-term progress is to be made in Afghanistan, adding new US policy on Afghanistan will not affect Pakistan.
He termed the ongoing operation against militants in South Waziristan as highly productive to root out the menace of extremism.
The Centcom Chief said Pakistani forces are operating very well against militants in SWA, adding they (militants) are posing a significant threat to Pakistan.
On the other hand, COAS Gen Kayani again urged the US to stop drone attacks because it is proving counterproductive and thus creating a negative impact on war against terrorism.

The Pak Army Chief discussed with the US Centcom Chief sending of 30,000 additional American force to Afghanistan and new US Policy. Stop drone attacks, COAS asks US By: Maqbool Malik | Published: December 15, 2009

Zardari is history.

2009-12-16T19:06:00.001-05:00

Mr. President, its time.

You can go quietly, or you will dragged through the mud.

The government didn’t even have an Attorney General. The one recently appointed may himself be under indictment. The Supreme Court of Pakistan asked the government to pursue the 60 million Dollar stolen Pakistani money that was frozen by the Swiss government. The numbered account belonged to Mr. Zardari.

The Civilian dictator called Mr. 10% is facing the crucifixion. His political demise is near. Many dictators and pretenders tot eh throne try to hang on to power with their fingernails. It is as useless and futile.

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan — The Supreme Court struck down a controversial amnesty on Wednesday that had dismissed allegations of corruption against thousands of Pakistan’s politicians, including President Asif Ali Zardari, effectively restoring the cases against them.

As president, Mr. Zardari is granted immunity from prosecution under the Constitution. But the Supreme Court order is expected to reverberate across Pakistan’s rocky political landscape and to further weaken the standing of Mr. Zardari, whom the United States has tried to support as a partner in the fight against the Taliban and Al Qaeda.

The march of history is being witnessed by Constitutional Boulevard. On one end is the Supreme Court—on the other end is the presidency. Mr. Zardari is being cut down to size—the sooner the better. Perhaps he should move to Surray Palace, and take his incompetent government with him.

Petitions challenging Mr. Zardari’s eligibility as a presidential candidate are expected to follow from the ruling, and about a dozen senior members of Mr. Zardari’s coterie of advisers will likely face renewed corruption cases.

They include the interior minister, Rehman Malik, who is perceived as being particularly close to the Americans; the defense minister, Ahmad Mukhtar; and Mr. Zardari’s chief of staff, Salman Farooki, said Babar Sattar, a lawyer and expert on the amnesty.

Even as the court ruling was awaited Wednesday afternoon, a former law minister, Syed Iftikhar Gillani, said that the government ministers facing renewed corruption charges should resign.

How can you run a state with the likes of Kaira, Babur, and Rehman Malik. They refuse to speak the national language and are unable to speak English. Why, may we ask do they try to play the Englishman.

Mr. Zardari and his supporters noted that he has never been convicted, despite having spent 11 years in jail, proof they say that the cases arrayed against him are political vendettas without substance and aimed at undermining the civilian government’s agenda, which is pro-American, in the face of a resurgent military.

Farhatullah Babar, the presidential spokesperson, talking to reporters outside the Supreme Court after the ruling, said that Mr. Zardari and Pakistan Peoples Party respected the court and its verdict. But he stressed the president’s immunity.

“We believe that no criminal case can be instituted or continued in any court against a president or a governor during the term of office,” he said. “So, this doesn’t affect the President of Pakistan. Regarding other matters law will take its course and we will see what happens.”

A presidential confidant, Babar Awan, said that Mr. Zardari would complete his five year term and rebuffed immediate calls from opposition politicians that Mr. Zardari resign.

The people will celebrate a day of deliverance when this compliant government is thrown out and NRO culprits thrown in jail

In all, nearly 6,000 politicians and bureaucrats across all political parties, including the main opposition party, the Pakistan Muslim League led by Nawaz Sharif, benefited from the amnesty, known as the National Reconciliation Order, according to filings with the Supreme Court.

More than 10 days of hearings on the amnesty before the Supreme Court have served to drive home the impression among the public that Pakistan’s politicians, reap vast financial benefits beyond their meager salaries, and often squirrel their gains abroad in flashy apartments, offshore accounts and businesses.

The amnesty was devised in 2007 during the presidency of Gen. Pervez Musharraf with the help of the United States and Britain as a way to engineer the return of Mr. Zardari’s wife, the two-time prime minister Benazir Bhutto, after years in exile.

One of Ms. Bhutto’s chief demands was the dropping of a corruption cases that hung over the couple. In December 2007, Ms. Bhutto was assassinated as she left a political rally, and Mr. Zardari assumed leadership of the Pakistan Peoples Party and became president nine months later.

The Supreme Court proceedings were scrutinized continuously by the Pakistani media over the past week and appeared to hold more importance for the political class than the barrage of terror attacks against the nation’s cities from Taliban and other militants.

Of most interest to the 17-member bench, led by the feisty Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, was the question of who had authorized the return of $60 million in suspect gains of Mr. Zardari to offshore companies in his name after the government withdrew criminal proceedings against him in Switzerland last year.

The Supreme Court said in its decision that the withdrawal of the cases against Mr. Zardari in Switzerland, which was ordered by the former Attorney General, Malik Qayyum, was illegal and that the government should contact the Swiss authorities to restore the proceedings.

“If Mr. Zardari gets convicted in Switzerland that would have tremendous political consequences for him,” Mr. Sattar said.

Though Mr. Zardari has immunity from prosecution as president, his opponents may now seek to challenge his eligibility as a candidate for the presidency.

One opening, lawyers including Mr. Sattar said, is that Mr. Zardari failed to appear when he was called before the High Court in Lahore after he was released from jail in 2004, and may therefore be considered an absconder. Under Pakistani law, absconding is akin to conviction and could disqualify him as a presidential candidate, Mr. Sattar said.

Whether or not the Supreme Court ruling sets off such a chain of events, Mr. Zardari’s political fortunes have sunk perilously low just 15 months into his five-year term. American officials, who consider Mr. Zardari the rightfully elected democratic leader, described the president as desperately trying to find ways to hang on.

Mr. Zardari promised recently to give up powers accrued by General Musharraf that allow the president to dismiss the Parliament and to appoint the army chief. It was possible that the Supreme Court decision could hasten Mr. Zardari’s narrowing of powers, leaving him as a symbolic figure but still enjoying the prestige of office. December 17, 2009, Roiling Politics, Pakistan Court Strikes Down Amnesty, By JANE PERLEZ, Salman Masood contributed reporting

Imran Khan offers to mediate FATA peace

2009-12-15T21:14:00.001-05:00

IMRAN Khan has come forward at a critical time to offer himself as a mediating force between the tribal militants and the government and shown his willingness to travel to the tribal areas in order to push for peace and restoration of the writ of the state under the ambit of the 1973 Constitution. This is the first serious offer of a political approach to reestablishing peace in the country and moving towards an end to polarization and terrorism. The offer comes when the US and the Karzai government have made it abundantly clear that they will talk to the Taliban. While the government seems to have washed its hands off the terrorism and the tribal areas, leaving everything to the military, the country is being ravaged with terrorism and civil society and then armed forces are its prime targets. Clearly the military-centric approach is not working just as it is not working in Afghanistan. Our problems have been further aggravated by the US and its demands - as well as by the role being played by India, seemingly with at least a tacit approval by the US, in providing military and other aid to the militants from Afghanistan.

Within this scenario, Imran's offer should be given serious consideration by the government especially since he has credibility not only with the mass of Pakistani people but also with the tribals and militants. Imran's offer differentiates between the foreign and foreign backed militants as well as the criminal elements exploiting the situation, all of whom he feels need to be isolated and dealt with firmly; and the other two groups comprising the jihadis and the tribal people involved in the military struggle because of Pushtun solidarity and a reaction to US policies in the region, all of whom he feels can be won over if we delink from the US. These are the people Imran has offered to mediate with and some have already responded favourably to him. Imran's only conditionality: that the government should not undermine his peace effort under US pressure. Imran has left it open for anyone who feels like it, to join him in this noble national quest and according to his plan, any agreement reached would be presented to Parliament for ratification.

India’s Nuclear Fizzle: Nuclear scientists still bickering over failure

2009-12-15T21:05:00.001-05:00

“Figures don’t lie, but liars will figure. He chose to ignore facts for his own reasons,” Mr. Santhanam told PTI when his comments were sought on remarks made by Mr. Kakodkar in a TV interview.

“He (Kakodkar) is motivated by institutional loyalties,” he said when asked about the former AEC chief’s assertion that the nuclear tests were a success and had yielded more than 45 kilo tons.

Headley worked for CIA, FBI and the DEA: Was US responsible for Mumbai massacre?

2009-12-15T18:35:00.001-05:00

Once a CIA spy—always a CIA spy. The CIA spy, FBI agent and DEA operative is involved in the Mumbai massacre. Mr. David Coleman Headley is an American citizen and worked for various organs of the US Government. Mr. Kasab was an individual, another stateless actor. However Delhi’s anger is on Pakistan and not the USA.

Pakistani-American terror suspect David Coleman Headley, charged with scouting targets for Mumbai terror attacks, worked as a confidential informant with the Drug Enforcement Administration for more than a decade, according to a US media report.

The relationship began with his first arrest back in June 1988, when customs agents at the Frankfurt airport pulled aside an intense and striking young man waiting to get on a plane back home to Philadelphia, McClatchy Newspapers reported Monday.

"They suspected he had heroin in his suitcase. They were right - two kilos' worth from Pakistan, hidden under a false bottom," the report said. He wasn't tough to crack: Before the day was out, Daood "David" Gilani decided to save his own skin, agreeing to betray his drug-dealing partners by helping US drug agents set up a sting," it said.

It was the beginning of a complicated, off-and-on relationship as a confidential informant with the Drug Enforcement Administration - one that lasted more than a decade.

In fact, Gilani was so helpful as a DEA informant in the late 1990s on heroin imported from Pakistan, according to records and Inquirer interviews, that prosecutors made a rare move: They ended his probation years early, allowing him to travel freely.

Within weeks, investigators cited by McClatchy said, he began training with terrorists in Pakistan.

New details are emerging about the strange double life of Headley, the son of a Pakistani broadcaster and a Main Line socialite who would spend evenings holding court and drinking splits of champagne in her bar, the Khyber Pass, McClatchy said.

He was briefly married to a Philadelphia woman in the 1980s whom he met at the bar, who, like a lot of other young women, was mesmerised by his dark skin and piercing eyes - one blue, the other brown.

He later became a heroin addict, and twice was caught smuggling the drug into the country by the DEA, in 1988 in Frankfurt, Germany, and in 1997 in New York. Both times, he got off with a lighter sentence by testifying against his partners.

It quickly became clear to federal law enforcement officials in New York that Headley knew a great deal about the heroin trade between the US and Pakistan and was willing to cooperate, McClatchy said. Headley worked as US agency informant for a decade, Indo-Asian News Service, Washington, December 15, 2009, First Published: 13:04 IST(15/12/2009), Last Updated: 16:33 IST(15/12/2009)

Opportunities for Pakistan: Taking Automobile Manufacturing to the next level

2009-12-14T23:11:00.001-05:00

Shifting the export engine beyond Textile:—by Moin Ansari

The last decade witnessed a phenomenal increase in Pakistan’s manufacturing capabilities. Pakistan became one of the largest producers of automobile parts—with a robust exponential improvement in the engineering to manufacturing supply chain. The most rapid advance was the transformation of assembly plants to actual manufacturing enterprises. The number of motor-cycles, and automobiles increased at a rapid rate. Moving up the pac-man chain, Pakistan has moved from manufacturing spare-parts, to assembling kits, to designing, and constructing the motor-cycles and vehicles. The Army has been moving fast in producing tanks and jeeps which it needs for its own consumption. With the technology and manufacturing capabilities developed at Kamra, Pakistan is on the cusp of looking at commercial aircrafts.

Global Automobile manufacturing is going through a lot of suffering which provides opportunities to growing countries like Pakistan. Outsourcing parts is a global trend that has to be taken advantage of. Pakistan can provide rubber mats at the lowest rung of the technology ladder, seats, leather upholstery, and plastic knobs. Moving up the chain, mirrors and wind-shields can be sold to major automobile manufacturers, and also to the after-market for spare parts. Lights, bulbs, and accessories also make up a sizable numbers. All these parts are already being made and sold in Pakistan. The vision is to gear up the industry for export—linking the manufacturers to the global players. Body parts and repair of part has always been a strength of Pakistani mechanics. This should be taken advantage of. Junk cars can be imported, fixed and then re-exported to third world countries.

The automobile business is evolving rapidly on a worldwide basis. Car and parts manufacturers are merging, component design and manufacture are now frequently outsourced instead of being created in-house, brands are changing and the giant automobile companies are expanding deeper into providing financial services to car buyers. Meanwhile, all of the biggest, most successful automobile industry firms have become totally global in nature. Globalization is in evidence throughout the automobile industry. Plunkett Research

The following trends tables are provided by Plunkett research:

Automobile Industry Introduction > (View Sample Data)
Big Three’s Dominance of the U.S. Auto Market Is Compromised
Fuel Efficiency Becomes a Key Selling Element/Stiff Emissions Standards Adopted in the U.S. and Abroad
Hybrid Cars Gain Market Share
Electric Cars and Plug-in Hybrids (PHEVs) Will Quickly Gain Popularity/Major Research in Advanced Lithium Batteries
Clean Diesel Technology Gains Acceptance
Natural Gas Powered Vehicles off to a Slow Start
Ethanol Production Soared, But a Market Glut May Slow Expansion
Fuel Cell and Hydrogen Power Research Continues
Outsourcing of Component Design and Manufacturing/Sharing of Parts
"Optimum Lean Production" Saves Manufacturing Costs
Car Purchasers Rely on the Internet
Car Sales Shift in China, India and Russia/Chinese-Made Vehicles Exported for the First Time
Focus on Safety Improvements by Automakers
Super-Expensive Cars are Pushed by Manufacturers/Luxury Car Market Is Highly Competitive
Rethinking SUVs/Small Sedans and Crossovers Gain Market Share
Big News in Small Cars
Wireless Information Systems Surge Ahead in Cars: Telematics, ITS and Real-Time Traffic Information

While Tata purchased obsolete plants from Jaguar and Range Rover, and the Chinese are in the midst of acquiring old Saabs and the Volvo manufacturing facilities, Pakistani entrepreneurs and businessman are looking at the right acquisition to enhance their indigenous expertise. Locally manufactured Adam Car made the right first step two decades ago—however Adam is not a household name yet. The inter is not just a vehicle to download porn. The internet can be used to sell automobile parts and replacement parts. Savvy US consumers hunt for bargains on the world wide web. The name says it all. Quality spare parts can be shipped from Pakistan to consumers in Japan, Germany and the US. There is not middle man. The products if made in conformance to international standards will be create demand and the bad players will be filtered out.

E-commerce is having profound effects on the car industry. Consumers use the Internet to become better informed before making an automobile purchase. Online sites like Autobytel steer millions of car buyers toward specific dealers while the same sites deliver competing bids for cars, insurance and financing in a manner that lowers costs and improves satisfaction among consumers.

Pakistan has leapfrogged the First world by taking advantage of Cellular Technology. It has bypassed the copper infrastructure by latching on to wireless—and has achieved one of the most deep penetrations of cells into the population. The cell phone per population ratio is one of the most dense in the world. Local manufacturing of cell phones was the logical next step in this regard. The lessons learned from the success of Cell phones can be emulated by the Automobile industry.

Automakers around the globe are reacting to the changing economics of the global auto industry, as evidenced by the rapid consolidation currently taking place in the business. Even prior to the intense merging frenzy which has taken place during the past two weeks, the list of auto manufacturers which were partially or entirely purchased by other auto companies in the recent past was remarkable. Examples of manufacturers acquired by their competitors include Chrysler, Volvo, Nissan, Saab, Suzuki, Daihatsu, Lamborghini, Bugatti, Bentley and Rolls Royce.

During the past week, however, several auto manufacturers have felt the urge to merge. General Motors has agreed to acquire a fifth of Fiat, Ford Motor has agreed to purchase Land Rover from BMW, and DaimlerChrysler is nearing a decision to buy a one-third stake in Mitsubishi Motors. In addition, Daewoo and Samsung are currently both up for sale, and the acquisitions of these two companies are likely to occur before the end of the year.

There are several broad trends pushing the consolidation movement. These trends are: strong brand names are becoming more essential than ever; auto manufacturers have to enter difficult markets; the costs related to technology and research and development are significantly increasing.

The acquisition strategies of the major auto manufacturers seem to be similar for the most part. For example, Ford and Volkswagen both try and acquire internationally recognized brands such as Jaguar, Volvo, and Lamborghini. DaimlerChrysler and Renault have followed the strategy of entering new markets like Japan and Korea through their acquisitions. General Motors focuses on purchasing companies that will enable it to obtain technology and parts less expensively. All Business

Tata bought Jaguar and range Rover for business purposes and add glitter to their obsolete output. The losses incurred by Tata did not justify the purchase. The Post Tata purchase results show a precipitous drop in consumer confidence as displayed by a huge drop in sales. Some of the drop in sales can be attributed to a global economic slowdown—however the drop in Jaguar sales is not indicative of industry trends—Toyota did not feel the same pinch as Tata did. Many at Tata now want to divest the company of money draining enterprises like Jaguar and Range Rover. Tata is tied by stringent union contracts which prevent Tata from moving plants to Bharat (aka India). British labor Unions had long suspected that Tata would eventually move manufacturing to places which offered lower labor rates. The Labor Unions placed several poison pills into the sale of Jaguar to Tata—which would make it very hard for Tata to move the factories out of England to Bharat. There is a lesson learned in that purchase. We wrote extensively about it—saying that this was not a business decision, but an emotional one—a decision that could not stand the test of time and profits.

The Chinese did not bid on the Jaguar. They knew that it was not worth purchasing. The Chinese BAIC purchased the right components of SAAB to fill holes in their capabilities. This is the right approach. Purchase the infrastructure and the capability, reverse engineer it to fit Chinese needs. Beijing has done that successfully with aircraft manufacturing.

After the successful manufacture of Nuclear bombs, missiles, and planes (K-8, and JF-17 Thunder), Pakistan is at a stage where businessmen from Islamabad should be trolling the bankruptcy lists, to find jewels which can then be used to build an export oriented industry. The Government should provide the vision. Can the Minister of Industries spell “vision”. Does Mr. Abdul Ghaffar Soomro Secretary Industries and Production have a strategy. How can Mr. Zardari run a government on individuals who cannot see beyond their noses?

The world is moving away from Carbon burning engines to electrical vehicles.

Toyota Motor said Monday that it planned a widespread release of its plug-in hybrid car in 2011 as the company scrambled to gain the upper hand in an increasingly crowded battle over next-generation “green” technology.

Toyota, the world’s largest automaker, dominates the current generation of gas-electric hybrid vehicles, but it has refrained from rushing lower-emission cars like the plug-in hybrid to market. Instead, Toyota has focused on plans to introduce regular hybrid technology to all its models by 2020.

But Toyota’s rivals are surging ahead. General Motors plans to build as many as 60,000 Chevrolet Volt plug-in hybrids a year, starting in late 2010. Other automakers, including Ford and Volkswagen, have announced their own plug-in models, and Nissan plans to mass-produce a fully electric car in 2010.

Toyota is now increasing its pace. “Several tens of thousands” of the plug-in version of its Prius hybrid will go on sale in 2011, the automaker said Monday. A small number of the plug-in models will be available for lease later this month as planned, but those will be limited to government and corporate clients in the United States, Europe and Japan.

Takeshi Uchiyamada, Toyota’s executive vice president, said in Tokyo that the company was waiting until 2011 to begin sales so it could hear feedback from users during the leasing period. The plug-ins would carry an “affordable” price tag, he said, without giving an estimate. Prices for a regular Prius hybrid with no plug-in function start at $22,400 in the United States.

The plug-in Prius would be the first from Toyota to use the powerful lithium-ion battery already used by many of its rivals. The car travels 23.4 kilometers, or 14.5 miles, as an electric vehicle on a single charge before a regular gas-electric hybrid system kicks in. It gets an overall mileage of 57 kilometers a liter, or 134 miles per gallon — exceeding the Prius’s 38 kilometers a liter, according to Toyota.

The plug-in Prius would charge in about 100 minutes and halve the running cost of traveling 30 kilometers in comparison with a regular Prius if recharged at night, when electricity costs are often lower, Toyota said.

The automaker says it also plans to sell a pure electric “urban commuter” vehicle in 2012 that would run on lithium-ion batteries.

But Toyota is not a vocal advocate of cars powered primarily by batteries — partly because it first wants to reap the full benefits of its heavy investment in its hybrid technology. Regular hybrid systems are still the company’s main green technology, Toyota executives stress.

Executives point to a number of constraints for electric vehicles: short range and feeble horsepower, lack of infrastructure like recharging stations, long charging times and the burden the cars could place on the electric grid. All-electric vehicles, in particular, are suitable only for short city runs, they say.

“We have been working on developing efficient powertrains to be able to use oil as efficiently as possible,” Mr. Uchiyamada told the Associated Press on Monday. “Many hurdles remain for alternative fuels.”

Pakistan, begged borrowed, and stole Nuclear technology and built the bomb. It also did the impossible in building missiles, the envy of South Asia. All this required adept use of technology. The infrastructure exists in the military field. Civilian Subcontractors provide the parts for the military.The heavy Mechanical Complex, and the Advanced Electronics Manufacturing Complex have the engineering knowhow to build consumer items. The islands of automation have bto be hooked up into a national export oriented policy. Today, the same level of effort is required to set up a “Manhattan Project for Automobile Manufacturing” to build an export oriented industry for motorcycles, cars, trucks and buses. “Manhattan Project for Trains” should take the current infrastructure and enhance it to the next level. Bullet Train technology is about six decades old. There is very little that is not public information. Mag Lev and TGV (Tres Grand Vitesse) technologies are low hanging fruit--available for the taking. All Pakistan needs is a Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto with a vision that can transform Pakistan into the modern state that it should be.

Industry experts are split on just how quickly the auto industry will shift to regular hybrids and plug-ins — and ultimately to zero-emissions vehicles like pure electric or even fuel cell-powered cars. Much will depend on the price of oil, as well as emissions standards set by governments, they say.

The uncertainty over the future mix of technologies is forcing carmakers to hedge their bets with various kinds of technology. That means that, for the time being, manufacturers could “struggle to achieve the required scale economies to cover high up-front investment costs,” Clive Wiggins, an auto analyst for Macquarie Bank based in Tokyo, said in a recent note.

Heavy development costs could weigh on the bottom line of automakers already dealing with the fallout of the global economic crisis. Toyota predicts a loss of ¥200 billion, or $2.26 billion, for the fiscal year ending in March, following a record ¥437 billion loss last year.

Mr. Wiggins said he was “cautious on the infrastructure constraints and costs involved” with plug-ins and electric vehicles. Eco-friendly vehicles could log sales of 11.2 million units in 2020, or 12 percent of total auto sales, from 0.8 million in 2009, with the majority of those sales coming from regular hybrids, he predicted.

Others predict that plug-ins and electric vehicles will be “game-changers” that will allow rivals or even newcomers to leapfrog the industry leaders like Toyota.Toyota to Sell Plug-In Hybrid in 2011 By HIROKO TABUCHI, Published: December 14, 2009

Reverse Engineering the new technology will pay huge dividends to Pakistan. As the largest automobile manufacturers move towards hybrid and battery operated engines, the Pakistani automobile industry has to focus, not only on the domestic market, but also emulate the Korean export-oriented infrastructure. China and Korea don’t build what is needed for Asia—they build what is needed by the consumer.

The Nissan chief executives, Carlos Ghosn, has said that pure electric cars will make up at least 10 percent of global demand by 2020, assuming oil costs more than $70 a barrel.

To address some constraints on its electric vehicle, the company is readying a lithium-ion battery that will power a car for 300 kilometers on a single charge, about twice the distance currently possible, Japan’s largest business daily, The Nikkei, reported last month, without identifying its source.

With a technological leap of that magnitude, and with rising concerns over global warming, consumers could rapidly shift from gasoline cars and hybrids to zero-emissions technology, said Hiroshi Shimizu, an environmental studies professor at Keio University in Tokyo and an electric car advocate.

’“When the market decides on what technology will be dominant,” Mr. Shimizu said, “carmakers better be ready, or ready to fall out of the race.” Toyota to Sell Plug-In Hybrid in 2011 By HIROKO TABUCHI, Published: December 14, 2009

It is time the Textile manufacturers broke out of the Textile manufacturing mindset. Manchester the birthplace of the Industrial Revolution, and the progenitor of the Textile Industry has moved on. The Pakistani Textile giants lazy in their comfort zones, have to be goaded into diversification. The Pakistani industry is focused on Textiles---in terms of diversification, the country has to move beyond textiles—into becoming the food granary for the Middle East ($200 Billino Market) and taking a slice of the automobile manufacturing.

Textile mill owners in the 70 built chemical plants and set up new industries in Kala Shah Kakoo and other areas. Today, every Textile manufacturer has to set up new factories for making batteries, and hybrid cars.

The latest lithium-ion batteries developed by Nissan open up huge vistas of opportunity for the Pakistani entrepreneur.

Dr. Furrukh Saleem in a fascinating article (his best yet) published in The News calculated that Pakistan needs 58,000 new schools and 163,000 teachers to universal education for all Pakistani engines. Pakistan needs 58,000 new schools, 163,000 new teachers, and 5000 new hospitals. He also calculated that a new hospital costs $1.5 million. He suggested that Pakistan build 100 hospitals per year using US Aid. Can Pakistanis work smartly, and run double shift schools which have one room clinics attached to them—providing basic first aid and inoculation and welfare care? Can the third shift impart Vocational Training in trades like carpentry, automobile repair, electronic manufacturing, soldering, plumbing, medical support, teacher certifications, energy maintenance. The cost of providing basic healthcare and complete education to all Pakistani children would be about $15 billion. We put forward a proposal to the Pakistan Tehrik e Insaf to set up a Pakistan Overseas Organization with 5 million members. if each member purchased a share of $2500, the overseas Pakistanis could within a few years (short period, 5 to 10 years) transform Pakistan’s basic infrastructure in terms of health and education. This would unleash the spirit of creative entrepreneurship in Pakistan that would be unparalleled on the planet.

If the Overseas Pakistanis continue to the $2500 contribution to Pakistani infrastructure on a per annum basis—they could pick for-profit investment in automobile manufacturing, bullet train infrastructure, oil and gas development, and food security.

Lieberman a pain in the royal neck for Democrats

2009-12-14T22:59:00.001-05:00

Sen. Joe Lieberman, left, and Sen. Harry Reid confer in 2007.

STORY HIGHLIGHTS

Sen. Joe Lieberman says he opposes two Democratic proposals for health care bill
Lieberman nixes public option, expanding Medicare to people over 55
Senate Dems need 60 votes to close debate and bring health care bill to a vote
Lieberman spokesman says position is no surprise to Democratic leaders

Washington (CNN) -- A few weeks ago, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said colleague Joe Lieberman was the least of his problems in passing a health care bill.

Today, Lieberman has emerged as the main obstacle to Reid's efforts to get a health care bill through the Senate before Christmas, if ever.

An independent from Connecticut who sits with the Democratic caucus, Lieberman ratcheted up his public opposition to the bill Sunday. On the CBS program "Face the Nation," Lieberman said he would join a Republican filibuster if the bill contained either a government-run public health insurance option or a proposed alternative to the controversial provision -- expanding Medicare to people as young as 55.

Lieberman also called for eliminating a provision to provide long-term home health care to the disabled while adding more cost containment measures to the $848 billion Democratic bill.

"We don't need to keep adding on to the back of this horse until the horse breaks down and we get nothing done," Lieberman said.

Video: New health care pact doomed?

Video: Public option pullback?

Video: Closing health care loophole

Unanimous Republican opposition so far means Senate Democrats need all 60 votes in their caucus -- which includes Lieberman -- to close debate on the sweeping health care bill. The subsequent vote on final passage of the bill would require a simple majority -- 51 votes -- to succeed.

The Medicare expansion was part of a package of provisions announced by Reid last week as an alternative to the public option, which lacked enough support among Senate Democrats. Negotiated by a team of 10 Democratic senators -- five liberal and five moderate -- the compromise package was hailed by Reid, President Obama and others as an important step forward in the health care debate.

However, many senators have reserved judgment on the compromise proposal until the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office provides its analysis of how much the plan would cost. The package also would allow private insurers to offer nonprofit health coverage overseen by the government.

Reacting last week to expanding Medicare as part of the proposed compromise, Lieberman said he would "look at it," but added the Senate health care bill already included subsidies to help people 55 and older buy insurance coverage before they become eligible for Medicare at age 65.

"I want to make sure we're not adding a big additional burden to the Medicare program, which we need to figure out how to save, because it's going bankrupt," Lieberman said then.

On Sunday, Lieberman bluntly stated he would join the GOP filibuster if the bill included the provision to expand Medicare. In response, a senior Senate Democratic leadership aide told CNN that the "Democratic leadership was shocked about how strident Lieberman was in his opposition to the Medicare proposal when he went on the Sunday shows."

However, Lieberman spokesman Marshall Wittmann told CNN on Monday that Lieberman first informed Reid last week of his concern about expanding Medicare.

"Sen. Reid knew that problem could lead him to vote against this bill," Wittmann said. "He informed Reid of that Friday."

Wittmann also criticized anonymous assertions that Reid was surprised by Lieberman's stance expressed Sunday.

[Lieberman] wants to get it done. Adding on these additional elements ... is preventing us from passing a bill.
--Lieberman spokesman Marshall Wittmann

RELATED TOPICS

"Sen. Lieberman's position came as no surprise to the Democratic leadership," Wittmann said. "Any contrary charges from those who cowardly seek to hide under the cloak of anonymity are false and self-serving."

Reid spent Sunday trying to round up the 60 votes necessary to close debate on the health care bill, according to the senior Democratic aide, who said Democrats still believe the Senate can produce a bill by Christmas.

Lieberman first expressed possible opposition to the health care bill in late October, saying he would join a GOP filibuster if the measure contained the public option. Asked about Lieberman's position then, Reid said: "Joe Lieberman is the least of Harry Reid's problems."

Wittmann acknowledged Monday that Lieberman, as the vice presidential candidate in 2000, had campaigned then for expanding Medicare.

"This is nine years later, and we have a huge national deficit and a program [Medicare] that analysts indicate is in dire fiscal straits in 2009," Wittmann said. "If anyone believes that the situation has not changed, they also believe that Tiger Woods is not a controversial figure at this moment."

Asked about a possible compromise, Wittmann said Lieberman "believes there is much good in the core legislation."

"He is for health care reform," Wittmann said. "He wants to get it done. Adding on these additional elements in his view is preventing us from passing a bill."

Another potential obstacle for Reid is moderate Democratic Sen.Ben Nelson of Nebraska, who said Sunday said he cannot support the Senate bill without tighter restrictions on federal funding for abortion. The Senate last week defeated an amendment proposed by Nelson and two other senators that would adopt tougher language on abortion funding contained in the House health care bill.

A compromise on the abortion language is possible, said Nelson, one of 10 Senate Democrats who negotiated in private last week on the public option compromise.

Most Democrats support the public option as a nonprofit competitor to private insurers which would expand coverage and bring down prices. Republicans and some moderate Democrats, along with the health insurance industry, oppose the public option, saying it would be a first step toward a government takeover of the entire health care system.

If Democrats can get 59 of their 60 caucus members to support the bill -- for example, by changing the abortion language to secure Nelson's vote -- they can focus on gaining the vote of moderate Republican Sen. Olympia Snowe of Maine, who has signaled an openness to compromise but rejects the public option and questions the Medicare expansion.

If the Senate eventually passes a health care bill, its version will have to be merged by a conference committee with the House version passed last month. The final bill would then need approval from both chambers before going to Obama to be signed into law.

The president and Democratic leaders have said they want the bill completed this year. The Senate would need to finish its work this week to leave a realistic chance of meeting that schedule.

Shame on Hasni Mubarak for building a fence around Gaza prison

2009-12-14T22:49:00.001-05:00

Gaza border: Why Egypt is building a steel underground wall

Reports from the Gaza border say that Egypt is building an underground wall as deep as 100 feet to stem smuggling in Hamas-controlled tunnels. But there are broader goals, too.

Heavy machinery operates on the Egyptian side of the border between the southern Gaza Strip, right, and Egypt, left, as seen from Rafah, Thursday. Egypt has been digging trenches and installing metal sheets underground along its border with Gaza in an apparent attempt to curb smuggling into the Palestinian territory through tunnels, Gaza border guards and area residents said Thursday.

Eyad Baba/AP

Enlarge

By Sarah A. Topol Contributor / December 14, 2009

Cairo

Reports that Egypt is building a steel underground wall along its border with the Hamas-run Gaza Strip have fueled speculation about what exactly Cairo intends to accomplish with the project, which British newspapers claim is being carried out with the help of the US Army Corps of Engineers.

Skip to next paragraph

Photo Gallery
The Israeli separation barrier: A West Bank wall

The Punch: An antidote to the common pabulum. Views with a punch

India's Saffron Brigade Terrorists

Related articles

Is the PPP party over

Related articles

The Indus people of Pakistan and the Himalayan water

Related articles

Why Pakistanis dont want MFN to India

Related articles

Oklahoma racism faces wrath of US Constituton

Related articles

Mujib's fascism returns to Bangladesh

Related articles

Obam's major blunders in Delhi

Related articles

Uphill battle for India on UNSC seat

Related articles

Related Articles

Eliminating Washington's migraine: Exiting India from Afghanistan

Related articles

The Punch: An antidote to the common pabulum. Views with a punch: Obama's hard stand on oursourcing

Obama's hard stand on oursourcing

Related Articles

A word of caution: Don’t use the “P” word

Why China ignored India’s new ‘military doctrine’

The coming war between India and China

Haiti Earthquake: Why isn’t Pakistani ERRA there?

President Zardari is right about Kashmir: UN Resolutions should be upheld

Senator McCain is wrong again: Illegal Drone attacks only create more militants

Refuting Mr. M.J. Akbar’s Pakistanphobia

Indians evicted out their only military base outside India in of Ayini-Tajiksitan: Can they return?

Fareed Zakaria’s “Shining ‘India’ “

Ruling “India” by breaking it up into more pieces

Foreign Office overrides Mr. Haqqani. Visas refused to Blackwater

Sean Paul Kelley on Reflections on India

Kangaroo court—Bogus Indian case implodes: Cook Kasab denies any terror links: Indian Policy obtained confession using torture

Sagacious Virtuosity: Dump the elite--Pakistanis are not going to take it anymore

India entrapped the US in Afghanistan

RAW operates against Pakistan using Mukti Bahni model

Target Pakistan: India RAWs subsidiary Afghan RAMA spread terror in Pakistan

Rebuild Gaza Now: Jimmy Carter

Islamabad should dump “transit trade deal” with Afghanistan

Pakistanis blame the current bloody wave of bombings in their nation on U.S. mercenaries from Xe and old foe India

Nepal’s just struggle against Indian hegemony: Maoists lead charge against Delhi puppets

Nepal Crippled as Strike Enters Second Day

Kiyani says no to action in North Waziristan

Military Victory in South Waziristan or the Beginning of a Long War? Publication: Terrorism Monitor Volume: 7 Issue: 38, December 15, 2009 09:57 AM Age: By: Imtiaz Ali

India’s Nuclear Fizzle: Nuclear scientists still bickering over failure

Failed Warrior “diplomacy” of India

Reflections on India By Sean Paul Kelley

The two power centers in Pakistan

Manufacturing Windmill Turbines In Pakistan

Did CIA really fire Blackwater workers in Pakistan? or is it PR exercise?

US Apologist Talat Masood on Anti-Americanism:

India formed terror group “Zarqawi” to bomb Peshawar

Zardari is history.

Imran Khan offers to mediate FATA peace

India’s Nuclear Fizzle: Nuclear scientists still bickering over failure

Headley worked for CIA, FBI and the DEA: Was US responsible for Mumbai massacre?

Opportunities for Pakistan: Taking Automobile Manufacturing to the next level

Lieberman a pain in the royal neck for Democrats

Shame on Hasni Mubarak for building a fence around Gaza prison

Gaza border: Why Egypt is building a steel underground wall

Reports from the Gaza border say that Egypt is building an underground wall as deep as 100 feet to stem smuggling in Hamas-controlled tunnels. But there are broader goals, too.

Related Stories