2010 March | Real Pak Nationalists

March 29, 2010

India Threatened By Pak-US Friendship

Filed under: Defense,india — Tags: Gen. Kiyani, india, regional power, strategic partnership — admin @ 10:46 am

You know something is good for Pakistan when it makes the Indians angry. Another analyst is warning India about being outmaneuvered by Pakistan thanks to the recent Pak-US talks.

Pakistan’s clever outmaneuvering of India is racing towards a successful climax while India seems increasingly unsure of what to do. Consider two game-changing developments. First, America is willing to forge a strategic partnership with Pakistan.

Which means one thing to America, and quite a different thing to Pakistan. Second, India has been snubbed by the US first agreeing to India interrogating American terror agent Headley and then changing its mind.

And the writer knows what this means – it means that Pakistan is overcoming the dastardly scheming of RAW who has been trying to build a wall between the Americans and Pakistan’s military so that Pakistan will be vulnerable to India.

The net result is that India is facing its biggest policy failure to date. It has gained nothing whatever from the US in the fight against terrorism. It has potentially lost because the approvals Pakistan has won from the US put no break on terrorist activities directed against India.

In fact, following Gen. Kiyani’s recent visit to the USA, there is an even closer bond between to the two powers which will help ensure the might of Pakistan’s military. This is India’s greatest fear – an independent Pakistan that is the regional power. The Indians know this is coming, and that their plans to drive a wedge between the Americans and Pakistan has failed.

Things can get really dangerous because the man the Americans are banking on in Pakistan is army boss Ashfaq Parvez Khayani. They speak highly of him and in 2008 they honoured him with the US Army’s General Staff College Hall of Fame. As it happens, Khayani is also a former head of the ISI, the intelligence agency behind most of the operations against India. He is said to believe that India’s disintegration, or at least immobilisation through crippling terrorist attacks, is what will eventually stabilize Pakistan’s position as a major regional power.

The final result of this new Pak-US partnership is a strong and independent Pakistan. Gone are the days when Pakistan takes dictation from Washington, and gone are the days when India believes it can bully our troops and break up our nation.

Gen. Kiyani has secured the future for our nation. Pakistan Zindabad!

Comments (1)

March 26, 2010

Pak-US Talks Anger India

Filed under: india — Tags: india, strategic relationships, USA — admin @ 10:44 am

American Secretary of State Hillary Clinton Meets With FM Qureshi

If there was ever any question about whether or not Pak-US relations are good for Pakistan, the correct answer has come from India. While the talks are going on in Washington, India is getting nervous about the relationship building between Pakistan and America.

Indian strategic community believes Pakistan and the US may have come up with a hush-hush understanding on Afghanistan in the ongoing strategic dialogue, aimed at marginalising Indian role in Afghanistan.

This is what we have been writing about on this blog when we say that the people like Ahmed Quraishi and Zaid Hamid and Shireen Mazari who are always trying to end any friendship with the Americans are intentionally or unintentionally playing into the hands of India.

What better proof can there be than the fact that once the Indians see Pakistan and American becoming closer, they start to get scared? Why? Because they know that a strong bond between Pakistan and America will crush any of their dreams of undermining Pakistan. Because they know that this bond will mean that Pakistan’s military will have access to the best and most sophisticated military equipment to ensure that there are no threats to our sovereignty and our borders.

Do you not believe me? Simply read the words of Indian officials:

Former Indian foreign secretary Lalit Mansingh asked the Indian government not to be complacent over the US refusal to sign a nuclear deal with Pakistan. He called for focusing on the future of Afghanistan and India’s relationship with the central Asia.

Fighting: Mansingh said the nuclear-capable F-16s and maritime aircraft supplied by the US to Pakistan were not to fight terrorism, but to fight India.

Experts believe that the situation emerging in Afghanistan was a matter of concern for India and any deal with the Taliban would affect its interests. Former deputy national security adviser Satish Chandra said Pakistan had been given a veto over the future of Afghanistan, which was a big setback for India. “Pakistan wants to become the sole spokesperson of the Taliban. Pakistan has eliminated all potential mediators between the Taliban and the US so as to be the sole mediator with the Taliban,” said Alok Bansal, deputy director at the National Maritime Foundation (NMF).

Meanwhile, India’s main opposition Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) took exception to US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton saying, “Pakistan’s struggles are my struggles”, asking if America was a party to anti-India terror activities emanating from Islamabad. “Clinton’s statement at a meeting with Pakistani Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi amazingly belies an utter disregard for facts and history,” BJP spokesman Tarun Vijay said. He criticised the US for denying India access to David Headley, the American who confessed in a US court of plotting the Mumbai terror attack. “Instead of strengthening a dictatorial power centre supported and bolstered by the Pakistan Army, the US would have done better by asking Pakistan’s leaders to be actively helping India in its war on terror,” he said.

These talks in Washington are a blessing from Allah who has seen fit to give Pakistan an ally in the world’s two superpowers America and China. When India is kicking and screaming, you know that it must be the work of almighty Allah.

Comments (4)

March 25, 2010

US to speed up arms supply

Filed under: Defense,USA — Tags: Benazir Income Support Programme, Hillary Clinton, military supplies, National Defense, Shah Mehmood Hussain Qureshi, strategic relationships, Taliban, USA — admin @ 8:24 am

USA Pakistan Dialogue

US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said Wednesday US pledged a $125 million aid to boost the energy sector in Pakistan, besides allowing Pakistani products access to US markets and speeding up military equipment transfers, Geo News reported.

In a joint press briefing with Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi here after holding the strategic dialogue with the Pakistani delegation, she termed the strategic sitting important not only for Pakistan but also for the US administration.

She pledged American assistance to develop the agriculture sector in Pakistan besides extending assistance to maximise the exports of Pakistan. ‘Pakistani products will now have access to US markets,’ she said, adding that the US would provide cooperation in the establishment of three thermal power plants to lessen the power crisis in Pakistan. The US would also help Pakistan expand the Benazir Income Support Programme (BISP), she said.

Clinton said that the US would sign a letter for ‘significant road infrastructure’ in Pakistan’s troubled northwest without offering a figure. ‘Pakistan is on the frontline of confronting violent extremism that threatens us all, and Pakistan’s civilian and security forces continue to bear the brunt of that fight,’ Clinton said.

Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi said that US suspicions of his country have evaporated, with officials no longer questioning Islamabad’s commitment to fight extremism. Qureshi, who was holding a first-of-a-kind ‘strategic dialogue’ with the United States, said ‘the mood was completely different’ from previous visits to Washington.

‘I was at the Senate; I was at the House. It’s a 180-degree difference,’ he told a joint news conference with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. ‘There were no more question marks, there was no suspicion, there was no ‘do more,” he said. ‘There was appreciation for what we had already done.’

‘We’ve agreed to fast-track our requests, that have been pending for months and years, on the transfer of military equipment to Pakistan,’ Qureshi told said. Hillary Clinton, earlier in the dialogue, said that the US supported dialogue between India and Pakistan, while Shah Mehmood Qureshi called for a ‘constructive engagement’ by the United States on Kashmir.

Asked about Qureshi’s remarks later at the joint news conference, Clinton said that the US supported reconciliation efforts between India and Pakistan. ‘The issues that are part of that dialogue need to be addressed and resolution of them between the two countries would certainly be in everyone’s best interest,’ she said, without explicitly mentioning Kashmir.

Clinton said that the United States wanted to be a partner of Pakistan on ‘a full range of matters.’ ‘We can’t dictate Pakistani foreign policy or Indian foreign policy. But we can encourage, as we do, the in-depth discussion between both countries that we think would benefit each of them with respect to security and development,’ she said.

Speaking at an early-morning ceremony, Hillary Clinton said the US had started a ‘new day’ with Pakistan in hearing its concerns. Clinton said she wanted to speak directly to its people, acknowledging that the two nations ‘have had our misunderstandings and disagreements in the past.’

‘There are sure to be more disagreements in the future, as there are between any friends or, frankly, any family members,’ she said. ‘But this is a new day. For the past year, the Obama administration has shown in our words and deeds a different approach and attitude toward Pakistan.’

‘The dialogue we seek is not only with the government of Pakistan, but you the people of Pakistan,’ she said, vowing that both she and President Barack Obama had a ‘personal commitment’ to building ties with Islamabad.

Clinton said stability of Pakistan was in the world’s interest. Pointing to Pakistan’s growing action against extremism, she pledged full support, saying, ‘Its struggles are our struggles.’ Reiterating US support in the fight against terror to the nation, she affirmed that the Taliban were trying to consolidate in Pakistan, and it would be a threat for humanity as well as for the region.

She said that the Taliban wanted to destabilise Pakistan, and ‘we have to work together for their complete eradication.’ She said that the both nations are looking for a successful composite dialogue, as it would not be a one time dialogue.

She also lauded the role of Pakistan towards the establishment of peace in South Asia and termed the security and stability of Pakistan a top priority. ‘Pakistan’s military has mounted successful military operations against terrorists. Pakistan’s security agencies have captured many notorious al-Qaeda and Taliban terrorists,’ she said.

She made it clear that during the conversation, the United States will address Pakistan’s energy needs for the citizens of the nation. Clinton said that the stability and security of Pakistan was important for the world and the US would continue its maximum help to strengthen Pakistan.

She said, ‘We know that Pakistan is facing a severe problem due to the energy shortage in the country. And we will not let Pakistan alone in these intermingled problems and the US would always be on the side of Pakistan in its hour of need. The people are facing severe blackouts due to unavailability of electricity. Farmers are worried about the future of the agriculture sector due to the shortage of water in the country.’

Qureshi expressed gratitude for US assistance and pledged that Pakistan would keep up the fight against extremism. But he made it clear that Pakistan wanted benefits in return. Qureshi said that Pakistan was seeking ‘non-discriminatory’ access to energy resources as well as a ‘constructive’ role by the United States on its dispute with India over Kashmir. ‘Such a partnership, we are convinced, is good for Pakistan, good for America and good for international peace, security and prosperity,’ he said.

‘Pakistan is committed to doing its part to facilitate the world community’s effort for peace and stability in Afghanistan,’ Qureshi said. ‘We hope the world community will be equally responsive to our legitimate concerns and help advance common interests,’ he said.

He said the war against terrorism had seriously damaged Pakistan’s economy, as Pakistan has got nothing but bomb blasts in response to waging war against terrorism. Defence Minister Ahmed Mukhtar, US defence Secretary Robert Gates and Pakistan Army chief Gen Ashfaq Parvez Kayani and Chairman Joint Chiefs Staff Admiral Mike Mullen, senior advisers and officials attended the dialogue.

News Desk adds: The US has also agreed to pay Pakistan its military spending in anti-terror operations in two installments.

Source: http://www.thenews.com.pk/top_story_detail.asp?Id=27958

Comments (0)

March 24, 2010

Strategic dialogue and the Pashtun

Filed under: Defense — admin @ 11:46 am

by Zubair Torwali

By the time this article appears in print, the strategic dialogue between the US and Pakistani governments scheduled for March 24, would have started in Washington. The more important of delegations, perhaps the most significant one, left for Washington on March 20. This delegation comprises our top military stalwarts, with the army chief as its head. The other delegation from Pakistan includes some of the key position holders in the country’s economy, environment and energy sectors. Of course all these issues, the economy, climate and energy shortfall, will come under discussion during the dialogue, but analysts say that the most important point of the agenda is the war on terror and its future in Pakistan as well as across the border in Afghanistan.

This time the dialogue is most significant; and analysts have pinned many hopes on it. Its importance is twofold. The Obama administration wants to withdraw US and NATO forces from Afghanistan by the end of 2011. On the other hand, secret negotiations with the Taliban in Afghanistan are also underway.

The US has, by now, understood that the war on terror is never going to be won without the help of Pakistan. But things are not so simple. On the one hand, the US has always demanded that Pakistan should do more, and has very often ‘blamed’ Pakistan of having double standards in the war. It contends that the secret security agencies of Pakistan still support the Taliban in Afghanistan. Recently, according to some media reports, the arrests of some top Taliban leaders in Pakistan are seen by the US as an effort by Pakistan to thwart the negotiations between the Karzai government and the Taliban in Afghanistan. On the other hand, Pakistan is now expressing its frustration in loud words over the never-ending demands by the US to do more in its efforts to curb militancy and extremism.

All this ado clearly signifies that the two main allies in the war on terror lack mutual trust. It seems that now the two allies are running into difficulties with regard to combating terrorism collectively. In this dilemma, the effects on Pakistan are much greater as compared to the US, because the war has incurred the Pakistani nation tremendous losses both in term of economy and human lives.

Widespread confusion about the war, especially in the biggest, more influential province of Punjab, has now dragged Pakistan to the losing side. There is also resentment within the military about countering the internal threat in the form of extremism. This is evident from the statements of ex-servicemen, who are now making loud noises that this is not our war, but one imposed on us by the US. This sentiment is shared by Punjab much more than by the three smaller provinces of Pakistan. There are still some analysts who are hopeful enough to believe that Pakistan, particularly its military, is now in a marriage with the democratic government in fighting these internal threats. These analysts quote the successful military phase of the Swat operation. Yet, for many, Swat will be an example of whether Pakistan, and indeed the allies, will be successful in reining in the dragon of terror in the region or not. But this analogy falls short of realistic assessment, as Swat is not a separate state on the planet. Militancy in Swat was very much linked with the one in FATA and other areas of the NWFP. Swat was in no way the headquarters of the militants. Yet Swat had one advantage over other regions by being famous the world over for its beauty and sharing no borders with the safe havens of militants in FATA or Afghanistan. There is another aspect to the matter as well. Pakistan is fighting terrorism on its land but also wants to pursue the infamous policy of ‘strategic depth’ in Afghanistan. In simple words, it means to secure a pro-Pakistan government in Afghanistan, which will pose no threat, ensuring security on its western border. This wish was clearly enunciated by the army chief a few weeks ago.

But has Pakistan has ever tried to take the people — who are, predominantly, the victims of this strategy and terrorism — on board over this policy? The Pashtun, who undoubtedly are the direct victims of terrorism and the war on terror, have never been asked to express their views in this regard. Just look at the strategic dialogue in Washington. Neither party has bothered to ask the people whose fate is being decided in the dialogue. This is clearly an exclusivist approach, which will serve no end. The Pashtuns are now so tired of the strategic depth policy that they compare it with a deep grave for them. What is being felt among the Pashtuns is a replica of what was felt by the Bengalis 40 years ago. To avoid a fall of the Pashtun belt, the allies, Pakistan and the US must take them into confidence; otherwise it will be too late. The US is as much responsible in this as Pakistan is. Both need to listen to the Pashtun.

Besides, the Pakistanis living in Punjab must unlearn what they have been taught for decades, and they must reconsider whether they can play the role of the ‘big brother’ or not. They must deconstruct the imaginary discourse about a foreign enemy and reconstruct the national discourse to pinpoint the real threats this country faces. As ever, a greater responsibility now rests with them to prove that they deserve the title of the ‘big brother’.

Source: http://dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2010\03\24\story_24-3-2010_pg3_4

Comments (0)

March 23, 2010

On whose side are the Taliban apologists?

Filed under: Defense,Taliban — Tags: Al-Qaeda, Imran Khan, PML-N, saad rafiq, Shahbaz Sharif, Taliban, terrorism, TTP — admin @ 6:30 am

Imran Khan and Shahbaz Sharif: Taliban Apologists

by Babar Ayaz in Daily Times

To give apologists of the Taliban and jihadi groups among the politicians and journalists the benefit of the doubt, let us presume that either they are politically naïve or they are suffering from Alzheimer’s disease. Their usual refrain is that the Taliban’s terrorism would go away if the government stops taking foreign dictation. I wish it were that simple. Statements of Punjab Chief Minister Shahbaz Sharif, Saad Rafiq, Imran Khan and many fellow journalists reflect this mindset and one is amazed how they tend to forget the historical and ideological background of the rise of militant Islam in Pakistan. Blaming the government in this regard is just political point scoring, though sadly on a wrong issue.

Nobody can deny their assertion that interference in the national security policy should not be allowed. But for a moment let us assume we have no US interference in deciding our policy regarding the local and Afghan Taliban. And there is no pressure to wind up the India-specific terrorist networks. Suppose the PML-N is in power trying to work out the national security policy, if at all the GHQ would permit them to enter this sacred zone. In this situation, would they be able to deliberately gloss over the historical and ideological basis of the terrorists’ war against the state?

They will have to analyse the objectives of the people of Pakistan, the Afghan Taliban and the local jihadi organisations and then see whether these objectives are reconcilable with the interest of the majority of Pakistanis.

Once burdened with the power to rule, their analysis would have to be dispassionate, not idealistic. Their government’s ultimate responsibility would be to protect the democratic rights of the people and work towards raising their living standard. I am sure the PML-N realises that in a country where almost every third person lives below the poverty line, we cannot afford to fight the world in the name of promoting an Islamic caliphate.

So let us see what the major actors of this sad saga want:

1) The people of Pakistan: end of Talibanisation and religious extremism in the country; putting a stop to interference in Afghanistan; protection of Pakistan’s legitimate interests in Afghanistan; good relations with the Afghan government and the US; normalisation of relations with India.

2) The local Taliban and jihadi organisations: control over all the tribal areas to begin with, and enforcement of their version of shariah by force; support of the Afghan Taliban’s war against the US and Afghan government; fighting with Pakistani forces if they try to stop militants from joining the Afghan war and entering India for terrorist attacks; continue to support to al Qaeda; bring down the Afghan government; oust the US and NATO forces from Afghanistan; and liberate Kashmir through an armed struggle.

3) The Afghan Taliban: Take over Afghanistan by force and establish a government with their brand of shariah; resist any move by Pakistan to stop them from using its territory as a hinterland.

4) Al Qaeda: Help the Taliban in restoring their government in Afghanistan; continue using Afghanistan as their headquarters to export Islamic revolution through the barrel of the gun to the world; bring down the Pakistani government, which does not support al Qaeda’s ideals.

Now if we look at these demands keeping in view the interest of the people of Pakistan, it is clear that whether we listen to the US or we make indigenous policies, no compromise can be made with the Taliban and jihadis.

First, the people of Pakistan are Muslims, but they do not approve of extremism. They support democracy, which in essence is pluralistic and means tolerance of dissent.

Second, it does not suit Pakistan to help the Afghan Taliban who want to enforce religious fascism in Afghanistan and annoy the West.

Third, Pakistan has to stop interference in Afghanistan. There can be no two views about it. The UN Resolution 1373 “decides also that all states shall: refrain from providing any form of support, active or passive, to entities or persons involved in terrorist acts, including by suppressing recruitment of members of terrorist groups and eliminating the supply of weapons to terrorists.”

True, Pakistan should neither support the Taliban nor the US and NATO forces. But this would only be possible if the Taliban stop using Pakistan as their base and join the Afghan democratic process.

Fourth, Pakistan’s legitimate interest can only be protected in Afghanistan if there is a stable government in Kabul. A prerequisite of achieving this objective is to find a regional solution instead of a Pakistan-India proxy war in Afghanistan.

Fifth, we have to have good relations with the Afghan government. Those who suggest that we should stop supporting the Karzai government tend to forget it is recognised by the entire world and the UN.

Sixth, Pakistan cannot afford to have adversarial relations with the US and other Western countries. There is no reason that we should be fighting with them. Almost the entire economy of Pakistan is dependent on these countries. Over 50 percent exports go to these countries, leave alone the investments and loans, which we get from them. Any conflict with them would lead to sanctions that would mean closure of industries and immense damage to the economy — directly hurting the poor.

Last, no country is supporting the al Qaeda agenda because it is not in sync with 21st century political, social and economic values. Also, their terrorist means and Salafist ideology is unacceptable to the majority of Muslims around the world.

Apologists of the Taliban should realise that no matter who is ruling, it is high time that these terrorists should be dealt with. There should be no confusion that it is the agenda of the people of Pakistan. This is what Pakistan needs. Just because the US is saying the same thing does not mean we should foolishly tell the Taliban that we are on their side. There are no two options. Of course talks with the local and Afghan Taliban are possible if they renounce violence and join the democratic process in their respective countries. The interest of the people of Pakistan should be at the top of our list instead of anti-government and anti-US emotions. The Taliban have offered a deal to the Punjab government. It has a Faustian choice that no apologist can afford to make.

Comments (0)

March 22, 2010

Tribal Council Says Crush Taliban

Filed under: Taliban,terrorism — Tags: jirga, Peshawar, PML-N, Shahbaz Sharif, Taliban — admin @ 5:52 am

A tribal council from the regions near the Pak-Afghan border have shown themselves to be REAL Pak Nationalists this weekend. Unlike Shahbaz Sharif’s crying for Taliban to please spare his province, this jirga has made strong statements against terrorism and called for Taliban to be crushed.

Hundreds of tribesmen from regions near the Pak-Afghan border ended a rare tribal council on Saturday with a declaration calling for the army to crush the Taliban.

The meeting in Peshawar was called by an umbrella group of aid organisations and political parties in an effort to bring together people from the region.

Participants called for the army to escalate attacks against the Taliban across the tribal regions, dismissing Pakistan’s earlier offensives as “military dramas”.

“It should be a genuine military operation like the Sri Lankans did against the Tamil Tigers,” said Sayd Alam Mehsud, a powerful tribal leader, referring to the brutal military campaign that destroyed the separatist Tamil army in Sri Lanka.

They also called for more power for traditional councils.

“If we strengthen these councils and make them more functional, I believe it will win us half of the war,” said one participant, Salar Amjad Ali, 34. “We, the Pashtuns, live for our culture and tradition and we die for it,” he added.

While Saturday’s meeting was not a formal jirga, it is rare to have so many tribal leaders gather together.

A declaration at the end of the meeting called democracy vital to rooting out terrorism, arguing that the military should keep out of politics.

“A sapling of terrorism cannot grow in democracy. Any attempt to derail democracy is like letting the terrorists walk all over us,” the declaration said.

One organiser, Sayd Alam Mehsud, said the meeting was a way to bring together people from the area that is suffering most in Islamabad’s war against the militants.

“We have just tried to unite people for the sake of peace,” he said. Participants said they had little faith in the US-Pakistan alliance, and that Washington and Islamabad were more worried about internal political issues than dealing with the deep-set social issues at the root of much of the violence.

“If we do not address the mindset of the terrorists, we will not be able to eliminate terrorists,” said Alam.

Crush the unwilling: The tribal leaders urged the government in Pakistan to reach out to the militants – but also to crush those unwilling to negotiate.

“We tribesmen are more patriotic than anybody else,” said one participant, Din Muhammad Khan, who had come South Waziristan, where a government offensive that began last fall is thought to have killed hundreds of terrorists.

“Pakistan is ours. We are for Pakistan… we will die for this country if required,” he said. Meanwhile, in Karachi, police arrested three Taliban militants on Saturday and seized a bomb-making factory, a counter-terrorism official said.

Police raided a house in the city’s industrial area and forced the militants to surrender after a gunbattle, said Raja Omar Khatab, No one was injured.

After their arrest, the suspects led police elsewhere to the bomb factory, and a large number of explosives, detonators and other bomb-making material was seized, he said.

Violence has surged in Pakistan in recent days as terrorists – thought to be part of a loose network of insurgents fighting the US-allied Islamabad government – launched a wave of suicide bombings.

Comments (0)

March 21, 2010

We Must Unite To Defeat Taliban

Filed under: Taliban — Tags: NWFP, Punjab, Shahbaz Sharif, Taliban, TTP — admin @ 5:56 am

Ismail Khan’s column in Dawn today should be read by all. With all the talk from the Sharif’s about sparing Punjab and sacrificing the rest of the country, the flames of provincialism have been fanned. But if Pakistan is to survive, if we are to come out of this war stronger and with a secure future for our children, we must do away with this provincialism and stand united as on Pakistan.

How does it feel caught in the eye of the storm? For nearly seven years, the people of the NWFP and the adjacent tribal regions and the security forces braved bombings and terrorist attacks, laying down their lives and offering unprecedented sacrifices. That was, when terrorists had turned the NWFP and the tribal regions into killing fields, while those living further a field to the east in the Punjab and Sindh were lived a relatively unscathed life.

The lull in terrorist attacks during the February, 2008 elections and the months afterwards because of the government’s peace-overtures towards the militants, were followed by a dramatic uptick in deadly bombings that exacerbated human toll with every passing day.

Those have been one of the most difficult times in the history of the NWFP, when every new day brought in more blood and gore. Still, nobody seemed moved in Islamabad and Rawalpindi. Such was the frustration that people began to seriously ask if the NWFP had been abandoned to its fate.

The irony was that while Pakistani militants spilled the blood and slit the throats of their own countrymen, our drawing room intellectuals, right wingers and armchair anchors split their hair if the war being fought in the tribal regions was Pakistan’s own.

That was rubbing salt into the wounds of those in the NWFP suffering the pain of a thousand cuts not just at hand of the militants’ brigades but also the apathy and indifference of their brethren in the rest of Pakistan.

That changed in 2009, when the military establishment finally woke up from its deep slumber to the existential challenge to the state by the aggressive and more ambitious militants menacingly setting their eye on areas across the Indus.

Swat was the turnaround followed by South Waziristan. Newton’s third law of motion says that every action generates an opposite and equal reaction. Holed up in North Waziristan and relatively smaller pockets in Orakzai, Tirah and Mohmand, the militants are now fighting their own survival war. So, it would have been naïve, if not downright stupid, on our part not to expect retaliation; and they will hit where it hurts the more: Punjab.

This, because in the militants’ own calculation; and unfortunately, it was a perception many in the NWFP had come to hold too, due to the seeming indifference to their plight in Punjab and elsewhere, that to change the course of military action, take the battle to the heartland of the military power — the Punjab.

Nor that the militants would think twice before striking anywhere in the NWFP, if an opportunity presents itself. Attacks continue across the length and breadth of the NWFP, though the scale and recurrence of these attacks have, mercifully, shown a remarkable downward trend.

So, should the chief minister of Punjab, Shahbaz Sharif, be surprised over the outrage caused by his appeal to the Taliban to spare his province because both opposed foreign dictation? Does he still wonder, no matter what spin his advisers try to weave around his rather timid statement, why the Taliban are now choosing to hit the citadel of his power; Lahore? And was he taken aback when the military chief, Gen. Ashfaq Parvez Kayani summoned him to Rawalpindi to give him a piece of his mind?

It took the military nearly two years, of course with the much needed crucial and critical support of the political leadership, to turn the tide against the militants by shaping up public opinion, to own this war as Pakistan’s own.

So, was Mr Sharif implying that the war that was being fought in the volatile tribal regions of South Waziristan, Bajaur, Khyber, Orakzai and other places is not Pakistan’s own and was being carried out on foreign dictations?

Did he realise what toll would his statement take of the morale of the forces fighting in some of the world’s toughest regions? Did he know how much effort it took to motivate the forces to take on an enemy that claimed to be fighting a holy war in the name of Islam?

Did he know the possible implications his statement could have, for reaching out to the militants to seek reprieve for a province that is a major contributor of manpower to the armed forces?

These are pretty serious questions and that is precisely why the controversy his statement generated refuses to die down. Statesmanship is not just about rendering Faiz Ahmad Faiz, it requires foresight as well. It was therefore, all the more ironical that this could have come from a man, which the establishment once wanted to hoist on Pakistan.

Wonder why, those who have had no love lost for the present dispensation, have now come to like them more than they liked the Sharifs for being the new saviors of the country.

But what is probably more worrying in this whole sordid affair is the ethnic dimension that terrorist incidents have assumed.

That Punjab has been in perpetual self denial about the existence of Punjabi Taliban and what is cooking in its own backyard in southern Punjab will have its own implications for Pakistan’s most populous province and by extension on the whole of the country.

But what has begun to happen does not bode well for national unity — the witch-hunt bordering on ethnic profiling after terrorist attacks in the Punjab and Sindh, when Pashtuns invariably become a suspect and is picked-up for questioning. Sadly, the electronic media cannot exonerate itself from playing up this ethnic dimension.

It is unfortunate that the militants are probably more united than our own political leadership across the broad political spectrum. Instead of seeking a common cause with the militants, the chief minister of Punjab should at least have learnt one thing from the Taliban — their unity. The Taliban may be known by their origin but when it comes to fighting an enemy, they are one, be that in Afghanistan or in Pakistan.

Comments (1)

March 19, 2010

Shahbaz Sharif’s Neurotic Affliction

Filed under: Taliban — Tags: Musharraf, Punjab, Shahbaz Sharif, Taliban — admin @ 8:49 am

Zafar Hilaly, who is an esteemed former Ambassador, wrote a column in today’s issue of Daily Times that the Shahbaz Sharif’s latest outburst shows a neurotic affliction, and that he should be sent for treatment. One thing is clear, though, Sharif’s latest outrage is proof that he should be removed from Chief Minister. This has become a big distraction and Punjab deserves a CM that can spend his time doing his job and not trying to explain away his mistakes.

At the height of the Monica Lewinsky scandal, Yasser Arafat was asked what advice he had for Bill Clinton. “Bill Clinton,” he said, “should remember that goats don’t talk.” Mr Shahbaz Sharif should perhaps also remember that silence can, on occasions, be full of potential wisdom, because one unguarded impulse can reveal more of a man than a hundred speeches. His brief utterance in Lahore earlier this week, beseeching the Taliban to spare Punjab because essentially they were on the same side, said more about him than a hundred speeches could convey.

We know the Sharifs well, beginning with Abbaji and how he made his pile before losing it, getting it back and then converting it into a fortune, of course, entirely as a result of his remarkable business acumen. We know too the Sharifs’ love for Punjab, particularly Lahore, where they are presently ensconced in a veritable palace surrounded by a thousand splendid acres of land. We also know that in their innumerable terms in office, at the Centre and in Punjab, they did their best to develop their beloved Lahore, sometimes at the cost of the rest of the province and always at the cost of the rest of the country.

Following on their cri de coeur of ‘Jaag Punjabi Jaag’, we know also how they founded several institutions such as The Bank of Punjab, Punjab this and Punjab that. In fact, most institutions that have ‘Punjab’ as a prefix, or for that matter a suffix, owe their provenance to their initiative. And soon Punjab will also have its very own custom designed local government system, thanks again to the Sharifs.

Those of us who live in Sindh never actually get to see the Sharifs because the beat of the Sharif brothers normally extends from Lahore to Murree or, at best, within Punjab and abroad, to London, Dubai, Jeddah and Riyadh. Jeddah is for them an obligatory stop, in response to the call of a generous God who has bestowed on them so much largesse, even though Nawaz Sharif omits it from his Assets Declaration Form. And Riyadh is where creatures of the Sharifs’ earthly god, the Saudis, go when summoned. As for the other provinces, for the Sharif brothers they may as well be located in a different world, nay another planet.

Hence, it was not surprising that earlier this week when Mr Shahbaz Sharif demanded of the Taliban that they cease their barbarous and murderous antics, he did so only for the sake of Punjab. That was predictable because, for the Sharifs, Pakistan is a pseudonym for Punjab. And, predictably, as the popularity of the Sharif brothers has grown in Punjab, correspondingly it has declined outside Punjab.

Some felt that it was presumptuous for Shahbaz Sharif to harbour the hope the Taliban will cease terrorising Punjab in response to his entreaties. Not so. Like the Taliban, the Sharifs are fundos though, for the sake of political expediency, of the closet variety. And like the Taliban they also suffer from dyspepsia, a disease which the patient and his friends frequently mistake for deep religious conviction and concern for the salvation of mankind. Hence, there is always the hope for Shahbaz Sharif that the Taliban may oblige.

However, we can be sure that when the Taliban do not respond positively to his entreaties, Mr Sharif will not blame the Taliban, or fate, but Musharraf, the PPP, the MQM, the Americans, the Indians, the British, the Nigerians, the Somalis, in fact everybody but the Taliban. For the Sharifs, it is Musharraf who is the fount of all evil and, next to the devil, responsible for all our woes. An elaborate mausoleum has been designed in their minds for their enemies with Musharraf heading the list. The only problem is that if they continue indulging their fixation with Musharraf, they might end up finding their own bones interred in it.

At the function he addressed, Mr Sharif posed the question why the Taliban, if they fought with the PML-N against military dictatorship and the US and for democracy, are terrorising Punjab. Two thoughts occur immediately. Lolling about in a Saudi palace does not amount to ‘fighting’ for democracy. And if it is dictatorship that they were ‘fighting’, then what else is the Taliban rule but the most vicious form of dictatorship. The antediluvian, geriatric Sufi Mohammed of Swat told us, via the national hook-up in 2008, precisely what the Taliban thought of democracy. Besides, the Taliban repartee is full of violence, the language of the functional illiterate, which clearly the Sharifs are not, even if they cannot muster up more than a sentence or two on files.

Whatever happened to the Sharifs in the few weeks that they spent in jail under Musharraf was surely far less than what they inflicted on Salmaan Taseer when they had him in their clutches. And to the latter’s credit, one rarely, if ever, heard him bellyaching about the torture inflicted on him in the several months of solitary confinement that he underwent at their hands and those of their mentor Ziaul Haq. Nor did we see or hear Taseer urging Benazir or Musharraf to have the Sharifs tried for treason.

In the view of a former Punjab psychiatrist-turned-civil servant, the fixation of the Sharifs with Musharraf is actually the neurotic affliction that most ‘hands-on’ type of administrators, like Shahbaz, develop for their foes when overwrought or overworked. This affliction has many manifestations including loss of memory and denial, sudden temper tantrums including a desire to banish from view and office those who have the temerity to argue or resist. Clearly, Shahbaz Sharif needs a break for treatment.

But what Pakistan needs is not merely a break from the Sharifs. We need a break from all muddleheaded fools with occasional lucid moments leading us. We need neither a Napoleon, nor a Moses, nor desiccated calculating machines like those imported from Washington in the past. We are not a fussy people. We can make do with just about anyone who is reasonably honest and somewhat competent. Is that asking for too much?

Comments (0)

March 18, 2010

Shahbaz Sharif's Dupatta

Filed under: Taliban,terrorism — Tags: dupatta, Nighat Orakzai, PML-N, PML-Q, Shahbaz Sharif, Taliban — admin @ 7:36 am

Shahbaz Sharif's Latest Look

Pakistan Muslim League-Quaid (PML-Q) Member of Provincial Assembly (MPA) Nighat Orakzai on Monday removed her ‘dupatta’ and threw it on the floor during the NWFP Assembly session on Monday, asking the Punjab chief minister (CM) to wear it, in protest against a statement given by him in which he asked the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) to “spare the province of Punjab from its terrorist activities”.

According to a private TV channel, the PML-Q MPA said that if Punjab Chief Minister Shahbaz Sharif is so scared of the Taliban, then he should starting wearing a ‘dupatta’. She said the Punjab CM’s statement had revealed that he was only concerned for the safety of his province, and called it a “betrayal” of those killed in terrorist activities in the NWFP.

Source

PLEASE CONTACT PML-N HEAD OFFICE AND DEMAND THAT SHAHBAZ SHARIF BE REMOVED!!!

PML-N Head Office
House No 20-H streets 10, sector F-8/3 Islamabad.
Secretary General Direct NO : 051-2852661
Secretariat Phone and Fax No : 051-2852662,
051-2852663 and 051-2852665
E-mail : pmlisb@hotmail.com

Comments (1)

March 17, 2010

Remove Shahbaz Sharif

Filed under: Uncategorized — Tags: Militants, PML-N, Punjab, Shahbaz Sharif, surrender, Taliban, treason, TTP — admin @ 7:46 am

Punjab Chief Minister Mian Shahbaz Sharif Surrenders to TTP

What is the difference between asking for a truce with TTP and trying to surrender Pakistan? This action by CM Shahbaz Sharif makes me sick. Why hasn’t PML-N at least kicked him out? How can he stay in office after this act of TREASON???

Of course he is trying to back up and save his own skin after his words were caught. But for all the talk about corruption in government, is there anything so sinister as trying to SURRENDER TO TALIBAN!!!???

PLEASE CONTACT PML-N HEAD OFFICE AND DEMAND THAT SHAHBAZ SHARIF BE REMOVED!!!

Comments (1)

Older Posts »