Bismillah ar Rahman ar Rahim REALPakNationalists

June 9, 2011

Agencies Must Beware Iran’s nuclear ploy

Filed under: Iran — Tags: , , , — admin @ 11:29 am

Much is being made of the claims by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad that the US has designs on our nuclear assets. As we examine and investigate these claims, we must beware that Iran has its own security strategy and we have our own security strategy also and we must not allow ourselves to be duped and become a pawn in Iran’s strategy.

According to a news report, Ahmadinejad claims the Iranian intelligence has precise information about a US plot.

Speaking at a media conference in the Iranian capital, Ahmadinejad said, “We have precise information that America wants to sabotage Pakistan’s nuclear facilities in order to control Pakistan and to weaken the government and the people of Pakistan.” The president added, “The United States would then use the UN Security Council and some other international bodies as levers to prepare the ground for a massive presence (in Pakistan) and weaken the national sovereignty of Pakistan.”

As is admitted by the news report, “The Iranian president did not give details nor revealed the source of his information”. Besides having no evidence, this statement by the Iranian president has caused some hairs to stand on end. But let us evaluate this claim with cold reason.

While there have been many concerns stated about American designs on the national assets, the US has not made any attempt to seize or destroy the nation’s defensive arsenal. Even when America’s Enemy #1 and most wanted man Osama bin Laden was discovered hiding in Abbottabad, still the Americans did not make any move against our nuclear sites. Many believed that Abbottabad was a pretext for invoking Chapter 7 of the UN, but over a month has passed and still this has not materialised either.

Ahmadinejad wants our assetsLet us now examine the other player in this drama which is none other than Iran itself. Iran has long been a troublesome neighbor of Pakistan, playing against Pakistan to serve its own interests. The port of Chabahar is a perfect example being only 100 miles from Gwadar port of Pakistan. Iran has worked to secure the prominence of its own port over Pakistan’s to support its own isolated economy.

It is not only economic battles, though, as it also must be noted that Iran and Pakistan have become deeply suscpicious of each other in the area of security since the post-Cold War fight in Afghanistan during the 1990s. During this time Pakistan supported the Pakhtun Taliban while Iran supported the Tajik Norhter Alliance. This resulted in the rise of a low-intensity ‘proxy war’ between the two nations as Shia Iran became fearful of sectarian fighters in the Taliban. This situation strained to the level near to all out war when the Taliban executed several Iranian diplomats in 1998 and Iran deployed their troops to the Afghan border in response. Iran continues to see Taliban/al Qaeda jihadis as a threat to their own brand of Islamic revolution.

Can it be any coincidence then that after al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden is found in Abbottabad and then Taliban/al Qaeda join forces to attack Pakistani security posts in PNS Mehran as well as Peshawar and Kharian and other areas that Iran has renewed interest in Pakistan’s nuclear assets?

As our intelligence agencies investigate the Iranian claims and discuss with Ahmadinejad’s own security agencies they should beware of being played as a pawn by the Iranianians in two ways.

1. Iran could be looking for information on our strategic sites in order to target them in case of threats from Taliban
If Iranian security agencies are concerned about the possibility of infiltrators assisting PNS Mehran attacks, they may be looking for further intelligence about our own strategic resources and security sites in order to target them in case of continued attacks by Taliban forces.

2. Iran could be looking to get transfers of technology in order to build a deterrent against Taliban. Even more troubling is the possibility that the Iranians are attempting to use our natural religious sympathies to put our guard down so that we will give them some strategic technology for their own use. While they would certainly whisper convincing words about uniting against an imperialist threat, the true end game would be to secure their own predominance in the region and to use the technology as a deterrent against Afghanistan or even Pakistan ourselves once the Americans leave the region.

Either of these scenarios are both plausible and possible and must be watched closely. The Foreign Office has responded to the Iranian statement correctly by saying that Pakistan will not be used as a pawn in Iran’s attempts to gain their own nuclear assets. Pakistan’s strategic resources are for the security of Pakistan only. Also, while there has been no attempt to invoke Chapter 7 of the UN til date, transfer of technology to Iran would make such a verifiable certainty as even China would not stand up for us in such an event.

Intelligence agencies should discuss with the Iranians about these claims by Ahmadinejad to determine if there is any proof in the pudding, but they must do so with a clear vision and not allow the Iranians to pull any red, white, and blue wool over our eyes as a ploy to get access to our own defenses.

January 16, 2010

Pak-Afghan-Iran united against terror!

Filed under: Afghanistan,Defense,Taliban,terrorism — Tags: , , — admin @ 4:20 pm

It is a sign of our sovereignty and regional status that Pakistan conceptualized and participated in the Tri-Nation Conference. Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi, along with his Afghan and Iranian counterparts, Rangin Dadfar Spanta and Manouchehr Mottaki, respectively, met and discussed the issues all three nations must focus on together.

After the conference, a declaration was issued stating the following:

1 – All three nations vowed not to allow terrorists any harbor or protection within their borders. Militants and terrorism would find no safe haven under the federal laws of all three nations.

2 – They pledged to work together against cross-border crimes.

3 – A committee would be formed to ensure that the agenda of the meeting is carried out, and also strengthens ties between the neighbors.

“We acknowledge that terrorism poses a common challenge that can only be addressed through concerted efforts,” the three ministers said in the joint declaration issued at a press conference.

The fact is, such conferences are key to our stability and that of our region. We are a strong, vibrant people, and it is our duty to assist our Afghan and Iranian neighbors, especially when we are all battling the same demons.

December 23, 2009

Anti-Americanism and the Future of Pakistan

Hypernationalist anti-Americanism is a dangerous path for the nation's future.

Hypernationalist anti-Americanism is a dangerous path for the nation's future.

Anti-Americanism has become quite the trend in much of the country, and this does not hold well for the future. A writer on this blog wrote last week that there were uncomfortable similarities with the political situation in Iran thirty years ago – a reaction against American involvement in the country that popularized a faux-nationalism hijacked by theocratic militants. Renowned defense analyst Ahmad Faruqui notices this as well in his column, Monday’s issue of Dawn, and notes that the conspiracies and anti-Americanism that is being stoked by hypernationalists is not in Pakistan’s interests.

Lost on the anti-Americanistas was the fact that the US was not obliged to provide $7.5bn over the next five years to Pakistan. If the Pakistanis did not like the conditions that came with the funds, they could simply decline the aid. As Senator Kerry put it, the US had plenty of other places on which to spend the money.

When it comes to anti-Americanism, there is little doubt that Al Qaeda and the Taliban lead the pack. But the rightwing parties are not too far behind. At a recent demonstration in Pakistan, bearded men held up placards that flaunted the Yankees in no uncertain terms: ‘Crush, Crush, America.’

But we must ask if this rabid anti-Americanism being promoted by hypernationalists is based in facts. It is easy to come up with wild conspiracy theories, but what happens if you put those same theories to a historical test? Faruqui does just that, and finds some real problems with the theories:

Anti-Americanism has also picked up converts in the mainstream print and electronic media. Conspiracy theories involving America are aired with increasing frequency. Even some leading figures from the diplomatic establishment have joined the fray.

The latest is Shamshad Ahmad, a former foreign secretary and former UN ambassador.

Speaking at a seminar in Karachi on state sovereignty, he went beyond the usual recital of grievances. That well-known list includes three major items. First, the US did not come to Pakistan’s aid during the 1965 war with India. This overlooks the fact that the war was initiated by Pakistan and that US arms were never meant to be used against India.

Second, it did not come to Pakistan’s aid in the 1971 war with India. This overlooks the fact that the war was triggered by the military’s ambitions to negate the results of the general elections and to rule in perpetuity.

Third, it abandoned Pakistan once the Soviets pulled out of Afghanistan in 1989. This overlooks the fact that the US had not guaranteed Pakistan’s security for all times to come against enemies of all stripes.

The former foreign secretary, a strong proponent of Pakistan’s nuclear weapons but by no means a firebrand Islamist, stated: ‘The US had used us as a spy in the past to fulfil its motives, while now it is using us as a mercenary.’ And then came the clincher: ‘It is the US intervention, not the Russian intervention which has kept everything on the boil in the region.’

Some political analysts continue to indulge in conspiracy theories about the attack on Pearl Harbour on Dec 7, 1941 and the attacks of Sept 11, 2001. But Ahmad put himself in a class of one by saying that the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan on Christmas Eve in 1979 was engineered by the US.

He said, ‘The Americans think and plan about things they want to achieve in 50 or 60 years. They created a vacuum in Afghanistan. So after the political manoeuvring in Afghanistan, the US created a way for the Soviet Union [to be] sucked in[to] that vacuum.’

The former senior diplomat, who knows the country’s history better than most, went on to say that the Americans got the Pakistanis on their side by saying that the Soviets were out to fulfil the czarist dream of building a warm water port. This is revisionist history. Right after the Soviet invasion, Gen Ziaul Haq put in a plea for the West’s help, saying that the Evil Empire was about to make a run for Gwadar. He famously rejected President Jimmy Carter’s $400m aid package by calling it peanuts. But when President Ronald Reagan offered him a $3.2bn package, he was all smiles.

These are the historical inaccuracies of a former foreign secretary. Someone who should know better. But the fantasies that are flying around discussion boards and drawing rooms across the country are even more outrageous.

An ultranationalist theory that is rapidly gaining currency in Pakistan is that there was peace in the region until the US arrived in October 2001. Several of the ultranationalists also subscribe to four ‘booster’ theories. Namely, that all of our problems are a result of the Americans.

First, that the US engineered the 9/11 attacks on itself. It needed an excuse to invade Afghanistan and control access to Central Asian natural gas. Second, that Osama bin Laden did not carry out the 9/11 attacks, that he is an American agent trained and armed by the CIA and that he was killed in December 2001. Third, that Al Qaeda does not exist. And fourth, that the Taliban are simply freedom-loving people trying to free their country from foreign occupation. The obvious theory about 9/11 has no vocal adherents in Pakistan. This argues that the attacks were carried out to draw the US into the region, inflame interfaith relations and provoke a holy war that would result in the revival of the caliphate.

This sort of thinking not only ignores the past, but imperils our future. Recall the words of Lt. Gen (retd) Talat Masood and his explanation of why anti-Americanism is a danger to our national defense. Faruqui picks up this same theme in his closing arguments for his column in Dawn:

With every passing week, Pakistan continues to inch towards the brink. Given the frequency of the Muslim-on-Muslim attacks that are now being mounted, it is moot whether Pakistan is a failing state or a failed state. Neither prognosis is good.

The US is not perfect. It has made its share of mistakes, domestically and internationally. A common charge levied by the anti-Americanistas is that the US acts in its own interests. That should be cause for celebration and not denigration. If only Pakistan would do the same. Instead of demonising America, it should turn on its own demons.

This rabid anti-Americanism is a danger to the future of Pakistan. The Iranians also thought that following the words of hypernationalist theocrats would save their nation. Instead, it set them back decades, and still today they are struggling to remove the suffocating regime. Once the militants take control, there is no more confusion about who is the real enemy of the people.

The Americans have made many mistakes, but they have also stood by Pakistan in the past. Today, they appear to be making real attempts at building a partnership with us. To suggest that we turn our backs on them and join hands with the hypernationalists is suicide. After all, there can be no argument that it was Americans who beat to death protestors of the Iranian regime. Inshallah we will not find ourselves in a similar future.

December 22, 2009

An Existential Threat

The following column by retired Ambassador Javid Husain was first published in The Nation on December 22.

The monster of terrorism stalks the land from one corner to the other posing an existential threat to the nation. Hardly a day passes without a terrorist incident taking place in some part of the country resulting in the loss of innocent lives and causing material destruction. Security establishments, mosques and markets have been the target of this madness. It seems that nothing is safe from the hands of the terrorists who pose a serious threat to the security and economic well being of the nation. The need of the hour is to face and overcome this challenge which otherwise has the potential to tear apart the social fabric of our nation. This would require an objective and dispassionate analysis of the genesis of this threat, the formulation of a comprehensive strategy to eradicate it and the resoluteness of purpose on the part of the nation and the government to implement this strategy.

A successful strategy to overcome the evil of terrorism requires in the first place an understanding of the factors which gave birth to it. After all, terrorism is relatively speaking a new phenomenon in Pakistan’s history. The country was more or less free of this evil till 1990′s when it became the victim of sectarian terrorism. I cannot recall terrorist incidents now causing so much pain and sorrow to us taking place in the country with such ferocity or frequency even in 1980′s when we were deeply involved in supporting the Afghan jihad against the Soviet occupation. 

The problem of terrorism, from which we are suffering now, took roots after the withdrawal of the Red Army from Afghanistan and the commencement of the civil war in Afghanistan between the Pashtuns and the non-Pashtuns after the fall of the Soviet-installed Najibullah regime in Kabul in 1992. Ideally, Pakistan, Iran and other regional countries should have steered clear of this civil war and allowed the Afghan people to decide their destiny without external interference. Unfortunately, that did not happen either because the political leadership in Pakistan and Iran lacked the requisite sagacity and farsightedness or because their security agencies, which were guided by short-term considerations and the goal of military gains instead of a political settlement in Afghanistan, became so powerful that they were able to defy the political leadership. Pakistan extended its support to the Pashtuns led initially by Gulbadin Hikmatyar and later the Taliban despite their retrogressive character while Iran aligned itself on the side of the non-Pashtuns led mainly by the Northern Alliance in the see-saw struggle for power in Afghanistan which continues till today. Unfortunately, Al-Qaeda was able to entrench itself in Afghanistan during the Taliban rule. The present political dispensation, particularly the composition of the security forces in Afghanistan, established after the fall of the Taliban regime in the aftermath of 9/11 when Pakistan decided to support the US invasion of Afghanistan, by far favours the non-Pashtuns and is the real cause of the deep and widespread dissatisfaction felt by the Pashtuns. It also underlies the continued Taliban insurgency and the conflict between the Pashtuns and non-Pashtuns in Afghanistan. A peace settlement between the two warring sides together with the withdrawal of the foreign forces is, therefore, an essential pre-requisite for durable peace in Afghanistan.

Pakistan became the target of the current tidal wave of terrorism after it tried, under the American pressure, to deny sanctuary in its tribal areas to the Taliban/Afghan Pashtuns fighting the US forces and particularly after it tried to stop its Pashtun tribesmen from going to the support of their brethren in Afghanistan. The fury of the Pashtuns in Afghanistan and in our tribal areas which was to be directed against the coalition forces has instead been aimed now at the military and civilian targets in Pakistan. Thus, the presence of the US forces in Afghanistan and their efforts to bludgeon the Pashtuns in that country into submission in total disregard of their justified political aspirations and cultural sensitivities have not only destabilised our tribal areas but also pose a serious threat to the peace and security of the rest of the country.

In a nutshell, the current tidal wave of terrorism in Pakistan can be ascribed to the following factors. Firstly, it can be attributed to our willingness, for a variety of reasons, to tolerate the continued existence on our soil of the ideological and training infrastructure which had been created initially for supporting the Afghan jihad against the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan. Secondly, it is the logical outcome of our policy of involvement in the civil war in Afghanistan and our ill-conceived and short-sighted policy of support to the retrogressive Taliban regime in 1990′s despite regional and international isolation. The current wave of religious extremism and terrorism in Pakistan is the blowback effect of those flawed policies. Thirdly, we have become the victim of terrorism because of our meek surrender in the face of the US demands to “do more” militarily without impressing upon the Americans the imperative of combining the use of military force against Al-Qaeda and other terrorist elements with political initiatives to engage moderate Taliban elements and promote a peace settlement in Afghanistan.

A comprehensive strategy to overcome the menace of terrorism must be based on a judicious combination of the use of force and political initiatives. The first and foremost element of this strategy should be the dismantlement of the ideological and training infrastructure which we inherited from the days of the Afghan jihad against the Soviets. This infrastructure now poses a serious threat to Pakistan’s internal and external security. Secondly, we should abide by a policy of non-interference in Afghanistan’s internal affairs and support efforts to promote national reconciliation and a peace settlement in Afghanistan free from outside interference. Other neighbours of Afghanistan must be encouraged to follow similar policies. Thirdly, Washington must be advised to combine the use of force against terrorists with political initiatives aimed at promoting a just peace settlement in Afghanistan with the promise of the early withdrawal of its troops from that country. Fourthly, we should engage the moderate elements among the Pakistani Taliban politically to isolate and overcome the extremists within them while continuing the fight against the terrorists who refuse to lay down arms. In view of the cross-border links between the tribes in Afghanistan and those in Pakistan, the chances of success of the political initiatives by the US and Pakistan will improve if they are taken simultaneously. Fifthly, we must revamp our intelligence agencies which so far have failed miserably to do their job of identifying, infiltrating and eliminating the terrorist cells in different parts of the country. Finally, the nation and the government must promote the Islamic principles of tolerance and moderation in our society. This is the demand of the nation’s internal and external security as well as of its economic progress and well being.

December 17, 2009

Must not repeat history!

Filed under: Defense,NRO — Tags: , , , — admin @ 9:30 am

Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it.

There can be no doubt Pakistan faces huge challenges ahead. The economy is unsteady, the government faces a myriad of domestic issues and concerns, and the ever-present threat of extremism hangs over the nation.

It is therefore tempting to see a major shake-up, even some sort of a revolution, as an answer to the current situation.

But this is where we must be careful, and look to the past for guidance.

Thirty years ago, Iran was in a similar situation. The way that country responded then leads us directly to where it is now: a claustrophobic theocracy, depriving its people of civil rights, freedom of expression, and in the last presidential elections, the right to vote. Is that what Pakistan wants to be? Absolutely not. We must avoid the pitfalls, especially when they are so predictable.

We must learn from history. We must learn that falling under the umbrella of hardliners to deal with the problems is never the answer. Going from a bad situation to a worse situation…well, that is unacceptable.

In the world we live in, journalists rant and rail against the government. While a free media is valued and respected in any democracy, one cannot ignore the fact that it is a profession that comes with much responsibility.

The Hamid Mirs and the Shaheen Sehbais must understand that to rip apart our fledgling democracy is to give power to the opponents of democracy. We have the makings of a solid democracy, we must stick by those principles.

Our system of checks and balances exists to solve our problems in a clear, rational manner. The recent NRO decision by the Supreme Court highlights the staying power of our democratic institutions. The President has remained impartial and respectful of the Court’s power, and now we will see the results play out. But again, all this must be done in the framework of democracy.

Any alternative option will be catastrophic for our future. Just look at Iran.

Powered by WordPress