Bismillah ar Rahman ar Rahim REALPakNationalists

January 24, 2011

DEATH OF COLONEL IMAM PROVES JIHADI TREACHERY

Filed under: Taliban,terrorism — Tags: , , , , , — admin @ 8:34 am
TREACHEROUS KILLERS OF COL IMAM

TREACHEROUS KILLERS OF COL IMAM

If it was not already apparent from the murder of Khalid Khawaja last year the death of Col Imam clearly proves that the jihadi militants are not allies or assets of Pakistan but operating with no regards to loyalty or nation.

It would be proper to note here that Col Imam was outspoken against the American strategies in Afghanistan rather he was proponent of dialogue with Taliban leaders to determine an acceptable political solution to the fighting. For his efforts, the jihadi militants murdered him.

He warned that American attempts to divide the Taliban by bribing commanders was doomed to failure. “Their strategy will not work,” he said. “This carrot-and-stick strategy is going to backfire badly.”

But the manner of the death of the “godfather of the Taliban” suggests that there were some thing he could not foresee – and that even the powerful spy agency has very limited influence over the militants within their own borders.

This should be a grave warning to those who continue to believe the lies of jihadi militants that they want a peace while they are at the same time killing our soldiers and our citizens. Even those who have raised them from the beginning and stood by their cause are being murdered.

January 31, 2010

Could Extremist Pakistani Bloggers be FBI Moles?

Filed under: hypernationalists — Tags: , , , , , , , — admin @ 1:56 pm

Guest Post By Yahya Hussainy

The David Headley aka Daoud Gilani case has been in the media for a few months now. There have been numerous stories about how Headley was not just an extremist but rather a double agent used by US authorities to help fish out other extremists.

The Headley case highlights how sometimes the people taking the hardest line are actually doing so to entice others with extremist potential into revealing themselves. As Al-Qaeda and other Jihadi groups have turned to the internet for recruitment of future foot soldiers, the FBI and the CIA are also using websites to check out who thinks what and who might be a terrorist or a terrorist sympathizer.

Given the large number of anti-American and even pro-Jihadi Pakistani websites, I have often wondered if some of the more extreme Pakistani bloggers are also “trolling” to find who in the Pakistani diaspora might actually be a potential Jihadi. Some of the bloggers are so outrageously irrational in their attacks on the US, Israel and India that their authenticity becomes clearly suspect.

Yes, the US allows everyone under the First Amendment of its constitution to express opinions. But didn’t many extreme opinion-holders get visited by the FBI immediately after 9/11? It is a known fact that the FBI keeps track of American Nazis and anti-Semites in case they go beyond expressing extreme opinions and actually start acting on them. Why do we assume that is not happening with Pakistani and Muslim blogs?

Sometime ago it was revealed that a widely accessed pro-Jihadi website www.jihadunspun,com was actually run by CIA to help identify Jihadi sympathizers.

So which of the Pakistani bloggers express extreme emotions not because they have these views but rather as a means of “trolling” for others who might be actual extremists? I am sure readers can identify many on the basis of their own suspicions. My own favorite is RupeeNews blogger Moin Ansari who mixes anti-American, anti-Jewish, anti-Indian and anti-everybody rhetoric with his own peculiar mix of sexual innuendo and conspiracy theories. We all know sex sells so if a professional from the intelligence community or law enforcement was helping someone run a blog or website to attract most possible readers and to use that as a technique of drawing up a list of Muslims and Pakistanis with extremist views, a website that mixes sexy headlines with conspiracy theories and hardline ideology could be a likely product.

Now, I have no way of knowing who does or does not work for the agencies and I am not saying that Moin Ansari or RupeeNews are indeed part of the undercover internet-blog strategy of any agency. For all I know, Mr Ansari might just be whatever he claims to be. My only experience with him is that he can dish out a lot of harsh criticism but cannot take any. The last time I posted about him he didn’t take it in good humour or even as me using my right of comment like he does his.

I am just saying that if Moin Ansari was trying to fish out extremists, headlines from RupeeNews.com like  Did Pakistani PM Gillani grope Sherry Rehman?, Kashmala Tariq turns up heat: Bites more than she can chew?, Sex Antics of Mohandas Gandhi: His Failures, Pedophilia, Adultery, Incest, Sexual Perversion & Fetishes, Sex Life of Indira Gandhi of India: The Indian Matahari,  Indira’s tryst with seduction, Wives that slept with Gandhi would be the perfect attractions for angry young Pakistanis living in America ready for jihad.

So, dear readers, start looking at the hardline and angry Pakistani bloggers with a new angle. Are they really expressing their views or are they moles trying to help the Great Satan –and its South Asian satellite–they criticize so much to identify young men who might hate America, Israel and India enough to wage jihad against them?

December 14, 2009

Anti-Americanism

Lt. Gen (retd) Talat Masood

Lt. Gen (retd) Talat Masood

Retired Lieutenant General Talat Masood has a very good column in The News today about the rising attitude of anti-Americanism in Pakistan and how this is is based in paranoia and not in fact. Also, the anti-American attitude is harmful to Pakistan’s defense and national security because it threatens a fragile relationship with the superpower that could help to ensure Pakistan’s security and independence.

Gen. Masood begins by pointing out that the US has a history of mistakes in dealing with Pakistan, but that the administration of President Barack Obama is trying to address those mistakes and build a closer relationship between the two nations.

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.

Obviously, America still has some problems with dealing with Pakistan, otherwise there would be no anti-Americanism. But no government is perfect. Islamabad is not exception and neither is Washington, DC. But is it in our security interest to push the Americans away?

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.

America can’t be both friendly and unfriendly. If there is contradictions between past actions and current actions, we can best judge what the Americans are doing based on what is in their own best interest. There is no argument that Obama will follow a policy that is best for America, so where does Pakistan fit into this arrangement?

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.

Clearly, despite the ongoing chit chat about Black Water and drone attacks and national security, the facts are that our national defense and security is best served by a cautious but committed attempt to build a close relationship between our military and the Americans. But you don’t have to take my word for it. Rather, you can take the word of a distinguished General.

July 27, 2009

Pakistanis Need The Courage To Question

It’s sometimes tempting to think of the power crisis as a simplified model of the national crisis today. A large part of the role behind Japan’s success was played by its corporations. Companies like Mitsubishi, Nissan and Sumitomo excelled by teaching their managers to ask questions.

For example, they would ask why we didn’t meet our sales target last month. To the answer our production was slow, the follow-up question would be why it was slow. We’re short of spare parts; machines kept breaking down, would come the answer. Why were we short of …. And in this way Japan probed its way to the bottom of its problems and very soon became a rich country.

Getting rich by asking questions? Why, sounds absurd? Not to the US Navy which then sported an ‘if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it’ attitude. In 1984 it adopted the technique and — after adding additional content — branded it Total Quality Management. TQM became a buzzword and spread like wildfire to just about every US corporation and onwards to Europe and Asia.

A few days ago, as the lights and air-conditioning suddenly died on me and I put down Dr (Justice) Javid Iqbal’s book, Islam and Pakistan’s Identity, the last words to stick in my mind were: ‘Pakistan is not a
failed state; it is in the hands of a ‘failed generation’.’ Iqbal envisioned a homeland for Muslims, Maudoodi, counter-intuitively, resisted on two counts: one, a separate Muslim state would limit Islam which had not fully done its work in India. Two, that the Musalmans of India were not ‘pure’ enough (read not fundamentalist enough) to be deserving of an all-Muslim state. Iqbal retorted that ‘Muslim state and society were always in a process of becoming and never became a finished product.’

Nevertheless there were problems with Iqbal’s approach, as he too maintained that the religious ideal could not be separated from the social order. Was he implying an Islamic state (or republic)? Because once you’re on that turf aren’t you left with little room for debate about implementing Sharia? Isn’t it setting you up as a target for a fundamentalist onslaught that an unfulfilled promise of an ‘Islamic republic’ brings on?

Unlike his predecessors Zia ul Haq not only gave way to this onslaught, he harnessed it. Then again in the summer of 1998 came another close call. That year, with his intended 15th Amendment, Nawaz
Sharif brought Pakistan within inches of becoming a theocratic state. By 1998 weren’t Iqbal, Maudoodi, Zia and Nawaz Sharif all on the same page? True, Jinnah hadn’t wanted an Islamic state; just a state for Muslims but then, doesn’t the basis for Pakistan boil down to Muslims being only able to live with other Muslims?

The lights flickered back on, the AC started to hiss and the reassuring hum of appliances could be heard again. Then they dimmed and finally died again. Is there a power shortage? Apparently not. By some accounts, installed capacity is enough to meet all except peak demand. So why the blackouts? Circular debt … Mangla tripped … Lesco’s transformer at the Kot Lakhpat grid gave way. In the end we may find that there was less a shortage of capacity, and more a shortage of intelligent questions; and an inability to clear a cobweb of stupidity.

So if Dr (Justice) Javid Iqbal’s lament is that Pakistan is in the hands of a failed generation Aitzaz Ahsan, in his book, The Indus Saga, explains why. ‘Pakistanis have spent almost half a century of their existence without asking any questions.’ Indeed bold, courageous and informed questions are anathema in Pakistan. The book raises the question of whether Pakistan is the result of a ‘two-nation theory’ hastily put together and announced in 1940 as the Lahore Resolution, or has there been a historical separatist urge in the territory we know as the Indus Basin.

Recently, Pakistan lost its most distinguished historian. K.K Aziz believed that like governments, a people get the historians they deserve. In a country of 160 million people, only five or six historians actually wrote and published. And soon this ‘failed generation’ gets set to pass the state into the hands of an even more hopeless generation. This one opened its eyes under the dreadful rule of Ziaul Haq; when textbooks were mangled to portray Pakistan as a ‘besieged state’ under threat from a Hindu India, a godless Soviet Union and an anti-Islamic West. The result is now all around us. Some time back prominent educator Dr Pervez Hoodbhoy had explained:

‘Most students have not learnt how to think; they cannot speak or write any language well, rarely read newspapers and cannot formulate a coherent argument or manage any significant creative expression. This generation of Pakistanis is intellectually handicapped.’

If inquiry and analysis were forbidden for the earlier generation, then the present one may not even have learnt how to construct a question. In such a culture isn’t it natural that obscurantist explanations and fundamentalist dogma will take over, conspiracy theories will flourish?

Against this the Jamaat has kept its fundamentalist narrative evergreen and intact, when it says that it is not religion’s fault the state of Pakistan hasn’t succeeded, it’s the fault of the people who never became ‘pure Muslims’. Within these wheels are the recruitment networks of the various jihadi outfits — in an environment of multiple social anomalies and economic deprivation — and we are facing a very real spectre of a radicalisation of many of the 93 million Pakistanis who are today under the age of 24. Out of curiosity: how many will turn to radicalism to chase the promise of untold pleasures in paradise and how many will actually be seeking to improve their lot in this world?

According to Ali Dayan Hasan of Human Rights Watch, ‘Pakistan is indeed a failed state. A state that does not have enough self- confidence to take criticism…. A state that feels constrained to legalise bigotry and exclusion, extremism and prejudice, coercion and oppression in order to survive … [Pakistan] is certainly not presiding over a vibrant, successful and self assured society.’ If Ali was to travel to the past and meet Jinnah, with this message from the future, what would Jinnah’s response be to him? Perhaps more importantly, what would Jinnah’s questions be to him? Might one of the questions be ‘when did you people stop asking questions?’

Powered by WordPress