First Impressions from Pakistan

Lawrence J. Korb, Brian Katulis, Colin Cookman

We left for Pakistan last week with two main objectives: to gain a fresh, on-the-ground perspective of the very fluid and complicated situation in Pakistan; and to discuss the Pakistan report we released last November, which lays out a strategy for stabilizing Pakistan and the region, with a particular focus on issues of implementation given the dynamic situation here on the ground. As we conduct these meetings, we're also getting an earful on the Obama administration's moves since announcing the results of its policy review on Afghanistan and Pakistan last month.

U.S. newspapers and television news give the impression that Islamabad is like Saigon in 1975, about to fall to the enemy. That depiction may be overstated, but the heavily guarded and fortified hotel and government buildings that we've visited are reminiscent of Baghdad's Green Zone-the legacy of several high-profile bombing attacks in Punjab province and Islamabad over the past year.

We spent three full days in Islamabad-a typical government town with wide roads, big buildings, and minimal industry-before flying on to Lahore, the largest city on Pakistan's eastern border with India. Lahore has the feel of two cities. One part is a military cantonment with a seemingly endless stretch of bases, military housing, officer clubs, and golf courses. The other is an industrial city filled with trade and commerce, as well as historical sites such as the Badshahi Mosque and Lahore Fort.

We're now halfway through our trip, and we've had about three dozen meetings with more than 50 people inside and outside of government, current and former military officials, academics, and representatives from the media and civil society, as well as U.S. diplomats. Here are some of our preliminary observations:

Militant forces are placing increasing pressure on the government and people of Pakistan. The Pakistani Taliban insurgency has blatantly violated disarmament agreements in the Swat valley north of Islamabad, and moved into adjacent districts in its Northwestern Frontier Province where they have taken over government offices and begun to consolidate their presence only a few hours away from the capital city. These actions are coupled with statements by several militant-aligned ideologues rejecting the country's existing constitutional system as un-Islamic.

Many Pakistani moderates feel an increasing sense of siege. The U.S. government has been critical of Pakistani inaction against militant forces in the past, but there is a strong impression that these recent movements have served as a wake-up call for many Pakistanis who previously may have discounted the scope of the Taliban's ambitions in their country. Extremist groups in these two cities have conducted targeted attacks on politicians and security forces, and have issued quiet threats to women who don't cover their hair and liberals who speak their minds. Prospects for open insurgency in the country's heartland do not seem high in the near- to mid-term, but the militants' ability to infiltrate and carry out a sustained terror campaign against population centers in Punjab and Sindh certainly appears to be growing. Yet those who have the power to stop this assault do not seem to feel the same sense of siege, and the political establishment has not yet established a consensus on how to respond to public threats against the system.

The risk of another coup by the Pakistani military seems minimal for the immediately forseeable future. The Pakistani military does not want to take the blame for the country's massive economic problems or inflicting civilian casualties in operations against the Taliban. The military seems to be looking to the democratically elected civilian government for leadership and political cover, which is seen as lacking.

The democratically-elected civilian government leaders are divided, dysfunctional, and lack the capacity to deliver on the basic needs of the people. Nearly everyone we have met with discussed the crisis of governance as a major challenge facing Pakistan.

The Pakistani government and people continue to see both India and the United States as colluding against them. Several people we met with expressed disappointment in what they view as a tilt in the Obama administration toward a more "pro-Indian" stance since entering office, with many noting that Kashmir, which Obama addressed during his campaign, seems to have disappeared from the discussion. Many are also suspicious that India is actively meddling in Afghanistan and the southwestern province of Baluchistan to undermine Pakistan's national security.

What U.S. officials say matters a lot and has a major effect on public perception. The statements last week by a bevy of U.S. officials were much debated and bespeak the considerable influence we retain in Pakistan despite America's general unpopularity. Overall, the people we met with in Pakistan expressed a strong preference for quiet diplomacy.

Many Pakistanis fear the United States wants to use them, rather than work in partnership. Many American policymakers have expressed support for the goal of moving beyond a transactional relationship with Pakistan and developing broader ties. Yet the Obama administration's statements of the past week and the discussions in Congress of applying stricter conditionality on proposed economic assistance packages seems to have reinforced the notion among several Pakistanis that the United States wants to "use" Pakistan for its own purposes, rather than build a genuine partnership with the government and the people. The perception that the United States is a "fair weather" friend remains strong.

Pakistan sees its problems as distinct from those faced in Afghanistan. Senator John Kerry (D-MA) noted in a USA Today interview following his most recent trip to the country that many Pakistanis see the "Af-Pak" label as demeaning. They do not like being lumped in with another country that they see as much smaller and less developed politically and economically. Pakistan remains a highly stratified society with dangerously low levels of service provision for many of its citizens, but it does possess a number of institutions which, if not operating at the peak of Western standards, remain active and functioning.

Processing the many, and often conflicting, views we've encountered here will take time and distance. We will follow in the coming days and weeks with more developed thoughts on the future of this critical country and how the United States can best hope to manage its relations with it.

US think tank suggests new strategy to tackle terrorism

A US think tank has said there was a lot of talk about Swat in media but Taliban takeover seems to be over-stated.

Talking to journalists on Tuesday, Lawrence Korb, Brian Katulis and Colin Cookman of Centre for American Progress (CAP) suggested a "new strategy" involving non-military means to tackle terrorism, which should be based on long-term commitment instead of becoming "disposable allies". They said that the Bush administration, apart from primarily focusing on the military means, also made another mistake of "personalizing" relations with Gen. Musharraf without reaching out to other segments of society.

They underlined the importance of adopting "quiet diplomacy", and said that rhetoric and public statements will not help.

Former assistant secretary for defence, Lawrence Korb, said that insecurity, poor economy, inflation, weak governance and "the Taliban factor" were some of the negative points confronting Pakistan. However, he added, there were good signs such as elections, peaceful stepping down of Gen. Musharraf, independent judiciary and strengthening of civil society and the media. He said they also observed that foreign aid was least popular in the country.

Brian Katulis said their purpose was to get a perspective about Pakistan since it was regrettably being portrayed in American media as "Somalia". He said they observed strong sentiments against Drone attacks, which appear to be legitimate concerns of Pakistanis, and such actions raised a question as to whether Pakistan was a partner or a target in the "war on terror".

He said Pakistanis feel that there was a "strong shift" in the Obama administration's policy toward India, which was evident from appointing Richard Holbrook as advisor for Pakistan and Afghanistan, excluding India.

Korb said Americans did not know about the complexity of governance in Pakistan, adding: "Insecurity may be a problem for foreigners in Pakistan but if you want to learn, you cannot sit behind".

He said: "Obama is a smart guy and he is not ideological, hence he is open to listening and learning. In contrast, George Bush believed in 'American exceptionalism' and American power, though the limits of such power needed to be recognized."

They also distributed CAP's report, titled: "Partnership for progress, advancing a new strategy for prosperity and stability in Pakistan and the region". The report cited six obstacles for defeating militancy, namely: the focus of the army on India; the "remaining links" between the military and militant groups; the unpopularity of US-led war on terror; tensions with Afghanistan; and the over-reliance on the military tactics and ineffective peace agreements. It also considered the weak civilian govt as a contributory factor.

The report suggested coordinating the strategy with the parliament, attaching development assistance to strengthening governance, the judiciary and reforming police and law enforcement agencies by emphasizing accountability, merit-based performance and de-politicization as part of comprehensive policy to tackle terrorism and extremism in Pakistan. -IA

From the Mahatma to Modi

Aijaz Zaka Syed (View from India)

Sitting in a cab or the more convenient three-wheelers called autorickshaws, while your driver negotiates the madness of India's roads, you would be forgiven to think you are in your own city. For all Indian cities look the same.

But it would be a mistake to dismiss Ahmadabad just like any other Indian city. This is not just Gujarat's largest city, it is also one of the most important and happening cities in the country. Its close association with India's Independence movement and Mahatma Gandhi's close ties with Ahmadabad and Gujarat make this a rather special and enduring relationship.

It's thanks to Gandhi that Gujarat has always enjoyed a special place in the hearts and minds of all Indians. But few in Gujarat today seem to miss the great man who fought an unusual battle for India's independence, inspiring numerous freedom movements and generations of leaders around the world.

In fact, whenever I bring up Gandhi in my conversations with politicians from the governing Bharatiya Janata Party as well as the opposition Congress, there's a stunned silence in the room, as though I have said something embarrassingly forbidden. They squirm in their seats as they try to ignore my naive fervour for the Mahatma.

Eminent historian and social activist Achyut Yagnik, who runs a non-government organisation called Sethu or the Centre for Social Knowledge and Action, laughs at my invocation of Gandhi. "Please don't talk of Gandhi. Nobody here cares for what he believed in anymore," advises Yagnik.

He is working on his latest project, a book to mark the 600^th anniversary of Ahmadabad next year, the city founded by Ahmad Shah of Gujarat sultanate.There's no love lost for Gandhi's ideals and values in today's Gujarat. I realise with a shock that the Mahatma has become passé, an anachronism in his own land. This impression becomes all the more acute when you visit his modest ashram on the banks of the Sabarmati river that runs through the city, neatly dividing it into old and new.

This is where the humble lawyer, who changed the world with his simple yet revolutionary doctrine of non-violence, bringing the world's greatest empire to its knees, spent his critical years.

Today's Gujarat seems to belong to Narendra Modi, rather than the Mahatma. In a land fast waking up to the fruits of economic liberalisation and instant gratification of capitalism and commercialism, there are few takers for Gandhi's spirit-over-body outlook and his universalist philosophy based on truthfulness and fairness. Like it or not, today's Gujarat - and perhaps India too - looks not to the past epitomised by Gandhi but to the future represented by the likes of Modi.

The Gujarat chief minister has been a divisive figure, hopelessly fracturing one of the most prosperous and progressive states along religious and sectarian lines. This is starkly clear wherever you go in Gujarat. The Hindus and Muslims live in two separate worlds, totally divorced from each other.

However, it's not possible to ignore what Modi has managed to accomplish over the past eight years or so. He has been the best thing to happen to the state economically.

By aggressively wooing big businesses like the Tatas, Ambanis and the Mittals, and rolling out the red carpet for global players, Modi has become the darling of big corporates as well as the powerful merchant classes in the state.

The numbers and statistics that Jay Narayan Vyas, the Health and Tourism Minister and government spokesperson, shares with me as a tribute to the state's phenomenal progress and all-round development are amazing.

While the rest of India has grown at the rate of 8 to 9 per cent, Gujarat has maintained an incredible growth rate of 13 per cent. Modern roads, 50,000 kilometres of fibre-optic networks, 2,200 kilometers of gas pipelines, uninterrupted power in rural areas, drinking water for 7,000 villages - the list is long and the statistics spell-binding. Gujarat has signed MoUs worth Rs 13,500 crores ($2.7 billion) with foreign companies that will bring new jobs and economic opportunities to the state. Already, half of the new jobs created in India are said to be in Gujarat.

Opposition parties and independent observers like Yagnik question these claims saying the government statistics are hugely inflated.

Maybe there's some sense in Yagnik's argument. Nevertheless, Modi's performance in Gujarat and his no-nonsense approach to governance coupled with his hardline Hindutva outlook have transformed him into one of the tallest leaders in the BJP.

So much so his one-time mentor Lal Krishna Advani, who is contesting for parliament from the state capital Gandhinagar and is being projected as the BJP's prime ministerial candidate, is feeling threatened.

Earlier this week, two former federal ministers Arun Shourie and Arun Jaitley pitched for Modi as prime minister. Interestingly, this happened bang in the middle of an all-important election and at a time when Advani was campaigning alongside Modi in Gujarat.

Even though a red-faced Advani found it hard to 'explain' the Modi-for-PM call by his party leaders while he was still in the race for the top job, it is not hard to see where Modi is headed.

Even the media appears to have fallen in love with the man who once served buns and tea at a roadside stall in Ahmadabad. The Times of India, the country's largest-selling newspaper, has been running a campaign of sorts for the chief minister. So is Modi indeed destined for greater glory and power at Delhi? Will he go on to lead the world's largest democracy and rising superpower? It's not as improbable as it once sounded.

He has created himself a large constituency of affluent, upwardly mobile Indians who are not too hung up on irrelevant issues like political correctness, justice and the rule of law etc. This constituency is not just confined to Gujarat but is pan Indian. India could certainly do with a determined, go- getter leader like him to sort out its myriad problems.

Ironically though, while 'missile Modi' looks all set to take off for his next target, there's a little, teeny-weeny problem that could yet derail his journey to New Delhi - the irritating issue of the infamous 2002 religious riots that killed nearly 2,000 Muslims refuses to go away.

At least eight of Gujarat's ministers, several top officials and ruling party functionaries are facing charges of actively planning and abetting the massacre of Muslims across the state.

A sitting minister Maya Kodnani has already been put behind bars on the evidence of mobile phone data presented by police official Rahul Sharma before the Justice Banerjee commission, probing into the Godhra violence.

As I write this sitting in a quaint, little Ahmadabad hotel, India's Supreme Court has asked the Special Investigation Team probing the 2002 tragedy to investigate chief minister Modi's role. The top court acted on a complaint by the widow of Ahsan Jafri, a former member of parliament who was killed during the attacks.

Dr Mukul Sinha, a Gujarat high court lawyer and convenor of Jan Sangarsh Manch, an organisation fighting for the rehabilitation of the 2002 victims, is confident justice will finally prevail.

It's brave and selfless individuals like Dr Sinha who have helped a deeply demoralised and traumatised community to come out of its shell and start afresh.

It wouldn't be easy for the state's nearly seven million Muslims to regain their confidence in themselves and their place in the world's greatest democracy. But they are trying hard, thanks to support from people like Dr Sinha and the faceless multitudes across India that make this a great country like no other.

Meanwhile, in a huge irony of epic proportions if anyone can stop Modi's proud march to Delhi, it's Modi himself. As his past appears to be catching up with him, there are growing calls asking him to apologise for 2002 and reach out to the Muslim community.

The Times of India, in a front page story titled, Can Godhra abort Missile Modi?, this week advised the chief minister to say 'sorry' and move on.

Invoking the Congress' apology to the Sikhs for the 1984 carnage, and Advani's own belated remorse for the Babri Masjid demolition, the paper pleaded with Modi to similarly break away from his past.

Even the Muslim community appears keen to move on and bridge the gulf with the Hindu majority, although there's still great bitterness and anger over the past. Tens of thousands of families evicted by the 2002 attacks are still living in refugee camps in poor conditions. Nevertheless they would like to forgive and forget, as state Congress vice-president J.V Momin puts it. The question is, is Modi ready to move on? Unlikely, if you understand the persona of the Gujarat leader built on machoism of a stubborn kind.

But no matter what Modi chooses to do and whether his political trajectory eventually takes him to Delhi or not, Gujarat's - and India's Muslims - cannot afford to give up hope and on their future in the country. India's democratic institutions, its independent judiciary and its inclusive and tolerant society will ensure they eventually get justice and their due. The wheels of justice may take their time to move but they do move in India.

From the Mahatma to Modi, Gujarat and India have certainly come a long way. But it's not the end of the road. Hope springs eternal in the breasts of a billion Indians.

Aijaz Zaka Syed is KT's Opinion Editor and can be reached at aijaz@khaleejtimes.com. Views expressed here are his own

Grabbing Water Resources

By Zeeshan Khan

In 1990, an analyst remarked in his report that, "by making water the main issue of contention, we could undertake to resolve other contentious issues. For example, by treating the Chenab River as the frontier we could establish the geographical boundaries of Kashmir. The analyst concluded his report by citing two sentences, whose interpretation is nearly the same; the first sentence was, "The Rivers hold the keys to the future conflict" and the next sentence was "The issue (Indus Waters) has the germs of future conflict." Last summer, in agricultural heartland of Pakistan, farmers began to notice that the level of water in the river and groundwater is decreasing to a great extent. The waterways, which bisect the Punjab are fed with glacial melt waters from the Himalayas and for centuries has provided crucial irrigation for the region. According to Pakistan India is withholding millions of cubic feet of water upstream in Indian-administered Kashmir and storing it in the massive Baglihar dam in order to produce hydro-electricity.

A treaty known as Indus Waters Treaty was signed between Pakistan and India on 19 September 1960 with World Bank as a signatory. According to this treaty, Sutlej, Beas and Ravi, termed the eastern rivers, will be under the exclusive right of India and Pakistan is entitled to unrestricted use of the rivers, Indus, Jhelum and Chenab. However today that treaty is in tatters because India has repeatedly broken it, bent it, subverted it, and worked around it to reduce the amount of water to Pakistan and increase the amount of water to India. India never had any intention of living up to it or to allow any concessions to either Pakistan or Bangladesh. Water is not only a strategic resource, but also a lethal weapon which is being used and will be used in the future. India has used her dams to cause flood damage to Pakistan. According to Lt Gen (r) Hameed Gul, India has so far built 62 dams and hydro-electric units on Pakistani rivers to deprive Pakistan of water and render into a desert.

Here two important question arises, firstly the water needs of Pakistan and secondly what will India gain from stopping the waters of Pakistan. As far as the first question is concerned, Pakistan is a successful agrarian society. Punjab province of Pakistan has been blessed with 30 feet of topsoil and a host of rivers to irrigate it. About 85% of this water originates in the Western Himalayas, in India and Tibet and the rest comes in small distributaries from Afghanistan and Kashmir. The Chenab River that flows through the heart of this fertile Pakistani Punjab area is the key to the prosperity of the region. But according to a recent report, the flow of river water in Pakistan is dropping precipitately, at nearly 7% a year. The country`s vast irrigation network is silting up and agricultural output will reach a crisis by 2010, with two key commodities - food grain and cotton - badly hit. And the reward goes to India. Building dams and reservoirs in Kashmir could help irrigate Punjab and Sindh in Pakistan. The trouble is that the territory required for such construction lies in Indian Kashmir. And again courtasy India, Pakistan cant build dams to fulfill its water requirements. And now the second question what is India gaining? Analyst believe that low water flows and energy deficiency have forced India to increasingly manipulate the IWT to its advantage; secondly, Delhi wants to use water as political leverage against Pakistan; thirdly, keeping up ancillary issues as a wall to keep the core issue on the backburner and lastly, to prove to the Kashmiris that Islamabad is denying them jobs and opportunities which originate from the state's very own resources.

The Indus basin treaty in itself had the seeds of discontent as the World Bank solution violated the International Law which does not allow change of direction and the flow of the rivers anywhere in the world. River Ravi passing through Lahore was given to India. Subsequently Pakistan saw with open eyes India building dams and powerhouses on the three Western Rivers which were designed "for exclusive use of Pakistan." this was yet another conspiracy planned against Pakistan. Pakistan has been apprehensive that in a dire need India under whose portion of Kashmir lies the origins and passage of the said rivers, would use its strategic advantage and withhold the flow and thus choke the agrarian economy of Pakistan. and the worst fears of Pakistan came true when on June 14, 2002, The Indian Minister for Power and Water, Chakravarty, said openly in a formal meeting of the IWT council held at Delhi: "When we abrogate IWT, Pakistan will be in a state of draught and Pakistanis will cry for drops of water".

India out of its hatred and revenge for Pakistan is leaving no stone unturned to damage the integrity of Pakistan. The implications of this move of India against Pakistan will be far reaching and disastrous. The water bomb needs to be defused. No nation should deprive another of a shared resource which, thanks to geographic design, collects in a basin within its borders. The Final Settlement calls for a cross-border body that will oversee the Indus water basin and treat water as a commodity to be shared equitably. Islamabad is acting mature and so should New Delhi.

Af-Pak and India

M Akram Sheikh

During his election campaign, Barack Obama promised to place Afghanistan at the top of his government's foreign policy agenda. After becoming president, he appointed a well-known diplomat as his special envoy for addressing the threat of terrorism in Afghanistan and Pakistan. Richard Holbrooke is not known for accepting defeat.

However, given his track record, it is surprising how he has allowed himself the liberty of not taking into account ground realities before devising his approach to achieve his stated targets of building trust with Pakistan. Unless Mr Holbrooke accepts the objective reality that India has no role to play in the achievement of his mission, it may not be possible for him to achieve his goal.

Mr Holbrooke refuses to even mention the Kashmir issue. Firstly, if he is so particular about his mandate, how can he declare India as the leader of South Asia but still be afraid of even mentioning the 'K' word? If he wants to build trust with Pakistanis, why can he not simply come clean about it by publicly saying that 'look I appreciate your concern about the Kashmir issue' but first it is not within my mandate and, then, India is too sensitive about it'. Also, Mr Holbrooke seems to want to keep India on the loop on whatever goes on in his mandate with dealing with Pakistan and Afghanistan - on the pretext that India is Pakistan's neighbour. Why not also inform Iran as well since after all it too is Pakistan's neighbour?

He claims that India has spent one billion dollars in Afghanistan. Instead of appreciating it, Mr Holbrooke should honestly ask himself if this level of spending is for charitable reasons only. Are there no more poor people in India who may be more entitled to Indian compassion? And is there any other country in the whole world that has received as much attention and money from India? What about Bhutan, Burma and Bangladesh? Is it difficult for Mr Holbrooke to accept that the reason for so much spending on the other side of what India perceives to be its number one enemy cannot be bona fide?

The fact is that against the bitter history of Indo-Pak relations, the psyche here is understandably that of 'paranoia of encirclement'. It would be helpful if the US government started to see Pakistani Army's action - or lack of it - against the Afghan Taliban, who may be enjoying the benefit of being perceived by Pakistani establishment as 'the-sole-enemy-of-our-enemy-in-Afghanistan', in the light of its India-related experience and perception.

If America wants to make any sort of headway on Afghanistan and Pakistan, it must first take on board the fact that from Pakistan's standpoint, India is its enemy number 1. India has wanted Pakistan to fail right from the day of its creation. The point is that it doesn't matter if the US agrees with this view or not, the fact simply is that for there to be any progress on Pakistan and Afghanistan, America needs to pay due regard to this issue that Pakistan faces.

Perceptions and fears, no matter how misplaced they may be, play a vital role in achievement of objects and targets. If Indian sensitivities have made Mr Holbrooke forget the 'K' word, if for nothing else then just to be able to achieve his targets in Afghanistan and Pakistan, Mr Holbrooke will need to forget the 'I' word as well.

The writer is a senior lawyer.

opinion: Justice and morality, British style

Brian Cloughley

There used to be something called British Justice which, although creaky and flawed, actually stood for the principle of innocent until proven guilty. Nowadays when someone is prejudged and gravely slandered but then found to be innocent, the tactic is to defame the victims by any possible means

One thing that Pakistan could have done without was yet another visit by Britain's prime minister, Gordon Brown, whose activities have driven his own country to misery. The thought of him presuming to advise Pakistan about its affairs is mind-boggling.

Britain is in a sad state. Sure, the Taliban are not swarming at the gates of London, nor are areas of the country under threat of sharia law, as in Swat, where it is imposed by vicious bigots whose claims to being human are fragile at best. But the United Kingdom is suffering from a dreadful sickness, economically and ethically.

In what used to be known as the Mother of Parliaments, 646 grubby bumptious politicians revel in a handout regime of unstinted financial generosity, designed and monitored by themselves and funded by the public. Their sordid antics include defrauding the British taxpayer by claiming vast expenses for houses as second homes.

For example, a cabinet minister - the home secretary, no less - claimed a room in her sister's flat as a second residence and scooped up over 100,000 pounds. They employ relatives in various gainful ways, and the home secretary's husband is one of her employees, getting 40,000 pounds a year from the taxpayer and trying to have rented pornographic films paid for with public funds. You couldn't make this up.

The record of morally fraudulent cheating schemes is extensive. They're all at it, and none of them has the slightest sense of guilt.

It is not surprising that a recent poll of Britons found that "less than a quarter believe government ministers are trustworthy [and only] 21 per cent trust politicians in general." As was observed by the main character in the splendid TV series Yes, Prime Minister:

"Being an MP is a vast subsidised ego trip. It's a job that needs no qualifications, that has no compulsory hours of work, no performance standards, and provides a warm room and subsidised meals to a bunch of self-important windbags and busybodies who suddenly find people taking them seriously because they've got the letters MP after their names."

Although politicians are barely affected, being financially cushioned by taxpayers, most British citizens are in the grip of a frightening financial crisis, brought about by slavering greedheads in various gutter-worthy organisations whose craving for money has been exceeded in intensity only by their contempt for the people who they have swindled for so long. They are the people of whom a particularly repulsive member of the governing Labour Party said "we are intensely relaxed about people getting filthy rich."

Britain's rich list of 'Lords' and 'Sirs' is long indeed, and many of them bought their titles by the medium of financial donations or generally sucking up to the ruling political party. (There is little difference between machine politicians in Britain's Labour and Conservative parties: they'll do almost anything for cash.)

The civil service has been politicised, and disgusting creatures abound, like the close adviser to the prime minister who was discovered to be plotting to spread disgusting fabricated stories about political opponents. This is new modern Britain.

The British police force, until quite recently being regarded as at least fairly trustworthy, has sunk to astonishing depths of improbity. The agencies of the law are out of control, having been given vast authority by a bunch of cosseted politicians whose loyalty is first to their purses and next to staying in power. The shambles over the arrest of Pakistanis alleged to have been involved in some sort of doomsday conspiracy against Britain would be a wonderful joke were it not evidence of appalling incompetence - and sadly indicative of how low the country has sunk.

Last week, British police released 11 Pakistanis whom they had arrested two weeks before in a counter-terrorism raid. Despite Gordon Brown prejudging the affair as "a very big terrorist plot", the police found no evidence of wrongdoing. No bombs, no bomb-making material, no guns, no plot; nothing. But they are going to be deported, anyway.

After all, an official had told the BBC that the arrests were made because police believed plans for a "very, very, big attack with possible Al Qaeda links" had reached their final stages. But where's the proof?

This bizarre episode resembles another fiasco in March when five people were arrested under the terrorism act and then released after much alarmist rubbish was spread about how dangerous they were. One fatuous statement by the police was that "As the search [of their homes] progressed officers found a number of weapons and suspected imitation weapons as well as material relating to political ideology."

That was a lie. No weapons were found. The British police tried to deceive the public, and none of the five was charged with any terrorist offence, although they were detained for days. And, similarly, the 11 Pakistanis had to be released because they were innocent of any crime.

An official then said the government was "seeking to [deport] these individuals on grounds of national security". So although they can't be charged with an offence, they are still considered guilty of something or other, which of course we can't be told about, but they'll still have to suffer.

There used to be something called British Justice which, although creaky and flawed, actually stood for the principle of innocent until proven guilty. Nowadays when someone is prejudged and gravely slandered but then found to be innocent, thereby showing politicians and police to be pathetically incompetent and stupid, the tactic is to defame the victims by any possible means. The technique of the smear has been cultivated, and the police practice has its roots in the prime minister's office.

Britain has economic problems; but its biggest crisis is a moral one. And there seems to be precious little hope of a recovery.

Brian Cloughley's book about the Pakistan army, War, Coups and Terror, has just been published by Pen & Sword Books (UK) and is distributed in Pakistan by Saeed Book Bank

Srinagar put under unofficial curfew

Pro-independence leaders called for a strike against national elections and rejected all previous elections in the disputed region as an exercise by the Indian government to widen its control over the restive area

SRINAGAR: Shops, businesses and government offices remained closed in the occupied Valley on Wednesday as Kashmiri leaders called for a strike against national elections.

Indian troops flooded the streets in a show of strength in the main city of the Himalayan region.

Thousands of Indian forces in riot gear patrolled the streets of Srinagar and erected steel barricades and razor wire across roads to stop protesters from demonstrating against Thursday's vote, said senior police official B. Srinivas.

India's national elections are being held over a month in five phases, ending on May 14.

'We've imposed restrictions on civilian movement to maintain law and order,' police officer Pervez Ahmed said as policemen stopped residents leaving their homes.

Police also placed Kashmiri leaders under house arrest, including Syed Ali Geelani and Mirwaiz Umar Farooq and Yasin Malik.

Geelani, a key Kashmiri leader, called for the two-day strike against the election, which he has denounced as 'farcical.'

The boycott call has been backed by a stark warning from the most powerful militant group active in occupied Kashmir, Hizbul Mujahideen, which has said anyone who casts a ballot will be considered a 'traitor.'

Pro-independence leaders have rejected all previous elections in the disputed region as an exercise by the Indian government to widen its control over the restive area.

Protesters torched a vehicle and clashed with government forces across Srinagar on Tuesday night. At least 13 people were injured, said a police official.-Agencies

India’s role in US new cyber command

Afshain Afzal

US military has established a new Cyber Command to isolate Taliban and millions of others, who refuse to be part of 'Free World'. In fact 'Free World' pays negligible importance to ethics, human values, tradition, culture and religion while their adversaries consider these elements as essence of any socio-political system. Ironically despite these facts, US and its like-minded countries claim to be the champions of human rights. US and its partners had been working on Cyber Warfare even before World War-I but after the September 11 attacks on US' Pentagon and World Trade Centre, concentrated efforts were focused on exhausting adversaries' ability to communicate and reach to the common man.

In this context, US State Department spokesman, Robert Wood said: 'Taliban had taken advantage of very difficult situations in both Afghanistan and Pakistan and what we have to do is try to strengthen civil society in these countries, extend governance outward in these countries so that it can be shown that the Taliban just don't have the support that they claim to have and that they do have in many cases.' In the present scenario, US has not only started increasing its troops on Pak-Afghan border but is also trying to pollute the minds of masses through psychological warfare. US policy makers have agreed in principle and spared funds worth billions of dollars to create a new military command to coordinate the defence of its Psychological operations network and improve offensive capabilities in cyber warfare. The new command stared working soon after US President Barack Hussain Obama took over the office; however, details have intentionally been withheld. The move came after US felt that there was a lot of propaganda against US atrocities in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Palestine and Iraq on more than 70 per cent media, including blogs and websites. US Secretary Robert Gates has already spelled out outlines regarding creation of a new military Cyber Command which is likely to be led by a military official of four-star rank and would be initially part of the Pentagon's Strategic Command. US President Barack Obama is expected to announce the new command officially in the end of April or early May 2009. The new plan aims at improving computer security in the private sector, especially key infrastructure such as telecommunications and the electricity grid as well as would jam and block all hostile communication, including internet sites. The command would keep an eye on the media as a whole would plan Psychological Operations. The new move would further cut the civil liberties, which were once projected by US as synonym of 'Free World'.

Although US has planned to unite the whole world against orthodox Muslims and all other fundamentalists, starting with Taliban in Pakistan, but it is not possible for US to achieve its objectives. To counter orthodox elements in Pakistan, US is going to make best use of India. It is not a hidden secret that US is openly helping some of the Mujahideen groups in cash and kind against India, without any knowledge of Pakistani government. Although India is conscious that why all of a sudden US is making a public show of turning against Pakistan but it feels that it is change in US policy. The recent US move is neither as a result of change in US policy or strategy nor because of the fact that suddenly US became wise or fed-up with Pakistan, it is part of the US long term conspiracy of 'Divide and Conquer' against Afghanistan Pakistan, Iran and India. The US, Israel and Italian intelligence used elements in RAW to carryout Mumbai attacks and provoke India to carryout proxy war against Pakistan. Now with the creation of new US military Cyber Command, Washington has started delivering hi-tech equipment to New Delhi, Kabul, Dushanbe and Tehran to carryout pro-active offensive Psychological Operations and Cyber Warfare against Taliban and other adversaries. In this newest conspiracy, both Pakistan and India will suffer greatly while the real winners will be the US and Israel, as they will be main beneficiaries from profit from selling arms, materiel, and logistical support to both sides in the conflict, while the devastation of both Pakistan and India will benefit the geopolitical goals of enemies of the East. US and Israel have promised strengthening economic and political bonds but this is not going to be achieved in any case as the fate of India would not be different from that of Pakistan. India's dream of becoming a committed partner and greater market for US and Israeli products is also going to fade away. The end result of this conspiracy would be strained relation between India and Pakistan and further division of these countries into smaller states. India must remember that Pakistan had been bluffed through Marshal Plan, CENTO, SEATO, GWOT and the impression that Indian and Communists are the greatest threat for humanity. Today agreements are being signed between US and India in which New Delhi is being realised that Pakistan and Islam as well as Communism are the greatest threat to the existence of India. Although India is a wise country but let us see how India get rid of this international conspiracy. One wonders that in present case history is repeating itself but actors have been changed.

Even God's Arm Is Not Long Enough To Catch The Murderers Of Gujarat!

The curious silence around Modi

Those who feel that the post-Godhra Gujarat riots of 2002 constitute one of the most shameful episodes in the history of independent India might celebrate the Supreme Court's directive to the Special Investigative Team, headed by ex-CBI director R K Raghavan, to inquire into the role of chief minister Narendra Modi, 15 other Gujarat ministers and MLAs, and saffron leaders such as Praveen Togadia in the organised violence and submit its report in three months. Such celebrations would be premature.

In response to the SC order, the widow of former Congress MP Ahasan Jafri who was murdered by a mob during the riots has said "Allah ke haath lambe hain" (God's arm is long). Tragically, long as it might be, even God's arm is not long enough to retrieve the miscarriage of justice from the tortuous labyrinths of what passes for India's legal system. -- Jug Suraiya

The campaign to project Narendra Modi as the BJP's future prime minister has taken some interesting turns. First, the Supreme Court has ordered a probe into Modi's role in the Gujarat riots. Second, the Congress has been strangely reluctant to raise this issue or to call for Modi's head.

Third, the Rajnath Singh camp within the BJP has hit back. It recognises that the subtext of the campaign is to denigrate Rajnath's own position. And finally, more BJP leaders have signalled their support for Modi suggesting that they regard his ascension as inevitable. -- Vir Sanghvi

The question is relevant because the order against Modi, 11 members of his Cabinet, bureaucrats and policemen has the potential of polarising the electorate in the state where communal peace has been tenuous since the 2002 pogrom. Political pundits are already arguing whether the probe that ended the complainant's seven-year-long wait for judicial redress, could be a blessing in disguise for the CM? --Vinod Sharma

Modi as martyr

Jug Suraiya

Those who feel that the post-Godhra Gujarat riots of 2002 constitute one of the most shameful episodes in the history of independent India might celebrate the Supreme Court's directive to the Special Investigative Team, headed by ex-CBI director R K Raghavan, to inquire into the role of chief minister Narendra Modi, 15 other Gujarat ministers and MLAs, and saffron leaders such as Praveen Togadia in the organised violence and submit its report in three months. Such celebrations would be premature.

In response to the SC order, the widow of former Congress MP Ahasan Jafri who was murdered by a mob during the riots has said "Allah ke haath lambe hain" (God's arm is long). Tragically, long as it might be, even God's arm is not long enough to retrieve the miscarriage of justice from the tortuous labyrinths of what passes for India's legal system.

The seven-year saga of trying to get to the truth of what really happened in Gujarat in early 2002 when more than 3,000 people were killed and over 1,40,000 rendered homeless bears all the features of a tragic farce. Despite accusations by organisations like Amnesty International which said that "the same police force that was accused of colluding with the attackers was put in charge of the investigations into the massacres, undermining the process of justice", both the Shah commission, and later the Nanavati commission, by and large exonerated the state government from culpability in the riots and in subsequent attempts to suppress evidence of such complicity. These findings were in stark contradiction to the conclusions of the National Human Rights Commission of 2002 that nothing "rebuts the presumption that the Modi administration failed in its duty to protect the rights of the people of Gujarat".

Mass murder became a game of political football. As witnesses turned hostile amidst a storm of accusations and counter-accusations of intimidation and fabrication of evidence, a key case in the Gujarat carnage, relating to the Best Bakery killings, was shifted to Mumbai.

Only one clear verdict has emerged from this politico-legal morass. And that is that Narendra Modi has, among his supporters and they extend beyond the borders of Gujarat emerged as a Hindutva hero and a champion of not just Gujarati asmita but of an aggressive saffron nationalism. The SC directive to SIT will, if anything, only help to reinforce this image by turning Modi the hero into Modi the potential martyr, much in the way of Varun Gandhi whose much-reported 'hate speech' and his subsequent detention under the harsh National Security Act earned him fame or notoriety, depending on your point of view much above his stature.

In Modi's case, any real or perceived threat of politically motivated persecution even if such persecution is no more, or less, than the prosecution of justice will only magnify his already larger-than-life image as the saffron superhero and the BJP's PM-in-waiting.

Jagdish Tytler, one of the accused in the 1984 anti-Sikh riots whose ringleaders have yet to be brought to book, was unlucky. Thanks to a shoe hurled at P Chidambaram who announced his candidature on the Congress ticket, Tytler was unceremoniously dropped from the party's electoral list. Modi, and the BJP, have both shown they're made of sterner stuff. Far from conceding defeat and by that token admitting to guilt in the face of public condemnation, Modi has mastered the art of turning accusation into assault, the meting of justice into the rite of crucifixion.

Indeed, coming as it does in the middle of the poll process, the SC's order to the investigative team regarding Modi couldn't have been better timed if it had been planned by an event manager. Whatever be the findings of the unfortunately acronymed SIT whose performance so far suggests that it has, true to its name, been sitting on the job Modi and his supporters will seek to fashion them into a crown of thorns. Which, as every martyr worth his cross knows, has a way of blooming into the laurel wreath of victory.


secondopinion@timesgroup.com

The curious silence around Modi

Vir Sanghvi, Hindustan Times


New Delhi, April 29, 2009

The campaign to project Narendra Modi as the BJP's future prime minister has taken some interesting turns. First, the Supreme Court has ordered a probe into Modi's role in the Gujarat riots. Second, the Congress has been strangely reluctant to raise this issue or to call for Modi's head.

Third, the Rajnath Singh camp within the BJP has hit back. It recognises that the subtext of the campaign is to denigrate Rajnath's own position. And finally, more BJP leaders have signalled their support for Modi suggesting that they regard his ascension as inevitable.

The Supreme Court order is significant because it suggests that Modi owes the country an explanation. By naming various officials of the Gujarat Police and administration along with Modi, the court has suggested that the oft-repeated allegation that the Gujarat government deliberately let the mobs run riot also needs to be probed.

The court order is not, by any means, a conviction. But at a moral level, and at the level of propriety, it is at least as damning as the charges against Jagdish Tytler.

You would expect the Congress to now go for Modi. You would expect it to ask how the BJP feels about a prime ministerial candidate whose role in mass murder is being probed by the Supreme Court. It could even ask for Modi to step aside till the investigations are complete.

Instead, the Congress has played down the issue, refusing to ask for Modi's resignation and not saying much about the court's order - a startling contrast with the way in which the BJP went for Tytler.

The Congress's argument is that the court order may actually help Modi. He could use it to polarise the electorate, to raise Hindu-Muslim tensions and to project himself again as a Hindutva hardliner. Better therefore to play it down.

This is a risky strategy. A chief minister can afford to polarise the electorate. But a prime ministerial contender cannot afford to do so. If Modi adopts his old Muslim-bashing persona, it might actually scare away moderate voters, terrify potential allies, and embarrass the BJP.

Besides, Modi has spent the last two years trying to make people forget about the Gujarat riots, and projecting himself as a champion of development. Would he really want to go back to his old communally divisive persona?

One indication of how the BJP feels might be its response to the court order. Arun Jaitley offered the standard defence but after that the party tried to play it down. Few BJP leaders wanted to discuss it and the party's C team of spokesmen was dispatched to TV studios to make the usual noises.

Partly, this reflects a division within the BJP. The Rajnath camp, which is paranoid about Arun Jaitley, sees the campaign to promote Modi as a Jaitley ploy facilitated by the former law minister's vast access in the media.

So, Sushma Swaraj - no pal of Jaitley's and a PM candidate herself - went public with her denunciation of the campaign. Rajnath's supporters sung their man's praises. And even Jaitley, in an effort to deflect the criticism, declared that this was 'a media campaign' - which, at one level, it certainly was.

But within the BJP, the conviction that Modi will be the next leader is growing. Even Yashwant Sinha, one of the BJP's secular liberals, declared on Monday that, "Modi has all the qualities needed to be PM," adding, "India would be lucky to have him as prime minister."


So, the Modi juggernaut rolls on, nevertheless.

What was the hurry?

Vinod Sharma, Hindustan Times

April 29, 2009

The Supreme Court's (SC) order directing a probe into Narendra Modi's role in the 2002 Gujarat riots cannot be faulted on grounds of law. The problem is with the timing and the possible impact of the ruling on the April 30 polls in the state.

Nobody doubts the punctiliousness of the Bench that directed the Special Investigation Team to inquire into slain Congress MP Ehsan Jaffri's wife Jakia Nasim Ehsan's allegations of murder and criminal conspiracy. But couldn't the judges have deferred the matter till the end of the Lok Sabha elections on May 13, or till April 30?

The question is relevant because the order against Modi, 11 members of his Cabinet, bureaucrats and policemen has the potential of polarising the electorate in the state where communal peace has been tenuous since the 2002 pogrom. Political pundits are already arguing whether the probe that ended the complainant's seven-year-long wait for judicial redress, could be a blessing in disguise for the CM?

It's hard to miss the irony of the situation as most political parties, including the BJP and the Congress, have desisted in the campaign, which closed on Tuesday, from any recollections of the retributive communal violence in the state. The contest is over strong leadership, good governance and an inclusive polity.

The probe directive has indeed arisen from a matter pending before the SC and is by no means an indictment or proof of Modi's complicity in the riots. But such nuances of the law often get lost in the din and bustle of elections. The worry is about the campaign being vitiated in its twilight phase by biased, politically ingenious interpretations of the SIT probe.

An identical situation had arisen in the SC, a couple of weeks ago, in the disproportionate assets case against Samajwadi Party leader Mulayam Singh Yadav and his son Akhilesh Yadav. The judges rejected the plea that the ruling be delayed to obviate electoral implications. They held back their order only on the technical point that a larger Bench of the same court was yet to decide the legality of a CBI probe without the approval of the state government.

Article 329(b) of the Constitution talks of "bar to interference by courts in electoral matters." Election in this case means the entire process starting from the notification to declaration of results of candidates to (the date) of completion (of the process).

The order in the Modi case is not the least in violation of this provision. But the court would have been in consonance with its spirit, had it decided to defer the ruling until completion of polling in Gujarat or the election process on the whole.

Many legal experts concurred with this view but were unwilling to go on record for the very reasons that they expected the court to reserve its ruling till after the polling date. For his part, former Chief Election Commissioner G.V.G. Krishnamurthy advocated "judicial circumspection" in the interest of free-and-fair polls: "Keeping the spirit of 329(b) in the national interest, the Supreme Court could have deferred its orders till the completion of election, if they could in the absence of urgency in the matter." On the urgency aspect, it would be pertinent to mention that Ms Jaffri moved her special leave petition before the apex court in December 2007 after failing to get relief from the Gujarat High Court.

Krishnamurthy's call for "judicial circumspection" is akin almost to the 'judicial statesmanship' the SC so often demonstrated in the early decades of Independence to transcend controversies and take a holistic, long-term view for strengthening institutions as well as social and institutional harmony. Unlike the executive and the political class, the SC needs no election-time model code. Its conduct is a model for other institutions.

URL of this page: http://www.newageislam.org/NewAgeIslamArticleDetail.aspx?ArticleID=1367

The War within Islam

Islamic fundamentalism or moderation: The choice facing Muslims

Mr Allawi calmly and methodically deconstructs an Islamic revival which has failed to live up to its promise. Islamist movements and secular governments anxious to pay lip-service to Islam have, between them, failed spectacularly to anchor themselves in genuinely Islamic principles: principles which, for Mr Allawi, are as much about inner spirituality as outward religiosity. The results are everywhere to be seen. Autocratic governments abuse human rights, whether in Islamic Iran, Saudi Arabia and Sudan or in secular Egypt and Syria. Economies are corrupt and mal-administered, and their supposed ethical principles, such as Islamic banking, are a sham. There has been a profound loss of cultural creativity, apparent, for example, in the decay of the Islamic city and its time-honoured traditions of craftsmanship, piety and community. -- The Economist

The choice facing Muslims

From The Economist print edition

FOR those (and they are many) who are convinced by the thesis that the West and its values are under remorseless siege from a menacing and resurgent Islam, Ali Allawi's antithesis may seem a little surprising, even absurd. But the author is a distinguished Iraqi who has twice served in post-Saddam governments in Baghdad and whose last, much-acclaimed book was a searing indictment of American (and Iraqi) failings. Though the two books tackle very different themes, what they have in common is their author's intimate knowledge of both Islam and the West, and his unflinching honesty.

Mr Allawi calls his new book an "attempt to understand the factors behind the decay of the spirit of Islam". He locates this decay not in the personal piety of the world's Muslims-which remains vibrant-but in the collective failure of Muslims, over the past 200 years, to come up with an adequate and effective response to Western modernity. The problem is not that Islam is incapable of finding its own path to modernity. Mr Allawi wholly rejects the popular notion that Islam is inherently incompatible with tolerance, democracy, women's rights-in short, all that the West holds dear.

The difficulty, he says, is that the predominant Muslim response to the Western challenge has been narrowly political instead of being rooted in the inherited ethos of Islamic civilisation. Seen in this light, the Islamist movements which have received so much attention since the Islamic revival in the 1970s are shallow and passionate. For all their pretence of offering an "Islamic alternative", they represent, or so he argues, nothing more than Western modernity in Islamic garb.

Mr Allawi calmly and methodically deconstructs an Islamic revival which has failed to live up to its promise. Islamist movements and secular governments anxious to pay lip-service to Islam have, between them, failed spectacularly to anchor themselves in genuinely Islamic principles: principles which, for Mr Allawi, are as much about inner spirituality as outward religiosity. The results are everywhere to be seen. Autocratic governments abuse human rights, whether in Islamic Iran, Saudi Arabia and Sudan or in secular Egypt and Syria. Economies are corrupt and mal-administered, and their supposed ethical principles, such as Islamic banking, are a sham. There has been a profound loss of cultural creativity, apparent, for example, in the decay of the Islamic city and its time-honoured traditions of craftsmanship, piety and community.

Mr Allawi buttresses his case with some striking statistics: "The creative output of the twenty or thirty million Muslims of the Abbasid era [750-1258] dwarfs the output of the nearly one-and-a-half billion Muslims of the modern era." Per head, the income of the wealthiest Muslim country (the United Arab Emirates) is 200 times that of the poorest (Somalia).

Is there a solution? Mr Allawi, himself a Shia Muslim, believes the mystical (or Sufi) tradition must be an integral part of the revival of Islamic civilisation. But here too-although Sufism retains a strong grassroots following in several parts of the Muslim world-he finds himself at odds with both the modernist and puritanical (Wahhabi) strands of Islam, which disdain the individualistic heterodoxy of "folk Islam".

The West has not helped. Mr Allawi castigates the hysterical Islamophobia which came in the wake of the attacks of September 2001, as well as the hubristic attempts to "reform" Islam in the name of defeating terrorism. He insists that the challenge of recapturing the "spirit of Islam" is a task for Muslims, not outsiders. The stark choice for the Muslim world is between the revival of its civilisation, difficult as that is to achieve, and its secularisation-"the dissolution of Islam into modernity". Mr Allawi is not sanguine.

The Crisis of Islamic Civilization

Ali A. Allawi

Islam as a religion is central to the lives of over a billion people, but its outer expression as a distinctive civilization has been undergoing a monumental crisis. Buffeted by powerful adverse currents, Islamic civilization today is a shadow of its former self. The most disturbing and possibly fatal of these currents-the imperial expansion of the West into Muslim lands and the blast of modernity that accompanied it-are now compounded by a third giant wave, globalization.

These forces have increasingly tested Islam and Islamic civilization for validity, adaptability, and the ability to hold on to the loyalty of Muslims, says Ali A. Allawi in his provocative new book. While the faith has proved resilient in the face of these challenges, other aspects of Islamic civilization have atrophied or died, Allawi contends, and Islamic civilization is now undergoing its last crisis.

The book explores how Islamic civilization began to unravel under colonial rule, as its institutions, laws, and economies were often replaced by inadequate modern equivalents. Allawi also examines the backlash expressed through the increasing religiosity of Muslim societies and the spectacular rise of political Islam and its terrorist offshoots. Assessing the status of each of the building blocks of Islamic civilization, the author concludes that Islamic civilization cannot survive without the vital spirituality that underpinned it in the past. He identifies a key set of principles for moving forward, principles that will surprise some and anger others, yet clearly must be considered.

Ali A. Allawi has served as Minister of Defense and Minister of Finance in the Iraqi postwar governments. He is senior visiting fellow at Princeton University.

Pakistani media mafia's abuses

By Dr Shahid Qureshi

Mafia groups have invested in media and hired shining journalist/media persons. By doing that they are using their network to influence the authorities and also rubbing shoulders with the so called elite of Pakistan. By doing that some of them are getting away with their basic responsibilities as employers. The government need publicity so mostly it side with the owners of the press and media groups.

Pakistani media evolved in the past few years as a result of realization that no war and no peace could be won without it? A society where level of respect is measured with nuisance value journalists are at the centre. In past rich and famous use to keep close links/friendships with poor middle or working class journalists both to avoid bad publicity and get good one. Some university/college lecturers choose to keep on foot in journalism and one in education.

The verbal abuse by Nazir Naji of a junior reporter Mohammad Ahem Noorani of The News Islamabad is just a tip of the iceberg of the plight of media in Pakistan. A senior drunk with arrogance and power scolded a new comer for just asking legitimate questions. These old gurus blew trumpets of who ever in power are now enjoying the perks and those young like Ansar Abbasi, Ahmed Noorani, and Kashif Abbasi and others who say what they mean and not the otherwise are being criticised for their principle stands?

The access/powers a journalist has with empty pockets in Pakistan is open to abuse? This access attracts people to become journalists even work free with the view that these losses would be recovered in future. I am not sure medic cum anchor Dr Shahid Masood has recovered his losses of his voluntary/free work at ARY TV in London? The gold dealers are close to President Zardari and believe in live and let live at all cost…

According to senior journalist those who arrived with a 'trunk' (suitcase made with iron) in Lahore, Karachi and Islamabad are millionaires and own big media groups. These poverty stricken gurus never did anything for the new comers and become abusers themselves?

In December 2008 a young Pakistani TV journalist committed suicide due to the non payment of his salary for months and rude behaviour of Imtinan Shahid of Channel5 of Khabrain Group. The suicide of Mohammed Azam a Pakistani TV Channel-5 journalist shows the amount of pressures and constant war of survival in the journalistic community in Pakistan. They are mostly being abused by their own former colleagues who become of owners of media groups after working for others. Obviously they know the ticks of the trade?

Media in Pakistan has become like family business where sons, daughters and daughter in laws can have fast track promotions as editors or chief editors, CEOs and a place in higher media bodies. That is how abuse of media and journalism starts? Those who have spent years studying media in the universities are being criticised or assessed by these people who don't have a clue about the profession? It's like direct appointment without training as General, which normally takes 30 yeas and few dozen exams and interviews.

A senior journalist received a phone call from Zia Shahid asking to work for his English newspaper 'The Post' in London. His son late Ednan Shahid send him a contract with a condition that, 'Pakistani labour laws would be applicable while he would be working and living in London. He wanted him to function under Pakistani laws and not British in London. The worst of all is they did not pay the agreed amount at all.

Wajahat Ali Khan current acting President of Pakistan journalists Association United Kingdom left GEO Television due to non payments of salary for many months. His section in charge Iftikhar Qaisar was reassuring him that one day you will be paid. I am not sure if he himself is getting paid as probably he himself is not regular employee of the company? In this age of emails and fax his case for payments is under consideration for months and his dues have not been cleared yet. These so called media giants are the worst perpetrators of the rights of the media and journalists. Pakistani journalists based abroad must be provided full support like many other countries. No doubt what these journalists are doing money can't buy but it is an essential for the survival in the most expansive cities in the world so they could focus on media activities?

Huma Ali a senior journalist based in Islamabad told me that 'some media groups are hiring/sub contracting journalists through third companies for years to avoid labour laws and are depriving them from their legal rights'.

We have to find a solution of the problem and support each other. Media in Pakistan has been hijacked by organised mafia gangs who are using it for their protection? It is difficult to differentiate between true journalists, pen pushers and fakes since they have joined the ranks. Now any one can become a journalist by self certifying but it does not work in practice?

Those groups avoiding labour laws by issuing short term contract letters for years should be told to stop that practice and legislation should be introduced to protect rights of journalists. There should be a clear and transparent policy of internship for the training and education of young journalists to avoid future suicides and exploitations.

Government of Pakistan should ask for the complete list of full time and temporary employees, their duration of service, of all print and electronic media groups. Ministry of Information can easily do that and should accredit only if a legal contract from the employers represented and company hired is the same.

When I asked President Musharraf in London to do something for the rights of the journalists. He said, 'they should come on the road'. He said, 'journalists in Pakistan are getting Rs50,000. per month'. The real question is how many are getting Rs.50,000 a month? Though some are getting paid in US$ but others are not getting paid at all.

(Dr Shahid Qureshi is award wining journalist and writer on foreign policy & security based in London)

Who’ll Do It In ISI’s Case?

The U.S. President visited CIA headquarters and praised the agency despite its history of supporting proxy militias worldwide and its role in official torture of detainees. The U.S. President did this to underscore the crucial role of the agency in protecting America's national security. In Pakistan, the ISI faces a dirty attack by CIA cohorts in the mainstream American media. But no one in Islamabad steps up to defend the national intelligence agencies. If anything, we have ambassadors in the Pakistan Foreign Office who think they represent Washington or London and who have been seen criticizing Pakistani spy organizations in important capitals [The Editor-AhmedQuraishi.com].

Makhdoom Babar


Editor-in-Chief, The Daily Mail.


Wednesday, 29 April 2009.


WWW.AHMEDQURAISHI.COM

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan-THE US President Barack Obama, while visiting the CIA Headquarters in Langley, Virginia, made a comprehensive speech the other day. In his speech, while addressing the personnel of the CIA, the US President appreciated their professionalism and working abilities. The US President further encouraged the CIA staff by giving them assurances that he will not only do everything to strengthen them but would also defend the Agency at every level and forum and against every criticism.

Such moves are very vital and of a very high importance to boost the morale of an intelligence agency, particularly, when it is engaged in a state of war. The wise leaders miss no opportunity to encourage and strengthen the secret agencies of their countries as they firmly believe that their top intelligence agencies are guarantors of the security and solidarity of their countries and thus it becomes necessary for the national leaders not only to make all out efforts to strengthen and encourage their intelligence organizations and their officials but also to defend them, especially in the face of unwarranted and malicious attacks launched by foreign powers with their own agendas.

Unfortunately, the opposite is happening in Pakistan. Apart from the tenure of former President Musharraf, no leader, during the last 15 to 20 years, has even attempted to do for country's first defense line, the ISI, what leaders like Obama have been doing for years and years. To the contrary, many of our politicians/leaders have seen the ISI as a threat to their absolute rule during their respective tenures, perhaps because they always thought this agency was the only countercheck on their wrongdoings. Instead of strengthening and defending this top national security organization, these politicians/leaders opted to weaken and demoralize ISI and its fine officers, men and women. Sometime a civilian was made the head of this otherwise military organization, sometimes it was attempted to put it under the command of Ministry of Interior, sometimes attempts were made to control the funding of the agency and sometimes its chief was ordered to go and give explanation to the traditional enemy, India.

The Daily Mail asks: Can any sane leadership in any other country take such highly insane steps and that too against a national organization considered to be the first line of defense of the country? The Daily Mail argues whether any national leader contemplate such steps?

The Daily Mail here would like to urge upon the national leaders, both in government and opposition, that they should under the given circumstance come forward clearly and try to strengthen and defend this vital security agency with full trust, confidence and clear intentions. Instead of issuing textbook media statement in support of ISI, they must come up with clear heads and words. It is their responsibility to confront all the media and official criticism on ISI from the West and India and rather not to join them in the chorus. It is their primary responsibility to highlight the achievements of the ISI in anti-terror war, it is their basic obligation that they should underline the sacrifices that this agency's personnel have made to ensure global and regional peace and it is their duty to seek respect and trust for this agency that, under the day, has emerged as the entire world's first defense line.

Our leaders should keep in mind one factor very clearly that if they need to strengthen their democratic institution, they first need to strengthen the national institutions because if the national institutions are not strong, it is a clear indication that country's solidarity is at stake and if the country's solidarity is at stake, what talk of democracy and democratic institutions.

These leaders must remember that starting from CIA's failures in Vietnam through the worst intelligence debacles of missing the Indian nuclear tests the and movement of Russian troops into Afghanistan, no US leader has ever gone against the CIA and instead they have always been defending their top national security agency with full heart and maximum force at every level and against every criticism.

The Daily Mail is the only Pakistani daily newspaper that publishes two editions simultaneously from Beijingand Islamabad. Mr. Babar can be reached at macbaburAThotmail.com

Kashmir: People's Tribunal requests Jammu & Kashmir government to determine the impact of landmines on local communities

Author(s): Site Admin <webmaster2SPAMFLTER@SPATMFLTERicbl.org>

An International People's Tribunal on Human Rights and Justice in Kashmir, which held hearings in Indian Administered Kashmir in 2008 and early 2009, has issued a Memorandum on its findings to Jammu & Kashmir Chief Minister Omar Abdullah.

The Tribunal was concerned with events since 2003 when the most recent Indo-Pakistani ceasefire was concluded.

Among other considerations which the Tribunal put forward , it noted that: "the placement of landmines along the border and other sensitive areas in Jammu and Kashmir continues to endanger lives, including those of children. While the Government of India is not a signatory to the Convention on the Prohibition of the Use, Stockpiling, Production and Transfer of Anti-Personnel Mines and on their Destruction, and has continued to justify landmine use in Jammu and Kashmir, we ask that the Government of Jammu and Kashmir institute a comprehensive ban on the use of landmines. We ask that an audit be conducted to ascertain the impact of landmines on local communities, to determine the extent of casualties, devastation, and displacement, and undertake rehabilitation of those affected and de-mining."

The ICBL noted that while the Jammu and Kashmir State Government does not have the power to ban mine use by the Indian Army, it is important that the State authorities follow up on this recommendation and conduct a survey of the precise impact of landmines on local communities, since civil society actors are prohibited access to most communities in the border areas. State authorities can and should demand better marking and fencing of all mined areas within Jammu & Kashmir by the Indian Army. Restitution to landmine victims available in other states of India should be extended to those in Jammu and Kashmir who are currently denied such relief.

Upon receipt of the memorandum on 11 February 2009, Chief Minister Omar Abdullah made a public statement saying that he would consider the memorandum at the highest level, and would invite the International People's Tribunal for further discussions.

With the exception of public UN sources, reproduction or redistribution of the above text, in whole, part or in any form, requires the prior consent of the original source. The opinions expressed in the documents carried by this site are those of the authors and are not necessarily shared by UN OCHA or ReliefWeb.

Pakistani Forces take on militants in Buner

DAGGAR: Pakistani Security forces, backed by artillery, gunship choppers and jet fighters, launched a full-fledged operation against the militants in Buner on Tuesday, targeting their suspected hideouts in different areas, besides placing the whole district under curfew.

The militants, on the other hand, blew up a bridge, a police post in Ambaila and occupied the Paacha Police Station, sources said. Sources told The News that large contingents of security forces entered the restive district from Mardan side at 3 pm after clamping an unannounced curfew on the Ambaila area.

"Fighter planes bombed Kalil, Sherataraf, Kandao areas located on the mountainous boundary of Swat and Buner districts," the sources said, adding the militants had taken shelter in these areas. However, no casualty was reported so far. Two houses were destroyed when jet fighters targeted Mashkipur, a village near the boundary of Buner and Mardan districts.

Official sources confirmed the air strikes in the area but there was no word on loss of life. The security forces also shelled suspected hideouts of the militants with artillery from Bajkata area. The house of Ayaz Badshah was completely destroyed when a shell hit the structure. No casualty was reported.

It was learnt that the militants destroyed a bridge connecting Mardan and Buner districts near Ambaila area, besides blowing up a police post in the same vicinity. The militants later occupied the Paacha Police Station near the shrine of Sufi Saint Pir Baba.

Soon after the launch of the military operation, all the bazaars and markets were closed in Pir Baba, Swarai, Jaur and Daggar, the headquarters of the restive district. The area was in panic and the people remained indoors while a large number of residents started migration to safer places.

AP/Reuters add: Witness Mohammad Shahid Khan said he saw tanks, heavy artillery and hundreds of troops heading over the Ambaila pass leading to Buner. TV footage has shown hundreds of refugees fleeing the area, but officials have not released figures on any exodus.

The London-based Amnesty International said on Tuesday that around 33,000 people were reported to have left their homes in Lower Dir over the past two days.

Muslim students at JNU being targeted by ABVP activists

By Mumtaz Alam Falahi, TwoCircles.net

New Delhi: In a setback to the secular culture and history of the prestigious Jawaharlal Nehru University in New Delhi, the right wing Hindutva groups, it seems, have strengthened themselves in the campus, and they are announcing it by their actions: in the last six months ABVP activists have carried out three attacks on Muslim students in the campus. The administration did take action but in a way that only emboldened the attackers.

The recent attack was on April 17 on a Ph.D. student. "I was outside the Lohit Hostel. Five students came up on bikes and started beating me without any provocation," says Idrees Kanth. They were from the same group of people who had beaten up some other students in the past also, says he who lives at Lohit Hostel.

On March 17 this year another student Masihullah, from the same hostel, was brutally beaten in full public view by the Hindutva activists. "Five students from the same hostel beat up Masihullah in the mess room. The warden remained mute spectator as he was threatened by the attackers," says Abhilash, a Ph.D. student living at the hostel for four years.

"They are not misguided youths, they guided RSS activists," says Abhilash adding that one of the attackers is son of a Rajasthan Congress leader.

In Ramazan last year, another student Iqbal Zia was also beaten by the same group. Apparently there is no such reason like personal enmity or student politics. Behind the attacks there is simply a communal agenda of the extremist group. In all incidents they have singled out Muslim students. By attacking and frightening Muslim students they may be seeking communal polarization in the campus.

Stanlee, a Ph.D. student who is living at Lohit Hostel for four years, says the attackers are hardcore ABVP activists. "Tension has prevailed Lohit since the beginning. Since it was opened for students four years ago, there have been a number of incidents, and in most cases ABVP activists have been involved," says Stanlee. "There is no student politics behind the incidents. There is simply communal thinking behind the attacks," he says. All victims so far are Muslims. There are about 300 students in the Lohit Hostel, of them Muslims are between 20-25.

In Masihullah's case action was taken against seven attackers. Three were declared out of bounds and four were transferred to different hostel. A fine of Rs 3000 was also slapped on them. But notice about the action was not pasted on notice board anywhere in the campus. And some time later the punishment was revoked.

The administration has taken the cases as a normal law and order issue. They have not acted against them seriously, says Abhilash.

In my case they have not taken any action. They say the accused are last year students. We cannot take hard action against them. This will affect their career, says Idrees. "The problem is not just these incidents. Problem is rather deeper. The administration is fast turning anti-minority," says he.

Pakistan Ordinance Factory exports touch $80m

TAXILA, April 28: Exports of the Pakistan Ordnance Factories (POF) Wah Cantonent have reached $80 million during this fiscal year.

This was stated by spokesman for the POF Muhammad Tariq Mehboob, while briefing mediapersons on Tuesday.

He said the POF had struck an export deal of $6.5 million with the Lebanese company on the eve of first day of the exhibition being held at Istanbul, Turkey.

The spokesman said the POF was by showcasing its full range of products at this defence exhibition IDEF-2009, adding that its stall had become the focus of attention among the visiting delegates due to sophisticated technology of international standard being exhibited there.

He said Prime Minister of Turkey Tayyip Erdogan also visited the POF stall on the first day of the exhibition. During his visit to the stall, Chairman POF Board Lt-Gen Syed Sabahat Husain briefed him about the wide range of products of the POF, including arms and ammunition.

He told the delegates that the POF was producing arms for peace and meeting the demands and requirements of armed forces of Pakistan.

Overview of Pakistan-Afghanistan Relations

Pakistan - From Major Non- NATO Ally to Battle Ground: Seven years after terrorists struck at the symbol of American might - the World Trade Centre and Pentagon - and the start of the questionable war against terrorism on October 7, 2001, Afghanistan remains in the grip of intransigent Taliban and Al-Qaeda on the one hand , and in indirect control of major NATO nations, backed up by 71,000 troops on the other. Terrorists in neighboring Pakistan are also on the loose, with about 28 suicide attacks in the first eight months of the year so far. In his address to the National Defense University in Washington on September 9, the U.S. President George W. Bush resonated his defense establishment's conviction when he declared Pakistan as the new "battleground for the war on terror" and that "terrorists carrying out attacks in Islamabad and Karachi are planning attacks on targets outside Pakistan as well. Eliminating these people hiding in Pakistan's mountainous border regions is both in the interest as well as the responsibility of the government," Bush said.

The same day, at a press conference together with his Pakistani counterpart Asif Ali Zardari in Islamabad, the Afghan President Hamid Karzai underscored the need to "destroy terrorist sanctuaries whether in Afghanistan or Pakistan." No peace is possible without cracking down on these "enemies of our countries," Karzai emphasized. Hours later, the US Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff Mike Mullen said he was already "looking at a new, more comprehensive strategy for the region" that would cover both sides of the Afghanistan-Pakistan border. "We can hunt down and kill extremists as they cross over the border from Pakistan, but until we work more closely with the Pakistani government to eliminate the safe havens from where they operate, the enemy will only keep coming," he said.

Lose-lose Situation in Afghanistan: During the current year, the spiraling violence in Afghanistan has taken some 3,800 lives including some 200 foreign troops in the first eight months alone. Violence overall in Eastern Afghanistan has been up by up to 30% and to 50 percent in some areas, reckoned NATO and Afghan officials, if compared with 2007. Since the beginning of Operation Enduring Freedom, US-led coalition troops have lost about 955 soldiers topped by the United States with 583 casualties, followed by 117 of Great Britain, and 96 of Canada.

Generally, security is deteriorating, corruption running, food prices soaring, job market moving at a snail's pace, and inflation eating into the already meager incomes of the vast majority. These circumstances only add to poverty in a country which is already one of the poorest in the world, with life expectancy only around 44 years. "The security situation is worsening day-by-day. The government is still in a deep sleep. There are no jobs, no good income, so it is obvious that kidnappings will increase," said Jawed Rashidi, a doctor in Kabul. (Reuters, Sep 7)

Some 130 people have been reported kidnapped in the last five months, the Afghan Criminal Investigation Department (CID) says, but the real number is believed to be far higher. Security analysts in the country say the situation has become "even direr." While not taking territory, the Taliban is terrorizing the population, targeting roads and restricting the government's ability to function.

Security On Ground: Currently. close to 71,000 foreign troops drawn from 40 countries, , including 34,000 from the U.S, are based in Afghanistan to quell the Taliban insurgency, backed up by 60,000 strong Afghan National Army with 8000 under training, and some 76 000 national police, both inadequately trained though. Of the 34,000 U.S. troops in Afghanistan, 19,000 operate under U.S. Central Command, and the rest placed under the NATO-led international force. Major General Robert Cone, in charge of helping to train the Afghan army, says plans are afoot to raise Afghan army strength to a "122,000-strong structure, with a total of 134,000 personnel. "The extra 12,000 would allow keeping a lot of people in school and training," Cone said in Brussels early September. In addition to the combat brigade of about 3,500 to 4,000 troops being readied for deployment by end of this year, U.S. officials also plan to withdraw about 2,000 non-combat support personnel from Iraq and transfer about 1,300 Marines from Iraq 's Anbar province to western Afghanistan .

Karazi - A Powerless Protégé's Corrupt Government: Though run by an elected president and a bicameral parliament, President Hamid Karzai's government remains beset as much by administrative and financial problems as by an almost direct control over governance by roughly 20 member Policy Advisory Group (PAG) comprising nine Afghan ministers/advisors with about an equal number of foreign diplomats and internationals (US, NATO and ISAF officials). The government remains hamstrung as far as vital security, financial and foreign affairs are concerned because the PAG, led by the US deputy chief of mission and assisted by Political Adviser to CIMISAF/ NATO, discusses and decides issues such security situation assessment, Auxiliary Police Initiative, update on joint security plan Kabul, ministerial visits abroad, updates on situation in Kandahar und Helmand, and sharing updated strategic communication messages.

The Afghan government relies on aid for about 90 percent of its total expenditure. Unemployment stands at around 40 percent with 80 percent of Afghanistan ' s labor force employed in agriculture, and massive unemployment because of a staggering reconstruction process.

Early September President's apparent unease over foreign interference came to the fore when he accused Great Britain for the resurgence of the Taliban and its growing activity in large tracts of the country. Talking to Afghan MPs, Karzai claimed Premier Gordon Brown had threatened to withdraw British troops from Helmand province, if the president reinstated Sher Mohammed Akhunzada, the former governor of the insurgency infected and drugs-rich Helmand province. Akhunzada was forced out under British pressure two years ago after nine tons of opium and heroin were discovered in his basement. (The Sunday Times September 7, 2008)

Some Western diplomats in Afghanistan suspect, however, that Akhundzada's reinstatement could actually lead to an escalation of fighting between rival drugs gangs, who have thrived off the conflict between Taliban militants and the coalition troops.

The United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime said Afghanistan now produces about 93 percent of the world's opium, yielding an estimated $3 billion a year. The money typically benefits local warlords, corrupt government officials and the Taliban, which once famously banned production of the crop. The UNODC statistics also indicate the amount of opium cultivated here has increased every year since 2001, with direct or indirect support and connivance of politically influential people in and outside the government.

Relations with Pakistan: Although Presidents Karzai and Zardari exchanged vows of cooperation during their first encounter in Islamabad on September 9, yet the mutual mistrust is not likely to wane. Both the US and Afghan establishments mince no words in declaring Pakistan's tribal areas spread over 27,000 square kilometers as "Al Qaeda Central." And the latest US announcement of taking the war to Pakistani areas, certainly doesn't augur well, neither for Afghanistan nor for Pakistan. Physical invasion by US and NATO forces, even if selective surgical strikes, will likely stoke public resentment on both sides of the border. This will also provide the militants with a justification to expand their activities on both sides of the border as well as outside FATA. Pakistan, which fears Afghanistan might exploit the situation and seek to develop a bridge between 25 million Pashtoons living in Pakistani territory and 12 million Pashtoons on its side of the border, is also apprehensive of the growing Indo-Afghan ties. It suspects India might be trying to encircle Pakistan.

President Karzai also threatened Pakistan in June of attacking FATA. Afghan military does not have the capacity to fighting the insurgents on its soil and there has not been any coherent effort from Kabul to take on Taliban while Pakistani military not only is capable of taking on them but also has done that in Swat and various regions of FATA. Despite the greatest number of casualties because of the American war in Afghanistan, the Pakistani military has been criticized by allied forces and Kabul and the suspicions of Pakistan's mighty military and intelligence establishment refuse to go. And until this goes, bilateral bickering and mistrust will keep dogging the relationship

Army's 'indifference' to Swat

By S.m. Hali

Chairing an important operational meeting of the military top brass at the GHQ on Friday, April 24, General Kayani admitted that doubts were being voiced about the intent and capability of the army to defeat the militants. He reiterated that the Pakistan Army never has and never will hesitate to sacrifice whatever it may take, to ensure safety and well-being of the people of Pakistan and the country's territorial integrity and that victory against terror and militancy will be achieved at all costs. His words appear to be milk and honey to the people of Pakistan who had begun to despair at the Swat situation. The question arises, why had "doubts" crept in and why was the army being accused of "indifference" to the situation in Swat?

The situation in Swat has taken a turn that detractors of the Peace Deal are crying foul. Harbingers of doom and gloom are adding to the despondency through stories that the Taliban are only a 100 kilometres away from Islamabad. Stories in a local English and its counterpart Urdu daily quoting interior ministry sources that "Five top Taliban commanders, who are close aides of Mehsud, have left North Waziristan for Islamabad, allegedly with 300 suicide bombers, to attack Islamabad, Rawalpindi and Lahore", do not help matters. The same get quoted by the western media who threaten attacks by the infamous "daisy-cutter" bombs if Pakistan does not take action itself. The BBC added to the pandemonium with its disclosure quoting locals that Taliban have looted seven trucks loaded with chemical fertiliser 'ammonium nitrate' in Swat which, according to security officials, the insurgents use for making bombs. Another English daily jumped into the fray with the disclosure that a terrorist group based in adjacent tribal area has been tasked by the intelligence agency of a neighbouring country to hit the Peshawar International Airport and other key installations in the Cantonment area with multi-barrel rockets.

The people of Swat as well as the ANP government are keen to ensure that the Peace Deal succeeds. The army would be more than willing to see to it that peace prevails. However, the militants appear reluctant to lay down arms, which was a prerequisite to the deal. Armed Taliban entered Buner; after being asked by the NWFP, majority of them vacated the locale but some Taliban remain, occupying strategic posts. On Saturday Taliban blocked the main highway linking Swat with the rest of the country to stop a military convoy carrying supplies to Mingora, but a major clash was averted after intervention by the ANP-led provincial government. It appears that at times mellow and at times breathing fire and brim stone Sufi Muhammad is not calling the shots. His son-in-law, the Swat Taliban commander Fazlullah announced on Saturday that the Taliban would only accept "Islam's writ" in the valley. In a speech on his illegal FM radio channel, he said that the Taliban were "ready to offer more sacrifices" if Shariah law was not implemented in Malakand division.

At the same time, warning against any fresh military action in Swat Valley, TTP spokesman Haji Muslim Khan said that they were abiding by the agreement and the government would be responsible for breaching the truce if they launched another operation.

The army's quandary to take action is thwarted by developments like on Sunday, addressing a big public meeting in Swari, leaders of the PPP, ANP, PPP (Sherpao), JUI-F, PML-Q, TNSM, Tablighi Jamaat and Ishaat Tauheed-Wal Sunnah opposed the deployment of troops in Buner. A resolution adopted at the meeting said that army deployment in the district would not be accepted and the government should respect the opinion of all political parities. Meanwhile, in Lower Dir, security forces are battling the miscreants in a counter attack. Over 50 militants, including a local Taliban commander, have been killed, with the security forces also suffering some losses. Mian Iftikhar Hussain, Interior Minister for the NWFP, claims that plans to establish Shariah courts throughout Malakand would proceed but that the government would not tolerate Taliban vigilantes.

PM Gordon Brown, who had a day-long tumultuous visit to Islamabad on Monday, expressed his concerns regarding the situation in the tribal belt and Swat stating: "There is a crucible of terrorism in the mountainous border between Afghanistan and Pakistan." Hillary Clinton and Richard Holbrooke have voiced their consternation repeating their old apprehension regarding Pakistan's nuclear weapons falling in the hands of extremists.

The trying circumstances necessitate the people, the Parliament and opinion builders including politicians, setting their personal grudges aside and uniting to evolve a concerted strategy to thwart the perils of extremism facing Pakistan. The media plays an essential role in the dissemination of this strategy to the people and the world at large. Perhaps our countrymen have been under the yoke of army-rule far too long and they look to the GHQ for reassurance in moments of national crisis, rather than the Parliament. The fact is that the army is squarely placed under the civilian government and the COAS has reiterated time and again that he acts under the directions of the chief executive i.e. the PM through his defence minister. Any reassurance must come from the government and not the GHQ.

The writer is a political and defence analyst and hosts a TV programme Defence & Diplomacy