Fighting back against the CIA drone war

They call it "bug splat", the splotch of blood, bones, and viscera that marks the site of a successful drone strike. To those manning the consoles in Nevada, it signifies "suspected militants" who have just been "neutralised"; to those on the ground, in most cases, it represents a family that has been shattered, a home destroyed.

Since June 18, 2004, when the CIA began its policy of extrajudicial killings in Pakistan, it has left nearly 250 such stains on Pakistani soil, daubed with the remains of more than 2,500 individuals, mostly civilians. More recently, it has taken to decorating other parts of the world.

Since the Pakistani government and its shadowy intelligence agencies have been complicit in the killings, the CIA has been able to do all this with complete impunity. Major human rights organisations in thrall to the Obama Administration have given it a pass. So have the media, who uncritically accept officials' claims about the accuracy of their lethal toys.

Two recent developments might change all this.

The unlawful combatant

On July 18, 2011, three Pakistani tribesmen, Kareem Khan, Sadaullah, and Maezol Khan, filed a formal complaint against John A Rizzo, the CIA's former acting General Counsel, at a police station in Islamabad. Until his retirement on June 25, 2009, Rizzo served as legal counsel to the program whose victims have included Kareem Khan's son and brother, Maezol Khan's seven-year-old son, and three family members of Sadaullah (who also lost both legs and an eye in the attack).

In an interview with Newsweek's Tara McKelvey, Rizzo bragged that he was responsible for signing off on the "hit list" for "lethal operations". The targets were "blown to bits" in "businesslike" operations, he said. By his own admission, he is implicated in "murder". Indeed, he boasted: "How many law professors have signed off on a death warrant?" And that is not the full extent of Rizzo's derring-do: he claims he was also "up to my eyeballs" in Bush's program of torture in black sites in Afghanistan and elsewhere.

The detailed First Information Report (FIR) that barrister Mirza Shahzad Akbar prepared on behalf of the tribesmen was filed at the Secretariat Police Station in Islamabad, whose territorial jurisdiction includes the residence of Rizzo's leading co-conspirator Jonathan Banks, the CIA station chief who has since fled Pakistan. As a party to a conspiracy to commit murder in Pakistan, Akbar believes that Rizzo is subject to the country's penal code.

Clive Stafford Smith, the celebrated human rights lawyer best known as George W Bush's nemesis over Guantanamo, is leading the campaign to secure an international arrest warrant for Rizzo. Asked about the question of jurisdiction, Smith told me that that "there is no issue of jurisdiction - these are a series of crimes, including murder … committed on Pakistani soil against Pakistani citizens". The CIA, he says, is "waging war against Pakistan". He insists that "there is no question that [Rizzo] is liable for the crimes he is committing. The only issue is whether he will face the music or be kept hidden by the authorities".

Smith, who heads the legal charity Reprieve, is a practical man, uninterested in mere symbolic gestures. Earlier, he successfully sued the Bush administration for access to prisoners at Guantanomo and has so far secured the release of 65 of them. He is confident that once the Islamabad police issues a warrant, Interpol will have no choice but to pursue the case. Furthermore, he notes, depending on the success of this test case, they will broaden it to also include drone operators.

The US position so far is to either claim that it is engaged in legitimate self-defence, or to make the policy more palatable by downplaying its human cost. Neither argument is tenable.

The laws of war do not prohibit the killing of civilians unless it is deliberate, disproportionate or indiscriminate. However, Akbar and Smith reject the applicability of these laws to CIA's drone war. "The US has to follow the laws of war," Smith recently told the Guardian. But "the issue here is that this is not a war" - there is no declared state of conflict between the US and Pakistan. Moreover, Gary Solis of Georgetown University, an expert in the laws of war, told Newsweek that "the CIA who pilot unmanned aerial vehicles are civilians directly engaged in hostilities, an act that makes them 'unlawful combatants' and possibly subject to prosecution".

Murder by numbers

The US government has made bold claims for the extraordinary accuracy of its wonder-weapons. In a press conference earlier this year, US president Barack Obama's chief counter-terrorism adviser John Brennan insisted that "nearly for the past year there hasn't been a single collateral death" in the CIA's drone war.

This would be remarkable indeed if it weren't demonstrably false. A major investigation by the London-based Bureau of Investigative Journalism (TBIJ) has shown that in just ten CIA drone attacks since August last year there were a minimum of 45 individuals killed who were confirmed civilians. These include women, children, policemen, students and rescuers among others. TBIJ has also identified an additional 15 attacks in which 65 more civilians might have been killed.

Unlike the New America Foundation or the neoconservative Long War Journal - the two most frequently cited, and least reliable, sources on drone casualties - TBIJ's investigation does not rely on official claims or the media reports that exclusively rely on them. Chris Woods, the journalist who led the TBIJ investigation, told me earlier this month that, besides reviewing thousands of media reports about the attacks - including those written days, weeks, or even months after the initial incident - the Bureau has worked with journalists, researchers, and the lawyers representing the civilians killed in the attacks. The Bureau has also employed its own researchers in Waziristan to corroborate the evidence it has gathered.

However, as the Bureau notes, its figures for civilian casualties are a "conservative estimate". It has only included those in its list whose civilian status it can confirm through multiple sources. The actual figures are likely much higher. But given the restrictions on travel to the region, a more comprehensive assessment of the war's human cost remains impossible.

The respected Pakistani journalist Rahimullah Yusufzai told me that it is no longer possible for journalists from outside to travel to the tribal region and, as a result, most of the reporting comes from a handful of stringers based in Miranshah and Mir Ali.

Confined to the environs of the region's two main cities, even the journalists based in FATA have to call up the military's press office for information on all strikes that occur beyond those limits. The kind of courage exhibited by 39-year-old Noor Behram, who photographed the aftermath of 27 drone attacks in North and South Waziristan between November 29, 2008, and June 15, 2011, is rare. The photos are currently on display at London's Beaconsfield gallery. Unsurprisingly, the picture that emerges does not quite jibe with the CIA's claims. "For every ten to 15 people killed," he told the Guardian, "maybe they get one militant".

The CIA claims that of the nearly 2,500 Pakistanis killed in the drone attacks, 35 were "high value targets" - that is, people it actually intended to kill. The rest it claims were mostly "suspected militants". The world of think-tankery is even more linguistically challenged - in the New America Foundation's database there is no category for "civilian" - there are only "militants" and "others". Until now we had only the CIA and the ISI's word for the presumed guilt of those killed. Given the history of both organisations there is ample ground for scepticism, but in the light of the Bureau's investigation, the public would be wise to treat all future victims of the drone war as civilians unless proven otherwise.

But even where guilt is established, the killings would still constitute extra-judicial murder since no declared state of hostilities exists between the US and Pakistan. Things have come a long way since July 2001, when following Israel's "targeted killing" of Palestinians, the then US Ambassador to Israel Martin Indyk declared: "The United States government is very clearly on record as against targeted assassinations ... They are extrajudicial killings, and we do not support that."

Under Obama, extrajudicial killings have been adopted as a less complicated alternative to detention. Earlier in the year, Newsweek quoted one of Obama's legal svengalis - American University's Kenneth Anderson, author of an essay on the subject that was read widely by Obama White House officials - as saying: "Since the US political and legal situation has made aggressive interrogation a questionable activity anyway, there is less reason to seek to capture rather than kill."

"And if one intends to kill, the incentive is to do so from a standoff position because it removes potentially messy questions of surrender."

Deferred reckoning

So far, the drones policy has been an unmitigated disaster. The handful of Taliban and al-Qaeda leaders killed have been replaced by a more ruthless leadership which has progressively expanded its operational ambit into the Pakistani mainland. To the extent that "militants" are killed, they are mostly foot soldiers whose death has no discernible impact on the outcome of the insurgency; indeed, it merely helps deepen resentment and broaden the militants' support base. The CIA practice of bombing funerals and rescuers has ensured that even those who might otherwise disdain the Taliban identify with them as common victims of a uniquely barbarous adversary. Unable to strike back at the US, the Taliban instead revenge themselves on Pakistani soldiers and civilians in attacks that are no less brutal.

Two years ago, when I spoke to Yusufzai amid one of the most ferocious wave of terrorist attacks on Peshawar, he remained optimistic that, once the US withdrew from Afghanistan the militancy would recede. Events of the past two years have tempered his optimism. Last week when I spoke to him again, he told me that conditions have deteriorated so much that Pakistan will have to live with the consequences of America's reckless war long after it has withdrawn. The drone attacks are merely compounding the mess.

Campaigners in Britain and Pakistan are determined to bring transparency to Obama's secretive war and justice to its victims. Barrister Akbar told me in an email that with his team of researchers, he is "working to dig out information beyond the news reports, trying to find out the identities of individuals killed in drone strikes". He is now representing a growing number of individuals who have lost family members to the CIA drones, and many more are coming forward.

"This is only the start of a long, long, peaceful battle to stop this kind of 'murder by videogame'," says Smith. "What we most need are allies willing to work with us, and help provide truthful information about what is really happening on the ground in Pakistan's border regions."

India probe exposes US$3.6b mining scandal

An independent-led inquiry implicated a prominent Indian opposition politician in a $3.6 billion illegal iron ore mining scandal today, underscoring a need to overhaul and better regulate India's booming but graft-ridden mining sector.

The extensive report into mining graft in southern Karnataka state accused its chief minister, B.S. Yediyurappa, and other key officials of causing at least 160 billion rupees (US$3.6 billion) in lost state revenues between 2006 and 2010 from illegal mining and a litany of abuses.

"This inquiry found that there's a large scale involvement of officials, powerful people, both in administration as well as in the government," independent ombudsman Justice Santosh Hegde, who spearheaded the report, told reporters.

Several other senior officials with the opposition Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) including the state Tourism Minister Janardhana Reddy, were also named in the report.

"I have not done any mistake. I don't think I need to worry about anything," Yediyurappa told reporters. He has rejected calls for his resignation.

Other BJP officials were not immediately available for comment.

While the report is not legally binding the political implications are far reaching and analysts, as well as several members of the BJP, predicted several resignations would follow.

With India's ruling Congress party coalition reeling from a spate of graft cases including a multi-billion dollar telecoms scandal, the spotlight on the BJP could give the stricken government of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh some respite.

Hegde said 400 firms and 787 people had been implicated in a web of corruption involving mining, transport, customs and shipping officials, leading to hundreds of thousands of tonnes of iron ore going missing from mines across the state.

Illegal mining is a major problem across India, as powerful businessmen, often in cahoots with officials, plunder the country's mineral wealth to meet surging demand for commodities like iron ore in places such as China.

India is the world's No. 3 iron ore supplier after Australia and Brazil. Karnataka is India's second largest iron ore producing state but deep-rooted graft and conflicts led authorities to once even impose an export ban that spiked global iron ore prices.

Lax oversight and patchy laws are prompting parliament to propose a new national mining bill that will open up the sector to foreign investment, create an independent regulator and impose profit sharing arrangements with villagers.

"This is a transitionary phase for the industry," said Basant Poddar, with the Federation of Indian Mineral Industries for Southern India. "Business and politics should be kept out as many of businessmen are simply caught in the line of crossfire."

The mining scandal again underscores the need for India - Asia's third largest economy after China and Japan - to overhaul strategic sectors including retail, property, and mining to raise growth and lure fresh investment.

Fearing a public backlash could bruise its chances in polls and erode a key southern voter base, analysts say the BJP will almost certainly force the populist Yediyurappa to resign.

Corruption pervades almost all levels of society in India despite a thriving democracy and a relatively independent judiciary. It has long been accepted as a fact of life.

Over the past year, however, public anger has risen sharply over particularly blatant abuses, stoked by activists and aggressive media and TV campaigns pushing for the creation of an independent ombudsman to step up the anti-corruption fight.

Speak up Mr Finance Minister!

It was sometime in October 2008, a rumour was doing the rounds furiously that the banks were seeing ferocious withdrawals and the situation could, within hours, develop into a run with serious systemic risks. Our reserves had plummeted so low that treasury heads in the banks had lost all faith in the reserve numbers being released by the State Bank and the prospect of default loomed. Then a rumour started that the lockers are going to be seized and some branches began to see panicked people coming in and hurriedly emptying out their contents.

I struggled with how to cover this. I didn't want to do anything to fuel the rumours further, but could not ignore the fact that they exist and are producing real world outcomes. The best way for our channel to approach the issue was to try and get a comment from the finance minister on the whole affair. A brand new finance minister would likely be shy of speaking on the air about such a hot issue I figured, so maybe we should start the questioning with another topic and work our way to what we wanted.

President Asif Ali Zardari was on his first tour of the US in those days, and had just given an interview in which he famously announced that "Pakistan needs $100 billion" in assistance. That was our peg, we'd start by asking Shaukat Tarin what he thought of this announcement, where the $100 billion figure had come from, and then work around to the crisis facing the banking system.

I placed the call and Shaukat Tarin answered on the first ring.

"Can we talk to you on air about this $100 billion business?" I asked.

"Sure" came the prompt reply and then to my surprise he added, "but I also want to address these rumours doing the rounds regarding banks, can you make sure you ask me about that too?"

In days to come, I saw Tarin speaking on air to all other TV channels, in talk shows and bulletins, giving comments in print as well, breathing confidence back into a financial system shattered by the sudden withdrawal of liquidity.

His track record can be debated, but the media never had a harsh word to say about Shaukat Tarin, he never gave us the chance. Being accessible meant his version of things was always available. Look up the coverage; you'll be hard-pressed to find any news story by any paper or channel that was unfavourable towards him or his competence. And when he left, he earned glowing tributes, one paper headlining its epitaph with these words: "An honourable exit for an honourable man".

What a contrast it is then to see Hafeez Shaikh, the current finance minister, now past his twelfth month in office, standing in the lowest ebb of his tenure, grinning to himself in his little corner of oblivion. He's been abandoned by his team and there's not a word to be heard from him. He sits atop a fiscal train wreck, with his revenue numbers for the last fiscal year stripped of their credibility and bets being placed on when the first downward revisions will come on his projections for the forthcoming year, and not a peep from him. His core task as finance minister - to be an interlocutor between the political elites of this country and their creditors - lies in tatters. Yet he remains inaccessible.

It's time that Hafeez Shaikh started worrying about how his tenure as finance minister will be remembered. He's clearly not a man of words, and his track record inspires little confidence. What memorable words of his will remain after he is gone? What will be remembered as his finest hour? What will be his biggest success? When exactly did he draw the line in the sand, to say this far and no further? What was his moment, his hour of grace, and the time he played his hand and revealed his character? I have no answers to these questions, and nobody else does either. Nobody knows if there is anyone in charge of the economy any more, and given the danger stalking global markets, that's a very worrying sign indeed.

Sarfraz Shah killing trial

Even though just one shot was fired, the Rangers men acted in unison when they encircled the unarmed Sarfraz Shah. They pointed their weapons at him and thus they were conjoined in the murder.

These were the answers the investigating officer in the case, DIG Sultan Khawaja gave to questions in the anti-terrorism court on Wednesday during the hearing of the high-profile case.

To a question from the defence, the DIG said that all the arms issued to the Rangers were used in the commission of the murder. Explaining the point further voluntarily, he said that the shots were fired by Shahid Zafar from his G-3 rifle but the other accused men also pointed their arms at the 22-year-old.

Thus, when the defence suggested that there was no plan, design, common intention or intention to terrorise people, the DIG replied that all these elements were there.

To a question on why he has not examined or recorded the statements of witnesses who described the act of killing Sarfraz Shah a murder, Khawaja said that all the staff and officers at the Shaheed Benazir Bhutto Park said that the incident had left them in shock and terror. He said besides this, nine other witnesses had said in their statements that they felt terror when they saw the footage of the incident on television. To another suggestion, he said that deceased was "neither an enemy nor a robber".

After the completion of the testimony, Special Public Prosecutor Muhammad Khan Buriro said the prosecution rested.

Judge Bashir Ahmed Khoso adjourned the hearing till Thursday afternoon when all six accused men will be examined. They will also be allowed to produce any defence witness.

Jurisdiction

Meanwhile, the matter of the jurisdiction to hear the case was sent back to the anti-terrorism court that earlier rejected the argument that it could be heard by an ordinary court. The defence has been trying to have the case transferred from the anti-terrorism court.

On Wednesday, the Sindh High Court disposed of a plea to transfer the trial to a sessions court. The order was stated to be by consent as the bench proposed that the question of jurisdiction could be raised at the time of final arguments.

Syed Mehmood Alam Rizvi advocate, appearing for one of the accused men, Muhammad Afzal Khan, submitted that the joint investigation team's report to the defence on Tuesday, explicitly holds that no element of terrorism was found in the alleged incident of June 8.

He submitted that while the instant revision application was pending hearing, new facts and details have surfaced. Now it is a case fit to be transferred from the ATC to an ordinary court. He said that this may also benefit the complainant, Salik Shah, who is the brother of the victim Sarfraz Shah. The parties may arrive at an out-of-court settlement.

Sarfraz Shah, 22, a resident of Hijrat Colony, was shot and injured by a Rangers man, who was part of a six-man strong mobile squad. Shah was turned over to the Rangers by a civilian Afsar Khan, who accused him of looting his friend and girlfriend at gunpoint.

Sindh Prosecutor General Shahadat Awan opposed the plea to transfer the case and said that this could not happen as the Supreme Court had ruled that prima facie it was to be challaned before an ATC. The counsel for the applicant, rebutting the arguments, said that the SC order was tentative and it left the decision to the Investigating Officer. He had to decide and file a charge sheet before "a court of competent jurisdiction" and thus a trial before an ATC was not according to the SC orders.

Govt-sponsored Karachi peace campaign begins

Pakistan Peoples Party's (PPP) ministers kicked off Karachi's 'peace drive' by hoisting white flags at the press club on Wednesday.

The government, under the directives of President Asif Ali Zardari, launched the campaign to end the target killings in Karachi.

Around half a dozen cabinet members belonging to the PPP, the ruling party, reached the press club with a large number of their workers who were chanting peace slogans.

Sindh Information Minister Sharjeel Inam Memon said that the effort was meant to bring peace to the city and restore its image as the 'city of lights'. He said that PPP's workers and leaders were going to play their role in this peace process. Moreover Sindh Chief Minister Qaim Ali Shah has also directed all cabinet members to be a part of the campaign.

"All political forces inside and outside parliament would be approached for cooperation in the peace mission. In fact, not only political parties, but even the judiciary will be sent the peace message," said Memon. He explained that every institution should work for peace in its own limits.

He went on to say that Governor Dr Ishratul Ebad Khan has also promised to use his influence and extend his cooperation to make the peace drive successful.

Memon thanked Muttahida Qaumi Movement's chief, Altaf Hussain, for his appeal to bring peace to the city. He urged the media to play a role and avoid reporting news that creates rather than resolves problems.

While answering a question, Memon criticised the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz's leader, Nawaz Sharif, and said "he is not sharif [decent] because he ordered an attack on the judiciary. We are warning him again not to interfere in the affairs of the judiciary and let it work independently." Memon said that "the Sharif brothers have been looting and plundering public wealth since 1985. They started their political career on the instigation of a dictator, General Ziaul Haq."

Minister for Excise and Taxation Mukesh Kumar Chawala appealed to the minorities to participate in a peace rally, which was being organised from Sea View to the Karachi Press Club on Saturday. He said that they had started inviting different political and religious parties to participate.

Minister for Power Shazia Marri and Minister for Revenue Jam Mahtab Dahar also came.

The bad guys are better armed than us: IG

The problem in Karachi is long term, according to the Sindh Inspector General of Police (IGP) Wajid Ali Durrani.

The reporters questioning the IG at the officers' darbar at Police Ground in the Cantonment area pounced on his vague observation that the violence in Karachi was not about to change any time soon.

"While the problem in Karachi will continue, the police is also responsible for upper Sindh," he said, backpedalling hastily. "I meant to say that the former IG did not go out of Karachi to other parts of Sindh to find out the issues there."

Durrani told Hyderabad's finest that the defunct Citizens-Police Liaison Committee (CPLC) is to be replaced with a similar body which will comprise ten notable residents and volunteers in an attempt to take a fresh approach to control law and order. "Community policing is the modern way of crime control. It is most successful in Japan," he said.

The IG pinned his hopes for peace on political committees with representatives of the Pakistan Peoples Party, Muttahida Qaumi Movement and Awami National Party. "People will not listen to me if I appeal for calm, but political leaders with influence in the city will be heeded."

The committees will visit violence-hit areas and dissuade people from taking up arms. The IG emphasised that the law enforcement agencies can't control the situation through force alone - politicians have to do their bit, especially when it comes to removing ethnic prejudices.

"Miscreants attack pockets of Sindhi, Urdu-speaking, Balochi and Pakhtun communities and run away, making it look like a certain community has attacked another."

The IG also dismissed rumours of having seen the list of names involved in violence that has been handed over by a country in Africa. He said that the list was with the home minister, Manzoor Wassan, and 90 suspects have been arrested in connection with the recent Karachi violence.

"Although I can't say with certainty that a particular foreign country is involved in the Karachi violence, at the same time I cannot rule anything out either," he added. The police will use the Rs5 billion provided by President Asif Ali Zardari to buy new armoured personnel carriers, grenade launchers and other advanced weapons. "We realise that the criminals have more sophisticated arms than the police," he observed darkly.

He announced new apartment buildings for policemen in Hyderabad similar to the 30,000 flats being constructed in Karachi.

He then asked the SSPs present to pick out plots for housing societies but was told that 54 acres of police land is under illegal occupation. "The land, located at a prime location near Rajputana Hospital, is police property," said a sub-inspector. The IG asked SSP Pir Farid Jan Sarhandi to immediately set up a post there.The mounted police meanwhile, had their own woes to voice during the hour-long question session. One such policeman, Azizullah, complained that his officers do not pay for fodder and other expenses of the horses. "There are 12 mounted police personnel in Hyderabad and we pay for our horses' food from our own pockets."

Not to be left out, the traffic police complained about how they are not being given their share - 20% - from the fines that they collect from violators of traffic rules. The majority of the 19 complaints, however, were about delays in promotions and granting of the 'son quota'. As expected, they were met with the usual assurances from the IG.

Infringing National Sovereignty In The Name Of The American President: Secret Bush Order Lets U.S. Raid Al Qaeda Without Regard For International Law

The United States military since 2004 has used broad, secret authority to carry out nearly a dozen previously undisclosed attacks against Al Qaeda and other militants in Syria, Pakistan and elsewhere, according to senior American officials.

These military raids, typically carried out by Special Operations forces, were authorized by a classified order that Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld signed in the spring of 2004 with the approval of President Bush, the officials said. The secret order gave the military new authority to attack the Qaeda terrorist network anywhere in the world, and a more sweeping mandate to conduct operations in countries not at war with the United States.

In 2006, for example, a Navy Seal team raided a suspected militants' compound in the Bajaur region of Pakistan, according to a former top official of the Central Intelligence Agency. Officials watched the entire mission - captured by the video camera of a remotely piloted Predator aircraft - in real time in the C.I.A.'s Counterterrorist Center at the agency's headquarters in Virginia 7,000 miles away.

Some of the military missions have been conducted in close coordination with the C.I.A., according to senior American officials, who said that in others, like the Special Operations raid in Syria on Oct. 26 of this year, the military commandos acted in support of C.I.A.-directed operations.

But as many as a dozen additional operations have been canceled in the past four years, often to the dismay of military commanders, senior military officials said. They said senior administration officials had decided in these cases that the missions were too risky, were too diplomatically explosive or relied on insufficient evidence.

More than a half-dozen officials, including current and former military and intelligence officials as well as senior Bush administration policy makers, described details of the 2004 military order on the condition of anonymity because of its politically delicate nature. Spokesmen for the White House, the Defense Department and the military declined to comment.

Apart from the 2006 raid into Pakistan, the American officials refused to describe in detail what they said had been nearly a dozen previously undisclosed attacks, except to say they had been carried out in Syria, Pakistan and other countries. They made clear that there had been no raids into Iran using that authority, but they suggested that American forces had carried out reconnaissance missions in Iran using other classified directives.

According to a senior administration official, the new authority was spelled out in a classified document called "Al Qaeda Network Exord," or execute order, that streamlined the approval process for the military to act outside officially declared war zones. Where in the past the Pentagon needed to get approval for missions on a case-by-case basis, which could take days when there were only hours to act, the new order specified a way for Pentagon planners to get the green light for a mission far more quickly, the official said.

It also allowed senior officials to think through how the United States would respond if a mission went badly. "If that helicopter goes down in Syria en route to a target," a former senior military official said, "the American response would not have to be worked out on the fly."

The 2004 order was a step in the evolution of how the American government sought to kill or capture Qaeda terrorists around the world. It was issued after the Bush administration had already granted America's intelligence agencies sweeping power to secretly detain and interrogate terrorism suspects in overseas prisons and to conduct warrantless eavesdropping on telephone and electronic communications.

Shortly after the Sept. 11 attacks, Mr. Bush issued a classified order authorizing the C.I.A. to kill or capture Qaeda militants around the globe. By 2003, American intelligence agencies and the military had developed a much deeper understanding of Al Qaeda's extensive global network, and Mr. Rumsfeld pressed hard to unleash the military's vast firepower against militants outside the combat zones of Iraq and Afghanistan.

The 2004 order identifies 15 to 20 countries, including Syria, Pakistan, Yemen, Saudi Arabia and several other Persian Gulf states, where Qaeda militants were believed to be operating or to have sought sanctuary, a senior administration official said.

Even with the order, each specific mission requires high-level government approval. Targets in Somalia, for instance, need at least the approval of the defense secretary, the administration official said, while targets in a handful of countries, including Pakistan and Syria, require presidential approval.

The Pentagon has exercised its authority frequently, dispatching commandos to countries including Pakistan and Somalia. Details of a few of these strikes have previously been reported.

For example, shortly after Ethiopian troops crossed into Somalia in late 2006 to dislodge an Islamist regime in Mogadishu, the Pentagon's Joint Special Operations Command quietly sent operatives and AC-130 gunships to an airstrip near the Ethiopian town of Dire Dawa. From there, members of a classified unit called Task Force 88 crossed repeatedly into Somalia to hunt senior members of a Qaeda cell believed to be responsible for the 1998 American Embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzania.

At the time, American officials said Special Operations troops were operating under a classified directive authorizing the military to kill or capture Qaeda operatives if failure to act quickly would mean the United States had lost a "fleeting opportunity" to neutralize the enemy.

Occasionally, the officials said, Special Operations troops would land in Somalia to assess the strikes' results. On Jan. 7, 2007, an AC-130 struck an isolated fishing village near the Kenyan border, and within hours, American commandos and Ethiopian troops were examining the rubble to determine whether any Qaeda operatives had been killed.

But even with the new authority, proposed Pentagon missions were sometimes scrubbed because of bad intelligence or bureaucratic entanglements, senior administration officials said.

The details of one of those aborted operations, in early 2005, were reported by The New York Times last June. In that case, an operation to send a team of the Navy Seals and the Army Rangers into Pakistan to capture Ayman al-Zawahri, Osama bin Laden's top deputy, was aborted at the last minute.

Mr. Zawahri was believed by intelligence officials to be attending a meeting in Bajaur, in Pakistan's tribal areas, and the Pentagon's Joint Special Operations Command hastily put together a plan to capture him. There were strong disagreements inside the Pentagon and the C.I.A. about the quality of the intelligence, however, and some in the military expressed concern that the mission was unnecessarily risky.

Porter J. Goss, the C.I.A. director at the time, urged the military to carry out the mission, and some in the C.I.A. even wanted to execute it without informing Ryan C. Crocker, then the American ambassador to Pakistan. Mr. Rumsfeld ultimately refused to authorize the mission.

Former military and intelligence officials said that Lt. Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal, who recently completed his tour as head of the Joint Special Operations Command, had pressed for years to win approval for commando missions into Pakistan. But the missions were frequently rejected because officials in Washington determined that the risks to American troops and the alliance with Pakistan were too great.

Capt. John Kirby, a spokesman for General McChrystal, who is now director of the military's Joint Staff, declined to comment.

The recent raid into Syria was not the first time that Special Operations forces had operated in that country, according to a senior military official and an outside adviser to the Pentagon.

Since the Iraq war began, the official and the outside adviser said, Special Operations forces have several times made cross-border raids aimed at militants and infrastructure aiding the flow of foreign fighters into Iraq.

The raid in late October, however, was much more noticeable than the previous raids, military officials said, which helps explain why it drew a sharp protest from the Syrian government.

Negotiations to hammer out the 2004 order took place over nearly a year and involved wrangling between the Pentagon and the C.I.A. and the State Department about the military's proper role around the world, several administration officials said.

American officials said there had been debate over whether to include Iran in the 2004 order, but ultimately Iran was set aside, possibly to be dealt with under a separate authorization.

Senior officials of the State Department and the C.I.A. voiced fears that military commandos would encroach on their turf, conducting operations that historically the C.I.A. had carried out, and running missions without an ambassador's knowledge or approval.

Mr. Rumsfeld had pushed in the years after the Sept. 11 attacks to expand the mission of Special Operations troops to include intelligence gathering and counterterrorism operations in countries where American commandos had not operated before.

Bush administration officials have shown a determination to operate under an expansive definition of self-defense that provides a legal rationale for strikes on militant targets in sovereign nations without those countries' consent.

Several officials said the negotiations over the 2004 order resulted in closer coordination among the Pentagon, the State Department and the C.I.A., and set a very high standard for the quality of intelligence necessary to gain approval for an attack.

The 2004 order also provided a foundation for the orders that Mr. Bush approved in July allowing the military to conduct raids into the Pakistani tribal areas, including the Sept. 3 operation by Special Operations forces that killed about 20 militants, American officials said.

Administration officials said that Mr. Bush's approval had paved the way for Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates to sign an order - separate from the 2004 order - that specifically directed the military to plan a series of operations, in cooperation with the C.I.A., on the Qaeda network and other militant groups linked to it in Pakistan.

Unlike the 2004 order, in which Special Operations commanders nominated targets for approval by senior government officials, the order in July was more of a top-down approach, directing the military to work with the C.I.A. to find targets in the tribal areas, administration officials said. They said each target still needed to be approved by the group of Mr. Bush's top national security and foreign policy advisers, called the Principals Committee.

Punjab vs federation: PML-N vows to support judiciary in case it seeks military’s help

By Abdul Manan

The federal government is stalling on implementing the Supreme Court's orders to cover up corrupt practices of its coalition partners, Punjab Chief Minister Shahbaz Sharif has said.

"The Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) will hold a party convention on July 27 after which we will hold a high-level party meeting to draw strategies to force the government to obey court rulings," Shahbaz said at a press conference held on Tuesday at his Model Town residence in Lahore.

Announcing war against the federal government, he said that he was willing to sacrifice his own government to ensure that the judiciary's verdicts in the corruption scandals, such as the Hajj scam and the National Insurance Company Ltd land scam, are honoured. "The PML-N will support the judiciary if it asks for the military's help to implement its verdicts," he said.

Shahbaz said that President Zardari is the biggest hurdle in the way of an independent judiciary. "Zardari wants Dogar courts from where he can get a ruling of his own liking," he said.

Asked why the court is not initiating contempt proceedings, he said that it was the court's prerogative and he cannot comment on it. However, he said that the PML-N will not be a silent spectator as the court is humiliated and will take direct action against the federal government. "Defying court rulings will be like spoiling the country's basics. If needed, we will again launch a long march against the federal government," he said.

Meanwhile, Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) leader and former law minister Babar Awan has criticised Shahbaz's speech saying he is 'politicising' judicial matters.

"The PML-N is trying to play the judicial card and will fail like [it did] in the past," Awan told the media at the Governor House. "He has indirectly given a message to the federation that Punjab will defy it."

He said that the chief justice of Pakistan should take suo motu notice of Shahbaz's statement in which he has tried to provoke the people against the federal government.

Awan said that before announcing war, Shahbaz should review whether Punjab is itself complying with court orders or not. "The court has also given a verdict against current Lahore police chief for negligence in the Gojra incident but he continues to serve," he said.

He said that Shahbaz has used unparliamentary language against President Zardari just to provoke the PPP. "There is no constitutional war between the executive and the judiciary in any province and I cannot understand who Shahbaz is challenging in his declaration of war," Awan said.

Us-Afghan strategic partnership must be on Afghan terms

Afghan President Hamid Karzai says he will not negotiate his terms for a strategic partnership with the United States that will lay out the long-term U.S. role in Afghanistan.

Karzai said Tuesday that the U.S. must accept all of his conditions for a strategic partnership agreement, including an end to night raids and other military operations by American forces that could cause civilian casualties.

Addressing a gathering in Kabul, the Afghan leader also called on Afghan forces to rise to the challenge of taking control of security from international troops. President Karzai said Afghan forces will soon be able to protect their own country.

Some 33,000 American forces are set to leave Afghanistan by September of 2012. Last week, the first seven areas of Afghanistan were transitioned from NATO control to Afghan forces. Most foreign combat troops are set to leave Afghanistan by the end of 2014.

Violence has increased as Afghans begin taking security control from U.S. and NATO-led forces.

On Tuesday, Afghanistan's National Directorate of Security said Afghan forces had foiled a plot to attack Kabul International Airport. NDS spokesman Lutfullah Mashal said insurgents had accumulated weapons near Kabul in order to attack the airport. Detained militants told security officials about the plot.

In southern Afghanistan, provincial officials say at least 22 insurgents and two police officers were killed in two separate clashes in Helmand province on Monday.

Elsewhere in Helmand, authorities say a roadside bomb killed two children on Monday.

In the north, NATO says four insurgents were killed Monday during separate operations in Jowzjan province. Five other insurgents were killed in a joint operation targeting a Taliban leader in the eastern province of Laghman on Monday.

Sindh government to initiate peace campaign

"We will spread the message of peace in the city through the families of those who have lost their lives in the violence," said Sindh Information Minister Sharjeel Inam Memon. This is a part of the 'peace campaign' that the Sindh government will start on Wednesday.

Memon told a press conference on Tuesday that the government would accompany the affected family members to disturbed areas of the city and ask them to appeal to different groups in the sensitive areas to express tolerance and give up the rivalry.

The campaign is being launched due to the volatile situation of Karachi and will comprise walks, seminars and interactions between the government and the political parties as well as between the government and civil society members.

Memon said that the aim of the peace campaign is to bring the socio-economic condition of the city back to normal.

He explained that the government will start interacting with leaders from different political parties, NGOs and other civil society members and ask them to play their role in bringing the law and order situation under control.

"We appeal to the people of Karachi and other stakeholders to cooperate with the government and make the campaign successful. The government will give a special award to those who play the best role during the campaign," announced Memon.

The information minister went on to say that they had not only organised seminars and walks, but the government together with members of civil society organisations would erect banners and distribute pamphlets in all the areas of the city including markets, hospitals, schools, colleges and universities.

"We will ask our celebrities and national heroes to play their role in maintaining the law and order situation through radio, film and other fields," he said.

He said that PPP workers would start the campaign from different areas and would also appeal to people to hoist 'white flags', symbolising peace, on their buildings and markets. He announced that the government had started printing peace stickers, which would be distributed on a large-scale among public and private transporters.

Religious scholars would be approached and asked to deliver peace sermons during Juma and prayer times in their mosques.

Memon explained that President Asif Ali Zardari has directed them to bring peace in the city and this initiative is being launched on his directions.

"During the campaign we will not indulge in recriminations ," he said. Along with the peace drive the government would continue administrative efforts to maintain order in the city.

PPP's MPA Imdad Pitafi and MPA Mukesh Kumar Chawala were also present at the conference with Memon.

Is this the Obama doctrine?

Nothing seems to be going right in Pakistan-US relations. Just when we were wondering what Pakistan needed to do to restore some semblance of normalcy to its ties with the US, the latter decided to arrest Ghulam Nabi Fai, long a voice against violence and an advocate for peaceful resolution of the Kashmir issue. Are the two agencies playing games with each other?

Next, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton decided to serve another 'demand note' on Pakistan and that too while in India, which made it needlessly provocative. Her other remarks at the end of the US-India strategic dialogue were not helpful either, particularly her support for India's quest for transit rights across South and Central Asia. It was, however, in the southern port city of Chennai that Clinton became India's unabashed cheerleader, stressing that India-US ties would be the defining partnership of the 21st century, while nudging India to play a more assertive role across the Asia-Pacific region, arguing that it "is an ambitious agenda, but we can afford to be ambitious." Her assertions must have fallen on receptive ears, as Indian Foreign Minister Krishna confirmed that "we discussed our shared interest in peaceful and stable Asia-Pacific and the Indian Ocean region architecture in the region". As if to demonstrate how much the two are in sync, it was announced that the Indian president would be undertaking official visits to South Korea and Mongolia, two countries of special interest to China, while the joint statement revealed that "India, the US and Japan plan to commence a trilateral dialogue at the senior official level."

Increasingly, Clinton has been sounding as if she has joined those in the US who are convinced of the need to galvanise South East Asian nations to confront China now, rather than in the future, when it may no longer be feasible. A year ago, at the annual Asean Regional Forum (ARF) meeting in Hanoi, Clinton had waded into the choppy waters of the South China Sea, where China and its South Asian neighbours are embroiled in a contentious dispute, declaring America's support for the right to freedom of navigation. Suspecting it as America's effort to fish in troubled waters, China was constrained to warn the US and other major powers to stay out of disputes in the region. At last week's ARF annual meeting, Clinton renewed her efforts to encourage South East Asian nations to be more assertive in their claims to the strategically located and potentially lucrative waters of the South China Sea.

Clinton's remarks in Chennai appear to flesh out the bare bones of the US-India strategic partnership envisaged by Bush and the neocons. Its scale is huge and ambition unlimited, as Clinton herself admitted. Though an Indian Ocean power, the US is committing itself to making India a Pacific Ocean power as well, and for this purpose encouraging her to work with Japan on security issues relating to the region. The East Asia Summit would be turned into the premier regional forum for dealing with security issues and India invited as an observer, for the first time, in the annual Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit. Nothing could be more provocative to China.

Do Clinton's exhortations in Chennai represent the Obama doctrine for 'containment' of China? Getting India into this arrangement may sound like a stroke of genius, but could turn out to be a huge folly as well. Coming as it does at a time when the American economy shows no sign of recovery and its debt to China exceeds $1 trillion, Clinton and company are engaging in an audacious gamble and one that is likely to add greatly to regional tension and turmoil.

Given Pakistan's strategic relations to China and continuing tensions with India, the Obama administration's encouragement of India to become more assertive and ambitious in both South and South East Asia demonstrate the limitations of US-Pakistan relations, while creating huge challenges for Pakistan.

Talks in New Delhi

Talks between Pakistan and India in July have become a regular feature - and for some that is perhaps an end in itself. Last time, the venue was Thimphu and the year before that Sharm-el-Sheikh. Both meetings were held amid mutual suspicion and acrimony. In the latter, the Indian prime minister made some very encouraging remarks but it seems that his resolve was undercut by vested interests in the Indian establishment who did not want to see ties between the two countries return to any semblance of normality after the 26/11. The foreign ministers of both countries are scheduled to meet in New Delhi today, with the hawks on both sides yet again wishing that they come to naught. It has been reported that some confidence-building measures related to Kashmir (such as increasing the number of trading days, opening more bus routes and allowing more entry points through the Line of Control) may come out of the meeting, but it remains to be seen whether other pressing matters of conflict will be addressed in any realistic manner.

As with the previous July meetings, the New Delhi summit will be heavily focused on 26/11. Indian External Affairs Minister SM Krishna has already made it clear that he will demand that Pakistan bring the perpetrators of the terrorist attacks to justice. This is a clear reference to Hafiz Saeed and several members of the Lashkar-e-Taiba who are being tried in a Pakistani court (though the case seems to have dragged on inordinately long). An additional concern for Pakistan will be the performance of newly-minted Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar. There is concern that her lack of experience makes her unsuitable for the job and this wasn't helped by an undiplomatic remark on India she made soon upon assuming office. That said, the talks do present an opportunity for those on either side who wish for peace between the two countries to assert themselves. In Pakistan, all political parties are agreed on the need for a lasting peace with India, while across the border perhaps the biggest proponent of harmonious coexistence with Pakistan seems to be none other than Indian Prime Minister Dr Manmohan Singh.

10 militants killed in clashes with Yemeni troops

Yemeni forces said on Tuesday they killed 10 al Qaeda fighters who attacked their camp outside the southern town of Zinjibar, the scene of fierce clashes between government troops and militants.

Islamists have seized several areas in the surrounding province of Abyan in recent months -- raising fears in the West and neighbouring Saudi Arabia that al Qaeda's Yemen wing is expanding, taking advantage of a security vacuum left by prolonged anti-government protests.

Yemen has been rocked by more than five months of demonstrations against the rule of President Ali Abdullah Saleh. The country was left in political limbo when Saleh flew to Saudi Arabia for medical treatment following a bomb attack on his palace last month.

Yemen's army launched an offensive last week to push back militants in Abyan, on Yemen's southern coast, but has so far only regained one military site.

An army spokesman, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the al Qaeda fighters attacked one of its camps on Monday night.

"The 10 militants were killed by heavy shells before they could make it to the military camp," he said, adding that one of those killed was a senior member of the militant group.

An army general told Yemeni television late on Monday the army's offensive in Abyan was facing fierce resistance.

"Our forces are engaged in difficult clashes with al Qaeda in Zinjibar," said Mohammed al-Somali. "The fighting is large and violent, on a larger scale than most would probably imagine."

About 90,000 people have fled the violence in Abyan, most of them heading to the nearby port city of Aden, which lies east of a strategic shipping strait that channels about 3 million barrels of oil a day.

Security analysts have cast doubt on Yemen's reports that its forces have killed dozens of al Qaeda militants and several senior leaders, noting that many of those fighting in Abyan are likely members of other militant groups.

"It wouldn't surprise me if there were puritanical militants who want to see closer adherence to what the consider to be Islamic values but didn't necessarily share the trans national agenda of AQAP (al Qaeda's Yemen wing)," said security analyst Jeremy Binnie, of IHS Jane's.

Saleh's opponents accuse him of letting his forces ease their grip around areas suspected of hosting militants, in order to convince foreign governments that only he stands in the way of a militant takeover.

Both the United States and neighbouring Saudi Arabia, targets of foiled attacks by al Qaeda's Yemen branch, are wary of growing turmoil in Yemen, which they fear gives room to the militant group to operate.

Washington and Riyadh hoped to bring more stability to Yemen by pushing Saleh into signing a Gulf-brokered transition plan, but the 69-year-old leader has backed out of inking the deal three times.

He has instead vowed to return to Yemen and start a national dialogue, angering protesters in the streets who are still insisting on his resignation.

The budget is to be altered, the system itself will not change

The commissionerate system has not become a law and the government will not make any amendments to it, said Chief Minister Sindh Syed Qaim Ali Shah has said that.

He told the media gathered outside the Institute of Chartered Accountants of Pakistan's Golden Jubilee Conference that "we will resolve the concerns of our friends administratively, otherwise there is no need to touch the commissionerate system".

In what appears to be a unanimous assumption, most government ministers were of the view that the government was open to amendments in the newly revived commissionerate system. The amendments were meant to pacify the disgruntled former coalition partner, Muttahida Qaumi Movement. Hence, the chief minister's revelation came as a first to many.

The government does not plan to carry out an operation in the city, the CM said in response to a question about violence in Karachi. Target killings, however, are a political issue and the government has begun interacting with different political parties to bring the Karachi situation back to normal.

The commisionerate budget

The commissioners and deputy commissioners have been made responsible for resolving financial issues when it comes to salary and recurring expenditure in their areas.

This was decided at a meeting held at the CM House under the supervision of Chief Minister Shah to review the budgetary changes that would have to be made to fit the new system.

Shah told the Sindh Chief Secretary to hold a meeting today (Wednesday) to discuss all issues including the allocation of the budget for development schemes and monitoring the evaluation system. He asked him to submit a report if necessary.

The meeting was informed that the allocation of three-month salaries with the POL and other essential heads have already been released to all departments so that no government employee will face any problem.

After the 18 amendment was promulgated, devolved departments were made integral parts of the respective provincial departments. The CM said that all changes should be made within three months.

The meeting was attended by Finance Minister Syed Murad Ali Shah, Chief Secretary Sindh Raja Muhammad Abbas, Additional Chief Secretary (P&D) Muhammad Ishaque Lashari, Accountant General Sindh Azam Khan, Secretary Finance Sindh Naveed Kamran Baloch, Secretary Local Government Ali Ahmed Lund, Secretary to Chief Minister Sindh Alamuddin Bullo, Additional Accountant General Sindh, a representative of the Sindh Police IG and others.

Rangers are not terrorists, declares JIT report

The defence in the Sarfraz Shah case finally has the information it needs to have the case tried as a simple murder rather than an act of terrorism.

The Joint Investigating Team (JIT) has submitted its report that is crucial to its stand that the murder of Sarfraz Shah does not fall within the scope of Anti Terrorism Act (ATA 1997).

The development came during the hearing of a revision application by a Sindh High Court (SHC) division bench comprising Justice Gulzar Ahmed and Justice Muhammad Tasnim on Tuesday.

Muhammad Afzal's lawyer, Mehmood Alam Rizvi, is seeking the transfer of this case from the Anti Terrorism Court (ATC) to an ordinary sessions court.

"You have stated that there was no terrorism because there was no public present at the park," said Justice Ahmed. "It is matter of evidence. The ATC decide whether it falls into the ambit of terrorism or relevant court as the ATC holds the daily proceedings on the case."

Rizvi then drew the bench's attention to the order of the Supreme Court which directed the Investigation Officer (IO) to file the case's charge sheet "before a court of competent jurisdiction."

He said that the JIT report was being kept from the defence which was affecting the interests of the accused. The IO, DIG Sultan Ali Khawaja, immediately produced the report and distributed copies to the defence when the bench asked why the defence had not been given copies of the report that stated that the murder did not cause any terror.

On the request of Counsel Shaukat Hayat Advocate, the court told the IO to submit the report before the ATC holding the trial.

Earlier, Prosecutor General Sindh Shahdat Awan opposed requests to make the JIT report public as he felt the charge sheet had already been submitted thus making the report immaterial.

The court later put off further proceedings in transfer plea till Wednesday as Mehmood Alam Rizvi advocate, counsel for applicant sought time to go through the JIT report.

IOs statement all for the defence

In a turn of events, DIG Sultan A Khawaja - who was appointed to the case specially by Supreme Court for his 'good reputation' - seemed to mince words in his statement before the ATC-I judge Bashir Ahmed Khoso.

He told the court he was appointed IO in the case and how he investigated the three FIRs including the two against the deceased, Sarfraz Shah, that were later declared null and void and closed as 'B-Class'.

The IO statement as a prosecution witness (PW) was based on the footage of the incident. He said that he saw the accused, Afsar Khan, dragging the victim and turning him over to the Rangers who encircled him and shot him.

He heard the boy begging for mercy saying that "he had no other choice and that the pistol is a toy pistol". "Instead of waiting for an ambulance, they should have shifted the injured boy in their mobile which is seen standing in the footage, this makes their intentions clear," said Khawaja.

Anxious to get the JIT report on record, DIG brought out the report but faced resistance from Special Public Prosecutor (SPP) Muhammad Khan Buriro who claimed that the IO is submitting the JIT report on his own motion, while he was testifying as a witness.

SPP Buriro told the Khawaja that the SHC has ordered him to submit the report before ATC trial court but he was producing it as part of his testimony.

To the defence's delight, Khawaja submitted that "the Rangers officials were on official duty, there was no pre-planning and no intention to commit terrorism".

The SPP conducting the examination in chief sought a clarification - they felt that the IO was deliberately favouring the defence in his testimony. However, the court said that it can clearly see that the IO is saying things that he would have said in a cross examination.

As the defence leapt to their feet to object, the court asked them to wait for their turn to cross examine the witness. Either way, "what is left to his testimony? He has already said everything that favours the defence's case" the court observed right before the case was set aside till Wednesday.

The court rejected applications by the defence asking to visit the crime scene and to summon the host of the programme 'News Beat' who interviewed the cameraman who recorded the incident Abdul Salam Soomro.

Pakistani tax collectors asked to snoop on militants

Pakistani police struggling to stem a growing Islamist insurgency are recruiting traditional village tax collectors to snoop on militant groups but critics say the plan is ill conceived and unlikely to be of much use.

On a recent day about 100 of the tax collectors, known as numberdars, sat under a big tent in the town of Sahiwal, in Punjab province, listening to lectures from policemen and lawyers about their new duties.

A police official read instructions from a briefing booklet to the men, many of them wearing turbans and other traditional garb, before the day-long session ended with a question session during which some of the men raised fears for their safety if militants caught on to their spying.

"We asked the government to issue us with arms licenses so we can protect ourselves," said one of the men after the session.

"Otherwise we and our families will be at risk of attack," said the would-be informant, who declined to be identified for security reasons.

Now authorities are turning to any means they can to try and end the bloodshed and police in Punjab hope the force of collectors of taxes on water for irrigation, first set up under British colonial rule, can augment their efforts.

"We want numberdars to become the eyes and ears of police and help us in eliminating terrorism," senior Sahiwal police official Shahzada Ghous Ahmed, who is organising the workshops, told Reuters.

The plan is being field tested in Sahiwal, 340 km south of Islamabad, and about 800 numberdars have been trained since the beginning of June.

During the workshops, the numberdars are given a booklet containing the names of 32 militant organisations, including al Qaeda, the Taliban, Lashkar-e-Taiba and Sipah-e-Sahaba, and asked to provide information about their members.

"It is now the duty (of the numberdars) to point out religious extremists and those having links with terrorist organisations," police said in the 12-page booklet.

Punjab is Pakistan's biggest province home to some of its most violent militant groups and the numberdars are told to get information about militants collecting donations and recruiting youngsters.

Security officials in Sahiwal said they had prepared a list of 111 hardcore militants in the district and numberdars have been told to find out what they're up to.

OLD SYSTEM, NEW THREAT

Under the old numberdari system, influential landlords were appointed to collect water taxes for the government and help police control crime.

But the system virtually disappeared after Pakistan's independence in 1947 when the government appointed its own officials to collect revenue and strengthened the police.

The bid to revive the numberdari system in Punjab mirrors government efforts to mobilise ethnic Pashtun elders in the northwest to tackle militancy there.

There, some tribal elders have raised militias to help the military but the militants have struck back hard, killing hundreds of elders and militia members.

Security analysts said the numberdars' fears that the same fate could await them were justified.

"The numberdar is part of the society. If he started telling this then he can be killed," said military expert and security analyst Ayesha Siddiqa. "Why should he do it?"

Police official Ahmed said they had promised to allow numberdars to keep weapons if they provided good information about militants.

Another analyst said the plan had not been properly thought through.

"It's a half-hearted and not very well-thought out effort because it is risky for those who will do this job and apparently there is no backup plan to protect them," said political and security analyst Hasan Askari Rizvi.

"It's a drama. They already have this information," Siddiqa said.

"Historically, we've seen when leaders of banned organisations are arrested then they (government officials) make phone calls for their release."

The art of bribing in India

There's been a lot of debate on the Lokpal Bill, and the venality of netas and babus. But what about ordinary citizens? Though we often have no choice but to pay a bribe, isn't it within our power to refuse to do so and break the cycle of corruption? With this thought, DNA, over the next few days brings you a series where eminent persons speak about putting their foot down.

The art of living has become the fad among the rich and so has the art of bribery.

The first time somebodysought a 'subornment' from me, it was still a developing art. That was sometime around 1981 (in the pre-Bofors era). As an ordinary litigant, I had filed a suit in the Ahmedabad civil court. I had to swear an affidavit in a related application. I was told to go to a room where an officer gave me a board that had the oath printed in different languages.

I read the one written in English and eagerly waited for the impact. I was still quite new to the judicial system and tried to be accurate with my pronunciation.

The officer (who I came to know was an assistant registrar later on) sadly shook his head and told me it was not good enough. My second effort also failed. I was directed to go back and meet the clerk who was helping me file the suit and learn the procedure!

I narrated my problems to the clerk, who merely smiled. He asked me whether I noticed the half-open draw of the officer's table. Litigants who had to swear an affidavit were required to drop a fiver in; the pronunciation was immaterial thereafter. I was very disturbed and refused to pay. Being genetically obstinate, I informed the clerk that I will continue to read out the printed oath till the officer signed the affidavit even if it took the whole day.

The clerk went inside the room and within minutes came out with the affidavitsigned. I do not know whattranspired inside. Apparently the officer had liked my pronunciation!

After about 30 years, when Annas and Ramdevs are 'sacrificing their food' for the sake of a new law against corruption, I think the officer had already thought of a mechanism to avoid the Lokpal. A half-open draw and no demand. That was a new art of collecting 'black money'.

My good friend Maheshbhai, who has an anecdote for every occasion, had one on the 'burning issue' of the day. A traditional sethia (money-lender) had narrated this story. He used to stash a lot of cash and one day theincome tax raid took place. The sethia produced his wealth and the income tax officer berated him for stashing so much cash.

The sethia politely told him that now that the raid was over, he had to complete the customary formalities. He then brought out his cheque book and offered it to the officer. While eager to get his share, the IT officer had to scold the sethia for offering him a cheque.

The sethia replied : "Sir, now you know why I have to keep so much cash in my house. High-ranking officers like you - sale-tax, civic officers - visit my house for some inspection or the other. None of you take a cheque payment but I have to do my duty.

Tell me, sir, what do I do?" This is the vicious question that capitalism has no answer for.

Contemplating ‘the greatest threat to India’

The Express Tribune

Naxalite Movement reflects underlying issues in the Indian social, economic and political institutions, while exposing its claim of a big democratic country. This was stated by Asghar Ali Shad, writer and author of a book on the guerrila movement that was launched at the Institute of Policy Research Islamabad (IPRI) on Monday.

Published by IPRI, the book "Naxal Tehrik Ki Ibtida Aur Farogh" (Genesis and Growth of Naxalite Movement) gives a detailed account of the atrocities of the guerrilla movement with facts and figures, which claims to establish a state based on radical left doctrines in India within two decades, and which the Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh has described as "the greatest threat to Indian security".

"The spread of Naxalite movement since 1967 reflects the widespread alienation and discontentment felt by large parts of the country". Naxal movement highlights various underlying weaknesses of India's governance, political institutions and socio-economic disparity. It has succedded to spread its network to 240 districts in 15 states, the author said.

"Given this socio-economic alienation, it is easy to see how the Naxalite's ideology is popular among the rural poor and indigenous tribes in India," said Shad, who is a linguist and specializes in India's domestic politics.

However, some argue that Naxalites are not concerned about the socio-economic welfare of the poor and are simply using them as a means to seize political power, he added. "It is an amazing fact that India, having one of the fastest growing economies in the world, and being the most populous democracy, is facing several resistance movements," Shad said.

During question answer sessions the participants agreed that to comprehensively dissolve the Naxalite-like threats, the governments of India and Pakistan should address root causes of uprising and resistance movements. Socio-economic alienation and dissatisfaction with the widening economic and political inequality will not be solved by military foce alone, they said.

U.S. trucking funds reach Taliban, military-led investigation concludes

A year-long military-led investigation has concluded that U.S. taxpayer money has been indirectly funneled to the Taliban under a $2.16 billion transportation contract that the United States has funded in part to promote Afghan businesses.

The unreleased investigation provides seemingly definitive evidence that corruption puts U.S. transportation money into enemy hands, a finding consistent with previous inquiries carried out by Congress, other federal agencies and the military. Yet U.S. and Afghan efforts to address the problem have been slow and ineffective, and all eight of the trucking firms involved in the work remain on U.S. payroll. In March, the Pentagon extended the contract for six months.

According to a summary of the investigation results, compiled in May and reviewed by The Washington Post, the military found "documented, credible evidence . . . of involvement in a criminal enterprise or support for the enemy" by four of the eight prime contractors. Investigators also cited cases of profiteering, money laundering and kickbacks to Afghan power brokers, government officials and police officers. Six of the companies were found to have been associated with "fraudulent paperwork and behavior."

"This goes beyond our comprehension," said Rep. John F. Tierney (D-Mass.), who last summer was chairman of a House oversight subcommittee that charged that the military was, in effect, supporting a vast protection racket that paid insurgents and corrupt middlemen to ensure safe passage of the truck convoys that move U.S. military supplies across Afghanistan.

The military summary included several case studies in which money was traced from the U.S. Treasury through a labyrinth of subcontractors and power brokers. In one, investigators followed a $7.4 million payment to one of the eight companies, which in turn paid a subcontractor, who hired other subcontractors to supply trucks.

The trucking subcontractors then made deposits into an Afghan National Police commander's account, already swollen with payments from other subcontractors, in exchange for guarantees of safe passage for the convoys. Intelligence officials traced $3.3 million, withdrawn in 27 transactions from the commander's account, that was transferred to insurgents in the form of weapons, explosives and cash.

A senior U.S. defense official said that a radically revised transport system, replacing the Host Nation Trucking contract when it expires in September, will be announced in a few weeks. Based on the findings of the investigation, the new contract will expand the number of companies from eight to at least 30 and change the security system for the truck convoys. It will require detailed information on all subcontractors and supervision by military units in the field rather than headquarters-based contracting officers.

In the meantime, interim steps have been taken to improve oversight and accountability within the murky web of companies and individuals involved in the shipment of more than 70 percent of all U.S. military food, fuel, weapons and construction material within Afghanistan, said the official, who was authorized to discuss the issue only on the condition of anonymity.

"It's still ugly," the official said. "But it's getting better."

Problems with local vendors

Unlike in Iraq, where the U.S. military favored using American contractors who made millions providing security, reconstruction and training, local hires have performed the bulk of those tasks in Afghanistan. During the first quarter of this fiscal year, the U.S. military's Central Command reported that 53 percent of more than 87,000 contract personnel it employed in Afghanistan were locals.

The U.S. Agency for International Development and the State Department together signed nearly 1,000 contracts with non-U.S. vendors in Afghanistan last year.

The employment, under a government-wide policy called Afghan First, is an integral part of the Obama administration's counterinsurgency strategy and calls for promoting Afghan capabilities, businesses and infrastructure.

The extensive military use of contractors for tasks such as transport, security and construction is also designed to free U.S. troops for warfighting and, in most cases, is deemed far less expensive than using American resources.

But "awards to local vendors in Afghanistan pose particular challenges," according to a General Accountability Office report issued last month, because of the large size of the U.S. effort, the great distances that must be traveled on often-dangerous roads and "the potential for fraud, corruption, or the siphoning of funds to organizations hostile to U.S. forces."

The GAO report concluded that the number of contracts was so huge that it was impossible to vet them all, and it recommended assessing only the most risky. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the State Department, the GAO said, have no vetting system in Afghanistan, and the Defense Department's practice is to vet contractors only after contracts have been issued.

The GAO noted that one Defense Department vetting system averages 15 vendors per week and would take until March 2012 to vet the 1,042 Afghan vendors awarded new military contracts in fiscal 2010. The estimate did not include a backlog of contracts from previous years or any contract valued at less than $100,000.

Weak contractor oversight

Massive amounts of food, fuel and warfighting material are needed to support U.S. troops in Afghanistan; their number has more than tripled to about 100,000 since President Obama took office. Most supplies are brought by ship to neighboring Pakistan and transported by truck to central military depots in Afghanistan.

From there, the goods are trucked to hundreds of military installations across the country, usually along desolate stretches of road controlled by or vulnerable to attack from warlord militias and Taliban insurgents. Moving the supplies requires 3,000 to 4,000 trucks per week.

Six of the eight companies chosen as prime contractors under the Host Nation Trucking contract are owned by Afghans or are joint Afghan-international ventures. Two are considered U.S.-owned, including the Washington-based Sandi Group and NCL Holdings, whose founder and president, Hamed Wardak, is the son of Afghanistan's defense minister. The new investigation, conducted by a military-led task force that included officials from the FBI, Treasury and U.S. intelligence, did not identify which of the companies are implicated in payments to insurgents, nor does it quantify how much money has been misspent or transferred to insurgents.

Wardak, in an interview last year, denied that his company was involved in any kickbacks or indirect payments to insurgents. The Sandi Group did not respond to requests last week for comment.

For the life of the contract - one year, with options for a second year and the recently exercised six-month extension - each company was guaranteed a minimum of $250,000 and a maximum of $360 million. U.S. expenditure was capped at $2.16 billion, although less than $600 million had been paid out through March.

Prime contractors were responsible for furnishing up to 600 trucks and protecting them. But five of the eight prime contractors had no trucks of their own, two had fewer than 200, and all hired subcontractors to provide security, according to the investigation. From the start, the companies have served largely as brokers atop scores of subcontractors.

As early as the summer of 2009, amid frequent reports that subcontractors and middlemen were paying contract money to warlords and the Taliban to guarantee safe passage for the convoys, U.S. Army investigators prepared a briefing for senior commanders that bore the blunt title "Host Nation Trucking Payments to Insurgents." Investigators estimated that the going rate for protection was $1,500 to $2,500 per truck, paid by contractors and their subs to private Afghan security companies allied with warlords or insurgents - or, in some cases, directly to militias or Taliban commanders.

The military maintained that federal contracting rules did not require, and by some interpretations prohibited, a close look below the level of prime contractors. Investigating the relationships behind the kickbacks and protection rackets would have been expensive, time-consuming and difficult. Many military officials in charge of overseeing the contracts were reluctant to disturb the status quo, believing it was far more important that food, fuel and bullets for U.S. forces were delivered intact and on time.

"These people should be fired and sent home," the senior defense official said of the military overseers. "The attitude is crazy - it's okay to pay the enemy because then we have better snacks" if the convoys travel unimpeded. "I think everybody gets that now."

Concern in Washington

In the fall of 2009, problems with the trucking contract were discussed during a closed-door review by the administration of its war strategy. That December, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton and then-Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates voiced public concern that the United States was funding the very people it was fighting against in Afghanistan.

Since then, Afghan and U.S. officials have made changes on the margins as they tried to unravel the complicated web of actors and track the money. In Afghanistan, President Hamid Karzai pledged to disband all private security contractors and form a new government security force to guard supply convoys, but implementation has been slow.

In Washington, impatient lawmakers began their own investigations. In early 2010, Tierney charged the military with foot-dragging in its response to the subcommittee's request for "all documents related to HNT security." In May, after the military refused to turn over the 2009 briefing prepared by Army investigators, Tierney wrote a letter of complaint to Gates.

The document was supplied in June, along with a redacted copy, in which most or all of every page was blacked out, that the Defense Department deemed suitable for public disclosure. A department lawyer wrote Tierney to warn of "serious consequences" for what were still "open criminal investigations" and "for our relationship with the government and people of Afghanistan" if the unredacted document was publicly revealed.

Last summer, after the release of the House subcommittee report, the then-U.S. commander in Afghanistan, Gen. David H. Petraeus, appointed task forces to investigate contracting and corruption, including Task Force 2010, which carried out the investigation of the trucking contract. In September, he released new guidelines making commanders accountable for monitoring contracts within their areas of responsibility.

The next month, a separate Senate Armed Services Committee investigation into contracting confirmed the House report, concluding that the military had only minimal knowledge of - and exercised virtually no control over - the thousands of Afghans contracted to guard its installations and supply convoys.

Both reports identified the security wing of the Watan group, a business conglomerate run by relatives of Karzai, as involved in bribing officials for control over convoy routes and making payments to Taliban commanders. In the most substantive action by the military, Watan was barred in December from receiving new U.S. contracts. But it has contested the action in court, denying the allegations, and has been allowed to continue its security work so the company could "fully exercise due process," the senior defense official said.

The House and Senate have adopted measures this year, attached to fiscal 2012 defense spending legislation, giving military commanders additional powers to investigate and cancel contracts in which insurgent ties have been found.

Tierney, now the top minority member of the national security subcommittee of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, voiced sharp criticism of the length of time it took the military-led task force to reach the same conclusions that lawmakers made public a year ago.

"I would hate like hell to think my kid was over there" and the Taliban was "coming after them with something bought with our taxpayers' money," Tierney said.

Norwegian mass killer's manifesto hails Hindutva

Goals of Indian Hindu nationalists were identical to Justiciar Knights, Anders Breivik claimed

Norwegian mass killer Anders Behring Breivik hailed India's Hindu nationalist movement as a key ally in a global struggle to bring down democratic regimes across the world.

'2080: A European declaration of independence' lays out a road map for a future organisation, the Justiciar Knights, to wage a campaign that will graduate from acts of terrorism to a global war involving weapons of mass destruction - aimed at bringing down what Breivik calls the "cultural Marxist" order.

India figures in a remarkable 102 pages of the sprawling 1,518-page manifesto. Breivik's manifesto says his Justiciar Knights "support the Sanatana Dharma movements and Indian nationalists in general." In section 3.158 of the manifesto, he explains that Hindu nationalists "are suffering from the same persecution by the Indian cultural Marxists as their European cousins."

"Appeasing Muslims"


The United Progressive Alliance government, he goes on, "relies on appeasing Muslims and, very sadly, proselytising Christian missionaries who illegally convert low caste Hindus with lies and fear, alongside Communists who want total destruction of the Hindu faith and culture."

Even though Hindus who are living abroad "get an eagle's view of what's happening in India, Indian Hindu residents don't see it being in the scene."

Breivik's manifesto applauds Hindu groups who "do not tolerate the current injustice and often riot and attack Muslims when things get out of control," but says, "this behaviour is nonetheless counterproductive."

"Instead of attacking the Muslims, they should target the category A and B traitors in India and consolidate military cells and actively seek the overthrow of the cultural Marxist government."

"It is essential that the European and Indian resistance movements learn from each other and cooperate as much as possible," he concludes. "Our goals are more or less identical."

Lists websites


Breivik lists the websites of the Bharatiya Janata Party, the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, the National Volunteers' Organisation, the Akhil Bharatiya Vidyarthi Parishad and the Vishwa Hindu Parishad as resources for further information.

The manifesto pledges military support "to the nationalists in the Indian civil war and in the deportation of all Muslims from India." This is part of a larger campaign to "overthrow of all western European multiculturalist governments" and evict "U.S. military personnel on European soil."

India is one of several countries - including Russia, the Philippines, China and Thailand - where Breivik hopes his successors will fight.

He uses the work of historians K.S. Lal and Shrinandan Vyas to point to the threat posed by Islam to Europe, saying their work has established that millions of Hindus were killed in a genocide during 1000-1525 AD. N.S. Rajaram, another historian, is quoted as saying India's "political class have been so debilitating that they continue to live in a state of constant fear."

Breivik's manifesto envisages that this future organisation would hand out a "multi-cultural force medal," which would be awarded for "military cooperation with nationalist Hindu, Buddhist, Jewish and/or atheist forces (non-European) on Hindu, Buddhist or Jewish territory. These efforts must be directed against Jihadi or cultural Marxist forces, personnel or interests."

The medals would include a "Liberation of India Service Medal," which would be awarded for "assisting Indian nationalist forces to drive out Islam from Indian territory."

Breivik's Indian-made combat badges, revealed by The Hindu as having been contracted to a workshop in Varanasi, were the first in this series of battle decorations.

His manifesto acknowledges that lives will be lost in the war, and calls for the organisation to "provide and subsidise a standard edition of the Justiciar Knight tombstone" for those who fell in battle.

Since a "European tombstone carver, preferably specialised in traditional tombstone architecture, is likely to charge more than 5000-10000 Euro in order to create the stone," Breivik suggested that "producers in low-cost countries should be contacted for the task of creating one or multiple stones in the future."

He acknowledged that this "might sound hypocritical considering the fact that cultural conservatives in general oppose Indian or Chinese membership in [the] WTO and the fact that we generally prefer in-sourcing as many industries as possible. However, conserving our funds is a central part of our struggle."

Even though Breivik's Knights would fight shoulder to shoulder with Hindu nationalists, his vision for their rights in a post-revolutionary Europe is limited. The manifesto envisages the creation of a "servant class," made up of non-Muslim individuals from Bangladesh, Pakistan and India.

"During their stay," the manifesto envisages, "they will work 12 hours a day for the duration of their contracts (6 or 12 months) and are then flown back to their homelands." "These individuals," it goes on, "will live in segregated communities in pre-defined areas of each major city."

Norway Massacre: 9 years of meticulous Planning

Ever since Anders Behring Breivik fired the opening volley of the shooting spree that took the lives of at least 85 youngsters on the small Norwegian island of Utøya on Friday, every few hours has brought some new shock.

The latest revelation is that the 32-year-old Norwegian appears to have spent nine years planning the massacre. This, at least, is the claim in an extraordinary 1,500-page document Mr Breivik published on the internet a few hours before the first part of his two-pronged attack-the bombing of a government complex in Oslo.

Mr Breivik's manifesto exposes his preparations as meticulous and obsessive. According to his own testimony he spent several years earning money to finance the attacks. He moved into his mother's apartment to save money on rent and gradually distanced himself from friends and relatives in order to avoid suspicion.

During this time he read and contributed to far-right and Islamophobic websites, and spent many hours learning how to build a bomb.

He stage-managed his own image, taking dozens of self-portraits in which he appears in a variety of uniforms-police, paramilitary and traditional Norwegian costume-and publishing them online. His preparations for these photos included visits to tanning salons and beauty parlours.

The final phase involved leasing an isolated farmhouse. This gave him solitude, an excuse for buying the huge amount of fertiliser he needed for the bomb, and a barn big enough to store it.

Mr Breivik went to elaborate lengths to conceal his purpose. People who wanted to visit were told he was busy with the summer harvest, though he knew nothing of farming. He was apparently content to let a rumour circulate that he had dropped out of circulation in shame over a homosexual affair.

Mr Breivik's manifesto-"2083. A European Declaration of Independence"-also provides some insight into his motivations. His ideology appears to be a form of reactionary Christian fundamentalism, fuelled by hatred of Islam, Marxism and non-whites.

Page after page detail his thoughts on politics and society. He rails against the European Union, the United Nations and other transnational organisations. Norwegian politicians are castigated: the right-wing Progress Party (to which he once belonged) is condemned as too tame and the ruling Labour Party comes in for particularly vicious attack.

Mr Breivik's hatred has stunned Norwegians. The country has a proud reputation as an international peace-broker, is home to the Nobel peace prize and has scant appetite for rightist radicalism. Even during its heyday under the Nazi occupation, Vidkun Quisling's fascist Nasjonal Samling Party mustered no more than 2.5% of the vote. In 2009's general election, the neo-Nazi party Vigrid won just 179 votes.

The only serious far-right violent incident in recent years was the murder, in 2001, of Benjamin Hermansen, the 15-year-old son of a Norwegian mother and Ghanaian father. Two members of BootBoys, a neo-Nazi group, were convicted of the killing.

Following the murder anti-racism rallies took place throughout Norway, with some 40,000 people joining a candlelit procession through Oslo's streets. This year, on the tenth anniversary of the murder, 5,000 people gathered for a vigil.

Far-right extremists have kept a low profile in recent years. Norway's intelligence services have warned of a potential threat, but the population and the media were more focused on the possibility of Islamist violence.

What far-right activity there was seems to have occurred online. And although these were monitored by intelligence agencies, Mr Breivik's determined attempts to conceal his plans appear to have ensured he stayed under the radar until it was too late.

Israel ponders new options in response to Palestinian UN bid

A team headed by National Security Adviser Ya'akov Amidror is looking into calling off the Oslo Accords in response to the Palestinian Authority's unilateral plan to gain United Nations recognition for an independent state.

The Prime Minister's Bureau confirmed yesterday only that the NSC was discussing many alternatives ahead of September, and would be presenting them to the political echelon for a decision when it was done.

sraeli officials did confirm that recent discussions held by Amidror had mentioned the option of voiding the Oslo Accords. However, this is not considered a leading alternative, they said.

"It is one of the options that will be presented to the political echelon," a source said.

Meanwhile, the PA is continuing its preparations ahead of the UN General Assembly meeting in September. Palestinian ambassadors who met in Istanbul over the past two days were informed that a meeting on the final draft of the UN resolution would be held in Doha, Qatar, with representatives of the PA, Qatar, Egypt and Saudi Arabia on August 4.

The resolution will call on the United Nations to recognize a Palestinian state within the 1967 borders as a full UN member.

The Palestinian diplomats were instructed to launch a public relations campaign among international Jewish communities, in an attempt to explain the significance of the move.

Meanwhile, Israel is working to rally support from states to oppose the UN move. It is also making preparations for the "day after."

A senior Israeli official said that three weeks ago, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told Amidror to start drafting day-after plans with other government bodies. These include recommending a potential Israeli political response.

Skirting the Security Council

Israeli officials believe the Palestinians will skirt the Security Council and will appeal directly to the General Assembly, in order to avoid a potential American veto. The Palestinian proposal is expected to receive the backing of more than 140 UN members.

Another senior Israel official noted that Amidror has started initial discussions at the NSC with representatives from the foreign, defense, finance, industry and trade, and justice ministries, as well as from the Israel Defense Forces Planning Bureau and the Military Advocate General's Department of International Law.

The NSC asked the various government offices to consider the implications of Israel announcing that it considers the Oslo Accords void due to the unilateral Palestinian move, should the General Assembly approve the bid.

Israel is concerned that the Palestinians may use the General Assembly resolution in order to launch a legal fight in the International Court at the Hague, or to try to alter the economic and security arrangements reached over the past 18 years.

NSC officials told representatives of the various government and military bodies that Israel would not initiate such a move, but may do so in response to the Palestinian actions. The various bodies were asked to present their views and legal opinions, and to offer possible responses. The matter has still not been discussed by the ministers.

"Netanyahu is opposed to actions such as annexing settlements to Israel in response to a Palestinian move at the UN," said an Israeli source familiar with the discussions. "Therefore, the NSC is evaluating other possibilities, one of them being voiding the Oslo Accords. In any case, there is no decision yet."

The Oslo Accords between Israel and the PLO were struck between 1993 and 1995, and are the legal framework for the relationship between Israel and the Palestinian Authority in matters including security, economy and infrastructure.

Doing away with the accords would require reexamining key issues, primarily the status of the PA in the West Bank.

Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman had mentioned doing away with the Oslo Accords during a meeting with European Union High Representative Catherine Ashton on June 17.

Even though Lieberman supports such a response to a unilateral Palestinian move, officials at the Foreign Ministry consider such action "counterproductive."