IS SINGH KING?
[info]pakistanpal

GREG MATTHEWS-007

Prime Minister Singh of India came to Washington, was feted as expected and has left after the usual bland joint communiqué was issued. Indian spin masters and the paid hacks in the US think tanks and media is now busy turning a non-event into an event but there are limits to which you can go with a damp squib. The US media has been somewhat restrained and busy with the new Obama strategy on Afghanistan.

Much is being made of India-US cooperation in the Asia-Pacific region. The US has been and is a strong presence there and it has excellent bilateral relations with the countries in the region. It is India that is worming itself there on US coat tails. The countries in the region have duly noted Indian ambitions and will no doubt have their own views and reactions. The US does not need US-Ind in AS-PAC nor do the regional countries-they would like to trade and interact with India on their own terms.

India is equating itself with the US and trying to forge a 'space partnership'. Does the US need India for this? How will others see this cooperation? An unpopular and largely condemned India-US Civil Nuclear Technology Agreement that is seen as country specific and discriminatory should not lead to more destabilizing ventures.

Read Complete Article : http://gregmatthews007.newsvine.com/_news/2009/11/26/3548856-is-singh-king


Singh Obama monomania and the Jai Shri Ram mantra
[info]pakistanpal

Fatima Rizvi

The Lok Sabha's last session was indeed an indecorous sight to see as the Home Minister finally tabled Liberhan's Commission Report re-establishing criminal involvement of India's political leadership in burning down the Babri Mosque and thus leading the country to the brink of communal discord, as the report describes it.

On the television screens could be seen two of the legislators leaping at BJP membership benches from where a roar of Jai Shri Ram had ensued (Victory to Lord Ram, a common slogan used by ultra-right Hindu Nationalist groups) while the report was being tabled during the session. The report declared some of the political heavyweights from Hindu extremist parties (among them the then ruling party BJP) culpable for the demolition of Janambhoomi Babri Masjid on December 6, 1992. It declared active or passive involvement of cadres of RSS, BD, VHP, BJP and SS along with their leaders who were present at the spot, in support of the demolition.

This could however not be seen by some in Mumbai as Shiv Saniks (SS) had attacked a TV channel in Vikhroli and had thrashed the staff members rendering the channel incapable of operationalizing for quite some time . The attackers had barged inside the building and had destroyed equipment and furniture, while beating up journalists and staff members.

Read Complete Article : http://rohit-kumar.newsvine.com/_news/2009/11/26/3549003-burning-dome-


BURNING DOME
[info]pakistanpal

It was the evening of India's horror, and its memory and images refuse to go away even one year after the event. The terrorist attack on Mumbai on the evening of November 26, 2008, is an event that imposed itself on the nation's memory because of the sheer daring of the attackers, the destruction and killing they carried out, and the slow reactions of the Indian State and its various law-enforcing agencies in counteracting the terrorists and rescuing those who had been held hostage in the two principal hotels of Mumbai. These factors should not deflect attention from the fact that the event also saw acts of great heroism, fortitude, sacrifice and human kindness. The nation's character had been put to the test, it seems in retrospect. The State had been found wanting; the common soldier and policemen and ordinary men and women doing their duty had emerged triumphant.

That last sentence might appear to be a bit harsh on the State, which after all had finally rescued the hostages, killed or apprehended the terrorists and restored a semblance of normalcy. But one cannot reflect on the event without reckoning with the colossal intelligence failure it represented. The operation must have taken months of planning, and India's spook establishments were either ignorant or unprepared. It took the State a few hours to wake up to the enormity of what was happening: the National Security Guards and the commandos reached Mumbai nine hours after the violence had occurred. The official version continues to be that only 10 men perpetrated the horror without any local collaboration. Even before the recent revelations about the activities of David Headley, doubts had been raised about the claim that the terrorists had no local links. Those collaborators were allowed to melt into the multitude of Mumbai and have not been heard of since.

The most important aspect the attack highlighted was India's vulnerability to terrorist attacks from within and without the country. Even after one year, this sense of vulnerability has not disappeared; if anything, the sense of impending doom has been aggravated. That there has been no repetition of Mumbai offers no comfort. One reason for this is that every single terrorist attack on India originates in Pakistan. Sometimes, the attacks exhibit pug marks that point to the direct involvement of the Pakistan government or its ubiquitous intelligence agency, the ISI. The Indian government is at its wits' end to counter this terror primarily because no one, leader, party or military, seems to be in control in Pakistan, a country held at ransom by Islamic fundamentalists. The attack on Mumbai showed that India is condemned to be a threatened State because its western neighbour is a terror State.


Army capable of fighting terror war, says COAS
[info]pakistanpal

PESHAWAR: Chief of the Army Staff (COAS) General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani has said the nation is fighting the war against terrorism like a solid rock and every citizen has matchless spirit of making his contribution in efforts to curb the menace faced by the country.



He expressed these views while addressing the convocation of the seventh batch of the Khyber Institute of Technical Education (KITE) here on Wednesday. Corps Commander Lt-Gen Muhammad Masood Aslam, high ranking officials, tribal elders and students of the KITE were present on the occasion.

The COAS said the nation will succeed in overcoming the menace of terrorism as the whole country was fighting this war like a strong wall. Gen Kayani said the achievement of the Pakistan Army in Swat and Waziristan reflected professional competence of the country's force. He also highly appreciated the role played by the police force and paramilitary forces in fighting the war against terrorism. The Army chief also lauded the role of tribesmen who, he said, had always played a positive role for the integrity and solidarity of the country.

Gen Kayani clarified the military operation in Waziristan was not against any tribe of the Fata, but was totally aimed at eliminating the anti-state elements, who were playing with the lives of innocent people for destabilising Pakistan. He said the training being imparted to tribesmen through the KITE would play an effective role in the development of Fata. Addressing a ceremony held at the Police Lines in Peshawar, meanwhile, Kayani paid rich tributes to the Frontier police for their invaluable sacrifices in the war against terrorism. He said the Army has the capability and the capacity to fight the war against terrorists and the sacrifices rendered by the Army reflects the level of their morale.

He highly praised the courage and patience of the Peshawarites and added that the whole world had lauded the courage and sacrifices of the people of Peshawar. He said the terrorists' attacks and bomb blasts were expected in the country as a reaction to the ongoing successful operation of the Army in the South Waziristan Agency.

Kayani reiterated his resolve that peace would be restored in the country and in Peshawar at any cost. He said the Army would continue its cooperation with the Frontier Police and added that even if the Army had to cut down its enrolment for the training of the Frontier Police, he would do that.

General Kayani said he would present a cheque to the NWFP Inspector General Police to cater for the weapons and ammunition needed for the Frontier police. Earlier, he announced Rs 20 million for the Frontier Police Shuhada Fund and met with the injured police officials and with their parents. Meanwhile, General Kayani also visited the bomb blast victims at the Lady Reading Hospital.


America Between Morality and Imperialism in Afghanistan
[info]pakistanpal

by Muqtedar Khan

On November 5th, I had the privilege of testifying to the House Armed Services Sub-Committee on Oversight and Investigations. These hearings are part of the lengthy ongoing deliberations in Washington D.C. searching for a new direction in Afghanistan. The Hearing was chaired by Chairman Dr. Vic Snyder (D-Ark) and Ranking Member Rob Whitman (R-VA).

The panel was divided. Half the participants were pro-surge and advised the government to honour General Stanley McChrystal's request and send in additional US troops to Afghanistan, and the other half did not believe that another surge would help. The pro-surge view was based on several assumptions that were in my opinion debatable. This view saw the possibility of Pakistan's nuclear weapons ending up in the hands of radical groups as the most pressing of US national interests in the Afpak theatre and they felt that this threat justified intensive and extended US presence in the region.

The pro-surge view did not see an exit from Afghanistan on the near horizon. They felt that the threat of the collapse of Pakistani state to the resurgent Taleban justified indefinite US military commitment to Afghanistan. The advocates for sending more troops did not make operational distinctions between Pakistan and Afghanistan and between the Taleban in Afghanistan and the Taleban in Pakistan. It was a similar absence of nuance that got us into unnecessary wars in the first place.

They want the US to stay in Afghanistan and build a state with an army and a police force that can achieve for the US what NATO and the US military have so far failed to do - secure Pakistan and Afghanistan, defeat Taleban in both countries, defeat or contain Al Qaeda and establish democracy. In principle these are laudable goals but unfortunately the American public does not have an appetite for a prolonged commitment to Afghanistan. President Obama is already talking of an exit strategy. What needs to be done there, we are no more inclined to do; and what we are doing is only making things worse. My recommendation was to exit Afghanistan as soon as possible. The Taleban have never threatened the US and they have neither the reach, nor the intention to attack us. The same is true of Taleban in Pakistan. Our enemy is Al Qaeda and we must focus our attention 
on Al Qaeda.

As far as extremism and intolerance in the area is concerned, let those who suffer from it most fight it first. We should be willing to help those who strive for democracy and aspire for prosperity. But let them demonstrate their desire for freedom first before we rush to assist them. The current attitude of armies and populations in Afghanistan and Pakistan leaves much to be desired. It is obvious that we want democracy for them more than they do.

US and NATO military presence in Afghanistan constitutes a provocation that intensely agitates not only many Afghans and Pakistanis but also many Muslims elsewhere. Muslims in the area continue to view US intentions with suspicion and are very angry with the number of civilian casualties that are caused by US and NATO operations. Scaling down US presence will help in refocusing the attention of the people of the region on their indigenous problems, away from US occupation, and perhaps motivate them to work towards stability.

There was a moment during the Hearing, when I was caught off guard by a very poignant question by Chairman of the committee Dr. Vic Snyder. "What is America's moral obligation in Afghanistan?" he asked. Honestly, I did not expect that question. After witnessing the Congress do very little for eight years as horrifying event after horrifying event unfolded; Abu Ghraib, torture, Guantanamo, renditions to just name a few; I didn't think morality had a cache on the hill. I salute Vic Snyder for not only raising the issue but for making it the central theme of 
his investigations.

America's moral obligations to Afghanistan date back to 1989, when we walked away leaving behind the world's poorest and most underdeveloped nation to deal with the culture of war that we had fostered to win the cold war. America's moral obligation is to the families of each and every innocent civilian we accidentally kill. America's moral duty is to leave Afghanistan better than it was before it 
encountered us.

But unfortunately, morality like imperialism is a commodity that America can no longer afford in Afghanistan.

Muqtedar Khan, Director of Islamic Studies at the University of Delaware and a Fellow of the Institute of Social Policy and Understanding


Pak Moving her Forces from Western to Eastern Border?
[info]pakistanpal

Zaheerul Hassan

Reliable sources stated that Pakistani authorities have decided to move her forces from Western to Eastern border. The move of forces would start soon. The decision has been taken after receiving the threat from Indian Army Chief General Deepak Kapoor to strike Pakistan on November 22, 2009. Indian Chief warned that a limited war under a nuclear overhang is still very much a reality at least in the Indian sub-continent. On November 23, 2009 Pakistan Foreign Office Spokes man Abdul Basit asked the world community to take notice of remarks passed by the Indian Army Chief. He also said that India has set the stage and trying to impose a limited war on Pakistan. There are reports that Indian intelligence agencies have made a plan to hit some Indian nuke installation, alleging and then striking Pakistan.

Indian Chief's statement by design came a day earlier to Manmohan Singh visit to USA. The purpose of threatening Pakistan could also be justifying future Indian attack on Pakistan. Therefore, Islamabad concern is serious in nature since any Indian misadventure will put the regional peace into stake and would lead both the country towards nuclear conflict. Islamabad probably conveyed her ally (USA) regarding danger of limited war against Pakistan; she has to cease her efforts on western border for repulsing Indian aggression on eastern border. In fact, Indian government and her army chief made a deliberate try to sabotage global war against terror. In this connection Pakistan Army Spokesman Major General Athar Abbas time and again said that India is involved in militancy against Pakistan and her consulates located in Afghanistan are being used as launching pad.

It is worth mentioning here that Pakistan has deployed more than 100,000 troops on the border with Afghanistan and is fighting a bloody war against terrorism. Her security forces are busy in elimination of foreign sponsored militancy. Thousand of soldiers have scarified their lives not only for the motherland but to bring safety to the world in general. Pakistan is a key ally in the war on terror and the threat of withdrawal would alarm the USA as it could seriously hamper NATO troops fighting in Afghanistan. Pakistan is a nuclear power too and is able to handle any type of Indian belligerence.

In this context, earlier Pakistan Army Chief of Staff General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani has categorically expressed at number of occasions that Indian attack would be responded in full strength while using all types of resources. On November 25, 2009 General Kayani stated that the nation would emerge as victorious in the on-going war against extremism. While addressing a ceremony at Police Lines he paid rich tributes to the Frontier police for their valuable sacrifices in the war against terrorism. At this occasion General Kayani revealed that Pakistan was founded in the name of Islam by our forefathers and each one of us should work for strengthening the country and should made commitment towards achieving the goal of turning the country into a true Islamic state. He also announced Rs.20 million for the Frontier Police Shuhada Fund.

In response to Indian Army Chief' statement he also put across the message that the protection and solidarity of the country are our main objectives as our coming generation owes this debt to us and resolved that any threat to the sovereignty and integrity of the country would not be tolerated. The General made it clear that Pak Army has the capability and the capacity to fight the war against terrorists and adversary too. He praised the sacrifices rendered by the security forces and high morale of the troops. Lt General Masood Aslam, Commander 11 Corps, IGFC Major General Tariq and IGP NWFP Malik Neveed Khan were also present at this historic moment.

Pakistan Army Chief visits of western border reflect his commitment to root out the foreign sponsored militancy from the area. This rooting out is directly helping global war on terror, whereas on the other hand his counter part (Indian Chief) keep on yelling and dreaming of striking Pakistan. He probably has forgotten that Pakistan is a responsible nuke power and capable to defend and strike. In 2001 and 2008 at the occasions of attacks on parliament and Mumbai, both the nations close to a nuke war, this was averted by interference from the world community India and USA. At that time too security officials have also told NATO and USA that they will not leave a single troop on the western border incase of Indian threat.

Pakistan is facing a serious economic crisis and terrorist attacks present most serious threat to the country's internal security. The political and military leadership knows that it is not an ideal situation for them to go for war, but they would not be having any choice to defend the country if threatened by India. Moreover they would be justified in moving her forces from her western to Eastern front. USA, if serious in elimination of global militancy then she has to ask India to resolve regional issues with the neighbouring countries instead of trying to hijack the war against terror. American think tanks should also review the remarks of Indian Army Chief Gen Deepak Kapoor in the light of India's offensive nuclear doctrine. The doctrine of a fake nuke power (Indian) reflect the hazardous and aggressiveness of nuclear theory and prediction of third World War.

In the wage of above debate, the world community and USA should ask India to stop fanning terrorism. USA should review the nuke deal with a fake nuclear power prior of signing NPT and CTBT. Foreign Office Spokesman Abdul Basit also quite right in saying that India's dangerous and offensive nuclear doctrine is serious hazard to global peace. It is true that also that India has long been working on the so-called 'Cold Start' strategy and preparing for a limited war. Thus, Pakistan has to pay more attention on her Eastern front under the prevailing adverse security environment and Indian General Kapoor's threat to her.

Zaheerul Hassan is keen follower of the developments in the region. He writes regularly for Opinion Maker.


Pakistan: The South Waziristan Offensive Continues
[info]pakistanpal

A Pakistani army soldier guards his South Waziristan post Nov. 18 as he watches internally displaced civilians fleeing from military operations against Taliban militants

Summary

Inspector-General of the Pakistani Frontier Corps Maj. Gen. Tariq Khan said Nov. 24 that South Waziristan would be split into two separate agencies. The statement comes nearly six weeks into a Pakistani military offensive to root out Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) forces from their stronghold in South Waziristan, and will form part of Pakistan's political strategy to maintain alliances with neutral tribal leaders and prevent the Taliban from re-entrenching themselves in the region.

Analysis

The military offensive Rah-i-Nijat is entering its sixth week of ground operations in South Waziristan. The Pakistani army has been fighting through a section of South Waziristan home to the Mehsud tribe that was, until recently, the center of operations for the Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP). The military has employed a strategy of attacking this area from three directions: Jandola-Sararogha, Shakai-Kaniguram and Razmak-Makeen. Each axis has led to the capture of major roads and major population centers in the area - objectives that deny militants mobility and sanctuary.

The military has not completely consolidated its control over the area - militant ambushes, mortar and improvised explosive devices (IED) attacks continue. However, the military has captured and cleared the major population centers of Sararogha, Kaniguram and Makeen, and is now moving to other strategic population centers such as Ladha (where there is a fort that was taken by the TTP in 2008) and Janata, as well as clearing smaller villages outside of the larger towns.



It is important to emphasize that military operations are ongoing and that the Pakistani forces deployed to South Waziristan will be tied up there for some time. Presently, there is no withdrawal plan and the military has not indicated when operation Rah-i-Nijat will conclude. This also means that internally displace persons (IDPs) in South Waziristan will continue to be without homes for a while. However, the total IDPs resulting from Rah-i-Nijat number around 300,000 - much more manageable for the government than the nearly 2 million IDPs that resulted from Rah-i-Rast, the May 2009 military operation in the Swat Valley.

Pakistan, however, still faces many challenges, including how it can mitigate the dispersion of soldiers and prevent the TTP from simply re-establishing itself outside of South Waziristan. Even before military operations began, many of the high-level TTP commanders were believed to have fled to other areas of Pakistan, so it is key that the militant threat does not return and re-establish itself as soon as the military operations end. By the nature of non-state groups like the Taliban, leaders are elusive, so capturing or killing all of them is extremely difficult, but disrupting their bases of operations will likely weaken their power and frustrate their objectives against the Pakistani state.

In addition to the South Waziristan, the army has also paid considerable attention to the northern Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) agencies of Bajaur, Orakzai, and Khyber, where pre-existing Taliban allies remain strong and have likely attracted at least some fleeing militants from South Waziristan. Militants in Bajaur Agency continue to engage the Pakistani army, and as recently as Nov. 22, the army killed 16 militants in an operation there that was part of the larger mission of preventing the spread of militant fighters. Despite recent success against militants in Bajaur, Islamabad still faces belligerents there.

Meanwhile, in Orakzai Agency (which was the home of current TTP leader Hakeemullah Mehsud before he took over following Baitullah Mehsud's death), the Pakistani air force has conducted a sustained air campaign against several militant positions and killed scores of militants. However, it is clear that the TTP and its militant allies have maintained their capability to attack the Pakistani state, as seen by the string of attacks since Rah-i-Nijat began.

Additionally, Pakistani ground forces and helicopter gunships have been patrolling Khyber Agency to protect the major route that is used to supply NATO and U.S. troops in Afghanistan as well as deny militants a sanctuary from which they can strike at nearby Peshawar. Lashkar-i-Islam (LI) in collaboration with the TTP is likely responsible for recent attacks in Peshawar. Even though LI is more oriented toward organized crime and making money by smuggling goods into Afghanistan, it has an interest in allying with the TTP (which it has been in competition with) in order to resist the state's offensive.



The Nov. 24 announcement that South Waziristan will be divided and politically administered as two separate agencies (raising the number of agencies in FATA from seven to eight) is also part of Islamabad's strategy to maintain order in South Waziristan once the military mission there is complete. The specific geographical split is not yet clear, but it will largely divide the Mehsud and Waziri tribal areas. The Mehsud area is in the center of South Waziristan, where the TTP has its largest presence and, consequently, where the Pakistani military has launched operation Rah-i-Nijat. The Waziri tribal area (largely under the control of Taliban warlord Maulvi Nazir Ahmad) is located primarily in the west along the border with Afghanistan.

Maulvi Nazir and the Waziri tribes located along the Afghan border have cooperated with Islamabad by remaining neutral before and during the execution of Rah-i-Nijat. Nazir's forces are more concerned with fighting Western forces in Afghanistan and have not taken up arms against Islamabad. The understanding reached between Islamabad and Nazir was an effort to divide forces in South Waziristan in order to isolate the TTP and its leadership from neighboring tribes, whose combined resistance to the Pakistani military would have frustrated their mission. Splitting South Waziristan agency in two would be a continuation of the strategy to divide control of the geographically difficult-to-govern territory in order to weaken remaining TTP elements. This also would have put the TTP's area of operation under Islamabad's direct control without unnecessarily impeding upon other actors in the region (like the Waziris) whom Islamabad is wary of further alienating.

Islamabad is considering several options to govern South Waziristan and FATA in general after Rah-i-Nijat. First, FATA may lose its autonomous status and become another province, which would give Islamabad more control over the area's governance and services. Another option would be to follow the recent example of Gilgit-Baltistan in the north, which is not a new province but will now be responsible for its own regional executive, legislature and judiciary. FATA could also be incorporated into the North-West Frontier Province (NWFP) and its governing structures assimilated into the NWFP's government (which is much more closely controlled than FATA). Regardless of what happens, it will be quite some time before military control on the ground can permit effective political changes that would drastically alter the way the area is governed.

The federal government is responsible for these decisions, which is itself suffering from destabilizing disputes like the one surrounding the National Reconciliation Ordinance - a highly controversial piece of legislation that granted amnesty to politicians accused of corruption and other criminal activity, many of whom are part of the current government.

But for now, the Pakistani military is still occupied with the task of securing the area and preventing the TTP from taking back what it has lost. The future success of this offensive depends upon the outcome of the political battle in Islamabad over the NRO, which will be heating up once the legislation expires on Nov. 28.


“I Just Cant Stop Failing”: Agni Missile of India
[info]pakistanpal

PKKH

Indian Agni Missile test Failed again? Yes, again. This should not be a surprise for anyone, most of India's Missiles don't work and are just dead weights shooting out hot air and nothing else. Al Hamdullillah Pakistan has always done successful Missile Tests, and Inshallah in future we will do successful tests as well.

Defense scientists and military commanders today downed shutters, with each of the authorities denying responsibility after the failure of an Agni II missile that was being tested last night. This is the second failure of the 2000km-range nuclear-capable missile this year after claims by the defence establishment that it was inducted by the armed forces five years back. The missile was said to have been proven by the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) before the army took possession for deployment in 2004.

It was developed by the DRDO's Advanced Systems Laboratory, Hyderabad, and integrated by the defence public sector unit Bharat Dynamics Ltd in association with private companies. DRDO sources said they could not comment because the Agni II now belonged to the Strategic Forces Command (SFC), which was conducting the trial.

Military sources said, however, that DRDO scientists were monitoring the test and that they would be able to explain what had happened after an investigation that could take up to two weeks.

The SFC is a unified command of the three armed forces that reports to the Nuclear Command Authority headed by the Prime Minister. The SFC is the custodian of nuclear weapons and their delivery systems. DRDO sources said they could not comment because the Agni II now belonged to the SFC. Military sources said DRDO scientists were monitoring the test and they will be able to explain what happened after an investigation that could take up to two weeks.

A scientist said the missile was launched successfully but went off its pre-set trajectory about a minute after lift-off when it was at a height of about 20km. The missile has a two-stage thrust, the first lasting about 60 seconds and the second about 50 seconds. The possibility is that the second-stage booster did not fire in the way it was expected to. Strangely, the last failure, in May, was also said to be at the second stage. On that occasion, when the missile was fired at 10.06 in the morning, it did not travel the full distance.

"The Indian Scientists and engineers could not figure out the problem of second stage failure in six months yet they went ahead with another failed test."

Visual evidence from last night, said the scientist, suggests the missile fell into the Bay of Bengal off Wheeler's Island, near Orissa's Balasore.

The Agni series of missiles is part of the DRDO's Integrated Guided Missile Development Programme (IGMDP) first headed by A.P.J. Abdul Kalam. The Agni III with a range of 3,500km failed a test in 2007.


Pakistan: The South Waziristan Offensive Continues
[info]pakistanpal

A Pakistani army soldier guards his South Waziristan post Nov. 18 as he watches internally displaced civilians fleeing from military operations against Taliban militants

Summary

Inspector-General of the Pakistani Frontier Corps Maj. Gen. Tariq Khan said Nov. 24 that South Waziristan would be split into two separate agencies. The statement comes nearly six weeks into a Pakistani military offensive to root out Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) forces from their stronghold in South Waziristan, and will form part of Pakistan's political strategy to maintain alliances with neutral tribal leaders and prevent the Taliban from re-entrenching themselves in the region.

Analysis

The military offensive Rah-i-Nijat is entering its sixth week of ground operations in South Waziristan. The Pakistani army has been fighting through a section of South Waziristan home to the Mehsud tribe that was, until recently, the center of operations for the Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP). The military has employed a strategy of attacking this area from three directions: Jandola-Sararogha, Shakai-Kaniguram and Razmak-Makeen. Each axis has led to the capture of major roads and major population centers in the area - objectives that deny militants mobility and sanctuary.

The military has not completely consolidated its control over the area - militant ambushes, mortar and improvised explosive devices (IED) attacks continue. However, the military has captured and cleared the major population centers of Sararogha, Kaniguram and Makeen, and is now moving to other strategic population centers such as Ladha (where there is a fort that was taken by the TTP in 2008) and Janata, as well as clearing smaller villages outside of the larger towns.



It is important to emphasize that military operations are ongoing and that the Pakistani forces deployed to South Waziristan will be tied up there for some time. Presently, there is no withdrawal plan and the military has not indicated when operation Rah-i-Nijat will conclude. This also means that internally displace persons (IDPs) in South Waziristan will continue to be without homes for a while. However, the total IDPs resulting from Rah-i-Nijat number around 300,000 - much more manageable for the government than the nearly 2 million IDPs that resulted from Rah-i-Rast, the May 2009 military operation in the Swat Valley.

Pakistan, however, still faces many challenges, including how it can mitigate the dispersion of soldiers and prevent the TTP from simply re-establishing itself outside of South Waziristan. Even before military operations began, many of the high-level TTP commanders were believed to have fled to other areas of Pakistan, so it is key that the militant threat does not return and re-establish itself as soon as the military operations end. By the nature of non-state groups like the Taliban, leaders are elusive, so capturing or killing all of them is extremely difficult, but disrupting their bases of operations will likely weaken their power and frustrate their objectives against the Pakistani state.

In addition to the South Waziristan, the army has also paid considerable attention to the northern Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) agencies of Bajaur, Orakzai, and Khyber, where pre-existing Taliban allies remain strong and have likely attracted at least some fleeing militants from South Waziristan. Militants in Bajaur Agency continue to engage the Pakistani army, and as recently as Nov. 22, the army killed 16 militants in an operation there that was part of the larger mission of preventing the spread of militant fighters. Despite recent success against militants in Bajaur, Islamabad still faces belligerents there.

Meanwhile, in Orakzai Agency (which was the home of current TTP leader Hakeemullah Mehsud before he took over following Baitullah Mehsud's death), the Pakistani air force has conducted a sustained air campaign against several militant positions and killed scores of militants. However, it is clear that the TTP and its militant allies have maintained their capability to attack the Pakistani state, as seen by the string of attacks since Rah-i-Nijat began.

Additionally, Pakistani ground forces and helicopter gunships have been patrolling Khyber Agency to protect the major route that is used to supply NATO and U.S. troops in Afghanistan as well as deny militants a sanctuary from which they can strike at nearby Peshawar. Lashkar-i-Islam (LI) in collaboration with the TTP is likely responsible for recent attacks in Peshawar. Even though LI is more oriented toward organized crime and making money by smuggling goods into Afghanistan, it has an interest in allying with the TTP (which it has been in competition with) in order to resist the state's offensive.



The Nov. 24 announcement that South Waziristan will be divided and politically administered as two separate agencies (raising the number of agencies in FATA from seven to eight) is also part of Islamabad's strategy to maintain order in South Waziristan once the military mission there is complete. The specific geographical split is not yet clear, but it will largely divide the Mehsud and Waziri tribal areas. The Mehsud area is in the center of South Waziristan, where the TTP has its largest presence and, consequently, where the Pakistani military has launched operation Rah-i-Nijat. The Waziri tribal area (largely under the control of Taliban warlord Maulvi Nazir Ahmad) is located primarily in the west along the border with Afghanistan.

Maulvi Nazir and the Waziri tribes located along the Afghan border have cooperated with Islamabad by remaining neutral before and during the execution of Rah-i-Nijat. Nazir's forces are more concerned with fighting Western forces in Afghanistan and have not taken up arms against Islamabad. The understanding reached between Islamabad and Nazir was an effort to divide forces in South Waziristan in order to isolate the TTP and its leadership from neighboring tribes, whose combined resistance to the Pakistani military would have frustrated their mission. Splitting South Waziristan agency in two would be a continuation of the strategy to divide control of the geographically difficult-to-govern territory in order to weaken remaining TTP elements. This also would have put the TTP's area of operation under Islamabad's direct control without unnecessarily impeding upon other actors in the region (like the Waziris) whom Islamabad is wary of further alienating.

Islamabad is considering several options to govern South Waziristan and FATA in general after Rah-i-Nijat. First, FATA may lose its autonomous status and become another province, which would give Islamabad more control over the area's governance and services. Another option would be to follow the recent example of Gilgit-Baltistan in the north, which is not a new province but will now be responsible for its own regional executive, legislature and judiciary. FATA could also be incorporated into the North-West Frontier Province (NWFP) and its governing structures assimilated into the NWFP's government (which is much more closely controlled than FATA). Regardless of what happens, it will be quite some time before military control on the ground can permit effective political changes that would drastically alter the way the area is governed.

The federal government is responsible for these decisions, which is itself suffering from destabilizing disputes like the one surrounding the National Reconciliation Ordinance - a highly controversial piece of legislation that granted amnesty to politicians accused of corruption and other criminal activity, many of whom are part of the current government.

But for now, the Pakistani military is still occupied with the task of securing the area and preventing the TTP from taking back what it has lost. The future success of this offensive depends upon the outcome of the political battle in Islamabad over the NRO, which will be heating up once the legislation expires on Nov. 28.


Shiv Sena attacks IBN offices, gloats
[info]pakistanpal

CNN-IBN

Mumbai: A group of 20-25 Shiv Sena activists attacked journalists and damaged property at the offices of IBN Lokmat and IBN7, the Marathi and Hindi news channels of the IBN Network, in north-east Mumbai's Vikhroli on Friday.

TAKING PRIDE IN SHAME: Shiv Sena leader says his workers attack on IBN Lokmat office justified.
TAKING PRIDE IN SHAME: Shiv Sena leader says his workers attack on IBN Lokmat office justified.

Several IBN Network journalists and other employees were beaten up and their clothes torn by the group. The attackers barged into the office at around 1600 hrs IST, slapped a woman receptionist and told employees that they would not accept reports criticizing the Shiv Sena.

Armed with sticks and bats, the attackers damaged furniture and fittings, glass partitions, OB (outdoor broadcasting) vans and electronic equipment. They threw a chair at Nikhil Wagle, IBN Lokmat's editor-in-chief, and tried to punch him.

"The attack was preplanned, they had come armed with sticks and iron rods for creating the mayhem in our offices. They hurled a chair at me," Wagle told media persons.

The Mumbai Police claimed they had arrested seven Shiv Sena workers for the attack.

Eight Shiv Sena workers were arrested in Pune for damaging an IBN7 OB van and pelting stones at the channel's office in the city.

Sandeep Chavan, a journalist with IBN Lokmat, said the attackers in Mumbai told employees they were looking for Wagle and wanted to "teach him a lesson". Chavan said the attackers were armed with iron rods, baseball bats and cricket wickets.

Maharashtra Chief Minister Ashok Chavan told Network18 the attackers will be punished.

"We had no idea that such a thing was going to happen. Whoever is responsible for this will be severely dealt with. Nobody has the right to assault journalists," said the Chief Minister.

"You will see action soon," Ashok Chavan told Network18.

Senior journalist Kumar Ketkar, whose house was attacked by Shiv Sena activists in January 2008, said political organisations attacked the media and others because they felt they can get away with it.

"This must be condemned by the entire media. Political institutions and the government of Maharashtra should be held responsible for stopping such acts," said Ketkar, executive editor of Marathi daily Loksatta.

The two channels have taken a tough stand against intolerant politics in the state. IBN Lokmat, the number one Marathi channel, has been vocal against the violence in the name of Marathi pride being witnessed in Maharashtra.

Shiv Sena Rajya Sabha MP Sanjay Raut, executive editor of party newspaper Saamna, admitted to the attacks and called them justified.

Rahul Narvekar, head of Shiv Sena's legal cell, refused to aplogise for the attacks and said his party was a defender of Marathi Asmita.


Blackwater's Secret War in Pakistan Revealed
[info]pakistanpal

Jeremy Scahill

An elite division of Blackwater plans targeted assassinations of suspected Taliban and Al Qaeda operatives in Pakistan. And everyone's denying it.

At a covert forward operating base run by the US Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC) in the Pakistani port city of Karachi, members of an elite division of Blackwater are at the center of a secret program in which they plan targeted assassinations of suspected Taliban and Al Qaeda operatives, "snatch and grabs" of high-value targets and other sensitive action inside and outside Pakistan, an investigation by The Nation has found. The Blackwater operatives also assist in gathering intelligence and help run a secret US military drone bombing campaign that runs parallel to the well-documented CIA predator strikes, according to a well-placed source within the US military intelligence apparatus.

The source, who has worked on covert US military programs for years, including in Afghanistan and Pakistan, has direct knowledge of Blackwater's involvement. He spoke to The Nation on condition of anonymity because the program is classified. The source said that the program is so "compartmentalized" that senior figures within the Obama administration and the US military chain of command may not be aware of its existence.

The White House did not return calls or email messages seeking comment for this story. Capt. John Kirby, the spokesperson for Adm. Michael Mullen, Chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told The Nation, "We do not discuss current operations one way or the other, regardless of their nature." A defense official, on background, specifically denied that Blackwater performs work on drone strikes or intelligence for JSOC in Pakistan. "We don't have any contracts to do that work for us. We don't contract that kind of work out, period," the official said. "There has not been, and is not now, contracts between JSOC and that organization for these types of services." The previously unreported program, the military intelligence source said, is distinct from the CIA assassination program that the agency's director, Leon Panetta, announced he had canceled in June 2009. "This is a parallel operation to the CIA," said the source. "They are two separate beasts." The program puts Blackwater at the epicenter of a US military operation within the borders of a nation against which the United States has not declared war--knowledge that could further strain the already tense relations between the United States and Pakistan. In 2006, the United States and Pakistan struck a deal that authorized JSOC to enter Pakistan to hunt Osama bin Laden with the understanding that Pakistan would deny it had given permission. Officially, the United States is not supposed to have any active military operations in the country. Blackwater, which recently changed its name to Xe Services and US Training Center, denies the company is operating in Pakistan. "Xe Services has only one employee in Pakistan performing construction oversight for the U.S. Government," Blackwater spokesperson Mark Corallo said in a statement to The Nation, adding that the company has "no other operations of any kind in Pakistan."

A former senior executive at Blackwater confirmed the military intelligence source's claim that the company is working in Pakistan for the CIA and JSOC, the premier counterterrorism and covert operations force within the military. He said that Blackwater is also working for the Pakistani government on a subcontract with an Islamabad-based security firm that puts US Blackwater operatives on the ground with Pakistani forces in counter-terrorism operations, including house raids and border interdictions, in the North-West Frontier Province and elsewhere in Pakistan. This arrangement, the former executive said, allows the Pakistani government to utilize former US Special Operations forces who now work for Blackwater while denying an official US military presence in the country. He also confirmed that Blackwater has a facility in Karachi and has personnel deployed elsewhere in Pakistan. The former executive spoke on condition of anonymity.

His account and that of the military intelligence source were borne out by a US military source who has knowledge of Special Forces actions in Pakistan and Afghanistan. When asked about Blackwater's covert work for JSOC in Pakistan, this source, who also asked for anonymity, told The Nation, "From my information that I have, that is absolutely correct," adding, "There's no question that's occurring."

"It wouldn't surprise me because we've outsourced nearly everything," said Col. Lawrence Wilkerson, who served as Secretary of State Colin Powell's chief of staff from 2002 to 2005, when told of Blackwater's role in Pakistan. Wilkerson said that during his time in the Bush administration, he saw the beginnings of Blackwater's involvement with the sensitive operations of the military and CIA. "Part of this, of course, is an attempt to get around the constraints the Congress has placed on DoD. If you don't have sufficient soldiers to do it, you hire civilians to do it. I mean, it's that simple. It would not surprise me."

The Counterterrorism Tag Team in Karachi

The covert JSOC program with Blackwater in Pakistan dates back to at least 2007, according to the military intelligence source. The current head of JSOC is Vice Adm. William McRaven, who took over the post from Gen. Stanley McChrystal, who headed JSOC from 2003 to 2008 before being named the top US commander in Afghanistan. Blackwater's presence in Pakistan is "not really visible, and that's why nobody has cracked down on it," said the source. Blackwater's operations in Pakistan, he said, are not done through State Department contracts or publicly identified Defense contracts. "It's Blackwater via JSOC, and it's a classified no-bid [contract] approved on a rolling basis." The main JSOC/Blackwater facility in Karachi, according to the source, is nondescript: three trailers with various generators, satellite phones and computer systems are used as a makeshift operations center. "It's a very rudimentary operation," says the source. "I would compare it to [CIA] outposts in Kurdistan or any of the Special Forces outposts. It's very bare bones, and that's the point."

Blackwater's work for JSOC in Karachi is coordinated out of a Task Force based at Bagram Air Base in neighboring Afghanistan, according to the military intelligence source. While JSOC technically runs the operations in Karachi, he said, it is largely staffed by former US special operations soldiers working for a division of Blackwater, once known as Blackwater SELECT, and intelligence analysts working for a Blackwater affiliate, Total Intelligence Solutions (TIS), which is owned by Blackwater's founder, Erik Prince. The military source said that the name Blackwater SELECT may have been changed recently. Total Intelligence, which is run out of an office on the ninth floor of a building in the Ballston area of Arlington, Virginia, is staffed by former analysts and operatives from the CIA, DIA, FBI and other agencies. It is modeled after the CIA's counterterrorism center. In Karachi, TIS runs a "media-scouring/open-source network," according to the source. Until recently, Total Intelligence was run by two former top CIA officials, Cofer Black and Robert Richer, both of whom have left the company. In Pakistan, Blackwater is not using either its original name or its new moniker, Xe Services, according to the former Blackwater executive. "They are running most of their work through TIS because the other two [names] have such a stain on them," he said. Corallo, the Blackwater spokesperson, denied that TIS or any other division or affiliate of Blackwater has any personnel in Pakistan.

The US military intelligence source said that Blackwater's classified contracts keep getting renewed at the request of JSOC. Blackwater, he said, is already so deeply entrenched that it has become a staple of the US military operations in Pakistan. According to the former Blackwater executive, "The politics that go with the brand of BW is somewhat set aside because what you're doing is really one military guy to another." Blackwater's first known contract with the CIA for operations in Afghanistan was awarded in 2002 and was for work along the Afghanistan-Pakistan border.

One of the concerns raised by the military intelligence source is that some Blackwater personnel are being given rolling security clearances above their approved clearances. Using Alternative Compartmentalized Control Measures (ACCMs), he said, the Blackwater personnel are granted clearance to a Special Access Program, the bureaucratic term used to describe highly classified "black" operations. "With an ACCM, the security manager can grant access to you to be exposed to and operate within compartmentalized programs far above 'secret'--even though you have no business doing so," said the source. It allows Blackwater personnel that "do not have the requisite security clearance or do not hold a security clearance whatsoever to participate in classified operations by virtue of trust," he added. "Think of it as an ultra-exclusive level above top secret. That's exactly what it is: a circle of love." Blackwater, therefore, has access to "all source" reports that are culled in part from JSOC units in the field. "That's how a lot of things over the years have been conducted with contractors," said the source. "We have contractors that regularly see things that top policy-makers don't unless they ask."

According to the source, Blackwater has effectively marketed itself as a company whose operatives have "conducted lethal direct action missions and now, for a price, you can have your own planning cell. JSOC just ate that up," he said, adding, "They have a sizable force in Pakistan--not for any nefarious purpose if you really want to look at it that way--but to support a legitimate contract that's classified for JSOC." Blackwater's Pakistan JSOC contracts are secret and are therefore shielded from public oversight, he said. The source is not sure when the arrangement with JSOC began, but he says that a spin-off of Blackwater SELECT "was issued a no-bid contract for support to shooters for a JSOC Task Force and they kept extending it." Some of the Blackwater personnel, he said, work undercover as aid workers. "Nobody even gives them a second thought."

The military intelligence source said that the Blackwater/JSOC Karachi operation is referred to as "Qatar cubed," in reference to the US forward operating base in Qatar that served as the hub for the planning and implementation of the US invasion of Iraq. "This is supposed to be the brave new world," he says. "This is the Jamestown of the new millennium and it's meant to be a lily pad. You can jump off to Uzbekistan, you can jump back over the border, you can jump sideways, you can jump northwest. It's strategically located so that they can get their people wherever they have to without having to wrangle with the military chain of command in Afghanistan, which is convoluted. They don't have to deal with that because they're operating under a classified mandate."

In addition to planning drone strikes and operations against suspected Al Qaeda and Taliban forces in Pakistan for both JSOC and the CIA, the Blackwater team in Karachi also helps plan missions for JSOC inside Uzbekistan against the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan, according to the military intelligence source. Blackwater does not actually carry out the operations, he said, which are executed on the ground by JSOC forces. "That piqued my curiosity and really worries me because I don't know if you noticed but I was never told we are at war with Uzbekistan," he said. "So, did I miss something, did Rumsfeld come back into power?"

Pakistan's Military Contracting Maze

Blackwater, according to the military intelligence source, is not doing the actual killing as part of its work in Pakistan. "The SELECT personnel are not going into places with private aircraft and going after targets," he said. "It's not like Blackwater SELECT people are running around assassinating people." Instead, US Special Forces teams carry out the plans developed in part by Blackwater. The military intelligence source drew a distinction between the Blackwater operatives who work for the State Department, which he calls "Blackwater Vanilla," and the seasoned Special Forces veterans who work on the JSOC program. "Good or bad, there's a small number of people who know how to pull off an operation like that. That's probably a good thing," said the source. "It's the Blackwater SELECT people that have and continue to plan these types of operations because they're the only people that know how and they went where the money was. It's not trigger-happy fucks, like some of the PSD [Personal Security Detail] guys. These are not people that believe that Barack Obama is a socialist, these are not people that kill innocent civilians. They're very good at what they do."

The former Blackwater executive, when asked for confirmation that Blackwater forces were not actively killing people in Pakistan, said, "that's not entirely accurate." While he concurred with the military intelligence source's description of the JSOC and CIA programs, he pointed to another role Blackwater is allegedly playing in Pakistan, not for the US government but for Islamabad. According to the executive, Blackwater works on a subcontract for Kestral Logistics, a powerful Pakistani firm, which specializes in military logistical support, private security and intelligence consulting. It is staffed with former high-ranking Pakistani army and government officials. While Kestral's main offices are in Pakistan, it also has branches in several other countries.

A spokesperson for the US State Department's Directorate of Defense Trade Controls (DDTC), which is responsible for issuing licenses to US corporations to provide defense-related services to foreign governments or entities, would neither confirm nor deny for The Nation that Blackwater has a license to work in Pakistan or to work with Kestral. "We cannot help you," said department spokesperson David McKeeby after checking with the relevant DDTC officials. "You'll have to contact the companies directly." Blackwater's Corallo said the company has "no operations of any kind" in Pakistan other than the one employee working for the DoD. Kestral did not respond to inquiries from The Nation.

According to federal lobbying records, Kestral recently hired former Assistant Secretary of State for Western Hemisphere Affairs Roger Noriega, who served in that post from 2003 to 2005, to lobby the US government, including the State Department, USAID and Congress, on foreign affairs issues "regarding [Kestral's] capabilities to carry out activities of interest to the United States." Noriega was hired through his firm, Vision Americas, which he runs with Christina Rocca, a former CIA operations official who served as assistant secretary of state for South Asian affairs from 2001 to 2006 and was deeply involved in shaping US policy toward Pakistan. In October 2009, Kestral paid Vision Americas $15,000 and paid a Vision Americas-affiliated firm, Firecreek Ltd., an equal amount to lobby on defense and foreign policy issues.

For years, Kestral has done a robust business in defense logistics with the Pakistani government and other nations, as well as top US defense companies. Blackwater owner Erik Prince is close with Kestral CEO Liaquat Ali Baig, according to the former Blackwater executive. "Ali and Erik have a pretty close relationship," he said. "They've met many times and struck a deal, and they [offer] mutual support for one another." Working with Kestral, he said, Blackwater has provided convoy security for Defense Department shipments destined for Afghanistan that would arrive in the port at Karachi. Blackwater, according to the former executive, would guard the supplies as they were transported overland from Karachi to Peshawar and then west through the Torkham border crossing, the most important supply route for the US military in Afghanistan.

According to the former executive, Blackwater operatives also integrate with Kestral's forces in sensitive counterterrorism operations in the North-West Frontier Province, where they work in conjunction with the Pakistani Interior Ministry's paramilitary force, known as the Frontier Corps (alternately referred to as "frontier scouts"). The Blackwater personnel are technically advisers, but the former executive said that the line often gets blurred in the field. Blackwater "is providing the actual guidance on how to do [counterterrorism operations] and Kestral's folks are carrying a lot of them out, but they're having the guidance and the overwatch from some BW guys that will actually go out with the teams when they're executing the job," he said. "You can see how that can lead to other things in the border areas." He said that when Blackwater personnel are out with the Pakistani teams, sometimes its men engage in operations against suspected terrorists. "You've got BW guys that are assisting... and they're all going to want to go on the jobs--so they're going to go with them," he said. "So, the things that you're seeing in the news about how this Pakistani military group came in and raided this house or did this or did that--in some of those cases, you're going to have Western folks that are right there at the house, if not in the house." Blackwater, he said, is paid by the Pakistani government through Kestral for consulting services. "That gives the Pakistani government the cover to say, 'Hey, no, we don't have any Westerners doing this. It's all local and our people are doing it.' But it gets them the expertise that Westerners provide for [counterterrorism]-related work."

The military intelligence source confirmed Blackwater works with the Frontier Corps, saying, "There's no real oversight. It's not really on people's radar screen."

In October, in response to Pakistani news reports that a Kestral warehouse in Islamabad was being used to store heavy weapons for Blackwater, the US Embassy in Pakistan released a statement denying the weapons were being used by "a private American security contractor." The statement said, "Kestral Logistics is a private logistics company that handles the importation of equipment and supplies provided by the United States to the Government of Pakistan. All of the equipment and supplies were imported at the request of the Government of Pakistan, which also certified the shipments."

Who is Behind the Drone Attacks?

Since President Barack Obama was inaugurated, the United States has expanded drone bombing raids in Pakistan. Obama first ordered a drone strike against targets in North and South Waziristan on January 23, and the strikes have been conducted consistently ever since. The Obama administration has now surpassed the number of Bush-era strikes in Pakistan and has faced fierce criticism from Pakistan and some US lawmakers over civilian deaths. A drone attack in June killed as many as sixty people attending a Taliban funeral.

In August, the New York Times reported that Blackwater works for the CIA at "hidden bases in Pakistan and Afghanistan, where the company's contractors assemble and load Hellfire missiles and 500-pound laser-guided bombs on remotely piloted Predator aircraft." In February, The Times of London obtained a satellite image of a secret CIA airbase in Shamsi, in Pakistan's southwestern province of Baluchistan, showing three drone aircraft. The New York Times also reported that the agency uses a secret base in Jalalabad, Afghanistan, to strike in Pakistan.

The military intelligence source says that the drone strike that reportedly killed Pakistani Taliban leader Baitullah Mehsud, his wife and his bodyguards in Waziristan in August was a CIA strike, but that many others attributed in media reports to the CIA are actually JSOC strikes. "Some of these strikes are attributed to OGA [Other Government Agency, intelligence parlance for the CIA], but in reality it's JSOC and their parallel program of UAVs [unmanned aerial vehicles] because they also have access to UAVs. So when you see some of these hits, especially the ones with high civilian casualties, those are almost always JSOC strikes." The Pentagon has stated bluntly, "There are no US military strike operations being conducted in Pakistan."

The military intelligence source also confirmed that Blackwater continues to work for the CIA on its drone bombing program in Pakistan, as previously reported in the New York Times, but added that Blackwater is working on JSOC's drone bombings as well. "It's Blackwater running the program for both CIA and JSOC," said the source. When civilians are killed, "people go, 'Oh, it's the CIA doing crazy shit again unchecked.' Well, at least 50 percent of the time, that's JSOC [hitting] somebody they've identified through HUMINT [human intelligence] or they've culled the intelligence themselves or it's been shared with them and they take that person out and that's how it works."

The military intelligence source says that the CIA operations are subject to Congressional oversight, unlike the parallel JSOC bombings. "Targeted killings are not the most popular thing in town right now and the CIA knows that," he says. "Contractors and especially JSOC personnel working under a classified mandate are not [overseen by Congress], so they just don't care. If there's one person they're going after and there's thirty-four people in the building, thirty-five people are going to die. That's the mentality." He added, "They're not accountable to anybody and they know that. It's an open secret, but what are you going to do, shut down JSOC?"

In addition to working on covert action planning and drone strikes, Blackwater SELECT also provides private guards to perform the sensitive task of security for secret US drone bases, JSOC camps and Defense Intelligence Agency camps inside Pakistan, according to the military intelligence source.

Mosharraf Zaidi, a well-known Pakistani journalist who has served as a consultant for the UN and European Union in Pakistan and Afghanistan, says that the Blackwater/JSOC program raises serious questions about the norms of international relations. "The immediate question is, How do you define the active pursuit of military objectives in a country with which not only have you not declared war but that is supposedly a front-line non-NATO ally in the US struggle to contain extremist violence coming out of Afghanistan and the border regions of Afghanistan and Pakistan?" asks Zaidi, who is currently a columnist for The News, the biggest English-language daily in Pakistan. "Let's forget Blackwater for a second. What this is confirming is that there are US military operations in Pakistan that aren't about logistics or getting food to Bagram; that are actually about the exercise of physical violence, physical force inside of Pakistani territory."

JSOC: Rumsfeld and Cheney's Extra Special Force

Colonel Wilkerson said that he is concerned that with General McChrystal's elevation as the military commander of the Afghan war--which is increasingly seeping into Pakistan--there is a concomitant rise in JSOC's power and influence within the military structure. "I don't see how you can escape that; it's just a matter of the way the authority flows and the power flows, and it's inevitable, I think," Wilkerson told the scribe. He added, "I'm alarmed when I see execute orders and combat orders that go out saying that the supporting force is Central Command and the supported force is Special Operations Command," under which JSOC operates. "That's backward. But that's essentially what we have today."

From 2003 to 2008 McChrystal headed JSOC, which is headquartered at Pope Air Force Base and Fort Bragg in North Carolina, where Blackwater's 7,000-acre operating base is also situated. JSOC controls the Army's Delta Force, the Navy's SEAL Team 6, as well as the Army's 75th Ranger Regiment and 160th Special Operations Aviation Regiment, and the Air Force's 24th Special Tactics Squadron. JSOC performs strike operations, reconnaissance in denied areas and special intelligence missions. Blackwater, which was founded by former Navy SEALs, employs scores of veteran Special Forces operators--which several former military officials pointed to as the basis for Blackwater's alleged contracts with JSOC.

Since 9/11, many top-level Special Forces veterans have taken up employment with private firms, where they can make more money doing the highly specialized work they did in uniform. "The Blackwater individuals have the experience. A lot of these individuals are retired military, and they've been around twenty to thirty years and have experience that the younger Green Beret guys don't," said retired Army Lieut. Col. Jeffrey Addicott, a well-connected military lawyer who served as senior legal counsel for US Army Special Forces. "They're known entities. Everybody knows who they are, what their capabilities are, and they've got the experience. They're very valuable."

"They make much more money being the smarts of these operations, planning hits in various countries and basing it off their experience in Chechnya, Bosnia, Somalia, Ethiopia," said the military intelligence source. "They were there for all of these things, they know what the hell they're talking about. And JSOC has unfortunately lost the institutional capability to plan within, so they hire back people that used to work for them and had already planned and executed these [types of] operations. They hired back people that jumped over to Blackwater SELECT and then pay them exorbitant amounts of money to plan future operations. It's a ridiculous revolving door."

While JSOC has long played a central role in US counterterrorism and covert operations, military and civilian officials who worked at the Defense and State Departments during the Bush administration described in interviews with The Nation an extremely cozy relationship that developed between the executive branch (primarily through Vice President Dick Cheney and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld) and JSOC. During the Bush era, Special Forces turned into a virtual stand-alone operation that acted outside the military chain of command and in direct coordination with the White House. Throughout the Bush years, it was largely General McChrystal who ran JSOC. "What I was seeing was the development of what I would later see in Iraq and Afghanistan, where Special Operations forces would operate in both theaters without the conventional commander even knowing what they were doing," said Colonel Wilkerson. "That's dangerous, that's very dangerous. You have all kinds of mess when you don't tell the theater commander what you're doing."

Wilkerson said that almost immediately after assuming his role at the State Department under Colin Powell, he saw JSOC being politicized and developing a close relationship with the executive branch. He saw this begin, he said, after his first Delta Force briefing at Fort Bragg. "I think Cheney and Rumsfeld went directly into JSOC. I think they went into JSOC at times, perhaps most frequently, without the SOCOM [Special Operations] commander at the time even knowing it. The receptivity in JSOC was quite good," says Wilkerson. "I think Cheney was actually giving McChrystal instructions, and McChrystal was asking him for instructions." He said the relationship between JSOC and Cheney and Rumsfeld "built up initially because Rumsfeld didn't get the responsiveness. He didn't get the can-do kind of attitude out of the SOCOM commander, and so as Rumsfeld was wont to do, he cut him out and went straight to the horse's mouth. At that point you had JSOC operating as an extension of the [administration] doing things the executive branch--read: Cheney and Rumsfeld--wanted it to do. This would be more or less carte blanche. You need to do it, do it. It was very alarming for me as a conventional soldier."

Wilkerson said the JSOC teams caused diplomatic problems for the United States across the globe. "When these teams started hitting capital cities and other places all around the world, [Rumsfeld] didn't tell the State Department either. The only way we found out about it is our ambassadors started to call us and say, 'Who the hell are these six-foot-four white males with eighteen-inch biceps walking around our capital cities?' So we discovered this, we discovered one in South America, for example, because he actually murdered a taxi driver, and we had to get him out of there real quick. We rendered him--we rendered him home."

As part of their strategy, Rumsfeld and Cheney also created the Strategic Support Branch (SSB), which pulled intelligence resources from the Defense Intelligence Agency and the CIA for use in sensitive JSOC operations. The SSB was created using "reprogrammed" funds "without explicit congressional authority or appropriation," according to the Washington Post. The SSB operated outside the military chain of command and circumvented the CIA's authority on clandestine operations. Rumsfeld created it as part of his war to end "near total dependence on CIA." Under US law, the Defense Department is required to report all deployment orders to Congress. But guidelines issued in January 2005 by former Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence Stephen Cambone stated that Special Operations forces may "conduct clandestine HUMINT operations...before publication" of a deployment order. This effectively gave Rumsfeld unilateral control over clandestine operations.

The military intelligence source said that when Rumsfeld was defense secretary, JSOC was deployed to commit some of the "darkest acts" in part to keep them concealed from Congress. "Everything can be justified as a military operation versus a clandestine intelligence performed by the CIA, which has to be informed to Congress," said the source. "They were aware of that and they knew that, and they would exploit it at every turn and they took full advantage of it. They knew they could act extra-legally and nothing would happen because A, it was sanctioned by DoD at the highest levels, and B, who was going to stop them? They were preparing the battlefield, which was on all of the PowerPoints: 'Preparing the Battlefield.'"

The significance of the flexibility of JSOC's operations inside Pakistan versus the CIA's is best summed up by Senator Dianne Feinstein, chair of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence. "Every single intelligence operation and covert action must be briefed to the Congress," she said. "If they are not, that is a violation of the law."

Blackwater: Company Non Grata in Pakistan

For months, the Pakistani media has been flooded with stories about Blackwater's alleged growing presence in the country. For the most part, these stories have been ignored by the US press and denounced as lies or propaganda by US officials in Pakistan. But the reality is that, although many of the stories appear to be wildly exaggerated, Pakistanis have good reason to be concerned about Blackwater's operations in their country. It is no secret in Washington or Islamabad that Blackwater has been a central part of the wars in Afghanistan and Pakistan and that the company has been involved--almost from the beginning of the "war on terror"--with clandestine US operations. Indeed, Blackwater is accepting applications for contractors fluent in Urdu and Punjabi. The US Ambassador to Pakistan, Anne Patterson, has denied Blackwater's presence in the country, stating bluntly in September, "Blackwater is not operating in Pakistan." In her trip to Pakistan in October, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton dodged questions from the Pakistani press about Blackwater's rumored Pakistani operations. Pakistan's interior minister, Rehman Malik, said on November 21 he will resign if Blackwater is found operating anywhere in Pakistan.

The Christian Science Monitor recently reported that Blackwater "provides security for a US-backed aid project" in Peshawar, suggesting the company may be based out of the Pearl Continental, a luxury hotel the United States reportedly is considering purchasing to use as a consulate in the city. "We have no contracts in Pakistan," Blackwater spokesperson Stacey DeLuke said recently. "We've been blamed for all that has gone wrong in Peshawar, none of which is true, since we have absolutely no presence there."

Reports of Blackwater's alleged presence in Karachi and elsewhere in the country have been floating around the Pakistani press for months. Hamid Mir, a prominent Pakistani journalist who rose to fame after his 1997 interview with Osama bin Laden, claimed in a recent interview that Blackwater is in Karachi. "The US [intelligence] agencies think that a number of Al-Qaeda and Taliban leaders are hiding in Karachi and Peshawar," he said. "That is why [Blackwater] agents are operating in these two cities." Ambassador Patterson has said that the claims of Mir and other Pakistani journalists are "wildly incorrect," saying they had compromised the security of US personnel in Pakistan. On November 20 the Washington Times, citing three current and former US intelligence officials, reported that Mullah Mohammed Omar, the leader of the Afghan Taliban, has "found refuge from potential U.S. attacks" in Karachi "with the assistance of Pakistan's intelligence service."

In September, the Pakistani press covered a report on Blackwater allegedly submitted by Pakistan's intelligence agencies to the federal interior ministry. In the report, the intelligence agencies reportedly allege that Blackwater was provided houses by a federal minister who is also helping them clear shipments of weapons and vehicles through Karachi's Port Qasim on the coast of the Arabian Sea. The military intelligence source did not confirm this but did say, "The port jives because they have a lot of [former] SEALs and they would revert to what they know: the ocean, instead of flying stuff in."

The Author cannot independently confirm these allegations and has not seen the Pakistani intelligence report. But according to Pakistani press coverage, the intelligence report also said Blackwater has acquired "bungalows" in the Defense Housing Authority in the city. According to the DHA website, it is a large gated community established "for the welfare of the serving and retired officers of the Armed Forces of Pakistan." Its motto is: "Home for Defenders." The report alleges Blackwater is receiving help from local government officials in Karachi and is using vehicles with license plates traditionally assigned to members of the national and provincial assemblies, meaning local law enforcement will not stop them.

The use of private companies like Blackwater for sensitive operations such as drone strikes or other covert work undoubtedly comes with the benefit of plausible deniability that places an additional barrier in an already deeply flawed system of accountability. When things go wrong, it's the contractors' fault, not the government's. But the widespread use of contractors also raises serious legal questions, particularly when they are a part of lethal, covert actions. "We are using contractors for things that in the past might have been considered to be a violation of the Geneva Convention," said Lt. Col. Addicott, who now runs the Center for Terrorism Law at St. Mary's University School of Law in San Antonio, Texas. "In my opinion, we have pressed the envelope to the breaking limit, and it's almost a fiction that these guys are not in offensive military operations." Addicott added, "If we were subjected to the International Criminal Court, some of these guys could easily be picked up, charged with war crimes and put on trial. That's one of the reasons we're not members of the International Criminal Court."

If there is one quality that has defined Blackwater over the past decade, it is the ability to survive against the odds while simultaneously reinventing and rebranding itself. That is most evident in Afghanistan, where the company continues to work for the US military, the CIA and the State Department despite intense criticism and almost weekly scandals. Blackwater's alleged Pakistan operations, said the military intelligence source, are indicative of its new frontier. "Having learned its lessons after the private security contracting fiasco in Iraq, Blackwater has shifted its operational focus to two venues: protecting things that are in danger and anticipating other places we're going to go as a nation that are dangerous," he said. "It's as simple as that."

Jeremy Scahill, an independent journalist who reports frequently for the national radio and TV program Democracy Now!, has spent extensive time reporting from Iraq and Yugoslavia. He is currently a Puffin Writing Fellow at The Nation Institute. Scahill is the author of Blackwater: The Rise of the World's Most Powerful Mercenary Army. His writing and reporting is available at RebelReports.com .


To Pentagon’s Pakistani Adviser Ahmed Rashid: What’s Wrong With Pakistan’s Interests?
[info]pakistanpal

The famous Afghan expert is now peddling his Pentagon bias as fair analysis. My question to him is this: fine if you justify US interest, but what's wrong if Pakistan has its interests too?

By AHMED QURAISHI
WWW.AHMEDQURAISHI.COM

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan-Mr. Ahmed Rashid's part-time job as an advisor to the US military on Afghanistan is beginning to overshadow his otherwise impeccable analysis.

As a journalist, Mr. Ahmed Rashid witnessed firsthand in Afghanistan the intrigues by several nations inside that country during the 1980s and '90s.

But here, in his BBC.com article titled, Pakistan conspiracy theories stifle debate , Mr. Rashid insists that the entire mess in Pakistan is self-inflicted and is free of any outside interest and influence.

His close contacts with Washington, and especially with the military establishment there, should not blind him to the clear signs of how Afghan soil is being used against Pakistan, and against its military to be more precise, in retaliation for the twisted perception that Pakistan is somehow behind the Afghan Taliban resurgence and the resulting US military and intelligence failures in that country.

While owning our part of the mess, we in Pakistan need to be very clear on those parts of the mess that the United States is responsible for.

Washington began its double game with Pakistan immediately after overthrowing the Afghan Taliban government.

The United States worked from the start to create a very anti-Pakistan setup in Kabul. The Indians have been given a lot of space in Afghanistan. In fact, parts of the US intelligence and military decided quite early in the Afghan campaign that Indian 'expertise' will shape American views on Afghanistan and on how to deal with Pakistan, in itself the first breach on the part of US over what was supposed to be a Pakistani-American alliance to stabilize Afghanistan. The composition of the puppet Afghan government, the collective punishment against the Pashtuns, and the way things panned out in the country over the past seven years support this conclusion.

Of course, the word 'signs' is an understatement now considering the piles of hard evidence that Pakistani political and military officials have been confronting the Americans with recently. This evidence proves American culpability in not only messing up Afghanistan but also Pakistan. This evidence includes material that shows how the Indians and Mr. Karzai's spymasters create and support terrorism against Pakistan. It also shows how CIA is turning a blind eye, and in some other instances actually supports terrorism inside Pakistan.

Yes, Pakistan and Pakistanis are responsible for creating a weak state, burdened by an unworkable form of democracy. We Pakistanis have created a situation that is now providing several openings for outsiders to wreak havoc inside our country and manipulate our politics.

The February 2008 elections in Pakistan could have been an opportunity for Pakistanis to reassert themselves and chart out a new course in domestic and foreign policies. Here again the United States and the United Kingdom colluded to force on Pakistanis one of the most corrupt and inept governments in the country's history.

As such, Washington and London are responsible for the latest political mess in Pakistan, since both helped create a secret 'deal' that resulted in forming a Pakistani government led by a dream team of Pakistan's most corrupt individuals.

Ethnic or religious insurgencies never existed in Pakistan before 2004. These insurgencies surfaced and gained momentum thanks to the mess in Afghanistan and the intrigues of some of our so called allies and friends.

This anti-Pakistan wave of terrorism armed and financed from the Afghan soil has an objective: the Pakistani military.

Pakistani military is too big and too strong for American and British plans for the region. In these plans, India is supposed to provide cheap or low cost soldiers and

For Mr. Rashid to simply dismiss legitimate Pakistani grievances is absurd, to say the least.

The second part of his op-ed is a passionate and at times desperate defense of the PPP government in Islamabad. Nothing surprising here. This government is even more pro-US than the Musharraf government. Mr. Rashid, of course, believes that any US plans for Afghanistan and the region supersede any conflicting - but legitimate - Pakistani interests.

By defending this Pakistani government and dismissing the legitimate Pakistani grievances that run contrary to US interest, Mr. Rashid betrays his own political bias, which he tries in this op-ed to peddle as fair and balanced analysis.

Pakistanis are fed up with fighting other people's wars and conforming to other people's agendas in the region.

Pakistan has its own agenda. This Pakistani agenda is rising up from this mess and is making itself felt in multiple ways. And this agenda will eventually supersede anything that foreign powers try to impose through unnatural means. It is better for Mr. Rashid and those who share his views to understand this before it is too late.


Manmohan Singh’s sojourn to USA
[info]pakistanpal

By Asif Haroon Raja

Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh will be on a visit to USA from 23 November onwards to hold wide ranging talks of mutual interest. The visit assumes significance since it is the first visit of any head of state to USA on the request of Obama Administration. The latter's endeavor would be to give a message to the world in general and China in particular that India is its strategic partner and a bulwark against China and hence deserves special handling and concessions.

In the wake of the planned visit, India had started to play upon issues of threats of nuclear and terrorism to India emanating from Pakistan. It was stated that another terrorist attack against India on the pattern of Mumbai was in the offing. Pakistan's linkage with Taliban was played up. Dissatisfaction on Pakistan's response to culprits of Mumbai carnage was drummed up. Pakistan was projected as a terrorist and a failing state. ISI and Pakistan Army were maligned. It was stated that Taliban were planning to attack Indian nuclear installation(s). All this was done to project Pakistan in worst possible light and to paint itself as an innocent victim of terror. Purpose is to hide RAW's clandestine operations against Pakistan.

Singh's primary endeavor will be to seek greater benefits and concessions from USA. Permanent seat in UNSC for India and more access to superior nuclear technology will be upper most. More importantly, poison the minds of Obama led Administration and others who matter against Pakistan. Spice will be sprinkled on existing doubts and apprehensions to widen chasm as well as mistrust between USA and Pakistan. Indian diplomatic staff in Washington coupled with Indian and Jewish lobbies in USA must have done their groundwork in energizing pro-Indian officials within Obama Administration, Congress, State Department, Senate and Pentagon and neutralized negative influences so as to make the visit a roaring success. The Jewish controlled media must have been fully tapped and charged up to project Indian viewpoint positively and to portray Pakistan poorly. Governed by age-old mindset, pro-Indian and anti-Pakistan Washington Post, New York Times, Wall Street newspapers, Times and Newsweek magazines in particular together with electronic media would come out with contrasting stories projecting India and Pakistan divergently. Jaundiced US media and think tanks have been continuously writing scandalous and cooked up stories about Pakistan military, ISI and nuclear program. Indo-US-Israeli-western rancorous propaganda campaign against Pakistan under a well orchestrated plan has been going on relentlessly for the last so many years and is still continuing to spit out venom. Conversely, India has been spared of US-western invectives and all its sins are covered up.

Sticking to its stance, no US newspaper would project Manmohan Singh in poor light. He would not be harried and embarrassed by asking pointed questions. The tone and tenor of Manmohan's visit has already been set by his interview to CNN on 22 November. In response to questions asked by the interviewer, he said Kashmir border cannot be redrawn, Pakistan has not done enough on Mumbai carnage, terrorism in Pakistan can spill into India, Pakistan is selective in its dealing with terrorists and would do only that much which suits its own interests and not that of USA or India, Pakistan continues to retain links with Afghan Taliban to cater for post US departure from Afghanistan, democracy in Pakistan is weak and Pak Army is the real strength which calls the shots, Indian record on nuclear is free of accidents and proliferation and as such it qualifies to draw maximum benefits from Indo-US nuclear accord.

After exchanging pleasantries and thanking Obama and his team for all the graces bestowed upon India, Manmohan would assure his hosts that India would remain beholden to USA and would look forward to act as its humble proxy to guard American regional interests with utmost loyalty and devotion. Praying for mutually sustaining ever lasting and ever growing Indo-US friendship, he will become somber and broach the touchy subject of Afghanistan. He would laud the good work done by US military in Iraq and in Afghanistan in trying to bottle the genie of terrorism which in his view affects USA, western world and India the most. He would urge Obama not to commit the mistake of quitting Afghanistan for another five years if not more otherwise all the sacrifices rendered would go waste. He will build up a frightening scenario to impress upon Obama that abandonment of Afghanistan at this crucial juncture would spell disaster for the whole region including India.

He will urge him not to trust monstrous Afghan Taliban and enter into any kind of negotiations and let them share power. With folded hands he would beseech Obama to quickly make up his mind and cede to the request of Gen Stanley McChrystal for additional 40,000 troops to steady the rocking boat of Afghanistan. This suggestion will be made in the hope of wining the goodwill of Gen Chrystal who has started to have serious reservations over the expanding and intrusive influence of India in Afghanistan having negative fallout effect on regional security. He will also put in a good word for Karzai led regime with whom India is having best of relations and is anti-Pakistan and urge Obama to continue with present arrangement irrespective of Karzai's compromised and weakened position because of fraudulent elections. He will reassure him that USA would not find a better alternative than Karzai and that given US patronage he would come out of the woods sooner than later. He will advise Obama not to consult untrustworthy Pakistan while rehashing new Afghan policy.

Having discussed Afghanistan he will then turn the course of his talks towards Pakistan and while doing so he would tend to become more gloomy and dejected. Instead of feeling sheepish and apologetic after RAW's blatant involvement in all the troubled spots of Pakistan getting thoroughly exposed, he would attempt to cover up by asserting that Pakistan is indulging in a vilification campaign to despoil the reputation and image of India. Terming the allegations as white lies, he would put up an innocent face saying it was not possible for RAW to indulge in covert operations from Afghanistan in the presence of military forces of 37 countries and five other intelligence agencies stationed there since late 2001. He would rouse his audience by stressing that Pakistan's frivolous allegations amounts to casting aspersions on USA and other allied countries that all are jointly indulging in cross border terrorism against Pakistan. He might quote the maxim of 'kettle calling the pot black' to lighten up the atmosphere. He will jokingly ask his hosts whether he looks like a terrorist or an abettor of terrorism.

He will whine that Pakistan has so far not taken any steps against Mumbai carnage despite India providing all possible evidence and giving names of the culprits. He will try to incite Obama that Pakistan's attitude is non-cooperative and defiant and has not paid any heed to US counsels in this regard. He will quote the example of Hafiz Saeed, whom India has declared as the master mind behind Mumbai attacks, having been let off by Pakistani courts. He will skip Indian negative and non-cooperative role in providing real evidence and refusing to carry out joint investigation or making available Ajmal Kasab, the lone witness in custody of Indian authorities either to Interpol or anyone from Pakistan for questioning. He will not disclose the series of steps taken by Pakistan to appease India and commencement of trial against seven members of Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT). In hushed and secretive tones he would whisper into the ears of Obama that RAW has found out that ISI is linked with LeT and Jaish-e-Muhammad (JM) and that it is in league with Afghan Taliban and Al-Qaeda and is surely abetting terrorism in Indian Held Kashmir (IHK) and in Afghanistan. To lend authenticity to his revelations he will hasten to add that even Mossad, MI-6, CIA, FBI and RAAM corroborate it.

He will whisper another lie fed to him by RAW that Muredke and Azad Kashmir have become dens of terrorist camps where terrorists are trained under the patronage of ISI and army and that infiltration into IHK has of late been stepped up. With trembling voice and eyes welled up with tears he would add that he has received intelligence that Pakistan is planning yet another Mumbai like attack in India. His voice almost choking, he would grudge that while India has been and still is the victim of terrorism, but Pakistan has the audacity to allege that India is indulging in terrorism in Balochistan, FATA, Swat and other parts of Pakistan. Continuing with his wailing, he will speak of insensitivity and heartlessness of Pakistani leaders that whereas India is seeking recommencement of peace talks which it had to perforce stall, Pakistan is indulging in blame game and is stubbornly rejecting genuine request of India that Pakistan should not allow its territory for cross border terrorism into India.

He will remind Obama of the negative role by Pakistan Army in the aftermath of traumatic Mumbai incident when it arrogantly stopped India from carrying out aerial strikes against terrorist camps in Pakistan and refused to listen to Adm. Mike Mullen, Gen Petraeus and Holbrooke. To project Pakistan as an aggressive state he would remind him how the defiant PAF had made the F-16s airborne to scare away Indian jets that were on a routine flight near Azad Kashmir and Muredke and how madly Pakistani troops had been rushed forward towards the eastern border and were all set to clash with Indian strike formations that had moved up only as a precautionary measure. He will also jog his memory about the perverse role played by Gen Kayani in disallowing the ISI to come under the wings of Rahman Malik led Ministry of Interior. With a sense of deep regret he would cry out that accomplishment of that plan would have clipped the wings of ISI for good and thus paved their way to reach up to their much sought nuclear treasure. Overwhelmed by feelings of sadness he will moan in pain that but for the ISI and Pak Army, they could have accomplished all their objectives by now. He will once again drill into the minds of US leadership that until and unless Pakistan army and the ISI are reined in, the security situation in the region will remain fluid and insecure.

Continuing with his anxiety ridden grievances, he will mutter his grave concerns about growing strength of Taliban in Pakistan, instability of Pakistan and vulnerability of Pakistan nuclear program. He will bring to light Indian fears about the possibility of extremist elements within Pak Army and nuclear establishments taking over nukes, emphasizing that such a threat was far more dangerous than threat from Taliban. He will try to scare his listeners by saying that in case some nukes are whisked away by these elements, they would use them against India, or American installations in Afghanistan. He will urge the attentive addressees that before the nukes fall into wrong hands; the US must act fast before it is too late. He will candidly point out that unless Pakistan is denuclearized and turned into a vassal state of India, it will not be possible for India to assume the role of a proxy super power of the region to protect US interests. He will inform them that but for softness of Obama Administration; Pakistan could have been netted by now. He will insist that provision of counter terrorism equipment to Pakistan Army would not only bolster its capability but would enable it to use the equipment against India. He will persist not to relent on laid down conditions in the Kerry-Lugar Bill and to ensure compliance in letter and spirit. He will express his unhappiness over the successes achieved by Pakistan Army against militant forces in Swat and South Waziristan giving his weird logic that the runaway militants are now homing towards India and IHK and a cause of great worry.

He will convey his concerns over US-China joint communiqué issued on Obama's maiden visit to Beijing in which it was stated that the two countries would help sort out Kashmir dispute. He will complain that rather than quizzing China about Dr AQ Khan's revelation on Chinese assistance in fuel and technology to Pakistan nuclear program, Obama chose to touch upon Kashmir which is integral part of India and over which there is no dispute and Bill Clinton as well as George W. Bush were in agreement with Indian contention. Obama might offer a lollypop of UNSC seat to India, for which Indian leadership is desperate, in return for an amicable settlement of Kashmir dispute acceptable to India, Pakistan and people of Kashmir. But Singh would insist upon UNSC seat as well as settlement of Kashmir dispute on Indian terms and speeding up of denuclearization and balkanization of Pakistan in return for India standing up as a bulwark against China.

Among several causes of defeat of Germany in 2nd World war, one reason was Hitler's wrong choice of Italy as an ally. Likewise, France was a liability for the Allied forces. USA is blindly and myopically trusting India which is well-known for its cunningness, selfishness, small-heartedness, falsehood, broken promises and double standards. It also has a poor track record of its military exploits be it wars with Pakistan and China, its misadventure in Sri Lanka, counter insurgency operations or UN missions. 1971 Indo-Pakistan war was a one-sided exercise with troops in which India enjoyed all the strategic, tactical, technical and administrative advantages and was fully supported by USSR while Pakistan suffered from countless limitations and handicaps.

India excels only in intrigues and machinations. To expect that India would stand up to Chinese challenge is like wishing for the moon. Eight years of close collaboration with India in Afghanistan should have been an eye opener for US leadership as to what it achieved and what all it lost. Like Israel, India too wouldn't mind if USA sinks in the quagmire of Afghanistan so that the two natural allies having far too many similarities emerge as future super powers. If the US leadership intoxicated with power has become tunnel-vision and its rational thinking has got blurred, isn't it high time for the saner elements among the Americans to guide their leaders and restrain them from committing Hara Kari. Likewise, shouldn't the saner elements in India rein in 2% cruel and callous Brahmans and 8% of their opportunist companions who are ruining the lives of 90% Indians living in utter misery?

Pakistanis have already taken up the challenge. They proved their resilience during the lawyers movement and are now eagerly demanding accountability of the corrupt and the criminals. The judiciary is reasserting its authority and independence to provide justice to all. Fully motivated Army is robustly fighting the scourge of terrorism and achieving commendable results. There is complete harmony within the three services and nuclear assets are in safe hands.

Vile propaganda has further steeled the resolve of guardians of nuclear arsenal to protect it from all evil forces at the peril of their lives. Civil-military relations are harmonious and the army looked at with respect. The general public braved load shedding in the scorching heat and shortage of commodities composedly. The people are putting up with almost daily acts of terrorism and back breaking price spiral courageously while lashkars in restive areas are combating the terrorists boldly. Hustle and bustle of cities goes on as usual. Mosques are getting crowded and God fearing Muslims pray five times seeking forgiveness of Almighty Allah and thanking Him for His bounties. They pray for those who have lost direction and fallen in the trap of our adversaries to revert to the righteous path. Political parties are getting together and shedding their traditional antagonism. Media is free and playing its role to highlight grey areas and to keep the people updated. It is this kind of awakening which is direly needed in USA and in India.

- Asian Tribune -


Forever war of the wind
[info]pakistanpal

MAX CLELAND

Every day I was in Vietnam, I thought about home. And, every day I have been home, I have thought about Vietnam. So said one of the millions of soldiers who fought there as I did. Change the name of the battlefield and it could have been said by one of the American servicemen coming home from Iraq or Afghanistan today.

Wars are not over when the shooting stops. They live on in the lives of those who fight them. That is the curse of the soldier. He never forgets.

While the authorities say they cannot yet tell us why an army psychiatrist would go on a shooting rampage at Fort Hood in Texas, we do know the sort of stories he had been dealing with as he tried to help those returning from Iraq and Afghanistan readjust to life outside the war zone. A soldier's mind can be just as dangerous to himself, and to those around him, as wars fought on traditional battlefields.

War is haunting. Death. Pain. Blood. Dismemberment. A buddy dying in your arms. The first time I saw the stilled bodies of soldiers dead on the battlefield is as stark and brutal a memory as the one of the grenade that ripped off my right arm and both legs.

No, the soldier never forgets. But neither should the rest of us. Veterans returning today represent the first real influx of combat-wounded soldiers in a generation. They are returning to a nation unprepared for what war does to the soul. Those new veterans will need all of our help. After America's wars, the used-up fighters are too often left to fend for themselves. Many of the hoboes in 'depression' were veterans of World War I. When they came home, they were labelled shell-shocked and discharged from the army too broken to make it during the economic cataclysm.

So it is again, with too many stories about veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan ending up unemployed and homeless. Figures from the Department of Veterans Affairs show that 131,000 of the nation's 24 million veterans are homeless each night, and about twice that many will spend part of this year homeless.

When we are at war, America spends billions on missiles, tanks, attack helicopters and such. But the wounded warriors who will never fight again tend to be put on the backburner.

This is inexcusable, and it comes with frightening moral costs. There are estimates that 35 percent of the soldiers who fought in Iraq will suffer post-traumatic stress disorder. I am sure the numbers for Afghanistan are similar. Researchers have found that nearly half of those returning with the disorder have suicidal thoughts. Suicide among active-duty soldiers is on pace to hit a record total this year. More than 1.7 million soldiers have served in Iraq and Afghanistan. Imagine that some 600,000 of them will have crippling memories, trapped in a vivid and horrible past from which they can't seem to escape.

We have a family 'army' today, unlike the army seen in any generation before. We have fought these wars with the Reserves and the National Guard. Fathers, mothers, soccer coaches and teachers are the soldiers coming home. Whether they like it or not, they will bring their war experiences home to their families and communities.

In his poem The Dead Young Soldiers, Archibald MacLeish, whose younger brother died in World War I, has the soldiers in the poem tell us: "We leave you our deaths. Give them their meaning." Until we help our returning soldiers get their lives back when they come home, the promise of restoring that meaning will go unfulfilled.

- Khaleej Times


Come, let’s burn a train
[info]pakistanpal

Anshul Chaturvedi

We just love it, don't we? I mean, the Indian tradition may look at fire as the ultimate purifying element, and we as a society are so much in love with the 'setting afire' reflex that we probably set alight more things - on Diwali, on Dussehra, even on the roadside as wedding processions go by - than anywhere else in the world. But what's with the reflex of stopping, smashing and burning trains, buses and assorted vehicles when we are 'upset' on any issue?

Arson and unchecked public violence can happen anywhere. That is not unique to India. What is getting unique to India is the complete legitimisation of such action - any such action where people collectively do what they individually would not dare to.

The problem with this is that we are legitimising the mindset that you can do what you want to, so long as you have enough 'upset' people who also want to do it - since all of them will get away with it collectively, while none of them may get away with it individually. The people who burn a train after asking the passengers to get down today because they have a grievance against the railways, may well burn a train without letting passengers get away tomorrow because they have an issue with them - on any grounds, communal, ethnic, ideological, whatever. The group that gathers to 'have fun' with a girl, and gets away laughing, will not worry too much when someone suggests a gangrape the next time. These are the natural next steps in anarchy, in 'teaching a lesson' or doing what you'd never do alone, through collective violence. Why should we provide the psychologically impotent their profound catharsis by ganging up in great numbers - increasingly at the exchequer's expense, at that?

But we don't say a word when this sort of thing happens, forget about taking action. The political class is mostly apologising to the rampaging crowds for whatever upset them, and requesting them to not burn any more. Now, I am not really a fan of all that Gandhi stood for, but when you look at Chauri Chaura, the man had the conviction - some would say stubbornness - to say, no, I am not with this brand of expressing your outrage at something. I will not support this, period.

Now, we are too keen not to offend the agitators. The ones who, for no reason whatsoever, suffered at their hands while all the drama lasted - the passengers violently pulled off a journey, the people pelted with stones simply because they happened to be at the wrong place at the wrong time, the staff shoved and beaten, the women pawed and pushed - are left to fend for themselves as some sort of collateral damage. It is utterly ridiculous.

When trains are burnt in Punjab, we appeal for peace and hope that the intra-faith tension will simmer down. But how was the issue being addressed by that route? When trains are burnt in Bihar, Mamatadi is quick to say, don't get angry with me, I didn't ask for the stoppages to be taken back. But Mamatadi, we expect you to get angry that trains are being torched, not say sorry to those torching them. Considering the number of demands there are for trains and stops nationally, if every refusal and withdrawal is handled this way, you won't have many trains left after the Great Railway Diwali is over. It is good to be an agitationist, but surely saluting any agitation so long as the people are emotionally upset isn't the way to govern, di ? The next time I'm emotionally upset since my train is sixteen hours late because of the fog or the rain, and begin to pelt stones at the station manager's cabin, will I get a letter asking me to maintain peace, or will the Railway Police promptly drag me off to the nearest cell? Why is my individual angst not worthy of consideration, pray?

It is NOT about the grudge, or what the issue that 'provoked' people was. When we hear the stories of a communal massacre of a few people caught in a hopeless dead end by hundreds of fanatics baying for their blood, a public disrobing and parading or pawing of a single woman caught in a crowd of dozens of hormonally challenged self-perceived studs, or people dragged out of buses and trains and kicked about by hoodlums seeking to maintain some sort of regional pride, we are only seeing the next stage of what we condone all the time. In fact I'm not sure if we even react to these things anymore. People get away with burning others alive, people get away with rape and brutal murder, people get away with arson, with practically anything - so long as it is done collectively. One hundred people do something and the police routinely files FIRs against "unknown elements" as if it were the Mossad or the ISI. Its bizarre.

Anyway, writing and recounting all this has got me emotionally charged up. I am upset at all that is going wrong around me. I don't think the government works. I don't think the common man is safe. I am aggrieved. I'm taking a break to go down to the New Delhi station, it's the closest. I need to express my emotional distress… Got a match, anyone?


Implications - Indian PM Visit to US
[info]pakistanpal

zameer36@gmail.com

Indian intelligence agencies launched a comprehensive media and psychological warfare against Pakistan prior to their Prime Minister Visit to USA. In this connection, New Delhi has raised numbers of issues to malign China, Pakistan, and its intelligence Agencies in her domestic communal conflicts. Indian started pretending them as a great victim of terrorism just to divert world attention from her ethnic problems.

Fortunately, now world community has somehow started recognizing ulterior Indian motives. In recent past, Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd has made it clear that he will not sell uranium to India. In a meeting with Indian Prime Minister, Rudd also stated that India's refusal to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty meant Australian would not sell it uranium, even though it had helped the Indian Government obtain materials to support its nuclear program. Australian government also sent back Indian students of physics.

On November 10, 2009 Indian Intelligence Team returned back to home after receiving shut up call just 14 days prior to her Prime Minister Visit to US. Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh started USA visit on November 23, 2009 he would also be meeting President Obama during his stay in Washington. The Indian team had rushed to Washington when FBI last month apprehended Dave Headley and Rana Tawassur. According to media, Indian authorities claimed that Dave Headly has been seen visiting her nuke plants. Indian investigators have alleged that terror plotters Dave Headley and Tahawwur Hussain Rana were in Pakistan when Mumbai was attacked on November 26 last year, raising further suspicion about their possible involvement in the conspiracy. Thus, to attract the world, Indian Union Home Ministry has put fresh security alerts for the country's nuclear installations. At the same time Canada has been asked by Indian authorities to provide more inputs on Headley`s accomplice.

In this context, Indian authorities stated that six nuke plants located at Narora in UP, Tarapur in Maharashtra, Kalpakkam in Tamil Nadu, Kakrapar in Gujarat, Kota in Rajasthan and Kaiga in Karnataka though properly guarded but were visited by Dave Headly. The stance of Indian authorities' reveals that Indian nuke security arrangements are too much poor and vulnerable. The nuke proliferation in India is undoubtedly on the peak. For example, the cases of abduction, murder of staff and scientists employed on the nuke plants and Uranium theft cases are yet to be resolved and proving big question mark to her nuke security. USA think tanks already objected former Bush polices in relation to civil nuke deal with India. They are also objecting that India has not yet signed CTBT and NPT.

Moreover New Delhi also remained as satellite of Russia. Its defence and mil culture is all based on Russian support. After disintegration of USSR she started looking towards America but Russia's hawks (India) would never go against her masters (Russian) . It is quite evident that India would fall back in the lap of Russia incase of any future world war because of her demographic and geopolitical needs. The questions arises that under the stated circumstances whether Obama and his team should make more nuclear deals with India? Should Indian prime minister be assisted and promised by USA in becoming veto power and permanent member of Security Council? Can American trust a country whose agencies are involved in Killing American and NATO's soldiers through fake Taliban? Can USA leadership push her nation in war against China just to protect Indian interest?

In fact above narrated hue and cry is a part of New Delhi's propaganda against Pakistan and China. The purpose of fresh Indian move and Manmohan Singh visit is to divert international community's attention from communal violence, and ethnic problems. She is cooking factious stories and creating hype for the last couple of month for the purpose of hiding ongoing Maoist's struggle for an independent state. The said moment has been spread in 20 states now. Similarly, Kashmiries have also been deprived for using their rights of self determination. In this connection China also stopped accepting Indian passport for Kashmiries. Instead of resolving border conflicts with Pakistan and China, New Delhi always alleged them for causing disturbance in the effected areas.

American leadership is aware of the facts that Indian serving army officers were involved in crushing Christians, Muslims and Sikhs. Lt Col Prohit and his others comrades are living examples of state brutality of India. On November 23, 2009 Indian Express and others leading newspapers also disclosed the involvement of Indian first line political leadership in destroying Babri Mosques and killing innocent Muslims. In this context, Indian Expressed stated that Liberhan Commission of Inquiry has indicted former Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee along with current Leader of Opposition in the Lok Sabha L K Advani and former BJP president Murli Manohar Joshi, among others, for the demolition of the Babri Mosque on December 6, 1992. The commission also stated that entire build-up to the demolition was meticulously planned.

The global political circle is viewing Indian prime minister visit in various perspectives like , (1) American president visit to China and South Korea is not being considered much successful (2) New Delhi's wishful regional aims and their effects on regional peace (3) containment of China and Pakistan (3) Indian try of becoming permanent member of security council (4) Indian troops to replace NATO and American forces in Afghanistan (5) Indian objective of hijacking war on terror (6) New Delhi assurance to guard American interest in the region and groom her economy. The stated perceptions show that in fact New Delhi is bluffing America. She is busy in state terrorism in Pakistan and others regional countries. Pakistan has shown great concern to American top brass regarding Indian intelligence involvement in unrest of FATA and other part of the countries. There are reports that CIA provided tacit support to Indian Intelligence Agency for destabilizing Pakistan and alleging ISI. AS per ANI on November 21, 2009 Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) chief Lt General Ahmed Shuja Pasha, during his meeting with Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) Director Leon Panetta, has reportedly presented evidence regarding India's hand in fanning terrorism in Balochistan and Waziristan.

Sources said General Pasha, during the meeting, expressed his disappointment over CIA's failure to provide credible information to Islamabad regarding the extremist groups working in Afghanistan to create trouble in Pakistan. CIA Director also holds meeting with President Zardari and Prime Minister Gilliani. During his meeting with CIA Director Leon Panetta made it clear to the US that al-Qaeda and the Taliban leaderships are not present in Pakistan. They also stated that the US leadership must share all kinds of information with Pakistan as it was not "our war" only. The president also stressed CIA chief to get US drone attacks in Pakistani tribal areas stopped.

President Obama if really interested in elimination of global terrorism then he has to convince Indian Prime Minister on, (1) stop fanning terrorism in Pakistan (2) American political leadership should carry out mediation between Indian and Pakistan on Kashmir issue (3) Indian active role in Afgnistan be condensed as bare minimum.(4) Investigation of murdering American and NATO troops be carried out (5) India should be asked to punish Col Prohit, LK Advani, Vajpai and others extremists Hindus for killing minorities and demolition of Babri Mosque (6) India should carry out the investigations of murder of nuke scientists (7) Indian-US Nuke deal should be reviewed in the light of Indian nuke proliferation (8) detailed inspection of Indian nuke plants be carried out as per IAEA's set procedures and Indio-US nuke civil deal. (9) India should not allowed to keep her forces in Afghanistan (10) minorities rights in India should be respected and state terrorism against them be stopped.


26/11: Questions That Need to be Posed & Answered
[info]pakistanpal

By B. Raman

The 26/11 terrorist attacks in Mumbai left many important questions unanswered, if not unposed.

What kind of intelligence was available----from the Indian as well as foreign agencies?

How and by whom were the reports analysed, assessed and disseminated?

Were the gaps in the available intelligence identified and was action taken to fill those gaps?

What follow-up action was taken on the available intelligence----however inadequate it might have been?

What action was taken to strengthen physical security----- hotel and coastal security---- in Mumbai keeping in view the fact that the available intelligence---even if general and not specific--- spoke of likely sea-borne attacks on hotels, the Taj Mahal Hotel being one of them?

Who co-ordinated the physical security measures in the Governments of India and Maharashtra?

Some media reports immediately after the attack had quoted a senior executive in the Taj Mahal Hotel as saying that security was strengthened in the hotel for some days before the attack, but was subsequently down-graded. Who took the decision to down-grade physical security? On what basis?

Who co-ordinated the investigation after the terrorist attacks? What was the role of the Government of India in the co-ordination?

Were the foreigners, who escaped from the custody of the terrorists, debriefed thoroughly after they were rescued before they were allowed to go back to their countries? Who debriefed them? Were the debriefings recorded in writing? Where are those notes kept?

If they were not debriefed, why? Was their being allowed to leave India without being debriefed due to negligence or was it the result of a conscious decision? If so, who took that decision?

Was a detailed reconstruction of the terrorist attacks made? Who made that reconstruction? What were the conclusions of that reconstruction?

On what basis did the police come to the conclusion that apart from the 10 Pakistani terrorists who came by sea from Pakistan, no other Pakistani accomplice was involved on the ground in Mumbai?

On what basis did the police come to the conclusion that apart from the two Indian Muslims arrested and prosecuted, there was no involvement of any other Indian Muslim?

On what basis did the police come to the conclusion that there was no evidence of any pre-9/11 reccee of the places attacked by the LET or its accomplices?

Did the police seize the guest registers of the hotels attacked, make out a list of persons of Pakistani origin who had stayed there in the months preceding the attacks and verify their background? If so, did the name of David Colemn Headley, who had reportedly stayed twice in the Taj Mahal Hotel, figure in that list? The fact that the Mumbai Police became aware of Headley's stay in the hotel only after they were tipped off by the FBI recently show that the registers were either not scrutinised or were scrutinised superficially.

Did the police seize the immigration records of the Mumbai airport to check the particulars of persons of Pakistani origin who had arrived in the days preceding the attacks and left in the hours following the attacks?

Were the investigators able to get any evidence beyond the confession of Kasab, the lone terrorist captured alive?

2. 26/11 in Mumbai was the most well-planned, well-organised and well-executed terrorist attack since 9/11 in the US. The National Commission appointed in the US made a detailed enquiry into the sins of commission and omission, which made 9/11 possible. Its report was debated in the US Congress and made available to the public. The relatives of US citizens killed by the 9/11 terrorist strikes mobilised themselves to ensure that there would be no cover-up, that the truth would be brought out and that follow-up action would be taken to identify and remove the deficiencies in the intelligence and physical security agencies.

3. The Government of India, by taking advantage of the apathy and confusion in the Bharatiya Janata Party, (BJP), has skilfully avoided any enquiry into the 26/11 terrorist attacks and diverted public attention away from its sins of commission and omission. The Government of Maharashtra did appoint an enquiry committee headed by S.D.Pradhan, former Home Secretary, but its report has been classified and not shared with the legislative assembly and the public on the unconvincing ground that releasing it could affect the ongoing prosecution.

4. The relatives of the security forces officers and civilians, who were killed by the terrorists, should emulate the relatives of those killed on 9/11 in the US, mobilise themselves and campaign for the constitution of a national commission to enquire into the terrorist strikes.

5. Kavita Karkare, the widow of Hemant Karkare, the brave head of the anti-terrorism squad of the Maharashtra Police who was brutally killed by the terrorists, should take the lead in the matter.

6. I had known Hemant personally. I met him for the first time at a seminar in Bangalore in February last year. I subsequently met him again in Jaipur in May last year after the explosions caused by the Indian Mujahideen. We were in telephonic contact with each other off and on. He never failed to return my calls-----whether they were professional or personal. He was an extremely sincere officer who, like the other officers killed by the terrorists, sacrificed his life in the fight against terrorism. Their sacrifice and the sacrifice of the civilians who were killed should not be allowed to go in vain.

(The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com)


Indian brinkmanship
[info]pakistanpal

INDIA'S military leadership has once again raised the issue of Limited War being a viable option within the overarching nuclear environment. This is part of a renewed belligerency on the part of the Indians, being orchestrated both at the diplomatic-political level and as well as the military. In fact the new pronouncements by the Indian Army Chief, General Kapoor, on Monday was a dangerously destabilising military doctrine whereby India has claimed the right to go for a limited war against a threat from anywhere in the world, including by a subnational group. India has been searching for a way of rationalising war fighting in the post-nuclear strategic environment and had spun the ColdStart Doctrine earlier of a rapid ground/air assault to achieve a limited objective and then assume the international community would intervene to prevent the other side (Pakistan) from responding in nuclear terms.

Of course, in principle limited war is always an option for countries; but keeping the war limited is a major problem and within a nuclear environment the danger is far greater. Mutual nuclear deterrence in South Asia has created an interesting and dichotomous security scenario between Pakistan and India. That is, on the one hand the mutuality of the nuclear deterrence has made both sides realise the futility of engaging in an all-out traditional war with each other for territorial gains. But the same logic has allowed both sides a greater freedom to intervene covertly in existing conflicts. Both sides also see a greater flexibility of fighting limited military engagements which they know they must keep limited because of the overall nuclear deterrence. And hence the danger of either of these states playing a game of brinkmanship that can go out of control unintentionally and result in catastrophic unintended consequences.

Both Pakistan and India need to realise that nuclear antagonists cannot be locked in a zero sum game environment. Their survival is linked together now. So nuclear deterrence requires the prevalence of conflict and common interest between the two sides. This can push in either of two directions: First, compel the stronger side to take advantage by taking calculated risks knowing the nuclear-related concerns that prevail. This course is dangerous and potentially fatal. Second, move both actors towards cooperation -without the smaller state being overwhelmed by the larger one - and away from risk-ridden policies like limited war and first strike. Finally, it has to be remembered that within the context of South Asia, it is not technology denial that will address the issue of nuclear stability, but political will. Clearly India is still lacking that needed political will to move out of its spirit of adventurism into a mode of behaving like a responsible nuclear state.


Muslim leaders condemn Liberhan for exonerating Cong, Narasimha Rao
[info]pakistanpal

By Mumtaz Alam Falahi, TwoCircles.net,

New Delhi: Welcoming the indictment of Sangh Parivar leaders for their role in the demolition of Babri Masjid, Muslim leaders have condemned the Liberhan Commission for giving a clean chit to the Congress and its then Prime Minister Narasimha Rao. Though the culprits have been indicted, the Muslim leaders said, they are not a bit hopeful that the culprits will be punished.

Talking to Mumtaz Alam Falahi of TwoCircles.net, Syed Shahabuddin, ex-MP and Convenor, Babri Masjid Coordination Committee, Dr Zafrul Islam Khan, President, All India Muslim Majlise Mushawarat and Nusrat Ali, General Secretary, Jamaat-e-Islami Hind, have expressed their views on various aspects of the issue.

Q: How do you take the indictment of Sangh Parivar leaders in the Liberhan Commission report for the Babri Masjid demolition?

Syed Shahabuddin:

The role of BJP, VHP and Sangh Parivar in the demolition of Babri Masjid was known to all. If the Liberhan Commission has indicted leaders of these parties, it is correct. But I have reservation on the indictment of Vajpayee. Atal Bihari Vajpayee was president of BJP. He no doubt knew what was going to happen. But he did not take part in the Ayodhya yatra. He did not go to Ayodhya. He returned from Lucknow perhaps to keep himself clean. Justice demands that Advani and Vajpayee cannot be put in the same dock. I am not advocating for him. My conscience feels so.

However, the biggest blunder that the Liberhan Commission has done is that it has given a clean chit to Narasimha Rao, the then Prime Minister of India. In my view he is culprit No. 1. in this case. The very second day of the demolition I wrote to Rao and told him he was more responsible than the Sangh Parivar for the demolition. Because he was prime minister, he had power and responsibility to protect the mosque, but he did not execute his power. I say he was connived with the Sangh Parivar. We gave him numerous memorandums and proposals. We urged him to take the mosque in government's control and declare it national monument of historic importance so that it becomes his government's responsibility to protect it. But he didn't. Rao was super villain in this case.

Only history will answer the question as to why Rao was given clean chit and Vajpayee indicted. But I would like to ask why the report was submitted now when it was completed four years ago. Why did Liberhan do so? I would not comment on it. But of course I would say that some time back it was said that Advani was being exonerated and Rao indicted. Now today the case is different. It surely means something happened behind the scene.

Zafrul Islam Khan:

Not only RSS, BJP, Shiv Sena and Bajrang Dal but Congress is also responsible for the demolition of the mosque. We know who did shila nayas there, who opened the lock of the mosque. Rajiv Gandhi launched his election campaign from that place announcing to establish ram rajya in the country. It is pitiable that the commission has indicted only Sangh Parivar while the Congress and its then Prime Minister Narasimha Rao have been given a clean chit when they were also responsible for that.

According to media reports, Justice Liberhan changed his story many times. When the Congress was in power he was writing something. When NDA came to power he started writing something else. Now Congress again in power, he has come with this report.

Nusrat Ali:

The report should have come much earlier, made public and discussed in the Parliament. Though late, the report is welcome. However, its findings are not at all surprising for us. What happened in 1992 was known to all. Now there is a need for action on this report.

Q: The government took 17 years to find out culprits of the demolition. How long will it take to punish them?

Syed Shahabuddin:

70 years. You know the fate of the two cases in this regard against top leaders of Sangh Parivar. I won't say only government is to blame for this. IB is also responsible for it. Two chief ministers of UP are also to blame for this. They split the case into two and did not pursue it honestly. How can we hopeful about punishment of these leaders?

Zafrul Islam Khan:

The culprits now have become big personalities. They have ruled the country. They have become prime minister and deputy prime minister and home minister. They are now part of State. They have a big power in the Parliament. No one is going to touch them. I don't think they are going to be punished in the present political situation. Contrary to that, I think the report will give a new lease of life to the dying party.

Nusrat Ali:

It was not good for the government to strain the commission to such a long period and spend crores of rupees on it. This was not good for the country. If it makes delay in punishing the culprits again, it will be not good for the country.

Q: Liberhan Commission has criticized leaders of Muslim organizations like Babri Masjid Action Committee for failing the community and not presenting a consensus and constant view on the dispute neither in the court nor outside. What do you think about it?

Syed Shahabuddin:

Muslim leaders and organizations related to the Babri Masjid Movement like Babri Masjid Coordination Committee and All India Babri Masjid Action Committee had united view that they will act keeping themselves within the parameters of law and constitution. We were not holding agitation. We were holding talks with the government on day-to-day basis. We were holding talks with different political parties, raising the issue in the Parliament and before the media. We were not raising armed forces to take on the Hindutva brigade. Whatever the commission has said about Muslim leadership is just their feeling. They have not accused us of collecting crores of rupees or demolition as they did in the case of Hindutva leaders.

Zafrul Islam Khan:

This is sheer injustice. Muslim leaders and organizations did nothing except raising their voice. Except that they did nothing, they had no power. On the other hand, Sangh Parivar gathered about 7 lakh people. Criticism of Muslim leaders is just part of traditional balancing act of Congress governments in India. Whenever they ban RSS they also ban Jamaat-e-Islami.

Nusrat Ali:

This is not correct. Muslims have always been united on the issue. For the community and leaders Babri Masjid was always Babri Masjid. Maybe there have been differences in their approach but not in the goal. There was no difference on the fact that idols should be removed from the mosque and it should be opened for namaz.

This is part of balancing act of the government. When Babri Masjid was demolished the government banned RSS who was responsible for the demolition. But it also banned Jamaat-e-Islami Hind which had no justification. The Supreme Court removed the ban from us. The policy of this balancing act is itself an oppression and injustice.

Q: If court verdict goes in favor of Muslims, what should be the stand of Muslims?

Syed Shahabuddin:

It is the responsibility of the government to enforce rule of law. But I have one apprehension: if the verdict is in our favor and we decide to build the mosque there, then again Sangh Parivar will create trouble and chaos in the country. I think when the time comes Muslim leadership will sit and decide what to do. But let the decision first come. Once I said that we will erect a boundary wall around the place and put a board on it that will read: Rest in Peace Here Lies Secularism.

Zafrul Islam Khan:

I don't think court verdict is going to be in our favor. If it is so, we should honestly take into account the ground situation of the area. We should accept we have no presence at that place. Moreover, when Muslims were prevented from offering prayers in 1937, stones were thrown on them then, in today's communally volatile situation when Muslims are not allowed to rebuild their homes, mosques, mazars demolished in 1992 how can the new mosque be built.


Probe reveals lead-up to Iraq war
[info]pakistanpal

by Alice Ritchie Alice Ritchie

LONDON (AFP) - The first full-scale inquiry into Britain's role in the Iraq war opened Tuesday with testimony suggesting Washington was gearing up for possible conflict two years before Tony Blair led London to war.


A protestor wearing a Tony Blair mask covers his hands with fake blood as he demonstrates outside the venue for the public inquiry into the Iraq war. The first full-scale inquiry into Britain's role in the Iraq war has opened with families of soldiers killed in combat desperate to hear Tony Blair justify the decision to join the US-led invasion.

More than six years after the US-led invasion, inquiry chairman John Chilcot said no-one was "on trial" in the year-long probe but promised not to shy away from criticism as he seeks to learn lessons from the conflict.

Chilcot profile

The highlight of the public inquiry will be an appearance by then prime minister Blair , who is due to give evidence in January.

The first day of hearings was dominated by testimony from top civil servants who told how some in the US administration were already considering toppling Saddam Hussein 's Iraqi regime two years before the 2003 invasion.

However, they said Britain distanced itself from these "voices" and said they remained sidelined even within the United States until after the September 11, 2001, attacks in New York and Washington.

"No-one is on trial here. We cannot determine guilt or innocence. Only a court can do that," Chilcot said in his opening remarks .

"But I make a commitment here that once we get to our final report, we will not shy away from making criticisms, either of institutions or processes or individuals, where they are truly warranted."

Chilcot's five-member inquiry committee has already met with families of the 179 British troops who died in Iraq, some of whom attended Tuesday's session.

"I just want the truth," Rose Gentle, whose son Gordon died in Iraq in 2004, told AFP afterwards, adding: "I've never had any answers. I've never been told anything. Why we went in, whether it was legal."

Timeline: Britain's role in Iraq

Gentle, who wears a picture of her son in a gold heart around her neck, said she would return when Blair gives evidence. "If mistakes were made, he's the one that's got to live with it," she said.

A small group of protesters gathered outside the inquiry venue in central London, wearing masks of Blair, former US president George W. Bush and current British Prime Minister Gordon Brown, and with fake blood on their hands.

Anti-war campaigners want a ruling on the legality of the conflict, which took place without explicit approval from the UN Security Council.

Inside, there seemed to be little public interest. In contrast to the one million people who marched against the invasion on one day in 2003 -- only about half of the seats in the public gallery were filled.

They heard senior civil servants outline how Iraq was considered a threat in 2001 because of a "clear impression" that it intended to "acquire WMD (weapons of mass destruction) capability."

Iraq's suspected possession of such weapons was the main justification for the invasion in March 2003, but they were never found.

The officials described "voices" in Washington talking about deposing Hussein as early as 2001, but insisted US and British policy was focused on containing the Iraqi leader's ambitions through sanctions and a no-fly zone.

William Patey, head of the Middle East department at the Foreign Office in 2001, said he ordered a memo in late 2001 detailing "all the options" for Iraq. It included regime change, but he said this was quickly dismissed.

He added: "We were aware of these drum beats from Washington and internally we discussed it. Our policy was to stay away from that end of the spectrum."

Peter Ricketts, who chaired Britain's top intelligence committee in 2000-2001, said: "I was certainly not aware of anyone in the British government promoting or supporting active measures for regime change."

Thinking in Washington shifted after the September 11 attacks, said Simon Webb, then policy director at the Ministry of Defence, "to say that we cannot afford to wait for these threats to materialise."

Britain also changed the way it viewed WMD proliferation and counter-terrorism but Ricketts said: "We still had our focus on the weapons inspector route and the sanctions-type route."

The inquiry, the third official probe into the war, is looking at all elements of British involvement in Iraq between 2001 and 2009 when nearly all its troops withdrew.


Home