Category — Pakistan

By Josy Joseph in The Times of India

New Delhi: Kashmiri terrorists and refugees from Jammu and Kashmir in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir have both received a pay hike. According to latest inputs from various intelligence agencies, Pakistani authorities are now offering terrorists coming to fight in J&K a monthly salary in the range of Rs 8,000 to Rs 10,000. This is a huge jump from the average pay of Rs 5,000 they were getting earlier.

The reason for this benevolence is obvious. There has been a drastic drop in violence levels in J&K and militancy needs a revival if the separatist agenda has to continue to grab global attention. The number of terrorists in J&K is now hovering around 700, an all-time low since militancy erupted in the state in the late 1980s.

The desperation among terror groups is also visible in the return of Furqan, one of the senior most Lashkar-e-Taiba operatives who had been the group’s launch commander based in PoK for some years now. He infiltrated into J&K in April-end with a group but the Army was able to intercept them. Furqan is believed to have successfully evaded the Army and entered the state. His return, after more than four years, is being seen as a sign of LeT’s desperation to carry out a few sensational attacks.

It is not just Kashmiri militants who have got pay hikes. Those staying back in refugee camps of PoK too have been given increased financial benefits. From Rs 1,800 per month, their allowance has gone up to Rs 2,400 a month early this year, sources said.

Thousands of Kashmiri youth moved across the border to PoK in the past two decades for the explicit purpose of becoming trained militants. Many now want to return.

Bait Money

Pak authorities said to be offering Rs 8,000-10,000 a month to terrorists to fight in J&K, up from Rs 5,000

Only 700-odd terrorists in the state now, the lowest since militancy began in the state in the 1980s. The raise is an attempt to get more recruits

Those who crossed over and stayed back in PoK refugee camps getting Rs 2,400/mth against earlier Rs 1,800 Dole hiked to dissuade refugees from leaving PoK camps?

New Delhi: Pakistan is opening the purse strings to fuel militancy in Kashmir. The monthly salary of Valleybound ‘freedom fighters’ has been hiked to Rs 8,000-Rs 10,000 from Rs 5,000. What’s more, thousands of Kashmiri youth who crossed over to PoK to train but have stayed back in refugee maintenance camps run by the Pakistan government will now get a dole of Rs 2,400 per month against Rs 1,800 hitherto.

There are no clear numbers, but some estimates say as many as 30,000 could be in PoK, holding state subject facility cards which grants them certain rights. Some have married local girls, and many Kashmiri youth have started small businesses.

While inflation is an obvious reason for the hike in monthly allowance for the refugees, the desire of many of them to return to India may have also been a reason for increasing the allowance, officials speculate.

In 2007, when Indian government opened up a liberal surrender policy for Kashmir, almost 150 of them came back. After a year, the policy was tightened, but sources now say that they are looking at revising it. An exodus of these refugees from PoK to J&K would hit Pakistan’s image, say officials. http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/5938412.cms?prtpage=1

SOMEHOW for all the signs that there could be no escape from implementing the NRO verdict, the government keeps prevaricating. The Prime Minister who, being the chief executive is duty bound to ensure that the court orders are carried out, is the main government functionary trying to find grounds for the futility of doing so. Speaking to the office-bearers of the Lahore Press Club, who called on him on Sunday, he seemed to advise the Supreme Court to summon the NRO architect, meaning thereby General Musharraf, without realising that the judgement already puts him in the dock for transgressing the limits of Article 6 of the Constitution. It would be interesting to recall that it was the PPP government that sent him abroad after giving him a grand guard of honour.
Mr Gilani had better ask his Law Minister to approach the apex court to summon Musharraf before it. He should also keep in mind that the beneficiaries of the bad law cannot be left out of the loop of accountability. Besides, as Mr Gilani himself stated, outside forces were behind the shameful NRO deal i.e. the Americans, British and some of our friends in the Gulf and that also makes them architects. He would have to spell out how to deal with them.
The Prime Minister told the LPC members that the Federal Law Minister would explain the government position to the Supreme Court. Mr Babar Awan has been known to the world for making the angriest and most questionable remarks about the area of competence of the court and the non-feasibitily of implementing its judgement, and it would be quite interesting to see how he faces the Bench. Mr Gilani’s mantra of ‘respect for the judiciary’ has assumed a funny ring now since the only thing that this could imply is that he is faithfully and honestly obeying its orders!
The reality speaks differently. His paying lip service, while effectively defying them despite the fact that the responsibility under the Constitution devolves on him, does not exonerate him. Besides, the despatch of PM’s Advisor on Information Technology to Switzerland raises many an eyebrow. That Mr Gilani should be sending him there, it seems, to find how the Swiss courts would react in case the government were to write a letter to them to reopen the cases against President Zardari, is highly unbecoming, to say the least.
At the same time, PML-N leader Mian Nawaz Sharif, in an address at London, has talked of attempts at creating conditions that could result in a clash between the government and the judiciary. He named both Zardari and Gilani as being equally responsible for ensuring accountability of the NRO-affected people. The upshot of the scenario, which reeks of scandalously undemocratic ways of saving the skin of the plunderers of national wealth, is that the Supreme Court’s verdict must be studiously followed in an attempt to cleanse the body politic of corruption, if we want to see the country flourish.
http://www.nation.com.pk/pakistan-news-newspaper-daily-english-online/Opinions/Editorials/18-May-2010/The-NRO-debate

The writer is an accountant living in Dublin

This refers the article by Mr Imran Khan published in The News (May 14) in response to my article previously published on these pages. It occurs to me that Mr Khan has totally misunderstood the issue by picking up the thread from the wrong end. The issue is not confined to ethnic labelling only. The primary issue is that of stripping the people of Hazara of their identity by calling them “Punjabiyan”. While I strongly believe that Punjabis are equally respectable as anyone else on this planet, I know for a fact that the reference “Punjabiyan” is made in the Pashto-speaking areas quite often in a contemptuous way. This attitude of people in the Pashto-speaking areas is particularly painful for those from Hazara who are of Pukhtun origin. For them, it is difficult to accept when the people of their own race try to outcast them for the wounds caused by your own people always leave dirty scars. It was particularly this issue that I had highlighted in my article which I feel is one of the main causes behind the reaction of the people of Hazara. I had mentioned that the common perception amongst the Hazarewals is that they are being singled out by the Pukhtun nationalists due to the key role they had played in the historic referendum of 1947. The objective of my article was also to highlight the fact that the renaming of the province was not the main issue. If the people of Hazara had accepted the renaming of Haripur, Abbottabad and Mansehra, why would they object to the new name of the province just for the sake of it, particularly those who are themselves Pukhtuns? Mr Khan has referred to some famous racial divides – the Irish and the English, the Pukhtuns and the Muhajirs, and, the Bengalis and the West Pakistanis. None of these serves as the right parallel to the problem of Hazara. In all these cases, there were two different races involved. Even otherwise, I am not sure if we should follow these examples as a lot of blood was lost in these divides. The reference to various chief ministers of the province hailing from Hazara is also not relevant. Just to close out on this, Hazara has been a strong base for the Muslim League and has been the reason for their government in the province. The Muslim League has chosen chief ministers from Hazara to keep its ground intact. However, I don’t think it has any relevance to the present issue. Mr Khan has also provided statistics to substantiate the claim that the region of Hazara has been adequately looked after in developmental terms. Without going into the details of those statistics, I am not sure if development alone can do the trick. The argument regarding the development of the Hazara region itself requires us to find out and address the real cause behind the demand for a separate province that now carries the cost of a few lives. If development were sufficient to keep the people together, then East Pakistan would not have become Bangladesh. I present to you some developmental statistics for East Pakistan that are from the book The Agony of Pakistan (page 115) written by Sir Zafarulla Khan, our first foreign minister who later became the president of the UN General Assembly and then the president of the International Court of Justice. * East Pakistan’s revenue receipts increased from Rs169m in 1947-48 to Rs1,789m in 1969-70. During the same period, the revenue receipts of Dacca Municipality increased from Rs1.6m to Rs16.3m and that of Chittagong Municipality from Rs0.75m to Rs15m. * In 1947, there were no jute mills in East Pakistan. By 1970, it had 55 jute mills processing 3 million bales of jute. * Between 1947 and 1970, the number of post offices in East Pakistan doubled from 3,000 to 6,000 and telephone connections increased from 3,000 to over 50,000. * Between 1947 and 1970, the length of high-type roads in East Pakistan increased from 240 miles to 2,400 miles and low-type roads from nil to 1,400 miles. * The handling capacity of Chittagong port was increased from 0.5m tons in 1947 to 4.7m tons in 1969. An additional port established in Chalna had a handling capacity of over 2m tons. * In 1947, there were only two small airports (Dacca and Chittagong). By 1970, there were a number of small airports and airstrips while the Dacca Airport was upgraded to handle jet planes. * Of the total developmental loans of Rs15,266m made available by the government of Pakistan between 1947 and 1970, more than 55 per cent went to East Pakistan. * Between 1960 and 1969, of the total revenues of Rs8,0451m contributed by East Pakistan, an amount of Rs3,884m (48 per cent) was refunded to it as provincial allocation. During the same period, of the total revenue of Rs22,371m contributed by West Pakistan, an amount of Rs4,000m (18 per cent) was refunded to it as provincial allocation. * The only steel mill was established at Chittagong and the only newsprint plant was set up at Khulna. The above-mentioned facts clearly failed to impress our Bengali brothers who parted ways with us. Their problems did not arise in1971. The seed of Bengali nationalism was planted in the early years of Pakistan when processions were taken out in East Pakistan against the adoption of Urdu as the national language. Our dismissive approach complicated the issue and provided opportunities to our enemies who exploited the emotions of our brothers. We should not repeat the same mistakes. As a result of strain between any two sections of a society, howsoever distinct, the people of each section start receding to their respective nuclei. In the next phase, they try to detach themselves from the part they consider as the source of pain. The region of Hazara is now moving towards phase two. This is a sensitive matter and needs careful attention, particularly considering our history and the present state of affairs. The objective of my article was to raise an issue and to jolt minds, hoping that better sense would start prevailing. We should accept our problems and try to address them, rather than going for a cover up approach. Some of the comments made by the participants in a TV show recently and some videos that can be found on Youtube of the speeches made in the processions that were brought out by people in favour of Hazara province clarify the point further that it is the rejection of the identity of Hazarewals that is being exploited to flare up emotions. I had mentioned in my post to The News published on May 13, 2010 that I support the view that all Divisions should be made provinces. However, it should be done for the purpose of administrative ease only. Dividing a province on the basis of ethnic differences may lead to further subdivisions and no one knows where it will stop. We need to consider the future implications of any such move. http://www.thenews.com.pk/daily_detail.asp?id=239856

(An authoritative account of how Pakistan’s A.Q. Khan helped spread nuclear terrorism unhindered for decades)  Review by Bob Drogin in The Los Angeles Times, May 11

Nuclear weapons, which largely faded from front pages after the Cold War, are back in the news. President Obama endorsed a new national security strategy, and earlier this year he signed an ambitious arms control treaty with Russia, further easing fears of global Armageddon. But Obama also led an unprecedented summit of world leaders to warn of an increasingly urgent threat — nuclear terrorism.

Much of this perilous state of affairs can be traced to the villainous deeds of Abdul Qadeer Khan. A.Q. Khan, as he is known, is the self-described father of Pakistan’s nuclear bomb and the self-confessed mastermind of a criminal network that seemingly sold nuclear weapons technology like it was aluminum siding. The proof: Nearly every nation that has tried to build or obtain a nuclear device in the last 30 years has relied on Khan’s black market enterprise.

Outside the CIA and its sister services overseas, probably no one has investigated Khan’s smuggling network as thoroughly as David Albright. His “Peddling Peril” is the most authoritative account we are likely to see of how a Pakistani metallurgist with monstrous ambition used front companies, forged documents and legal loopholes to create a nuclear Wal-Mart, or what Albright calls “Bomb Inc.” Dr. Strangelove couldn’t have said it better.

For years, government officials downplayed or ignored Khan’s illicit trade as industrial spying, or violations of export control laws, rather than as nuclear espionage on behalf of a foreign power. Security breaches were repeatedly concealed lest they jeopardize other diplomatic priorities or corporate profit margins. It is a terrifying tale, not least because the failure to prosecute or imprison most of Khan’s associates means the world’s most dangerous business may still be thriving.

Other books have sketched Khan’s story, but Albright mines previously unavailable documents, and he interviews key players for new details. He chronicles how Khan stole classified blueprints from a European consortium to jumpstart Pakistan’s uranium enrichment program in the mid-1970s and then did what no Western scientist considered remotely possible — he built an atomic bomb in Pakistan by secretly buying and assembling component parts from abroad.

In the 1980s, Khan again broke new ground: He began selling complete nuclear factories and the know-how to construct bombs, something only governments had done before. He assembled a team of unscrupulous German, South African and Swiss businessmen to help peddle these resources to dictatorial regimes in Iraq, Iran, North Korea and Libya.

Khan’s drawings and documentation for Libya’s centrifuge plant were so detailed they contained instructions on where to install toilet paper holders in the bathrooms. He also supplied Iran with critical components for a then-secret uranium enrichment program that still bedevils the international community. “Without Khan’s assistance,” Albright writes, “Iran’s gas centrifuge program would pose little threat to the region or the United States today.”

Khan has claimed patriotism and Muslim solidarity as his motive, but he and his cohorts raked in hundreds of millions of dollars. Vital supplies, purchased from the United States and Europe, were routed through a maze of businesses and third-party cutouts in Malaysia, Dubai, Turkey and elsewhere to avoid suspicion. “They could not outmaneuver us, as we remained a step ahead always,” Khan boasted on Pakistani TV last year.

Although the CIA and British intelligence investigated Khan from at least 1978, it took them nearly three decades to take him down, an intelligence failure that haunts us today. The evidence suggests willful blindness in successive U.S. administrations more concerned about using Pakistan as a Cold War proxy against the Soviet Union than on stopping this nuclear Johnny Appleseed.

It’s still unclear how much Pakistani leaders authorized Khan’s freebooting (he frequently used Pakistani Air Force planes to ferry his supplies) and, more important, whether his customers included Al Qaeda or its murderous offshoots. The Pakistani government has refused to let foreign intelligence or U.N. experts interview Khan since he was placed under house arrest in 2004.

Albright is a unique figure in Washington, a nuclear proliferation expert who flourishes in the interstices between intelligence and journalism. He founded and heads the Institute for Science and International Security, a one-man think tank for all practical purposes. He regularly makes news by relying on commercial satellite photos, personal ties to U.S. policy makers and U.N. nuclear inspectors (Albright served with U.N. teams in Iraq after the 1991 Gulf War) and a deep grasp of nuclear science. Like many journalists, I called him regularly when I reported on nuclear proliferation.

In September 2007, for example, Israeli jets bombed a nondescript building in the Syrian desert. Neither government, nor the George W. Bush administration, initially acknowledged the raid’s purpose. But Albright’s institute used commercial satellite imagery to determine that the target appeared to house a nuclear reactor built with technology from North Korea. For six months, Albright’s analysis was the only independent assessment. Finally, in April 2008, the CIA publicly concurred.

Albright is a better investigator than writer, and his dry prose sometimes reads like a grand jury indictment involving export licenses and shipping manifests. But this is also a valuable book: The reader’s outrage mounts as clues emerge, the danger spreads and government officials look the other way. It’s clear what drives Albright: America must vastly improve its ability to prevent nuclear smuggling and, ultimately, nuclear terrorism. After reading “Peddling Peril,” it drives my fears too. http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/news/la-et-book11-20100511,0,4115041,print.story

The writer is a graduate of Boston University.
Pakistan-India relations since independence have revolved around mutual distrust, uncertainty, disappointments, tensions and fear of conflict.

We should seriously think as to why it`s so, especially when both countries gained independence from a single colonial power through a political process, negotiated between the Indian National Congress and the Muslim League. While we often hear people from both sides say, had the two countries been one, we would have been a force to reckon with, both in might and economy, I wonder why India and Pakistan can`t draw strength from each other as friendly and stable neighbours, sharing a common past, heritage and civilisation.

Bilateral disputes between them remain unresolved, their cooperation bounded by severe limitations. India thinks Pakistan is an irritant impeding India`s emergence as a key player in the world economy and Pakistan feels that India has been trying to destabilise Pakistan since partition.

Unlike the past when Kashmir was the sole issue with maximum emotive appeal, today we have mutually impinging interests, of an unusually urgent kind, such as the issue of India blocking the waters of the western rivers, against the spirit of the Indus Water Treaty. If we don`t attend to the crisis, it will come and haunt us a few decades down the road when the Himalayan glaciers recede because of global warming.

Despite domestic sensitivities, Pakistan and India should realise that peace between them is imperative. They can no longer afford an armed conflict because it can easily escalate into a nuclear conflagration. The use of force for the settlement of bilateral disputes must be ruled out by both countries. The real challenge lies in building up trust and confidence, establishing a strategic restraint regime, developing mutually beneficial cooperation and making meaningful progress towards the resolution of all outstanding disputes for a genuine and lasting peace. Force and propaganda should no longer be considered viable for securing the objectives of foreign policy. Instead what should be considered feasible is a `tactical adjustment` aimed at clarifying intentions and promoting goodwill.

The meeting between the foreign secretaries of India and Pakistan in March 2010 served as an icebreaker in the aftermath of the Mumbai attacks. The subsequent revival of talks led to genuine optimism for resuming the composite dialogue and finding breakthroughs on all issues. There is a growing consensus among parties, individuals and independent experts that the potential for possible headway has increased significantly. They feel that achieving a breakthrough is not as important as preventing a breakdown!

Manmohan Singh and Yousuf Raza Gilani had a cordial meeting in Sharm-el-Sheikh, they exchanged courtesies in Washington and the recent bilateral meeting in Bhutan has paved the way forward for peaceful resolutions. Singh, often seen as a dove, carrying the emblem of peace, has already de-linked peace talks from progress on terrorism, hence talks are not being held hostage to Pakistan combating perpetrators of the Mumbai attacks.

The meetings have set the stage to seek deeper entrenchment in a sustained peace process, to try and agree upon an agenda, procedure and comfortable venue for talks. We must recognise that the details stage of negotiation is invariably more difficult and time consuming than the formula stage and will require the participation of experts. What is needed is precision, confidentiality and objective consideration of national interest. The momentum of negotiations can falter for a number of reasons, even if the government is committed to progress. Therefore it`s not a bad idea to have both symbolic and artificial deadlines.

Initiatives like `Aman ki asha` and subsequent people-to-people interactions may revitalise the peace process and have made a strong case for hope. A healthy exchange of ideas and opinions through a culture of debate and dialogue can make both sides adaptable and responsive and will give both countries leeway to bargain for mutual concessions. Cultural, religious and ideological tolerance will help explore and expand channels of bilateral negotiation.

For most of their history, India and Pakistan were locked into public postures that made negotiations impossible without jeopardising the domestic position of their leaders. There was profound mistrust of each other`s intentions and both countries employed threats as a tool. Today there are solid grounds for optimism about the future because peace seems obtainable through a cooperative pursuit of common interests.

Peace between India and Pakistan would mean that soldiers who have borne the greatest brunt will be surrendering postures in defence of which they have lost brothers; settlers will be relinquishing control over land in which they have sunk roots; exporters might lose important markets and workers may lose their source of income. When a settlement of great political sensitivity is eventually reached, it will still have to be packaged to obscure and minimise the most sensitive concessions. There should be no vagueness and no inconsistencies and the deal should be defensible at home.

The media on both sides can play an instrumental role in facilitating talks and driving negotiations forward by providing reassurances to each country that what is being said is heartfelt and both parties are genuinely interested in negotiating a peace-deal. The media can assist in the construction of an agreement by helping people understand the depth of a conflict that has obstructed relations for more than 62 years.

Our ultimate goal should be to ensure a secure and prosperous future for our people by addressing issues that are common to all South Asian neighbours such as poverty, healthcare, food security, water and energy shortages, terrorism and environmental problems. We need to pool resources, share knowledge and work towards a common strategy to earnestly address and resolve these critical concerns. What we need is visionary leadership, unflinching commitment and firmness of intent. http://www.thenews.com.pk/daily_detail.asp?id=238937

The writer is an economist working in Islamabad
This is in response to Mr Kashif Jahangiri’s article ‘The real Hazara problem’ which appeared in The News on May 6, 2010. The incidents of discrimination that Mr Jahangiri has mentioned in his article must be condemned; discrimination – be it ethnic or religious – is wrong. But to generalise the entire Pukhtun community on the basis of wrong behaviour shown by a few individuals is also wrong, just like it is unfair to brand all the Muslims as terrorists based on the actions of a few.

According to the hypothesis proposed by Mr Jahangiri, the current movement for the province of Hazara is a reaction to the “contempt” doled out to Hazarewals by Pukhtuns. I disagree with Mr Jahangiri and my disagreement is based on two reasons. First, this ethnic labelling is not unique to Pukhtuns and Hazarewals, and also, it is not one-sided. Second, the intensity of this “contempt” is not as high as suggested by Mr Jahangiri.

Linguistic differences provide the basis for ethnic identities, and using these differences to make ethnic jokes is a common practice around the world. In Pakistan, ethnic labelling exists between all linguistically different communities that are living side by side. Even in the more politically correct society of the United States, jokes based on Spanish-American accent, for instance, are part of the popular culture. This does not stop at different ethnicities; in many cases different dialects of a language become the basis for similar pun. For instance, within the Pathans, the linguistic differences between the Pukhtuns, Pashtuns and Pashteens often become a source of humour and labelling, and in many individual cases the difference has boiled into discrimination as well, similar to what Mr Jahangiri has described.

While the jokes and banter part is acceptable in most cases, and cherished as diversity, problems arise when this difference becomes the source of outright discrimination at a community level. Living in Dublin, Mr Jahangiri must be aware of the history of the differences between the Irish and the English, and how much blood had been spilled because of that. The Rwandan genocide that resulted in the death of almost a million people was also a result of distrust between two communities. In our own history, the discrimination against the Bengalis became the main reason for the creation of Bangladesh. Similarly, Karachi’s Pathan-Muhajir riots of the 60s, that planted the seeds of ethnic disharmony in Karachi, are a sad example.

So, how have these two communities – the Pukhtun majority and the Hindkowan minority – fared in the former NWFP? If the case presented by Mr Jahangiri is correct, then a discriminatory Pakhtun majority must have been a hurdle towards the political aspirations of the Hindko-speaking minority. The Hazarewal politicians must have found it really hard to argue their case in the Pukhtun-dominated provincial assembly. But when one looks at history, nothing of that sort has happened. In fact, since independence, the Hazara division has had the honour of claiming the highest number of chief ministers than any other division in the former NWFP. These include Sardar Bahadur Khan (1955), Muhammad Iqbal Khan Jadoon (1977), Pir Sabir Shah (1994), and Mehtab Ahmed Khan Abbasi (1999). Incidentally, all four of them belonged to the Hindko-speaking minority. If, as suggested by Mr Jahangiri, the Pukhtuns had strong contempt towards Hindko speakers, then this achievement would not have been possible through democratic means.

A discriminatory Pukhtun majority should also have leveraged its numerical strength to hog most of the provincial resources, leaving little for the Hazarewals in terms of development spending. But the reality, when measured in terms of various indicators of economic development, is that the Hindko-speaking districts of Hazara have a much higher level of development than the provincial average. The Pakistan Social and Living Standards Measurement Survey (PSLM) for 2006-07, conducted by the Federal Bureau of Statistics, reveals that in the former NWFP, 26 per cent of the households reported to have ‘RBC/RCC (concrete) roof’, with the Pushto-speaking area of Battagram at 15.9 per cent. In contrast, the Hindko-speaking districts of Abbottabad and Haripur reported 45 per cent and 51 per cent concrete roofs respectively, i.e. twice the provincial average. These statistics are comparable to Sialkot at 47.64 per cent and are much higher than those for districts in southern Punjab, for instance, Multan at 19.22 per cent, Bahawalpur at 11 per cent and Rajanpur at 2 per cent.

Similarly, Haripur and Abbotabad boast 67.76 per cent and 61.44 per cent access to tap water respectively, which is much higher than the provincial average at 44.19 per cent. This comparatively higher level of development, which, no doubt, reflects a better quality of life, is confirmed through a variety of other indicators pertaining to health, literacy and sanitation. Had there been well-entrenched hatred and discrimination against the Hazarewals, they would not have been able to achieve this level of development as a minority.

Mr Jahangiri also mentions the use of the word “Khariyaan” i.e. hindko speakers of Peshawar city, as a derogatory term used by the Pathans. Well, if that was true then how is it possible for Khariyaan such as the Bilours, Haji Adeel and Syed Aqil Shah to become the top leaders of a nationalist Pukhtun party? As I understand politics, leaders are defined by their popularity and acceptance; followers would not follow someone whom they consider ‘inferior’. For instance; did Malcolm X even stand a chance for membership in the Ku Klux Klan (KKK)? If one is to extend this KKK analogy to this situation, then these black Khariyaan have risen to level of Grand Dragons in this Pashtun Ku Klux Klan. Paradoxical indeed, if one is to accept Mr Jahangiri’s assertion.

But instead of acknowledging the prominence of these Khariyaan in Pukhtun nationalism, Mr Jahangiri disapproves of the Bilours, terming them non-Pukhtuns pretending to be Pukhtuns. I must say that this argument uses a logic that is very antiquated and defies modern sensibilities. If a Pukhtun lineage does not stop a Tareen, Tanoli, Jadoon, or Swati to stand shoulder to shoulder with the Awans, Gujars, Jatts, and Abbasis of Hazara in the name of the Hindko language and Hazarewal identity, then by the very same principle, the Khariyaans of Peshawar have every right to stand shoulder to shoulder with the Pushto-speaking Pukhtuns in the name of Pukhtun identity. The notion of lineage-based identity and the consequent generalisation of races based on their bloodline is an old and obsolete concept. The rejection of the name Pukhtunkhwa, by the descendents of Ahmad Shah Abdali’s soldiers that is the Jadoons, Tareens and Tanolis is living proof that when it comes to ethnic loyalties, successful cultural assimilation can leave bloodlines and lineages to be pretty much meaningless.

I would conclude by saying that the higher development levels of the Hindko-speaking districts of Khyber-Pukhtunkhwa, the frequent election of minority Hindkowans to the chief ministership of a Pukhtun-majority parliament, and the key leadership positions of Hindkowans in the ANP, provide ample proof of the cultural harmony that exists between Hindko speakers and Pukhtuns in Khyber-Pukhtunkhwa. This harmony is an achievement, the equivalent of which is very hard to find in Pakistan. It also is an achievement that cannot be discredited through mere anecdotal evidence. http://www.thenews.com.pk/daily_detail.asp?id=239198

One hears that the government is currently pondering the amount of extra time General Kayani should be given as head of the army. Should it be one, two or three years?
If life were fair, the prime minister, a gaddi-nashin, would have been making a living interceding with God on behalf of devotees. Nevertheless, Mr Gilani will need his special nexus with God to get the government out of the deep hole in which it finds itself as the seemingly inevitable clash with the judiciary draws nearer. To be fair to Mr Gilani, he would prefer not to be a part of the fracas, it being entirely a matter concerning Mr Zardari, but he has no option. As he said some time ago, “We swim or sink together.”

The Swiss cases are not the only cause of friction between the government and the judiciary. If, or rather, when the Supreme Court finds out about the amount of commission, the extent of advance payment and other details of the rental power projects (RPPs), of which it has taken suo motu notice, there will be hell to pay. The ethos of the Supreme Court is very different from that of Mr Zardari. Actually, there is a vast divergence between them on just about every issue, including their respective takes on right and wrong and what is permissible or reasonable and what is not. In brief, their perspectives are antithetical and a rupture, therefore, appears very likely.

Another development, which could impact negatively on the conduct of the war against the Taliban, is the question of General Kayani’s extension. That he should be given one is generally agreed by all, especially many of those who serve with him in the army. Ordinarily, extensions are considered unnecessary because no one is indispensable. However, that cliché has proved wrong by the absence of Benazir Bhutto and the presence of Mr Zardari in her stead.

One cogent reason for Kayani to remain is that, having been tasked to draw up the military’s response to the threat posed by the Taliban and India and to such Indian doctrines as ‘Cold Start’ and ‘Two-Front Wars’, it is only logical that he stays on to implement it. Thus far, Kayani’s operational plans have been successful far beyond expectations, although success against the Taliban has been marred by collateral damage to civilian property and lives, lack of a determined effort to resettle the displaced population and an inability to provide assured security to the inhabitants of the areas supposedly cleansed of the enemy. And although all that, the military says, is not its job, frankly no one buys such nice distinctions. There is no use clearing a field of weeds if nothing is made to grow on it. Whether the military feels aggrieved or not, it had better address these issues lest Kayani be equated with the victorious Protestant general whose troops caused such desolation and suffering that when he was removed many rejoiced.

One hears that the government is currently pondering the amount of extra time General Kayani should be given as head of the army. Should it be one, two or three years? And that will probably depend on who else the government has in mind. And also whether it prefers to serve out its own term with Kayani or would also like to appoint his successor.

Given the proclivity of the current regime to keep its options open, which is another way of not having to deal with the issue immediately, one suspects that it may opt to grant him only another year. That would be a pity for a number of reasons in addition to the importance of continuity of command: the excellent rapport that Kayani has forged with allied generals; the trust that he has engendered among them and with his own troops; the strategy that he enunciated and recently sold to NATO in Brussels; and, of course, the likelihood of another operation in North Waziristan. However, to my mind, Kayani needs to stay most of all because removing a commander in the midst of a war sends the wrong message to friend and foe alike and, more importantly, because he appears uniquely suited for the job at this juncture of our troubled history in view of his personality, temperament, ability, aptitude and experience.

These plusses easily outweigh the heart burning his extension may cause among his peers. They also outweigh fears that he may grow too big for his boots. In any case, that is misreading the man. And, as this is the near universal view about him, not everyone can be wrong. The snag is that General Kayani will not personally raise the issue nor, rumour has it, will he accept an extension unless it is long enough to allow him to implement his plans for the army.

The selection of an army chief, or the question of his extension, is nearly always in Pakistan the subject of intense controversy. What should be and is elsewhere a relatively routine matter dictated by need, and not wish or favour, is not so here. Mr Gilani (or is it Mr Zardari?) has the opportunity to lay such speculation to rest by being forthcoming on the issue and acting quickly to quell the uncertainty. And, hopefully, they will, because one recalls with no pleasure the antics of politicians when it came to choosing General Waheed’s successor after he refused an extension; and earlier after General Asif Nawaz’s untimely death. In the case of the former, it was virtually the only subject of discussion at every Islamabad gathering for weeks and, in the case of the latter, one recalls being offered celebratory sweets by supporters of a general who eventually did not make it. Things should not be allowed to reach such a pass. It is hardly an unforeseen event.

In many respects, therefore, 2010 is a crucial year. It will probably determine Mr Zardari’s fate and, if things do not go well in the war, also Pakistan’s future. Should one be downhearted? No!

http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2010\05\14\story_14-5-2010_pg3_2

Dialogue matters: edit in The Daily times, May 13
The recent SAARC Summit in Thimphu, Bhutan, promised many things aimed at promoting regional harmony and cooperation but the most promising development was a breaking of the ice between India and Pakistan on the sidelines. In continuation of that effort –as agreed to at the summit — the foreign ministers of both countries, Shah Mehmood Qureshi and S M Krishna, will be meeting for extended talks on July 15 this year in Islamabad to discuss the various issues that have remained contentious so far.

However, in the wake of the Mumbai attack’s subsequent conclusion — Kasab’s conviction — it is the issue of terrorism that will obtain top billing. Both countries, although extremely weary of this scourge, have nevertheless, time and again, locked horns on it. The fact that the interior ministers of both countries, P Chidambaram and Rehman Malik, will be meeting in Islamabad on June 26th to set the tone for the impending dialogue speaks volumes for the fact that terrorism will be the dominant topic. It is wise of Mr Qureshi to keep repeating that any attempts by non-state actors to disrupt the peace process should not achieve their objective. It is also very refreshing to note that our foreign minister is not entertaining any delusions about the “uphill task” that such a dialogue is, especially when it is occurring between two historically, and mutually, suspicious neighbours. He has cautioned the public not to expect a resolution to Kashmir and other such prickly issues overnight, and rightly so.

With matters on the table such as Sir Creek, Siachen, Kashmir and alleged violations of the Indus Water Treaty, and the pertaining issue of terrorism to boot, this is going to be a hefty agenda. However, this is a welcome about turn from the immutable deadlock voiced by India as irreversible till Pakistan ‘handles’ the matter of the Mumbai attackers.

We must realise that it is inconceivable that two nuclear-armed nations remain away from the dialogue front, as they cannot afford a war-like stance, not even in the worst-case scenario.

It is hoped that this move to bridge the trust deficit and overcome accusations will lead to mutually beneficial conclusions for both countries. Officially recognised as democracies, dialogue is the only way forward for both India and Pakistan as a means to usher in more civilised norms of conduct and normal relations. /www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2010\05\13\story_13-5-2010_pg3_1

Talks about talks: edit in The Frontier Post,  May 13
So there we are, at long last. Islamabad’s desperately-awaited telephonic conversation between the foreign ministers of Pakistan and India has taken place. And the two have agreed to meet, yes, after 65 days on July 15 in Islamabad, giving enough grist to professional commentators making a living from churning out the most pleasing scenarios out of the most dismal and to cliché-savvy and pretentiously self-righteous chatterboxes having fallen in love of seeing their faces on the TV screens. And we would be the last to embitter their good taste with even a slight streak of pessimism, although there are some home truths that we believe are too imperatively relevant and must not be left unspoken. For the first thing, the upcoming talks are about talks, not about the resumption of a stalled dialogue. The two interlocutors are, as Indian external affairs minister S.M. Krishna put it, to work out the modalities for carrying forward the dialogue process to discuss outstanding issues in an atmosphere of mutual trust. So there is many a caveat, many a ruffle to be sorted out before the actual dialogue starts. If the popular talk in the Indian media, think tanks and commentariat is any guide, the Indian officialdom wants just to do away with the format of the stalled composite dialogue and intend to give a new configuration to the dialogue process. And from foreign minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi’s press talk, it appears that Islamabad too is not any averse to the idea. He was cited looking forward to reconsidering the framework of the stalled composite dialogue for updating it to accommodate “other issues”. That gives the uneasy sense that the dialogue process is now set to mark a fresh beginning, may be a start from the scratch. If that be it, the little said of this new venture, the better. In that eventuality, the venture could get bogged down in mere footling and technicalities from the outset and so remain moribund incessantly, corroborating the suspicions of many a sceptic that India is just marking time as it presently has no heart in a real dialogue with Pakistan and is in the show only to appease the Americans on whose nudging has it entered talks as has Islamabad. Not that the stalled composite dialogue was any spectacular success. It was not. It did mark some remarkable accomplishments on the front of confidence-building measures. But four rounds if it passed away without a slight stab on any of the substantive issues. Indeed, the major casualty of that dialogue’s futility was the intended visit of India’s Prime Minister Manmohan Singh to Pakistan. To give meaning and significance to his visit, he wanted to come to Islamabad with a stitched-up final agreement on the Siachen withdrawal by the two sides and sign it up here. But his defence establishment was the stumbling block. Neither the Indian army was agreeable to vacate some high peaks, nor was the Indian air force willing to abandon its facilities on the glacier. He succumbed to their adamancy and his intended visit consequently slipped into the cold storage where stays freezing now for years. Ironically, as the peace dialogue was going through the rounds, Manmohan Singh even acceded to the Indian army’s demand of raising a South West Command for a surprise Cold Start offensive against Pakistan along the border between the Indian states of Punjab and Rajasthan. Considered by every reckoning, the issue of peace essentially boils down to the unswerving political will of a leadership and its unbending resolve to stand by its commitment. That essential irrefutably has been shown by the Pakistani side in these past years and the Indian side has clearly shown it not so far. Indeed, by agreeing to a radical Kashmir settlement dispensation on the diplomatic back-channel, Pervez Musharraf had put his neck on a chopping block that only providence could have saved, the people of Pakistan and the Kashmiris would have surely spared not. Yet Manmohan Singh only dithered and wobbled, and could muster not the guts to own it up publicly and accept it, even though the knowledgeable people assert it reflected 90 per cent of India’s traditional stance on the Kashmir dispute. Arguably, if a political leadership has the will, the commitment and the determination, it makes no difference what format or a framework a peace dialogue wears on. Peace flows in and in spates in any event. And the days ahead will show if the Indian leadership is real, if its intents are real, and if it is serious and means business. Its acts will count, not its vows. http://www.thefrontierpost.com/News.aspx?ncat=ed&nid=94

Pakistan-India talks: edit in The News, May 13
The doves can again be seen in the skies after a long period during which the hawks had prevented them from fluttering a feather. The foreign ministers of India and Pakistan, after a detailed talk over the telephone, have agreed to meet in Islamabad in the middle of July. This is indeed a breakthrough that could help resume the peace process interrupted by the 2008 acts of terrorism that left 166 people dead in Mumbai. It is possible that recent peace initiatives, including the `Aman ki Asha` effort, helped create some of the goodwill that encouraged moves seen at the official level. Certainly the meetings that brought people together, including those from the media, did no harm at all.

Shah Mehmood Qureshi has stated that terrorism will figure as a key issue in the talks. We know this is essential. If the matter is not tackled we run the risk of seeing another episode, such as that in 2008, throwing the dialogue effort into a nosedive. To avoid this, the question of militancy needs to be dealt with. The matter of Kashmir stands at the centre of this. It may not be possible to immediately open up discussion on the territorial dispute that has for over six decades held up good relations between New Delhi and Islamabad. But as high-level talks resume, both countries would do well to keep in mind that moving towards a resolution is essential to lasting peace. Necessary confidence-building measures may be adopted ahead of broaching the Kashmir issue, but in the final analysis it is this region which acts to generate militancy. We can hope for a lasting era of security and stability only when a fair settlement has been reached. http://www.thenews.com.pk/daily_detail.asp?id=238934

A fresh start:  Dawn Editorial, 13 May, 2010
Are Pakistan and India inching towards a new phase in relations? The meeting between the foreign ministers of the two countries on July 15 will go some way to providing the answer, but improving relations seems to be on the minds of both camps for the first time since the Mumbai attacks.
Never mind that the reasons for the change of heart may lie in faraway Washington or neighbouring Afghanistan; India and Pakistan must seize whatever opportunities that come their way to put their volatile relationship on firmer footing. While the focus will be on the talks between the foreign ministers, there are at least two opportunities before then that could set the stage for a real breakthrough in July. Meetings between the interior ministers and foreign secretaries of both sides will occur before then, and perhaps it is at those meetings that goodwill can be created.
Creating that elusive goodwill between the two countries is a matter of both sides offering something new. India is still very concerned about the relative lack of action here in Pakistan against those linked to the Mumbai attacks. On this count, it could be helpful to inject new life in the anti-terrorism trial that is moving desultorily, marred by countless adjournments. Yes, the wheels of justice move slowly in the subcontinent, but there is a sense that concluding the trial of the Mumbai suspects is not as much a matter of concern as it should be. A more vigorous trial could go some way to ease Indian suspicions.
On its part, India needs to make some gesture which demonstrates it genuinely wants a result-oriented dialogue process, and not just endless talks about talks that produce photo-ops and little else. Perhaps India should think about concluding a deal on Siachen and Sir Creek, two issues where the bureaucrats have come close to sealing a final settlement. There are other gestures that could be made too. The point is that between now and July 15 there are opportunities to ensure that a genuine breakthrough occurs when the foreign ministers meet — and one hopes that no untoward incident mars the prospect. http://news.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/dawn-content-library/dawn/the-newspaper/editorial/19-a-fresh-start-350-hh-04

While the prime minister was having a meeting with provincial chief ministers to review the success of the energy conservation strategy, farmers in Balochistan observed a province-wide wheel-jam strike to protest electricity load shedding on the call of the Zamindar Action Committee. Extended power cuts are adversely affecting their crops. Agricultural productivity of the province is already low due to arid terrain and inadequate investment in development of this sector.

This protest is different from what we are accustomed to hearing from Balochistan — militancy, nationalist insurgency and, recently, target killings of non-Baloch people. This is something that cuts across the political and social spectrum, because it is a question of economic survival. In the widespread protests, all the main highways serving the province were shut down. While there has been an improvement in load shedding nationally, as the prime minister triumphantly observed, it seems that it is not equally spread amongst all provinces, and even within provinces, as some areas are more privileged than others.

Reportedly, the recent electricity crunch in Balochistan came due to destruction of seven power pylons in Naseerabad’s Chattar tehsil three weeks ago, disrupting electric supply to 40 grid stations of the province. According to Wapda officials, it could not carry out the repair work due to lack of adequate security for its repair team.

While making efforts to cool tempers raised due to electricity load shedding elsewhere in the country, the government should not leave out Balochistan. In the presence of heavy contingents of the military and paramilitary forces, it is strange why security cannot be provided to the WAPDA team for repair work. Given the sense of alienation of the Baloch people from the state, it is understandable that going out unguarded in the interior may be risky. But making it an excuse to delay work is not acceptable. The government must double up its effort to ensure a sustained supply of electricity in Balochistan at par with other provinces. The sense of deprivation and resentment in Balochistan because of the past injustices will only be further fuelled by the perception that they are once again being treated as second-class citizens. http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2010\05\12\story_12-5-2010_pg3_1

It is high time for ever sleeping Pakistani nation to get over from their woebegone and scanty situation. Dawn of every morning is induced with another calamity in one shape or the other. These calamities are not at all natural or inevitable but they are the aftermaths of contemptible and deplorable policies of the government. These policies were not completely erroneous from the beginning rather many of them were commendable and laudable but the only element that made these policies futile and delusive was corruption. Corruption is the fundamental element in the fiasco of Pakistan’s social fabric.
All the three pillars of the government i.e legislature, executive and judiciary are victim of it, whole of the bureaucracy and military are part of it and most of the political ulema are emblem of it. There are innumerable incidents and events in which high level extortion of funds was exposed to all but no action was taken by any democratic or military government to eradicate the nasty situation or to penalize the belligerents. As a result, today, we see that there is no Govt. office or department that is free from this Frankenstein’s monster, and whose working is efficient and transparent.
Today govt. job means a licence for exploitation in which there is no accountability and no punishment rather you would be having more and more personal relations with big fish who would help you out in making more black money and then proving it as legitimate earning.
This deplorable situation can be tackled if govt. shows sincerity with the state and sympathy with the people. All the past efforts i.e. Department of Anti-corruption and NAB have proved worthless only because of the reason that the respective department itself was not strong. It could not sustain the pressure of shabby political elite or odious bureaucrats or military top brass.
After a long time we find that at least two institutions of Pakistan are toiling to get back their prestige and dignity namely judiciary and army. Both the institutions are praised today for taking measures to cut down corruption from their offices. By dint of their honesty these institutions are gaining the support of people on one hand and foreign acceptance and assistance on the other.
Now one thing is far sure that only these two institutions are strong enough to regulate and monitor the process of accountability. To eliminate corruption from the social fabric of Pakistan it is necessary that this gigantic task should be given to the Pakistan army with the approval of the majority of parliament.
Parliament has passed 18th amendment but it is impossible for heterogeneous parliament to start accountability across the board. It is only possible if Pakistan Army allocates its few units with the task to curb corruption from each and every department of Pakistan Govt. It is not at all easy to get back the plundered wealth of Pakistan from the serving and retired Govt. officers who have already deposited the looted wealth in foreign banks. Judiciary must support military by providing the evidences which are already collected by it.
The network of military exists in all the provinces and this task can be completed in a very short span of time. This kind of transparent accountability should be steady, quick and swift. Our past experiences of 62 years reveal that we should not linger on the process of accountability because it gives a room to the corrupt people to flee from the country or to gather fake evidences for their defence. It is comparatively easier for the military to make lists of all the senior and junior corrupt officers and politicians. Their names and estimated plundered wealth including each and every kind of interest should be mentioned in the lists.
All the lists should be given to all the directors of the departments, NAB and judiciary. Telephone numbers and mail addresses should be given to the people of Pakistan to collect more and more authentic information about corrupt people. These days it is very easy to calculate the capital which has been plundered by a corrupt officer. Only the schooling of the children and residence of such a person can reveal a lot of facts. Easiest way is to compare the financial status of the accused before the employment and his luxuries of life at present.
Officers of grade 21 and 22 and the politicians who have remained the part of parliament are not many but officers from grade 14 to 20 and all other political workers are in great number. Their collective jobbery amounts more than billions of rupees and till the time we do not put them to task, they will not stop looting the country. Most of the issues and problems of the poor people are based on the discretion of the officers who are serving from grade 14 to 20.
It is clear from the facts that more chances of corruption are availed by these above mentioned officers. If Govt. cannot arrest senior most officers then at least Govt. should take steadfast measures to control the dishonesty of relatively junior officers because most of the down trodden masses are victimized by these junior officers.
Military must not wait or waste its time in capturing (nominating) the senior officers for accountability rather it should start accountability from the point, it feels better. If military proves the bribery of even few officers of grade 17 or 18, it would be a great success in a way that military would prove its worth and all the venality of Govt. officers would come to an halt at least for some period of time.
It would hearten the poor people because all the problems of the masses would start resolving without any dishonesty. It is a fact that corruption threatens good government, sustainable development, democratic process and fair business practices and if Govt. wants to subdue this situation then govt. must work out on this line of action. The greatest irony is that all this corrupted wealth is given by the poor people in shape of taxes i.e. bills and indirect taxes.
There is a strong relation between utility bills and corruption. The more the taxes are collected by govt. the more the corruption takes place. For the last one year electricity charges, gas prices and rates of petroleum products have increased almost 100% and corruption too increased more than 100%. This means inflation and corruption are directly proportional to each other and to cut down the prices Govt. has to eliminate each and every kind of theft from the society.
One thing is far sure that every time it is the people that pay the price of every disaster, may it be inflation, political skirmishes, load shedding or scarcity of water. If it is the matter of price rise a common man would bear the burnt, if it is load shedding a poor man has to face loss in his business and if it is scarcity of water then farmers have to face the disaster in shape of barren fields.
Our ruling elite remain untouched from any disaster and hence they never understand or try to solve the problems of the people. Parliament must make it mandatory that no govt. officer or parliamentarian should be provided by govt. vehicle, security staff and residence till the time he himself does not put request for the facilities by proving that he cannot afford these provisions personally.
All other govt. employees should use their own cars and live in their own big houses which are often located in the most expensive vicinity of the cities. It is said that extraordinary measures are taken in extraordinary circumstances but to be true all these measures are not at all hasty rather these are the need of the hour. Most of the govt. residences are given to those officers who already have more than two homes of their own in more than two cities of Pakistan.
Most of the government cars are given to those who already have more than three or four cars of their own. By ignoring such policies govt. is widening the gulf between the rich and the poor. Dissatisfaction and unrest is escalating in whole of the country and if prompt action is not taken by the quarters concerned in this regard, we would face ruination in each and every field. http://www.thefrontierpost.com/News.aspx?ncat=ar&nid=256