In 2013, despite facing many challenges, Pakistani democrats celebrated the first ever completion of full constitutional term by the elected assemblies in the entire history of the country. They were also taking pride in the smooth transfer of power from the outgoing elected civilian government to the incoming one without intervention of the undemocratic third force. But the movers and shakers of the deep state were not amused by their “redundancy “ in the power politics. The unanimous passage of 18th Constitutional Amendment by the Parliament in 2010 that was regarded to be a glorious victory for both the smaller provinces and the federation turned out to be an affront to the undemocratic forces espousing “strong centre” which was synonymous with a strong control by them. But before it gets too serious let me share a joke to diffuse the tension a little bit. They say that once a tourist from the US was visiting the famous Taj Mahal in India. When the Indian guide had explained the unique history and intricate architectural characteristics of one of the seven wonders of the world he stopped talking to get the response of the tourist. The American tourist, after a brief pause, said that he was just wondering as to how could the Mughals build such a magnificent structure without American aid !


But unfortunately the response of the protagonists in our story was not confined to mere expression of amazement about the aforementioned development of Pakistani democratic system. They decided to do something about it. And then we saw in 2014 the aggressive IK and TUQ led mob physically assaulting the Parliament, the Supreme Court , the Prime Minister House and Pakistan Television in Islamabad under the guise of a “ sit in “ which kept shifting its goal posts from overthrowing the newly elected government to destabilizing it during the siege which continued for months. The public pronouncements by the mobocrat aboutthe intervention of the “ umpire” to send the elected government back to pavilion by raising his finger did not materialize as all the political parties rallied to support the Constitution and Parliament but the pressure exerted in the process was enough to pave the ground for a soft coup. Consequently the military dominated apex committees took charge of the law and order situation in all the four provinces of the country for indefinite time. They have been in the driving seat in FATA for quite some time. The deep state that has been already calling the shots in resource allocation was able to expand its not so implicit control over not only the entire state security policy but also the major portions of the foreign policy. Another important side effect was almost a rupture of the case of high treason against the former military dictator General ( retired) Parvez Mussharaf for abrogating the Constitution . Welcome to yet another era of controlled democracy in Pakistan !


The present crises in Sindh is clearly undermining the very structure of provincial autonomy that supposed to have been achieved under the 18th Constitutional Amendment. Rangers, a force under the command of the federal government and called by the provincial government to provide help in fighting terrorism have taking upon themselves to occupy the driving seat in running the province. Going far beyond their constitutional mandate they have started raiding government offices and arresting government servants and political figures on the charges of corruption without informing the provincial government and without initial involvement of NAB, a federal institution with the sole function of curbing corruption. It is pertinent to mention here that no one has raised objection to NAB’s actions in cases of the alleged corruption. But there are some dangerous aspects to the present stand off between the federation and the Sind government which has the support of the elected provincial assembly. If Rangers are allowed to raid government offices and arrest official without even informing the provincial government , this is a type of mini martial law that may not remain confined to Karachi and may spread to Lahore, Peshawar and even Islamabad .


The federal government, which is an extension of the ruling Punjabi elite, has decided to back the decimation of the provincial government in Sindh at the hands of Rangers. Now this is extremely alarming as allowing the use of state coercion for reversing of provincial autonomy that was achieved through constitutional processes can have dangerous fall out . Apart from deepening sense of alienation among the people of the smaller provinces it will also make the job of the shock forces of authoritarianism easier when they next time come to Islamabad for overthrowing the civilian set up. Then there is the case of a former PPP federal minister Dr. Asim Hussain. He was arrested by Rangers under charges of corruption , financing terrorism and providing treatment to injured terrorists in his hospital. Again it was rightly pointed out by the PPP that investigation of corruption is the domain of NAB and Rangers have overstepped their authority by taking this case into their hands. Terror financing and providing treatment to injured terrorists are serious charges and the courts must look into these charges and proceed according to law. Every single Pakistani will support across the board action not just against terror financing but also action for implementing all the twenty points of NAP to eliminate terrorism. But difficult questions will be inevitably raised if the government will drag its feet on NAP implementation and single out a certain hospital owned by a certain political figure for its anti terror raids. Will the people not speak about a method in the madness? Or will they not ask ask as to how many hospitals have been raided to arrest people responsible for treating OBL or Mulla Mohammad Omar or hordes of Taliban? Last but not the least there will be question regarding IK’s confession about treatment of Taliban in SKMH.


December 16 reminds us of the blunders committed by our ruling establishment ( dominated by Punjabi elites) that led to the disintegration of the country in 1971. Pakistan opted for a federal parliamentary system after that in 1973 Constitution to avoid repeating that tragedy. But under a new bout of controlled democracy similar blunders are being repeated in FATA, Balochistan and Sind. Even PTI which is opposed to PML(n)’s stand on every thing under the sun is not shy of supporting its actions in Sindh. Is the lure of Takht-e-Lahore responsible for this myopia? But will the tyrannical oppression of smaller provinces under controlled democracy not undermine the federation?
http://nation.com.pk/columns/02-Jan-...lled-democracy

Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s brief stop-over at Lahore on 25 December on his way back from a two-day visit to Moscow and another stop-over at Kabul to inaugurate the Indian built new Parliament building was a master stroke of imaginative summit diplomacy which achieved several objectives in one go. To the international community which had been pressurizing India to respond positively to the several good-will gestures made by Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, it conveyed India’s willingness to improve relations with Pakistan on reasonable terms. To Pakistan, it appeared as a good-will gesture, strengthening the hands of doves, but without any visible substantive change in New Delhi’s policy towards Islamabad. Domestically, it reassured the people of India that Modi was able to act like a statesman in the handling of foreign affairs. But while defending Modi’s visit to Lahore, perhaps the most revealing comment was made by RSS’s joint general secretary Dattatraya Hosbole who said that in the management of foreign affairs “one has to use various means such as persuasion-purchase-punish-exploitation of division (saam-daam-dand-bhed) as per the circumstances. The then PM Atal Bihari Vajpayee undertook bus journey to Lahore but the Kargil war was too fought under his tenure”.

Undoubtedly, Modi’s stop-over improved the atmospherics of Pakistan-India relations. It must, therefore, be welcomed as a good-will gesture which hopefully would help in recommencing a comprehensive dialogue on all outstanding issues between the two countries. It has since been announced that the foreign secretaries of the two countries would meet in Islamabad on 15 January to chalk out a road map for the resumption of the dialogue. It remains to be seen, however, whether the meeting would be successful in achieving this objective, especially after the recent terrorist attack on the Pathankot air base. Unofficial reports emanating from India have laid the blame for the terrorist attack at the door-step of the Jaish-e-Muhammad outfit. Although there is no concrete evidence to support the allegation, yet the terrorist attack may already have cast a shadow on the prospects of the foreign secretaries meeting.

Modi’s sincerity in recommencing the comprehensive bilateral dialogue will be tested soon. If the foreign secretary-level talks indeed take place as planned and lead to a road map for the resumption of a dialogue covering all important issues of concern to the two sides, it will be a solid indicator that Modi-led India is finally ready to move away from coercive diplomacy, which it has practiced over the past few years, towards the path of negotiations. Such negotiations will certainly help in defusing tensions and the adoption of confidence building measures. This would not be a mean achievement as the avoidance of a major armed conflict or a war is in the mutual interest of both Pakistan and India because of their status as de facto nuclear-weapon states and because of their need for peace to concentrate their energies and resources on the gigantic task of eradication of poverty and raising the standard of living of their peoples.

But if the resumed Pakistan-India dialogue fails to show any progress towards the resolution of outstanding peace and security issues, particularly the Kashmir dispute, Siachen and terrorism, its beneficial effects in other areas will remain limited and easily reversible.

Therefore, progress in these areas is an indispensable condition for the development of mutually beneficial cooperation in economic and commercial fields on a sustainable basis. It is unrealistic to expect that the two countries would engage in far reaching programmes of cooperation in economic, commercial and technical fields while they are at loggerheads with each other on those issues which have caused wars and armed conflicts between them in the past. At the same time, it is also unrealistic to expect that such contentious issues as Kashmir would be resolved to the satisfaction of Pakistan, India and the Kashmiri people in a short period of time. Therefore, what is needed is a virtuous cycle in which some progress in the resolution of outstanding issues of peace and security leads to increased cooperation in economic, commercial and technical spheres which in turn would pave the way for enhanced progress in the former and so on.

The recommended course would require a sustained comprehensive dialogue over a fairly long period of time to produce the desired results for the improvement of Pakistan-India relations. Neither of the two countries should try to derail the dialogue process on flimsy grounds as has been India’s wont during the past few years. India would also have to give up its practice of coercive diplomacy and instead aim at achieving its objectives through negotiations with Pakistan on the basis of sovereign equality and mutual respect. Pakistan is not a helpless small country at the mercy of India’s bidding. It is a de facto nuclear-weapon state of 190 million people at the crossroads of South Asia, Central Asia and West Asia, which is able to safeguard its legitimate security and economic interests. It is also high time that the elements in Pakistan with defeatist mentality, who are willing to kowtow in front of India and sacrifice our national interests for pleasing India, were told to reconsider their views which amount to a sell out to India.

India during the past few years has tried to dictate to Pakistan its one-sided terms for the resumption of a comprehensive dialogue as if it is a favour to be granted by it. It demanded prior satisfaction on the issue of the condemnable Mumbai terrorist attacks for the resumption of a comprehensive bilateral dialogue. Pending a satisfactory resolution of the Mumbai issue, it was willing to move forward only in promoting Pakistan-India trade which it saw as an opportunity to dominate Pakistan’s economy. This approach should be obviously rejected by Pakistan. While Islamabad should take all possible steps through the judicial process to punish those elements in Pakistan who may have been responsible for the Mumbai terrorist attacks, India should also be told unequivocally that non-state actors on either side of the Pakistan-India border should not be allowed to derail the dialogue process through their machinations. Instead, the two countries should step up their cooperation in rooting out terrorism while remaining engaged in the dialogue process. It is also worth underlining here that whereas India has complaints against Pakistan on this score, the latter also has its own complaints, particularly about RAW’s involvement in terrorist activities in Balochistan, FATA and Karachi. The point which must be underlined is that neither Pakistan nor India can unilaterally lay down conditions for the resumption of the bilateral comprehensive dialogue.

India should also be told in no uncertain terms that it would have to give up its hegemonic designs in South Asia and learn to deal with Pakistan on the basis of sovereign equality and mutual respect in the interest of durable peace and cooperation. Finally, we should not encourage India into believing that the two countries could engage in sustained and unlimited programmes for the promotion of mutual cooperation in economic and commercial fields while outstanding issues of peace and security like Kashmir and Siachen continue to fester and poison their relationship. Those in Pakistan who offer advice to the contrary must be given an elementary course in economics which, for good reason, was also called political economy because of the close connection between economic and political issues. The crisis in Ukraine should suffice to bring home this point.
http://nation.com.pk/columns/05-Jan-...di-s-stop-over

__________________
"But screw your courage to the sticking place,
And we'll not fail." _Shakespeare, 'Macbeth')

Maybe it’s a good thing that the world is spinning so fast. It could hasten the change that our battered mother earth needs to heal, in body and in soul. As international power-play heats up, the sooner Pakistan decides where it stands the better it would be for all of us. Clearly, standing on the sidelines is not an option when you’re bang in the middle of it all.

While staying neutral sounds great, it is essentially another name for staying passive in this time of international upheaval being thrust upon us. It boils down to making half-hearted clichéd resolves to mediate between brother Muslim countries while doing precious nothing; picture the continuing destruction of Yemen. So, should we be silent observers as the Third World War unfolds all around us?

I’m not suggesting that we send our troops to fight in another country. In fact, even those serving in useless UN peacekeeping missions should be brought home to augment the successful military operation against terrorists. All indications are that the real war on terrorism, not the farce with a similar name enacted by the US mind you, is about to get tougher in the international arena and at home. Patrons of terrorists have laid out their intentions on the table and they don’t look good.

Don’t tell me, in this day and age, you need me to tell you who the patrons of global terrorism are and what they intend to do. Don’t you see what they have done in recent years in Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya, Yemen and Syria? Can’t you see them claiming to fight terrorism while continuing their policy of funding, training and arming terrorists and playing them as pieces of chess to foment chaos and violence where they wish to?

The members of the US-led cabal, complete with allies, vassals and mini-me puppets like Saudi Arabia and Turkey, gather coalitions in the name of fighting terrorism and pretend to engage in dialogues for negotiated settlements, all the while employing terrorists as tools of perpetual war for crushing resistance to their designs for world domination. Caught with their terrorism-laden pants down in Syria and desperate to save their proxies, the US-led gang would now like to deflect the attention from their terrorist-crimes by shooting down planes and fuelling sectarian identities within the Muslim world.

Surely, what we are dealing with is much bigger than a sectarian spat triggered by the hanging of a cleric and the burning of an embassy.

It’s not even about the rivalry between Saudi Arabia and Iran and balancing our relations with two brother Muslim countries. What we are witnessing is a full-blown global war for the future of our planet and staying neutral doesn’t make sense when one side is hell-bent on destroying it completely.

The last masks are now flying off the face of those defending the continuation of the world order as we know it, a cleverly crafted facade for aggressive imperial exploitation under the law of the jungle. This rotten order has lately come to stand upon the arrogance of US exceptionalism and the lawlessness of its unilateralism. It is an order sustained by military interventions without a UN mandate on one hand and a dollar-based international economy on the other, by donor-driven NGOs on one hand and proxy terrorists on the other. Of course, not everyone is happy with this arrangement.

The biggest challenge for the US-led cabal and the rotten order it lords over has come in the shape of the China-Russia nexus and the change it portends for how our world is run. At the last UN General Assembly session, President Xi and President Putin both took an exception to the US claims about being an exceptional nation and its self-proclaimed right to militarily intervene in other countries without a mandate by the UN Security Council.

Clearly, diplomacy is only one aspect of the multi-faceted cooperation between China and Russia that is growing deeper at a tremendous pace. Together, they are building a parallel international finance architecture that bypasses the dollar. Their security doctrines are converging and as they coordinate efforts to genuinely tackle terrorism, the symbiotic relationship between global terrorism and the US-led gang is being laid bare.

The tentacles of the terrorist monster bred by the US cabal go way beyond Syria; from the Middle East to Africa, from countries in Central Asia to regions within the Republic of China and the Russian Federation. We should know a thing or two about these terrorist tentacles, engaged as we are under the current military leadership in cutting them off from the roots. We should know also because we bred them in collaboration with the US and Saudi Arabia in the 1980s.

The course correction in our strategic alignment has been brought about by the current military leadership that has distanced itself from the US-led cabal and is strengthening security and intelligence cooperation with the China-Russia nexus to effectively fight the proxy monster of terrorism. Obviously, it makes sense to cooperate with other targets of terrorism rather than its patrons.

The Saudi antics, whether it is the announcement of the doomed 34-member coalition or playing up the sectarian narrative, are designed to cover up its role as a prime patron of terrorism by drowning important developments on the world stage in a whirlpool of deception and distractions. Don’t tell me that, in this day and age, you would like me to tell you why our government announced that Pakistan was very much a part of the 34-member coalition though it was formed without consulting it.

So, whether we like it or not, we’re in the middle of it all; what with the Saudis and the US trying to drag us back to their chaotic laps on one hand and Iran right next door to us, a country that is clearly a part of the China-Russia resistance to the imperial world order. Staying neutral doesn’t make sense. In any case, withdrawing from the hoax of the Saudi-led coalition of 34 countries is the least our government could do to bring any credibility to its claims of neutrality.

__________________
"But screw your courage to the sticking place,
And we'll not fail." _Shakespeare, 'Macbeth')