Continuing blunders in the presidency

Wednesday, October 01, 2008
by Shireen M Mazari

A lot of attention is being paid to Zardari's comments on the Republican vice-presidential candidate, Sarah Palin, which undoubtedly may have been an attempt by our woolly-headed president to assert what he regards as his "playboy" credentials par excellence. Or perhaps he was simply going a step beyond Ms Rehman's facetious remarks made earlier to Ms Palin. But this particular incident was certainly not in the same category as Musharraf's declaration in New York about Pakistani women seeking to be raped to get visas to the west! What is it with our presidents when they arrive in the US? Are they so overwhelmed by being in the vicinity of our new imperial master? Whatever the case, it would appear that more harm than good has come to Pakistan from such visits, and the Zardari visit is yet one more instance of this.

If one can move away from the detracting Palin absurdities of President Zardari, which at best caused Pakistan to suffer, hopefully, only temporary indignity, other actions and statements of the president will certainly have a more lasting negative impact. The most critical is, of course, the joint statement issued after the Zardari-Singh meeting. It is obvious that when Zardari had declared that he would have "good news" on Kashmir, he was referring to good news for India. For that is what the joint statement is all about – unilaterally conceding to Indian demands. If the joint statement is to be a reflection of Pakistan's new policy towards India, it has neither any national consensus nor, therefore, democratic legitimacy.

Worse still, it totally undermines the Pakistani position that progress in all other areas of cooperation must be linked, no matter how tenuously – and in Musharraf's time the link was tenuous – to progress on Kashmir. Pakistan has not been demanding resolution of Kashmir but simply some progress on conflict resolution. Yet, the Zardari-Singh Joint Statement makes no reference even to this aspect of Pakistan's position while agreeing to opening of land trade routes – especially the most stridently demanded by India, the Wagah-Attari route into Pakistan and onwards into Afghanistan and Central Asia. While the intra-Kashmir trade routes may be a CBM of sorts, certainly the land routes across the international border are a unilateral concession, once again, to India. And Mr Zardari seems to be oblivious to the strategic dynamics of conceding the Skardu-Kargil route opening soon for India! It is not that trade should not be removed from the backdoor unaccountable route but giving away land route rights with no quid pro quo is another issue altogether.

Another demand of India's that was conceded to was a commitment to full normalisation of relations again without committing to any form of conflict resolution – be it on Kashmir, Siachin or Sir Creek. As for the issue of India's continued violations of the Indus Water Treaty and the blocking of the waters of the Chenab, all that Zardari got was an "assurance" that India would abide by the Treaty! What a joke, given how it has been violating this treaty to the extent of effectively destroying it. Yet President Zardari was "thankful" because Prime Minister Singh had given his "assurances" on the waters issue. Clearly the president needs to be better educated on Indian "assurances"! Then, as part of the humorous clowning that our president is fast making his trade mark, he declared that "we are not afraid of the K (Kashmir) word!" Unfortunately, Mr President, you are truly afraid of the K word lest it derail your dangerous agenda vis-a-vis India!

Even on terrorism, a one-sided concession appeared, with both sides agreeing to hold a special meeting of the Joint Anti-Terror Mechanism this month (October) to address mutual concerns including the bombing of the Indian embassy in Kabul! First, by accepting to look into this incident, Pakistan has de facto accepted its involvement. But if specifics in third countries were to be identified, then why not include the bombing of our Consulate in Kandahar which followed the Kabul bombing, and RAW's murky role in Balochistan through Afghanistan, etc. Does President Zardari realise the damage done to Pakistan by including the bombing of the Indian mission in Kabul in this way in the Joint Statement? Clearly, if the Musharraf-Vajpayee January 2004 joint declaration's reference to terrorism was damaging for Pakistan, this joint statement goes far beyond in terms of undermining Pakistan's position on a number of issues.

In fact, the slide down unilateral concessions is picking up pace fast thanks to the free-wheeling and non-serious style of President Zardari in conducting foreign relations. His meeting with Bush was embarrassing for any self-respecting Pakistani while the UN speech seemed to be coming from a party leader rather than the President of all Pakistan. It is high time he realises that, for better or worse, he now represents all Pakistanis not simply the around 30 per cent plus that voted for the PPP.

They say "where ignorance is bliss `tis folly to be wise" but in the case of a president of a sovereign state, ignorance can never be bliss – at least for that country. So it is with this hapless nation. On what basis could our president have declared that "Bush has made the world safer"? Even US strategic allies will not state such an absurdity! Is Zardari totally oblivious of the Iraq invasion, the unleashing of US military force and repression of Muslims through renditions and illegal incarceration in Guantanamo, and the growing space his actions have provided for the spread of Al Qaeda and the spawning of religious extremism across the globe – not to mention his acceptance of the brutal repression of the Palestinian people by a fascist Israel?

For the first time a Muslim president talked of the Bush-defined axis of evil and how it is growing – now was he actually referring to the same axis of evil Bush refers to which include Pakistan's Muslim state allies like Iran as well as North Korea with which Pakistan has no quarrel? Does President Zardari even know what he is talking about when he makes such bizarre pronouncements? And where are his handlers who can actually do some damage control? Can they not keep their infighting – which was reflected so shabbily in Haqqani's dinner fiasco – at bay in the larger national interest? Or is this deliberate revenge on the Pakistani nation whose leaders kept Zardari incarcerated? After all, look how he used and abused the PML-N leadership – which had incarcerated him in the first place!

How much damage are we going to be subjected to? And how much have we now conceded to the US after this disastrous visit? Even on the one occasion when we had finally decided to act in defence of our sovereignty by firing against US aerial incursions into Pakistan, President Zardari undermined the nationalist posture and resolve by denying any such action on the part of Pakistan. No wonder the US has since resumed invading our territory with impunity after the Zardari assurances! At this rate, it would not be surprising to find concessions having been made on strategic issues also – where it would appear attempts are being made to undermine the watertight security by the ruling party seeking entry of party men into the strategic institutions regardless of qualifications or security clearances. Perhaps there have been so many backdoor deals from the time of the NRO that there is hesitancy on the part of the government to have parliamentary discussions on sensitive issues like terrorism in particular and foreign policy in general.

At the end of the day, one-man rule continues – only the uniform has been replaced by civvies – and blundering pronouncements continue to rule the day. At the very least, our recent history proves that presidential visits to the US should be avoided if we are to retain even a modicum of dignity and sovereignty.

The writer is a defence analyst. Email: callstr@hotmail.com
http://www.thenews.com.pk/daily_detail.asp?id=138890

Shireen M Mazari

The big picture for Pakistan should be more visible now in terms of what the US agenda is for this country. But that agenda has been carefully operationalized since the opportunity presented itself to the US in the form of the terrorist attacks of 9/11 – in which, by the way, no Pakistani was involved. Some of us have been highlighting that agenda for some years since, and also pointing out how complicity of our leadership was a requirement for that agenda to continue moving ahead. And what is that agenda?

Clearly, it involves the US creating space within the tribal areas to move in militarily and eventually restructure the whole Muslim nuclear entity of Pakistan. Attacking civilians and thereby creating chaos and panic which would inevitably lead to a mass displacement and add to the pressure on the central government in Islamabad. Also, knowing full well – after all if we can conclude that such killings will create more space for extremists and terrorists, one can assume the US analysts and advisers must have done the same – that by unleashing a war against our tribals and abusing our sovereignty they will create more space for the terrorists; and thereby more reasons to further destabilise us from outside while we face increasing attacks from our home-grown terrorists. Let us not fool ourselves – the US is no friend but a powerful enemy and its ultimate aim is to defang us in terms of our nuclear assets. Already the statements have become more honed in terms of our nuclear assets – both directly, in terms of a bizarre fear that our nukes will fall into "terrorist" hands even though it is the US that seems to have a problem of loose nukes (remember the US planes flying with such weapons only last year?); and, indirectly, by having their politicians and some international agencies build up a crescendo of Pakistan being the most dangerous country in the world and a new "war zone".

That was the first phase of the plan for Pakistan. As the US war on terror has unfolded in our part of the world, we have suddenly seen the emergence of a Tehrik-i-Taliban, Pakistan and countless other militant groups – some of whom were raised and funded by the CIA in earlier years and may well have sustained that linkage. The most aggressively loyal Pakistanis of the tribal belt have now been turned into challengers of the writ of the Pakistani state. Is it not worth understanding why and how? We are being forced into accepting the US war now as "our war" although in reality while we are facing a severe threat from extremists and home grown terrorists, our fight against these forces has to be different from the US war on terror. That is still not our war but is in fact fuelling and aggravating our terrorist problems.

Now the US has moved to phase two where it is actually seeking direct intervention on the ground before it finally puts international pressure on us to hand over our nuclear assets – showing the world how Pakistan has indeed become a "war zone" in which the international community must intervene to take charge of the nuclear assets. Of course, the US would then offer to head such a mission. Seems far fetched? Then recheck what has been happening in terms of US policy vis a vis Pakistan since 9/11 and the statements emanating from the US at the official and media levels.

As for us Pakistanis, we are being confronted with a two-front war: against a qualitatively new terrorist threat in terms of suicide bombings and the growth of a violent extremism; and, against an indirect war being conducted by the US against our long term survival as an independent nuclear state. But, as I stated at the beginning, none of the US agenda would be feasible without the support of the Pakistani rulers. Unfortunately this support has been there from the start but now it has reached new proportions.

During the Musharraf government we were given many briefings to the effect that the US and NATO/ISAF could only intrude aerially into our space with our permission. As a perturbed pilot informed me the other day, he was shocked to learnt that apart from the UAVs flying into Pakistani air space, NATO and ISAF aircraft are flying round the clock tactical missions in Pakistan. Apparently, they have been cleared by our controllers' to fly tactical in FATA, "Pukhtunkhwa" and Balochistan. The Musharraf government had also given unprecedented access to the US in terms of bases and intelligence. But our democratic leadership has gone even further in affecting unilateral compromises, including it now appears permission to hit and kill our own people, which impact our very survival as an independent nuclear entity.

Regardless of how our own Goebbels tries to explain away the Zardari interview to the Wall Street Journal, the quotes speak for themselves and nor has a correction been sought or offered on either side. First there is the absurd style of reference President Zardari uses when talking of Pakistan and its institutions as his personal fiefdom, "my F-16s", "my security personnel" (that is the military) "my war" and so on. And of course he wants the world to "give me" $ 100 billion!

More damaging though is his declaration that not only is he "an American friend" but that the US is carrying out Predator missile strikes on Pakistani soil with his government's consent. His logic for insisting the US support his government also undermines Pakistan because he seeks to show that if he falls our nukes will fall into terrorist hands. Is this how he protects our national interests? Now if his wish of accessing our strategic institutions with his cronies and the like is fulfilled, we may as well hand over all our assets to the US – and now, by default, given the Indo-US strategic partnership, to India.

But then, they say a little knowledge is a dangerous thing and it seems our president has no understanding of our history since he declares grandly, "India has never been a threat to Pakistan". Please, Ms Rehman, at least teach him some basic history and you do not have to use Pakistani sources either! As for his comment on the Indo-US nuclear deal – which even more rational US analysts have decried as a factor in upping the nuclear arms' levels in South Asia, our ignorant President sees it merely as the "largest democracy" in the world "getting friendly" with the "oldest democracy" in the world!

In fact, he sees his own country simply as a backyard to serve Indian development. As for the poor Kashmiris, they have been labelled "terrorists" for seeking liberation from Indian occupation! To our shame, a Pakistani ruler's effigy was burnt for the first time since 1979, in Baramulla town in Occupied Kashmir with 400 Kashmiris defying curfew to express their anger at the Zardari labelling of the Kashmiri freedom fighters as "terrorists". So far, Zardari has certainly been good news only for the US and India!

If Musharraf was forced to compromise with the US – although now his compromises appear miniscule when compared to what the present government is giving to the US – to ostensibly sustain himself in power then what is our present leadership so worried about in terms of the US? Are there still some dangerous skeletons despite the NRO that the US can utilise to keep the democratic dispensation in line with its eventual goal of ending the nuclear Pakistani state as we know it?

If the present trends continue we may well eventually confront a civil war across the country. This is exactly the situation the US is seeking to come in fully and set up its own quisling set up. As we and the US know, there have always been many in our leadership only too willing to play that role. As for the present leaders, their embarking on the road to power may well have been prepared in Washington, but it is Pakistan's realities that will ensure their stay in or removal from power. Can they manage to get out of the US embrace to see their own realities?



The writer is a defence analyst. Email: callstr@hotmail.com

http://www.thenews.com.pk/daily_detail.asp?id=139855

__________________
The Me you have always known, the Me that's a stranger still.

Wednesday, October 15, 2008
Shireen M Mazari

So the president has finally become aware of Indian duplicity and hostile intent towards Pakistan. Deeply rooted in its revisionist historical mindset, India is certainly not going to alter its approach towards Pakistan simply because of the presumed "charm offensive" the president feels he can turn on to right all ills the country faces! In fact, it is the Indians who yet again managed to trap our leadership into conceding all manner of political (on Kashmir) declaratory compromises and trade concessions while they continue to undermine us with water strangulation and baseless charges of cross-LOC infiltration.

Our present leaders would do well to study the water disputes India continues to have with its other neighbours, despite the India-tilted bilateral agreements these neighbours were made to ink. Our seemingly lethargic approach to taking up the waters issue with India has sent the wrong signals to this bullying neighbour – or were they the intended signals, given how our new national security adviser (who has come full circle from being a GoP military bureaucrat to being American neo con Shireen Taher-Kheli's employee to again being a GoP appointee) has not allowed the serious Chenab water strangulation by India disrupt his misplaced bonhomie with Indian leaders in New Delhi!

Meanwhile, the state seems to be coming up with increasingly dysfunctional behaviour on the issue of terrorism. With no clear cut political policy of its own, its military is being compelled to fight bush fires and holding actions in a vacuum. The idea of building a national consensus through a threadbare briefing and discussion in Parliament seems to have come undone with many Parliamentarians complaining about the inadequacies of the briefings – the operational ones being little different to those given to many other sets of people including journalists. Of course, here one is equally at a loss to understand the PML–N logic of not asking pertinent questions because the briefings were unsatisfactory Logic would suggest that truly comprehensive and satisfactory briefings would throw up little in the form of questions while an unsatisfactory briefing would be all the more reason to ask probing questions. But what does logic have to do with our political leaders.

Clearly, the major starting point for any comprehensive information on Pakistan's post-9/11 anti-terrorism policy has to be the deal made with the US – what actually was and is presently being conceded to, to the Americans, and what are the quid pro quos. Without this basic starting point how can parliamentarians come to rational decisions which would be necessary to formulate a consensus policy? Or was the idea to hold these parliamentary briefings simply to get the elected reps to okay our continuing concessions to the US? If that was the intent, let us hope the elected reps will, for once, not allow themselves to be taken for granted or steamrolled on what is a critical national priority. Incidentally, can one ask why the government and the military have suddenly gone silent, after Zardari's return from the US, on the increasing US incursions into Pakistan and the killing of innocent tribal people almost on a daily basis? Is this yet another ground we have conceded to the Americans?

As a result of our concessions to the US and the damage the latter has done to this country and its people, the sad fact is that unless the government of Pakistan is able to create space between itself and the US, it will not be able to have a credible policy for tackling its terrorism and extremism problem; and without this credibility no policy will be effective. It is not about accepting or not accepting the war on terror as "our war"; it is about fighting this menace effectively, which can only be done with the support of the people since the terrorists and extremists – barring the foreign elements – spring from the people themselves. And while on the subject of foreigners, let the people be informed about the US citizen recently caught in the tribal area with suspicious maps on his computer. He is probably one of the many undercover US personnel roaming all over the northern and western parts of this country from Warsak onwards.

Meanwhile, if there was any doubt at all about the US hostile intent towards Pakistan, the verbose Mullen's latest pronouncements should clarify these lingering doubts. By declaring US intent of involving the Indians militarily in Afghanistan as part of the US strategy, the US is deliberately upping the ante for Pakistan in terms of its immediate security parameters. First it was the Indo-US nuclear deal, which will liberate Indian unsafeguarded fuel for the manufacture of additional nuclear weapons; and now Pakistan may confront Indian troops on its Western border also. US intent on involving the Indian military in Afghanistan has been on the cards for some time now and I had discovered this when in New Delhi in February 2008, when, at a conference, a US Defence Department person stated that the US saw the Indian military as the only effective military for the US's Afghanistan strategy. On my return I had not only written about this development but also spoken to government officials on this count. Presumably our civil and military bureaucracy chose to ignore such information.

Worse still, even to the more brazen statement of intent expressed by Mullen, no one from our officialdom or political leadership has given a response. One really has to wonder why! Perhaps some elected member of parliament could ask this question also when the briefings resume.

As if the continuing hostile US intent was not enough, the British through their media are now trying to once again undermine our intelligence organisations by declaring that the Taliban they had killed was actually a Pakistani army officer of the ISI, no less. Now how did they come to the following conclusions: One, that the man they killed was a Taliban, given how the ordinary Pukhtun differs little in physical appearance from a "Taliban"? Did he have the word Taliban imprinted on his forehead or did he carry some Taliban ID? If he was a Pakistani army officer, did he wear his uniform under a "Taliban" uniform? Or did he have Pak army/ISI IDs on him which would be absurd if he was undercover? Or do the Brits think they are above reproach or question on their assertions?

No. These are simply the deliberately nonsensical British and American media claims targeting Pakistan. As the US moves into phase two (identified in this column last week) of its Pakistan agenda, which involves seeking direct access into Pakistan on the ground, by making Pakistan the main "war zone" in the fight against terrorism, the Brits are aiding this agenda by undermining our strategic institutions. We need to be clear about our own interests and agendas as well as those of the US and its allies, including India. Most important of all, we need to take our people into confidence and have policies that are in consonance with the wishes of the people.

Our tragedy has been that be it in the brief interludes of democracy or the longer periods of dictatorship (both civil and military), the people have been simply cast aside or short-shrifted. Most recently, and most glaringly, this has happened in case of the judicial issue. It has also happened in the case of the missing persons issue and the continuing and disturbing unanswered questions regarding the Dr Aafia case; and it has continued to happen on the issue of terrorism and extremism. Perhaps if the rulers would move more in tune to the wishes of the people, and give a little more credence to the intelligence and commitment of the people, instead of looking longingly towards an increasingly hostile US, we would be more able to control and better shape our country's future destiny.

The writer is a defence analyst. Email: callstr@hotmail.com
http://www.thenews.com.pk/daily_detail.asp?id=141012

__________________
No signature...

A proxy occupation force?

Wednesday, October 22, 2008
Shireen M Mazari

Is Pakistan under occupation? If one is living in the capital, this seems to be the picture as our democratically elected leaders and their state apparatus increasingly behave like an occupation force. Perhaps given our ever increasing concession to the US, one can actually regard the Pakistani state as a proxy occupation force for the US. How else can one explain the present government's desire to recreate the "Green Zone" of Iraq in Islamabad? After all, Iraq's Green Zone basically was necessitated to protect the hated American occupiers and their local Quislings. Obviously, for an occupation force their lives are more valuable to them than the lives of the local people.

In Islamabad, the Navy had sealed its E-8 occupied area from the common Pakistani while the civilian citizen of the capital has not created any hurdles in the movement of naval officers in their residential and workplace areas. More recently the Air Force took the same apartheid-like approach for their E-9 occupied area so a civilian has to undergo many trials before moving in these areas – if allowed at all.

But is this how our democratically elected leaders also think? Now for our civilian leaders it seems all citizens are suspect, barring officialdom and the members of parliament. Too bad elected people can easily forget who sent them there in the first place. So now, thanks to the desire of the new leadership to isolate itself and become an occupation force rather than a representative government, we can undergo the same experiences as our brethren in Iraq. Now if only the wild boars could also realise that, democracy or not, leaders in Pakistan will protect their isolation, come what may, so their forays into the presidency will only result in dire poisoning! Of course, at the end of the day, if people rise up against occupation and increasing hardships, what happens to the self-designed occupiers? A problem has to be resolved and mere cutting off from the problem is no solution but an impediment towards one.

Coming back to the Pakistani state and its concessions to the US, while a complete picture is probably not possible, one does not require an in-camera briefing to make some general assessments as to what has been conceded by Pakistan post-9/11 to the US. But a reminder would be timely right now when we are seeing a resumption of the silence on continued US attacks in FATA against our citizens and our sovereignty.

Certainly, in the early days of our entering the US-led "war on terror," we offered certain strategic bases of which Jacobabad has since been returned apparently over two years ago (or so one is informed, but there is always the trust factor that is not totally there for us ordinary citizens). In any case, since our initial giving on this count, we have clearly given some base-like facilities to the US around Warsak, although, ostensibly, here there are only "trainers" for the FC and other Pakistani units involved in anti-terror operations. But as we all know, even the presence of a few US trainers requires a whole base-like infrastructure in terms of food (they do not trust the local variety), entertainment, logistics, communications (heaven forbid that they have to rely on ours), security, and so on. So, even if informally, we have a base presence in the Warsak area now. As for the Shamsi base in Balochistan where there are Predators, one can safely assume that the US would find it tempting to target Iran from this prime location (westward of Khuzdar). It is time we took back this base which is undermining our own regional security parameters.

Beyond bases, Pakistan also agreed to information/intelligence sharing and so all the equipment at airports, ports, and so on, through which information is gathered is shared with the Americans. But it seems there is little reciprocity from the US side on this count. What is unclear, and I wonder if we will ever know truly, the compromises made by Pakistan on renditions and the handing over of Pakistani citizens to the US. What we do know is that some agreement on this count was also put in place, with some individuals actually making money as a result – to Pakistan's eternal shame. It would also appear that this agreement continues since Zardari, despite grandiose statements, did not even mention Dr Afia Siddiqui's name while in the US recently.

It also appears that we allowed, and continue to do so, 24-hour overflights for US and NATO tactical operations over/through Pakistani airspace. Such instructions have been given to our air traffic controllers. In addition, over briefings given in the past, we were told that all Predator/missile attacks the US undertook were initially done with permission from Pakistan. But now it appears they have stopped seeking that permission. In fact, the Libbi strike was also carried out without Pakistani permission so we do not know when the US altered policy and chose not to inform, let alone seek Pakistani permission for attacks on Pakistani territory.

What we do know is that there was no agreement on ground attacks by US forces. Tut since the present government has been in power a question mark hangs over this aspect of so-called cooperation with the US. Especially since, after Zardari declared in New York, that Pakistani forces had not fired on US intruders, there has been not even a murmur of protest at the increasing US violations against Pakistani sovereignty and Pakistani citizens. In fact, so emboldened have the US and NATO become that, for the first time, in a reversal of the earlier stance, the NATO command has declared support for US intrusions into Pakistan! So, an intelligent conclusion would be that our new government has added to the concessions made by Musharraf.

As for the money Pakistan supposedly has received in return, first it should be clear that no amount of money can justify handing over a chunk of our sovereignty to the US for military purposes. In any case, the Coalition Support Fund went to the government and was to be shared 40:60 by them and the military, but from all accounts the military never got the full 60 percent. As for weapons, it is a cruel joke that continues to be played on the Pakistanis – or is our military so desperate for US equipment and training? It should not be since the army especially has managed without for many decades.

In any case, the largesse of night-vision goggles and supplies for our Cobra helicopters is hardly state-of-the-art transfers! More humiliating for the army has been the regular accounting of these goggles by US personnel which requires the army to collect all the goggles from far and wide and show them to their Yank givers before being returned to use! Now we had yet another absurdity of the US giving us a 32-year-old frigate which we have to restore at a cost of $65 million. If you want to see a proper military partnership simply look at what the US is giving India in terms of weapons systems and weapons technology and then realise where you stand with the so-called ally, the US!

But if our parliamentarians still think the US is our ally, Boucher's latest visit should have made things clearer. No talks, the Americans simply want to kill all our people who they classify as Taliban! This has been the other compromise we made with the US: No successful talks with our people on the pattern of the IRA-UK-Ireland talks and others of a similar pattern–only military response. After all, what seems to have remained hidden to all our leaders, although it has been clear to the rest of us for some years now, is the disruptive and negative US agenda for Pakistan. But our rulers continue to play the US game and our legislators do not seem to have the will to assert their democratic force to change course for the better. There are other solutions to our terrorism/extremism problem, but someone in power has to be prepared to move away from the US and listen to their own people. Till then, they are becoming our occupiers by proxy.

Email: smnews80@hotmail.com
http://www.thenews.com.pk/daily_detail.asp?id=142373

__________________
No signature...

For a brief moment faith in the workings of our democracy was restored with the passage of the unanimous resolution on terrorism. Despite inadequate briefings where nothing confidential was revealed; despite foreboding news about a lack of interest being shown by legislators on this most critical issue; despite a suspicion that the government was seeking to use parliament as a mere rubber stamp to claim the American war on terror as our own; despite all these fear, the unanimous fourteen-point resolution that was passed reflected the sense of the nation across the board – barring a few die-hard American apologists. For those of us who felt the government would push its US-focused agenda through, it was a pleasure to eat humble pie.

The 14-point resolution restored faith in the workings of parliament and in the elected representatives for they provided the state with a national consensus that was truly reflective of the people. It focused on dialogue with all stakeholders – and the Pakistani Taliban are also stakeholders – without the preconditions the rulers had been harking on earlier; it sought to kept he army in the background as a policy tool of last resort while reasserting the civil authority of government and law enforcement agencies and recognised to enhance the capacity of the latter; and, perhaps most important, it sought to reassert the sovereignty of the country and its territory and called on the government to take measures to ensure this. Finally it sought parliamentary control for supervision and oversight of the policy to be formulated on the basis of this resolution.

But what has happened in the wake of the passage of this historic resolution? American drone attacks have increased with a vengeance – as if to deliberately spite the Pakistani parliament and thereby Pakistan's return to democracy. Worse still, our rulers chose to maintain a silence till sufficient time passed to make their verbal protest irrelevant. Now the Senate has passed a resolution condemning US bombings and asking the government to take action to ensure these strikes end. What is required is resoluteness by the government on multiple fronts. First of all, it has to play the diplomatic card over and over again in terms of protests; but these have not proven effective in the past and clearly the Americans are not interested in upholding the Pakistani democratic consensus. So, in addition to the diplomatic route, the government has to issue orders to its military to take whatever action is needed to show by intent that Pakistan intends to implement the parliamentary resolution's sovereignty protection demand. In addition, an in-between step can be the temporary withdrawal from the tripartite Commission to convey the point forcefully to the Yanks. Also, it would do us no harm – in fact our commitment and determination would be conveyed unequivocally – to temporarily suspend US/NATO supplies going through and also suspend the twenty-four hour overflight permission in Pakistani air space, for tactical missions. It is now abundantly clear that unless we create the space between ourselves and the US, we will never rid our country of extremism and militancy.

However, parliamentary resolutions are simply a beginning. What follows depends on the actual intent of the government. Is it simply busying the legislators in parliamentary discussions and resolutions which it has no intention of implementing? That is certainly the impression being given so far. After all, if the speaker can find time to grace passing out parades of female cadets, can she not find time to put in place the committees and so on that are needed to fulfil the demands of the 14-point resolution? Talk and verbal commitments come cheap to the present set of leaders – as just so much "politics", to quote the president himself. Be it the restoration of the judiciary or the Constitution itself, words and actions are totally at variance with each other. It appears there is a general assumption that all the people, including the legislators, can be fooled all of the time if conciliatory declarations, without substance, are made periodically by the leaders!

Now there is talk of having an in-camera session on the economy but again to what avail? The government seems to have decided to take the US-favoured route of the IMF. Already the IMF has sought to fire the first salvo by stopping the $300 million World Bank loan. Let us be clear that if we go to the IMF, this country will be rocked by further instability and violence. This will play into the hands of the US which eventually seeks to undermine the state in its present form – especially in terms of its nuclear assets. Already the government is playing a strange game on the waters issue with India. By the time the Indians undo their illegal actions on the Chenab waters the damage will be done in terms of an inability of the farmers to sow the wheat crop. Meanwhile, President Zardari's love fest with the Indians will have allowed them unprecedented access to our markets and to the much-coveted land route into Afghanistan – all unilateral concessions as it turns out. Incidentally, if this government is really intent on cosying up to India, it should first focus on the energy sector through joint nuclear energy generation. This is the only sector that has immediate benefits for both countries which can also jointly control the civil nuclear technology. But every time I have suggested this to the Indians, they balk. Why, if they really do want to go fore the peace and development dividend?

But coming back to agriculture, already there are problems because of the over 12-hour power blackouts in the rural areas – including of southern Punjab, no matter what the Punjab chief minister may claim in terms of aiding the farmers. After all, providing tractors when there is no water to sow the crop and no electricity to run the tube wells is a bad joke on the farming community. It seems that the state is seeking to destroy the country's agricultural potential altogether so that Indian wheat and sugar may takeover the market. Incidentally, as happens every time there is some economic crisis or crunch, agriculturalists are targeted. Well, I think it is time to have agricultural tax based on production rather than the abiana and land tax we pay now which is based on holdings regardless of actual yield or production – that is, treat agriculture like industry with the same laws regarding labour and insurance. Perhaps it is also time to ensure that professionals like doctors and lawyers also pay their due share in terms of income tax, so that indirect taxation is not constantly upped to the detriment of the poorer classes of society.

As for the IMF, the US will undoubtedly seek this as a tool to target state institutions like the military but the issue of the IMF goes far beyond since the record on what the IMF does to developing states is clear for all to see – political instability and greater polarisation. And when will Pakistan's ruling elite learn that bankers have not done much for the country's long term economic health. So why do we continue to depend on them for formulating our economic policies in alliance with what friend Imti calls "the retired and serving Gurkha fighters of the IMF". Here it would not be amiss to remind ourselves that regardless of their fighting skills and bravery, the Gurkhas were a mercenary fighting force for the British colonisers. Mosharraf Zaidi's argument for defaulting (The News, October 28) need to be seriously considered (I find myself agreeing with him for once!) by our leaders and parliamentarians before another banker entraps this country into the IMF trap. Can they not follow the example of the passionate overseas Pakistani, Dr Yasir Khan from Australia, who has remitted to Pakistan $ 1000 for each member of his family and suggests others send at least $350 per head. Again, what a contrast between the rulers and the ordinary Pakistani wherever he/she may be. The latter acts to save his/her country while the former are full of hot air and dubious intent.

Finally, how long will the state allow women to be murdered by the powerful? A few brave souls expose these ills and then all is quiet again. While reading the horror story of young Taslim Solangi, one wonders what has happened in the case of the murdered Baloch women? Have the powerful succeeded in getting away again with such dastardly deeds?


The writer is a defence analyst. Email: callstr@hotmail.com

http://www.thenews.com.pk/print1.asp?id=143682

__________________
The Me you have always known, the Me that's a stranger still.

Wednesday, November 05, 2008
By by Shireen M Mazari

We are certainly overdosing on the US these days. As if their increased drone attacks against Pakistani civilians were not bad enough, we have had to suffer the excess of the Pakistani media's coverage of the US elections – which in the end will really not alter our fate vis a vis US policies and may make it worse. Now, in a most nauseating fashion, we have had to suffer Boucher once again and this time he has been accompanied by the new US Centcom commander, General Petreaus. We already know that the Zardari regime is in no mood to respect the parliamentary resolution demanding action against US attacks against our sovereignty, so what more can this hapless nation do for imperial US? Kill all our citizens who may have a resemblance to Taliban or may simply be guilty of living in the FATA region? This American duo's latest visit just before the US elections looks suspiciously like a visit aimed at providing a boost to McCain by some large scale attack which will unearth a big Al Qaeda or Taliban fish! Be that as it may, when will it become clear to our ruling elite that the US is a hostile, if not an enemy state? And simple issuing verbal warnings which continue to be ignored only undermine our ability to actually act on these warnings.

So what can be done against the mighty US? Very simply, there is a small window of opportunity and the following actions can be taken: Suspending logistics supply route for NATO/US forces; leaving the trilateral commission, at least temporarily, given that our requests are never respected; reclaiming our bases from the US and removing US undercover and military personnel from Pakistan.

In a worst case scenario, we could also think of some non-lethal military responses. And what more the US can do against us if we stand our ground? Well, politically they have already pushed our leaders into an IMF option that was certainly not the only option despite the surfeit of histrionic articles by retired IMF Gurkhas some of whom are also desperately seeking to re-access the Pakistani economic bureaucracy? At worse, the US can also send in ground troops accompanied by air attacks but given that they are presently in a state of transition such an expansion of their military operations in the region does not seem possible,. But if it did come to that, given how they are stretched, they would be entering a suicidal minefield because then the Pakistani military would have to be drawn in. We may fear such scenarios, but at the end of the day the US at present is not in a position to expand its military commitments especially against a state without whose support NATO would be suffocated in terms of logistics support. In fact, it is the incremental US destruction being waged on us that is more lethal for Pakistan. Given how Pakistanis are being killed to assuage US anger at 9/11, it is insufferable to have former US Secretary of State, Albright, refer to Pakistan as an "international migraine". Even if this was so, and we were to ignore the rogue state the US is fast becoming, what is the source of the migraine? The US itself. So, Ms Albright, when we rid ourselves of the cause for our "migraine", the healing will take place. Amid all this

killing of our citizens by the US, I was sent an email by Saud Khan, which should distress all those who still believe in the goodness of the US people. He sent me a copy of a news release by Westboro Baptist Church in Kansas, some of which is blasphemous against the Prophet (PBUH) and cannot be cited here, but what can be cited is the following:

"God Hates Pakistan. Thank God for killer earthquakes that visit Pakistan often: Last Wed.-160 dead;1935 – 30,000 dead; 2005 – 86,000 dead. WBC prays for many more dead. Yes. Pakistan is an evil and dangerous country and is a huge part of the World of Islam." Such is the humanity of the US Baptist Church! Interestingly the news release talks of Pakistan's killing of Christians but the Baptists seem to have turned a blind eye to the mass killings of Christians still going on in India!

However, in the final analysis, we must take the blame for where we are – especially our elite and the rulers that come from within them. There is a total indifference to the plight of the state and the nation since simply leaving the country with their wealth is such a viable option for this class. They have enjoyed the privileges this country has offered them and then left with the wealth they made as a result of these privileges. When the country is in financial straits, none of them think of bringing back their foreign stashed wealth back for the salvation of this country. And when they rule, they rule through guile and hypocrisy with generous promises that come cheap and remain unfulfilled.

The present set of rulers is no different. Cronyism is rife – from the Abraaj scam (and it is not just Zardari family connections that are involved; according to the Abraaj response given to The News there are names that link up to Shaukat Tareen also) at KESC, to all over the country in the form of advisers, assistants and so on. Special titles, special deals – with scant regard for even the most basic of qualifications! Perhaps the biggest slap in the face of the nation has been the 55-member cabinet – which will require a plethora of more assistants, staff and so on, all from the public exchequer – at a time of dire financial straits. To the further shame of the present government, the man who sought to justify the killing of Baloch women has also been given a ministerial slot. But then why not, given how there is no system or law that functions here. Look what happened to the doctors at the poly clinic only recently. And this is just one such story doing the rounds these days – just as other stories abounded in the previous regimes also.

As for respecting the bounds of the law, look at the scandal of the Gilani offspring wedding at the presidency. Even if one were to forget the morality at stake in such an event, surely the brazen violation of the laws of the land cannot be so easily cast aside? I am referring to the use of official state property, but, most important, to the use of the president and the country's flags/emblems right behind the married couple's seating. Even according to the Blue Book of Protocol this is not permissible – but is anyone bothered? Of course, us ordinary citizens cannot fly the national flag on our residences or anywhere else – except on August 14 ( a rather silly restriction that needs to be done away with) – but how can the prime minister and the president allow private citizens to use official protocol and official flags for a private wedding function?

With all these shenanigans of the ruling elite, it is no wonder we are continuing to cling to the hope the lawyers' movement still brings for justice to eventually reign strong and supreme in this land of ours. When we greeted the lawyers' rally at the Islamabad parade ground on Monday evening, we felt compelled to rejuvenate our hope even though the fervour of this summer's long march was not all there. But then I saw the determination of the missing persons' protestors still continuing to fight an uphill battle for justice. The group followed the lawyers' leaders, a little distance away, looking weary and, in contrast to the lawyers and other members of civil society, surrounded by a heavy silence. A small band of mothers, wives and relatives, they are still battling against all odds, especially since the democratic government has chosen to adopt a telling silence now that they are in power. I realised then that we, the citizens, have no choice but to keep our faith and hope in movements such as the lawyers' movement because in the end it is a strong and independent judiciary that will bring peace and resolution to these distressed Pakistanis as well as security to the nation as a whole. Otherwise we may as well resign ourselves to a life of subjugation and fear under our own breed of proxy imperialists. (Oh Gramsci, if you were only alive today!)

http://www.thenews.com.pk/arc_news.asp?id=9

__________________
No signature...

By Shireen M Mazari

This column was going to be about developments that should make us Pakistanis wary of US designs towards us in particular as well as towards the Muslim World in general. There was Obama's reaching out to Hillary Clinton as a possible secretary of state – one more sign that Pakistan's rough ride with the US was not about to end since it was Ms Clinton who had returned campaign money from Pakistanis lest she upset the Zionist and Indian lobbies. There are also the concerns over the manner in which the US is seeking to doctor evidence regarding Syria's nuclear intent with gnawing questions as to whether Israel actually left nuclear debris on its clandestine raid into Syria before it went in for the so-called targeted attack – showing once again that as in the case of Iraq, the US will go the whole hog in falsifying and lying about evidence simply to get its way. If this means pressurising the IAEA and allies with dirty tricks, it will do so; it will also continue to keep Israel totally immune from nuclear-related questions while Pakistan will continue to be targeted on the nuclear question with Obama also seeking to turn the nuke clock back in Pakistan. Then there was the "revelation" of the US having adopted the illegal policy of invading other countries in hot pursuit and Pakistan has been a target of this policy for some years now – a fact that many of us already knew. Finally there were the continuing and increasingly grotesque shenanigans of our present rulers.

However, before this columnist could draw a larger picture connecting the dots of these developments, a more personal tragedy took over. They buried my brother-in-law and cousin Shaukat Mazari last Friday and in his death I saw the demise of a politician who went against the grain of so many of our present set of rulers. Having disagreed with him on almost every issue for the forty years of his political life, I was still able to see a man who avoided the corrupt lures of office despite the opportunities presented to him.

He fought and won his elections without lavish spending – another unusual trait in the rural constituency he contested from. There is a general view that it is the National Assembly candidate who really has to dole out the money and the provincial candidate tends to get a free ride, but this was not the case with Shaukat, except perhaps in the very early years when he shared the ticket with his father-in-law on the National Assembly seat. But then the two of them were so much more than merely a political partnership – there was a strong family bonding between the two at a time when the tribe was at war within itself.

While many felt he kept too low a profile, he built up a populist base in a hierarchical feudal structured area. The extent of the poor man's respect and love for him was an eye-opener for many, especially within the family, when his funeral brought out the populace in their thousands and in the way in which the groups of ordinary mourners offered their condolences to the family. He may not have been a high roller, but his modest and unassuming ways also endeared him to his peers across the political divides. But he was not an idealist. Far from it. In fact he had a simple, pragmatic approach to life. For instance, when I asked him why he travelled without any arms often late at night in our more remote areas, he explained that carrying a firearm was an invitation to getting killed so why bother. Again, what a contrast to our political elite and their heavily armed entourages that present a public nuisance to the public at large.

Shaukat was a loyalist who had felt betrayed by the PPP, but he soldiered on till the 2002 elections when he asked Ms Bhutto's permission to fight as an independent given the local configurations. Even though he was told to go ahead, he finally saw the reality of the PPP workings' when another candidate – who barely made a dent in the voting pattern – was fielded against him by the PPP. Since he had been one of the early party members of the PPP, having joined about the time Farooq Leghari did, and since he had dedicated decades of unselfish devotion to this party and its leadership, he was not expecting this betrayal. Of course, some of us had been chiding him for years about his party, its leadership and its politics, but his loyalty had remained unfettered through so many earlier snubbings and sidelining at the hands of the party leadership which exploited his loyalty in a most brazen fashion. But I guess there is always that critical straw that breaks the proverbial camel's back. Again, I now wonder how he felt as he saw so many other devotees of the Bhuttos being humiliated and shunned by the nouveau courtesans and courtiers of the present PPP.

For me Shaukat's politics were a source of constant disagreement between us, but the arguments, no matter how heated, never became bitter. Controversial positions were not part of his make up and he was a traditionalist at heart. He never understood the intensity of my critique of the US policies towards Pakistan and I never accepted his overtures to US diplomats or his refusal to be more critical on foreign policy issues – especially in his capacity as an elected representative in the provincial legislature. The PPP was always a bone of contention between us, but despite my best efforts to rile him through shock therapy, he always maintained his calm. So eventually one accepted his innate social orthodoxy and political conservatism, in which he has so many counterparts today. But he never came out in support of tribal evils like karo kari like so many other tribals, and in many of his successful elections he fought against the tribal leadership despite his inherent instinct to remain within the bounds of social conservatism. But unlike so many of his contemporaries, his orthodoxy defined his lifestyle in reality – there was no duality or hypocrisy in this.

Certainly Shaukat was not a flawless politician. He was deeply flawed like all of us ordinary mortals, but in a political environment where it is the high-flying wealth accumulators and collectors of dubious sycophants that tend to dominate, he stood out as part of a group that went against this prevailing wisdom. Politics was literally his life for forty years and his success was that he continued to win his electorates' confidence without a high political profile in terms of official positions and lifestyle. As the droves of mourning constituents explained, he was always there when the floods or other tragedies struck them; and he was always there to listen to their woes; to seek employment (not always successfully) for the poor of his backward region; and to share in their lives. At the national level he may have been overlooked and sidelined, but within his own political space he continued to strike a chord with his electorate. Perhaps in his forty years he could have been more outspoken or aggressive in pursuing issues critical to his own area – after all, the Mazari village Rojhan still has no gas while all around gas has been supplied. But then, even high profile leaders of the area, including a former prime minister, have also failed on this count.

At the end of the day it is not what he did not do that seemed to matter as much as the decency and humanity he retained in his politics for these forty years. He died with his boots on, so to speak, as his last moments were spent in the Punjab Assembly. His death made me realise that we should seek out the ordinary and decent human beings within the political landscape, and there are many – including stalwarts far more high profile than Shaukat – but somehow they tend to get sidelined in the grabs for power. Why? Perhaps it is time to be more active in ensuring that these politicians and leaders become more central in our mainstream.

So, the wider picture will have to wait another week as I reflect on this unexpected family tragedy and pay respects to a man whose ordinariness and basic decency were perhaps his greatest political assets and the legacy he leaves behind for all of us in these troubled times.


The writer is a defence analyst. Email: callstr@hotmail.com

http://www.thenews.com.pk/arc_news.asp?id=9

__________________
The Me you have always known, the Me that's a stranger still.

Wednesday, December 31, 2008
Shireen M Mazari

Once again the tragic pulverization of the Muslim leadership has revealed itself in the mumblings and fumblings that have followed the launch of the new Israeli military campaign to annihilate the Palestinian people that dare to seek an end to Israel's illegal occupation of their lands – or even those that simply dare to exist with a modicum of self-respecting defiance of Israeli fascism. Over 400 people killed so far by Israel's military machine, so carefully aided and abetted by the US and its European allies. So where are the voices of the Muslim world? Where is some action to show that they will not allow Israel to commit genocide of the Palestinians? A few muted declaratory protests are all that have come so far. Is the Muslim World really so helpless in the face of Israeli abuse backed by the US?

No. The helplessness of the Muslim world is a myth. The reality is that the Muslim leadership – primarily Arab in the context of Palestine – has chosen to be pulverized into submission to the US and its more belligerent western allies. After all, despite numerous incidents of aggression and abuse at the hands of the US and Israel, the Arab leadership – barring some exceptions like Syria – continues to rely financially and militarily on the US and Europe. Their weapon systems are from these parts and their financial assets continue to lie primarily in the banking systems of the west. Both these facts could, of course, be used as a source of pressure also but that would require a strong and defiant Arab leadership and that does not seem to be on the horizon. Yet just imagine what a withdrawal of financial assets from the west would do! And just imagine how many arms industries would feel the pinch, and maybe even go under, if the Arab states did not buy their weapon systems! And one has not even begun to see the already-demonstrated-in-the-seventies power of oil.

But none of these elements of defiance will come into play so the Israelis will have a free hand in killing Palestinians by the hundreds – unless some western states with a genuine conscience and commitment to human rights, like some of the Nordic states or Canada, move forcefully but their power is limited partly by politics and partly by their still existing guilt over the Jewish Holocaust at the hands of the European monster of Nazism. It is indeed a supreme irony that the belated rejection of this European crime is allowing states to accept attempted genocides today – be it of the Bosnian Muslims, the Palestinians or the Muslims of Gujarat.

Perhaps an even greater tragedy is that the Muslim leadership has lost its will to stand up against all this abuse. If the Arabs would have taken their resources out of the west and invest it effectively in the Muslim World, especially the poorer but more technically competent Muslim states, the global picture would have been different today. If the Arab world would have stopped hosting US armed forces, so many murderous global designs of this unilateralist imperial power would have been undermined. For those Arab states that have security fears from their neighbourhood, surely dialogue and security pacts with strong Muslim states could have been a more viable alternative. As for purchasing of western weapon systems, if they are truly needed and alternatives are not considered viable, the dependency works both ways and could be exploited by the purchaser also.

But all this is mere day dreaming or wishful thinking. Or is it? After all the uplifting example of Hezbollah's success against Israel; the Iranian nation's steadfastness against US bullying; and even Syria's dignified and assertive reaction to one US bombing attack on its territory that should put a militarily much stronger Pakistan to shame. At another plane, there is the Mahatir economic miracle and political assertiveness. Again, at a time when Pakistan's leadership continues to bow ever lower to the US, a look in the easterly direction of Malaysia would not be amiss. Of course, if we could only have learnt some lessons from our long standing Chinese friends, we would have perhaps traversed less tumultuous paths.

But today we have reduced the country into a place where the rich and influential break all rules; where their children defy any institutional standards or procedures for jobs; and where repression and power grabbing are the norms, with rulers wanting absolute power – be they in uniform or in civvies. Is it any wonder then that there is no spirit left to defend against external or internal threats to our existence? The powerful grab all and move back to their nests abroad while the rest turn in despair to prayer and the life hereafter in their pillaged state.

Coming back to the self-created helplessness of the Muslim world in the face of the incessant abuse and violence unleashed by Israel and the US, one may well ask where the UN is today. Clearly it's Security Council has been reduced to an organization that is here to defend only the US and its allies and their agendas. That is why Secretary General Ban Ki Moon has been reduced to whimpering a protest against the latest Israeli attempt at genocide of the Palestinians in Gaza. First they starved them of all amenities including basic health, food and water and now they are moving in with military attacks while the US prevents any international condemnation through the UNSC.

But the UNSC has become a highly contentious political body for some time now – especially in the face of the demise of bipolarity. After all, look at its absurdities on the terrorism issue. While the UNSC's Committee on Taliban and Al Qaeda is Muslim-specific, the Counter Terrorism Committee is not. Yet one has seen no efforts to put the Hindu RSS and VHP violent extremist groups on the terrorist list. Nor has any thought even been given to state terrorism that the US is perpetrating in Iraq and Pakistan; that Israel is carrying out in Palestine; and that India is continuing in Occupied Kashmir. It is no wonder then that the UN feels under siege and has to barricade itself behind concrete in countries like Pakistan despite the fact that our soldiers die for the UN in the largest numbers and we continue to pay our UN contribution which helps pay the fattened salaries of the UN personnel that seem to regard Pakistan as a hostile land! Even the windows have been bricked up. What a farce! The UN may as well leave Islamabad since at the moment it is merely adding to our already many miseries. If it distrusts the people of Pakistan so much it should also look elsewhere for Blue Berets in the future.

But which Pakistani leader will have the national dignity to stand up for Pakistan? Where is the voice of protest on these counts by affected states like Pakistan? Our official voice is too busy seeking subjugation before the US grand design. That is why when US Secretary of State Rice calls India she calls her equivalent external affairs minister Pranab Mukherjee (who seems to have discovered the true spirit of Islam suddenly); but when she calls Pakistan she calls the president directly!

Yes, like so many of the resource-rich and financially powerful Muslim states, the militarily powerful and potentially resource-laden Pakistan has also been pulverized psychologically into a state with a muted and whimpering voice. Despite the military capability, our leaders are not prepared to defend their people against the daily US drone attacks, that are shrinking the space for moderation in the country (the frivolities of our leaders was so clearly laid out by Farrukh Saleem in his last column, but even that was simply one part of a much wider absurdity gripping our leaders). How are we expected to effectively raise our voice for the Palestinians then? And is it any wonder that Muslim people are being massacred with impunity today?

The writer is a defence analyst. Email: callstr@hotmail.com

__________________
No signature...

Deliberate acquiescence to Israeli terrorism

Wednesday, January 14, 2009
Shireen M Mazari
The writer is a defence analyst

Even as we in Pakistan are confronted with multiple developments and issues, the slaughter of innocent Palestinians in Gaza at the hands of a murderous Zionist state has focused our emotions of anger, helplessness and frustration alongside similarly displayed emotions across the civil societies of the world. For the Muslims in particular the attempted genocide of the Gaza populace is yet another reminder of the self-imposed helplessness of their rulers. The fact that many Muslim states continue to maintain their diplomatic relations with Israel when a non-Muslim leader in Latin America, Hugo Chavez, has had the moral courage to break these ties, should be a source of shame for Muslim ruling elites everywhere.

What has also come to the fore once again is the total acceptance of this Israeli murderous rampage by the USA. Obama's silence on the issue speaks louder than any hypocritical statements he made earlier on human rights and anti-terrorism. Clearly, Israel's state terrorism is as acceptable to him as it is to all other US politicians and the general US public. And the mutterings of the British leadership have once again shown the subservient role they are content to play to the US. Surely at this time it is indecent of Miliband to visit us and talk about extremism and terrorism – when there is a large-scale commission of unabated Israeli terrorism taking place in Gaza. Frankly, if the Zardari government had a modicum of self-respect they would refuse to receive Miliband at this time when we are mourning the daily murders of innocent Palestinians. But then, if we can continue awarding high national awards to the supporters of the murderers of Palestinians, like Biden, how will we have the gumption to stand up to Miliband's brand of neoimperialism?

But can nothing really be done against these new Israeli killings? Is the Muslim World really so helpless in the face of this brazen display of Israeli state terrorism? No, except in a psychological sense of being unable to stand up to the US. So, what could be done if the will was there within the Muslim ruling elites? There is always the option of the oil-rich states finally taking their assets out of Western institutions, but that does not seem a viable option given the self-interest of the rulers of these states. Then there is another option through the OIC collectivity – that is a military option whereby the high tech military hardware accumulated by many rich Muslim states can be used in defence of the Palestinians. After all, what is to stop the OIC from sending a multinational force to combat this Israeli aggression similar to the Allies effort against Nazism? After all, the OIC itself was formed as a response to the aggression of the Zionist state against Al Quds in the first place so it would be within its international legal mandate.

If the Muslim World is unable to pick up the moral courage to do any of the above, then there is also a way now provided for, ironically, by the UN Security Council itself through Resolution 1373 passed in the aftermath of 9/11. This resolution begins by condemning the acts of terror of 9/11, but then goes beyond to deal with the issue of terrorism in general. The resolution gives its context as the binding chapter VII of the UN charter and the operative paras are 1 and 2 of the resolution. Para I, demands that states "Criminalize the wilful provision or collection, by any means, directly or indirectly, of funds by their nationals or in their territories with the intention that the funds should be used … in order to carry out terrorist acts." Para 2 demands that states "Refrain from providing any form of support, active or passive, to entities or persons involved in terrorist acts … and eliminating the supply of weapons." Nowhere does this Resolution declare that it is only with reference to non-state actors and the reference to entities can also be applied to states. Clearly, under these paras the US stands guilty of abetting terrorism because it has allowed Jewish groups in the US to raise money for Israel and has itself supplied weapons to Israel. Now, if Pakistan is expected to deal with non-state actors or face international consequences under this resolution, surely OIC states can also hold the US to these provisions? Or we should simply declare this UNSC resolution as having been breached by a permanent member the US, and thus having lost its credibility as so many other UNSC resolutions.

As for the issue of state terrorism – just like any form of terrorism, it has also been defined to some extent in UNSC Resolution 1566 (2004), para 3, which states, inter alia, that "criminal acts, including against civilians, committed with the intent to cause death or serious bodily injury … with the purpose to provoke a state of terror in the general public or in a group of persons or particular persons, intimidate a population …are under no circumstances justifiable by considerations of a political, philosophical, ideological, racial, ethnic, religious or other similar nature…." Surely this describes Israel's massacre of the Palestinians perfectly and therefore Israel stands guilty of state terrorism and should be subject to the same penalties that other perpetrators of terrorism are to be subjected to.

So why is no Muslim state moving against Israel within the wide scope now offered by the anti-terrorism UNSC resolutions. Also, there is the whole gamut of international humanitarian law codified in the four Geneva conventions and its two additional protocols, which Israel has breached with this aggression against the whole Palestinian population of Gaza – with even UN schools and medical assistance teams being targeted. So that is another tool available for dealing with the latest Zionist aggression. And, finally, it may be worth reminding our psychologically paralysed Muslim leaders that the International Criminal Court had put out a warrant for the Sudanese president despite the fact that Sudan is not a party to the ICC, citing Darfur and other incidents involving human rights abuse and killings in Sudan. Surely the attempted genocide of the Gaza Palestinians is a crime against humanity; so why has the ICC failed to issue warrants against the Israeli leadership? Or are there two standards: One for Muslims and another for non-Muslims?

It is indeed a supreme irony that those that Hitler massacred have turned to do the same to the Palestinians! In fact there are haunting similarities between the Nazis and the Zionist state. After all, if the Zionists can refer to the UN as a source of their state's legitimacy – although nowhere did the UN seek to throw out Palestinians from their lands and have them periodically butchered at the hands of the Zionist entity – Hitler had even a greater claim to political legitimacy since he had elections to cite as his claim to power! And just as the Jewish holocaust (unless we accept revisionist history that it never took place) was part of his agenda, clearly Israel's agenda is the Palestinian holocaust, albeit in stages. Just as British prime minister Chamberlain followed a policy of appeasement towards the Nazis till it was too late, so the US and its allies have been following a similar appeasement policy towards Israel as it becomes ever more ruthless in its violence against the Palestinians.

From the continuous killings of Palestinians by the Israeli military to Sharon's acts of terrorism unleashed on the Sabra and Shatilla refugee camps to the present state terrorism in Gaza, the killings have become more audacious and we now know that Israel is using chemical weapons (white phosphorous bombs) as well as other inhumane weapons as described by two Norwegian doctors against which there are international conventions. Yet the US, including its president-elect Obama, continues to allow this holocaust of the Palestinians.

And Muslim governments continue to maintain a deadly silence – beyond a few whimperings and mutterings – even as their people rise in protest. Is it any wonder the Muslim street is becoming increasingly radicalised? They said the League of Nations was too discredited to provide an international response to Hitler, but the UNSC is now armed with powerful anti-terror resolutions and mechanisms for their implementation. So why is the international community mute on Israel? Or are these resolutions only for Muslims while the rest of the world is free to commit all manner of acts of terror unhindered?

Email: callstr@hotmail.com
http://www.thenews.com.pk/daily_detail.asp?id=156942

__________________
No signature...

Mr PM, go to Swat and FATA not Davos

By Shireen M Mazari

Wednesday, January 21, 2009

Yes, many of us have been guilty of ignoring the escalating crisis in Swat as well as across the FATA region which has now spread to the settled areas right up to and into the provincial capital of Peshawar. Like many other commentators, I have written on the ongoing destructive US-led war on terror but have not actually gone to the FATA region and seen for oneself the actual state of terror and killings that are going on – both at the hands of the drones, the militants and the Pakistan military. Perhaps each of us sticks to familiar areas and hopes others with greater knowledge and expertise on FATA and the Frontier province will focus on the increasing despair and devastation being visited on our fellow Pakistanis in these areas. But the truth is that all of us as Pakistanis should look more closely at what is happening in our own land.

There are those who have pointed out that Swat is not an area where the US military has intervened to kill with their drones and missiles, so one cannot lay the blame for what is happening at their doorstep. To some extent that is certainly the case. The problem in Swat can be dated to the time the local administrative system with its free Qazi courts was abolished and the national administrative model with all its failings and corruption was implanted in Swat. But the issue now is far beyond the restoration of the Qazi courts since criminal elements have become enmeshed with various brands of militant extremism and the fallout of the US "war on terror" into the areas bordering FATA, to enforce a reign of terror in the region. But perhaps the worst aspect of it all has been the abrogation of governmental responsibility by the provincial and federal governments. Everything has effectively been handed over to the military which has neither the capacity nor the mandate for establishing governance. Surely the provincial government should have taken charge and called the paramilitary or even the military forces simply to maintain law and order and protect ordinary civilians till the police was bolstered – and these coercive forces of the state should have been under civilian control in terms of their operations, as provided for in the Constitution. Instead, the civilian order moved out and handed everything over to the military – or that is simply what seems to be evident. And so we have seen the Army rushing from one area to another putting out bush fires! While the Taliban – and it is interesting to note that the Tehreek-i-Taliban-Pakistan only emerged after 2004 so the roots can be traced to the US's murderous war on terror – are destroying schools for a warped ideology, the army has also chosen to use schools as their trenches and their shelters thereby making them military targets.

It is time the provincial government, with adequate resources provided by the centre, move back into control and begin establishing the writ of the government by reinstating the Qazi courts and providing effective governance and rule of law to the people of the area. The much maligned process of dialogue needs to be established but with the backing of force on the part of the government. And by definition, dialogue has to be with militants since they are the source of the problem and they are our citizens. Paramilitary forces should be there to provide the security for schools and to the local people including the local political leadership. It is inconceivable that if the media can access the militants and those terrorising the populace, the state cannot bring the guilty to justice and the military and paramilitary forces, with all their intelligence and physical resources cannot identify, isolate and arrest those guilty of murder, mayhem and terrorisation of the people of Swat. Clearly, deliberate games are being played by various powerful elements within the state while the people of Swat bleed on.

The same is true of FATA. The military should never have gone in simply because the US wanted it so. In any case, no military can function effectively without a political and economic policy framework since it cannot do an endless holding operation as it is being made to do in FATA. It is time to take the military out while bringing in political and economic measures as well as instituting a political dialogue with all Pakistani stakeholders without preconditions as was done in Northern Ireland. As for citing earlier failed dialogues, the fact of the matter is that all dialogues were destroyed by US military attacks whenever dialogues had taken place or were taking place. This is what turned the locals against the military also- since the latter began to be viewed as fighting the American war.

In any case, it is time to take the military out of FATA and replace it with paramilitary forces – again under civilian control. The civilian government, in this case the federal government, has to take ownership and direction of policy for re-establishing peace in the area. Why has no political leader visited these troubled areas in all these years, especially after the February 2008 elections? There is a need to bring the Political Parties Act into FATA as well as numerous small businesses, without waiting for the US funded ROZs which will then not be needed. So what if some of that money goes to waste; some will be used effectively and set the ball rolling. If the locals see they have a stake in the system, they will isolate the militants and the foreigners. As for the suicide bombers, as has been stated in more detail in earlier columns, these are not the ideologically dedicated bombers of the Palestinian variety, or part of any military fighting cadre as in the case of the LTTE. Instead these are brainwashed, extremely poor young men (between the ages of 16-22 it would appear from some of the data) who are removed from local madrassahs to remote areas and brainwashed by professionals. But if the FATA population isolates the foreigners and militants, the brainwashing centres will also suffer a setback. Meanwhile the state needs to ensure that the DPIs from Bajaur and other areas are not kept in such miserable conditions that they become breeding grounds for future militants.

Sound too fanciful? Not really. In fact, only when militancy and chaos are at a peak does the state find itself able, if it has the gumption, to move drastically in an "out of the box" mode. But the first beginning that needs to be made is to create space between ourselves and the US so that we can effectively implement a policy of space denial to the terrorists in our midst. The alliance with the US has to go. As for some Pakistanis' excitement over the Obama presidency, we should get real. Obama has already committed more soldiers to Afghanistan, so the US military centric approach is going to continue in this region. Additionally, his silence on the Gaza crisis was a chilling reminder of the non-value of Muslim lives in the face of state terrorism by Israel. And let us not forget that Obama has repeatedly voiced his justification for US forces coming into Pakistan – and also Indian military forays into Pakistan in pursuit of "terrorists".

On the nuclear issue also, the hype is once again building up against Pakistan. The point is that with Obama, Pakistan has to revise its disastrous alliance with the Bush Administration. Bases need to be reclaimed; logistic routes need to be re-examined given the mayhem NATO supplies cause for the local population in Peshawar; and our military presence in FATA needs to also be reviewed. New rules of the game need to be put in place. Nothing has dented the military's standing in Pakistan's civil society more than its present actions in FATA and Swat. We cannot afford the mistrust that is being generated between the nation and the military – which may be part of the long term US agenda.

As for the Obama Administration supporting democracy, that will only happen when the Americans can distinguish between institutions and rule of law on the one hand, and individuals in power on the other, and move towards supporting the former rather than the latter. In US history so far that has not happened in terms of the Muslim world (remember toppling of Iran's Mossadaq, support for Zia, Musharraf, brokering of the NRO and rejection of the democratically elected Hamas). So let us look inwards for our own solutions, even if they begin with rejecting our present alliance with the US. Therein lies the real challenge. Let the President, Prime Minister and his cabinet members go to Swat and FATA and meet the people – instead of traipsing off overseas at the slightest opportunity. It is the Pakistanis in these beleaguered areas that need you right now – not Dubai, Washington or Davos.


The writer is a defence analyst. Email: callstr@hotmail.com

http://www.thenews.com.pk/editorial_....asp?id=158160

__________________
Marwatone.