Tuesday, March 19, 2024
07:59 AM (GMT +5)

Go Back   CSS Forums > General > News & Articles > The News

Reply Share Thread: Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook     Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter     Submit Thread to Google+ Google+    
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread
  #51  
Old Wednesday, June 06, 2007
mtgondal's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: On earth
Posts: 552
Thanks: 123
Thanked 56 Times in 42 Posts
mtgondal will become famous soon enough
Default

Confront the extremists not civil society


By Shireen M Mazari

Wednesday, JUNE 06, 2007

Every week brings more issues to the fore -- issues that will define our future in terms of civil society--state relations and within that, undoubtedly, civil--military relations. The state still seems unprepared to adopt a more holistic and conciliatory approach towards civil society -- as if restrictive measures on the media and threatening measures against civil society will somehow stem the tide of frustration and anger that rises in an ever stronger wave. Electronic media channels suddenly losing their sound or simply disappearing from the air only helps to fuel further dissent. Even more reckless is the attempt to try and put the whole judicial and political conflict within the framework of a civil-military conflict. This is an attempt to absolve the political ruling elite along with the whole machinery of the state -- including the law enforcers and bureaucrats -- of its responsibility.

Issues of state responsibility, especially in the context of May 12 mayhem in Karachi are also being deliberately lost sight of and sleaze has been made to rear its ugly head through the wall chalkings and sloganeering in that city. Fortunately for the country, civil society across the nation has not accepted this tack and the bag of dirty tricks has failed to achieve its purpose. Instead, there is a growing interest in Britain on how its government may be supporting violence in Pakistan through one of its citizens.

On a more critical note, no one in Pakistan can deride those who have and are laying down their lives for their country, nor wish to see the disintegration of the professionalism of the military institution. The issue is of constitutionalism, division of power and rule of law and fighting for the freedoms guaranteed to all under this still valid document -- with all its debatable amendments over the decades.

It is through this document that the people of Pakistan have chosen to define their political, social and economic rights and the relationship between the state, its institutions and the people as well as the relationship and distribution of power amongst the different organs and offices of the state. There can be no sacred cows in a political and social compact and, at the end of the day, it is only the people of the country who matter and it is the citizens who must be respected above all else within the context of the national polity. Without the nation, what is there for the state to defend and protect?

Which brings me to an issue which impacts the core of our nation's well-being and which has tended, in many ways, to be overshadowed by the intensity of the judicial crisis. In fact, it is both the judicial crisis and the actual danger posed by the extremists challenging the writ of the state that will shape our nation for the future and define our internal social compact. While the state has been flexing its muscle to stem the rising tide of political dissent centering around the judicial crisis, it has seemed to allow the law breakers of the Jamia Hafsa/Lal Masjid combine to run rampage with no fear of state intervention. Not only has the area of their control now become a fortified haven for extremists, with members of the public being encouraged to bring in their petitions and grievances, in what is an effort to create a state within a state, the Jamia Hafsa brigade has sought to go into the wider Islamabad area and intervene in institutions like the nursing college and so on.

The net result has been to terrorise the minorities even further with officialdom succumbing to the extremist pressure and acting against the Christian nurses through "inquiries" based on random charges. Once again, the evils of the blasphemy law have been brought to the fore, making it imperative for all those committed to enlightenment and moderation to work for the removal of this law. Given that we are a Muslim majority state, do we really need this protection against our already marginalised minorities? Is our faith so weak in Pakistan that we need to protect it through laws when we have already declared ourselves an "Islamic Republic" through our Constitution and have asserted the primacy of our faith in no uncertain terms? In practice, also, so far the blasphemy law has been used primarily to terrorise the hapless minorities who are also citizens of this country and as committed -- if not more so -- to its well being.

For those of us who have been proven right in their fears that the state's bizarre accommodation of the extremist law breakers in the midst of Islamabad would snowball into an ever larger problem, we see the Jamia Hafsa/Lal Masjid combine not only increase their demands and fortify their positions but also take hostages and now move out into a wider space to terrorise the minorities. Soon the terrorisation will spread to the mainstream population also -- especially those of us who do not subscribe to the extremist viewpoint. The Jamia Hafsa-Lal Masjid combine have already gotten away with taking the law into their own hands; now they are moving into the field of implementing their agendas against civil society at large and the state remains merely an observer -- and an indulgent one at that.

If the state is in a mood to flex its muscles, it should surely be against these extremist law breakers, not the media which simply reports ground realities or civil society which is employing peaceful means of protest. If the state can have dialogue with extremists, surely it should be able to adopt a policy of national reconciliation, embracing all its citizens and all shades of opinion -- barring those groups that have violent agendas out of consonance with our Constitution. Of course, in times of crisis there is a tendency to adopt a siege mentality and there are many vested interests that advise this erroneous course to the leadership. Yet this is exactly what has to be avoided. Leadership demands magnanimity and accommodation, not confrontationist posturing.

Political confrontation in Pakistan is acquiring a dangerous turn, which is deliberately being created and which the nation cannot afford. Yes, we have our problems but they still remain manageable with an altered approach by the state -- where it accommodates political dissent but ensures the writ of the state against the extremists that are bent on challenging this writ. So far the opposite is happening which is probably why, some of our official representatives abroad have become so confused that they are declaring India as a role model for Pakistan! Come now Ambassador Durrani, with all our problems, do we now also want to add on a caste system, heightened poverty, state-sponsored massacres (Gujarat) and even more terrorisation of minorities? Surely there are other ways to adopting and maintaining a parliamentary democracy? Detente with India does not have to mean replicating the Indian model. Is this where all our problems are leading us to now? If so, that may be our long-term national tragedy.



The writer is director general of the Institute of Strategic Studies in Islamabad. Email: smnews80@hotmail.com


http://thenews.jang.com.pk/daily_detail.asp?id=59286
__________________
Time is like a river.
You cannot touch the same water twice,
because the flow that has passed will never pass again.
Enjoy every moment of life.

I have learnt silence from the talkative, toleration from the intolerant, and kindness from the unkind; yet strange, I am ungrateful to these teachers.
Reply With Quote
  #52  
Old Wednesday, June 13, 2007
Last Island's Avatar
Royal Queen of Literature
Medal of Appreciation: Awarded to appreciate member's contribution on forum. (Academic and professional achievements do not make you eligible for this medal) - Issue reason: AppreciationBest Moderator Award: Awarded for censoring all swearing and keeping posts in order. - Issue reason: Best ModGold Medal: Awarded to those members with  maximum number of  reputation points. - Issue reason: For the year 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011Member of the Year: Awarded to those community members who have made invaluable contributions to the Community in the particular year - Issue reason: 2008Diligent Service Medal: Awarded upon completion of 5 years of dedicated services and contribution to the community. - Issue reason: More than 5 years of dedicated servicesModerator: Ribbon awarded to moderators of the forum - Issue reason:
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Forest of Fallen Stars
Posts: 7,585
Thanks: 2,427
Thanked 15,848 Times in 5,006 Posts
Last Island is headed toward stardomLast Island is headed toward stardomLast Island is headed toward stardomLast Island is headed toward stardomLast Island is headed toward stardomLast Island is headed toward stardomLast Island is headed toward stardomLast Island is headed toward stardomLast Island is headed toward stardomLast Island is headed toward stardomLast Island is headed toward stardom
Default

INTOLERANCE ALL AROUND


Wednesday, June 13, 2007.

By Shireen M Mazari

Intolerance seems to have become the hallmark of societies and people all across the globe. Here in Pakistan, we have been seeing the continuing negative fallout of intolerance, with some political representatives giving full vent to their abusive and violent nature. Only recently, abuse was heaped on the journalist community by a cabinet member within the hallowed halls of the Parliament itself, reflecting the scant regard we have for this institution. A more dangerous intolerance is reflected in the blasphemy law which continues to be used to harass and abuse the minorities. Presently, we in Islamabad are witnessing the horrible case of the victimisation of the Christian nursing community of PIMS. Already an underpaid and mistreated profession, they now have to face the wrath of the law breakers of the Jamia Hafsa-Lal Masjid combine. Shame on all of us who claim to be enlightened and moderate Muslims for our inability to support the beleaguered nursing community. Should we not be more vocal and visible in defence of all our citizens?

Of course, more often than not, intolerance rears its ugly head in a clumsy fashion that tends to have an impact contrary to the one being sought. This was clearly demonstrated in the bizarre attempt to sabotage Ayesha Siddiqa's book launch. The result was to make everyone aware of the publication and the book sold out! Additionally, it allowed the author to gain a certain political credibility by declaring that she had to leave the country because of threats even though her departure was pre-planned in connection with her book launch in England.

However, it would appear that it is not just Pakistan and its Establishment that is overcome with intolerance. The International Institute of Strategic Studies (IISS) of Britain, which also gets partial funding from the British government, seems to have acquired a rather intolerant approach in terms of accommodating journalists whom Dr Siddiqa regards as hostile! That is why the correspondent of The News, who had the nerve to publish a story disliked by the doctor, found his invitation to the IISS book launch revoked.

As Dr Siddiqa is prone to conspiracy theories and has recently written about "co-opted intellectuals”, the manner in which the IISS has been behaving towards Pakistan makes it abundantly clear that it has a strong anti-Pakistan agenda -- clearly reflected in the recent nuclear proliferation dossier which has already been critiqued for its bias and non-academic approach in an earlier column. This would lead one to believe that while there are the "co-opted intellectuals” of the state, there are equally a large number of self-termed liberal "co-opted scholars” linked to the state's detractors, especially external, who provide funds and access to this group.

While many aspects of this notion of "co-opted intellectuals” can form the basis of an interesting and relevant debate both at the national and international levels, as a former university academic who spent over 16 years teaching at post-graduate level in Pakistan, I take issue with the claim that most of our universities have never stopped free debate -- and certainly at Quaid-i-Azam University (QAU) where I spent most of my university career, debate was most heated during the oppressive regime of dictator Zia. Ironically, when I challenged in the high court an ordinance promulgated by the general as chancellor of QAU, it was the anti-Establishment co-opted intellectuals who were heading the Teachers' Association at the time and who chickened out of officially taking up this issue legally -- leaving it to "opportunists” to bear the burden of the legal option just as we were left to defend and post bail for the QAU teachers arrested or targeted in the so-called "Pamphlet case”.

That is why the good doctor should have used her time as a visiting teacher at QAU to continue and expand the tradition of free debate instead of walking away from her teaching commitments, sometimes midway through a course (DSS, Spring 1998). But then, teaching in itself is of little interest to Pakistan's external detractors and hence to their "co-opted intellectuals”.

Which brings me to the fascinating issue of linkages. Linkages amongst people and between people, institutions and events allow one to discover patterns emerging in what initially seem like random events. If one understands the linkages, one will begin to understand why, if Dr Siddiqa's data is being challenged by the Establishment, it is members of the Establishment that have to accept the responsibility. While I am still in the process of reading the book, Dr Siddiqa has cited sources for most of her data -- as opposed to her assertions which are simply assumed (which has led to General Hameed Gul's legal action) -- and if one looks at the footnotes, the sources are primarily from the Pakistan military. So if retired officers, who held sensitive positions of power, are giving her "erroneous” data, should Dr Siddiqa be faulted or does the fault lie with her sources that would be taken as reliable by any academic? At the end of the day, given that foreign and Pakistani intellectuals/academics are co-opted by one source or another -- be it the home Establishment, anti-Establishment forces, foreign detractors and so on, if one is to accept Dr Siddiqa's notion of co-option -- can there ever be any genuine scholarship distinguishable from agenda-driven works in the realm of the highly value-laden field of political science, beyond mere theorising?

Consider the following interesting facts: The naval establishment, under its Chief Fasih Bokhari, inducted her into the navy on deputation as Director Naval Research in 1998. After our nuclear tests, Fasih Bokhari called many of us writing in support of these tests to his office and told us the nuclear tests by Pakistan were a mistake. It was the same Fasih Bokhari, who went to an IISS seminar -- yes, the IISS again -- in the Gulf and critiqued Jinnah while declaring that the creation of Pakistan was a mistake. While Javed Hashmi has been incarcerated for much less, Fasih Bokhari has suffered no such penalty for what he said.

Dr Siddiqa, as she herself had informed me at the time, also acquired foreign funding for bringing together Pakistani and Indian naval officers in what I thought was a rather clandestine interaction before the dialogue process had been initiated. But she found support from within the Pakistan Navy for this venture. Therefore, why was there a complete silence and acceptance of all these happenings by those who are now pointing a critical finger to Dr Siddiqa's external linkages? And why should Dr Siddiqa feel the need to accuse other intellectuals and academics in order to establish her credibility?

Intolerance works both ways -- and is present both in Pakistan and in the so-called secular US and Europe -- and in all its forms it should be unacceptable because it undermines acceptance and respect of "the other”. The difference is our intolerance is condemned while their intolerance has become kosher, because it targets Muslim states and polities. Yet everyone is co-opted in one way or another: only the choice of co-option is the individual's -- with domestic forces (of one type or another) or with external forces.



The writer is director general of the Institute of Strategic Studies in Islamabad. Email: smnews80@hotmail.com


http://thenews.jang.com.pk/daily_detail.asp?id=60256
__________________
The Me you have always known, the Me that's a stranger still.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Last Island For This Useful Post:
  #53  
Old Wednesday, June 20, 2007
prieti's Avatar
Senior Member
Medal of Appreciation: Awarded to appreciate member's contribution on forum. (Academic and professional achievements do not make you eligible for this medal) - Issue reason: Qualifier: Awarded to those Members who cleared css written examination - Issue reason:
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 750
Thanks: 267
Thanked 327 Times in 170 Posts
prieti has a spectacular aura aboutprieti has a spectacular aura aboutprieti has a spectacular aura about
Default Dangerous external designs

Dangerous external designs

Wednesday, June 20, 2007

By Shireen M Mazari


We have witnessed a strange "invasion" of Islamabad, by members of the US Administration. For anyone who thought it is all related to the war on terror and Afghanistan, the itinerary of the first of these Americans, Mr Boucher, made it clear that the war on terror was not the main concern for this visit. After all, Boucher not only met with all shades of political opinions but also with the Chief Election Commissioner. Now honestly, what business did he have to undertake the last of these meetings -- apart from a clear intent to meddle in our internal affairs? Why do we continue to allow these external players this right to meddle?

As for Mr. Negroponte, only a few months earlier he was assailing the Pakistani state and government on the war on terror and other "related" issues (related in the minds of the Yanks, that is). Yet here he was in Islamabad, at a time when the country is confronting and working out its political crises, quite oblivious to our sentiments after his earlier rantings against us! What exactly was he seeking? And, to add to our chagrin, we had the CENTCOM gentleman over as well -- thrown in for good measure no doubt! Can all this be a mere coincidence?

Certainly not, given the dire forecasts in the US media about the state of affairs in Pakistan, especially the crises confronting the state. Also, for some time now rumours have been rife about the US seeking to bring in their all-weather favourite politician, Ms Bhutto, in a political alliance with the present powers that be. And we know how the US is seeking to impact all the Muslim states of what it refers to as the "Broader or Greater Middle East" -- West Asia to us Asians. Just when the Muslim civil societies are asserting their right to unfettered democracy and social justice, the US has developed an aversion to the same in the wake of the Hamas electoral victory. The results have been an unmitigated disaster for us all.

Look at what the US has helped engineer or engineer itself: The end game amongst the Palestinians with Fatah and Hamas killing each other instead of fighting Israel and with the US now promising to restart all the held-up aid in the wake of Mahmoud Abbas's dismissal of Hamas from government. In addition, arms are flowing in to Fatah from the US and Israel. Nor is this all. The civil war in Iraq continues to kill Muslims in ever increasing numbers as that country nosedives into anarchy. After the success of Hizbollah in Lebanon, that country seems to be heading once more into factional violence and chaos with the US announcing greater arms' supplies to the Lebanese government -- but arms that can only be used internally, not externally against aggressive neighbours like Israel. And, of course, US efforts to use the terrorist group Jundullah to destabilise Iran through its Sistan province continue.

Given this negative US agenda and its rather apparent dislike of true democracy for the Muslim World, the visits of Boucher and company can only be viewed negatively. Nothing good can possibly come from this US intrusion into our domestic affairs. But it is not just the US that is on a confrontationist course with populist Muslim forces. Look at events in Britain. First, there is the issue of British support for its citizens who preach hatred and violence abroad. Then there is the recent declaration by the UN's rapporteur, Ms Jehangir about the discriminatory and democracy-threatening anti-terror laws of Britain. According to her report, which will be presented to the new UN Human Rights body in Geneva, British Muslims are being discriminated against as a result of these laws.

Is it a mere coincidence, that at this time when the British Muslims are being discriminated against, we have the Queen of England, Elizabeth Windsor, putting writer Salman Rushdie on her Honours List? If his literary genius was to be given recognition should it not have immediately happened after the publication of what are regarded as his main literary works some decades earlier? Why reward him now when his recent products are being seen as mediocre if not downright poor? Simply to spite the Muslim World in general and British Muslims in particular? Is there something to the feeling that Elizabeth Windsor's Honours List, which has come around the time Diana's boys are publicly celebrating her life, also reflects the House of Windsor's personal antipathy for Muslims like Dodi Fayed and Dr Hasnat? Whatever the real reason, there is something rotten in the Honours List and one wonders how the British or indeed the Europeans would have reacted if the OIC or a Muslim state would have given a national award for historic scholarship to historian Irving who was incarcerated for his views on the holocaust? But there you have it -- curbs on freedom of expression, double standards, hypocrisy and, of course, important linkages and patterns must all be taken note of.

Which brings me back once again to the continuing pattern of tolerance by the Pakistani state of the lawbreakers of the Jamia Hafsa-Lal Masjid combine. Slowly but surely, they are spreading their terror into mainstream Pakistan. The Christians have already begun to be targeted, with the PIMS nurses' case. The government has done nothing to curb this growing spread of the extremists' tentacles and civil society is focused on other critical issues. So now more daring fatwas are coming against publications. Where will all this end? Will bookshops be pillaged next -- especially if they happen to have art books? What will it take for the state to finally end the reign of terror by the Jamia Hafsa-Lal Masjid combine? When will the law be enforced?

With all these domestic concerns still being center-stage in our lives right now, it is no wonder we are not reacting as strongly as we should to the ever more dangerous US design for our part of the world that is now becoming increasingly overt. Nor have we shown concern over recent pronouncements coming out of New Delhi. Yet there is ample ground for concern. India is clearly becoming more emboldened to gear up for greater intrusiveness in its neighbourhood once again. Why else would India's national security adviser, Narayan, caution Sri Lanka against buying weapons from China and Pakistan? Instead, he asserts that whatever Sri Lanka needs it should turn to India which is the regional power! Yet India has also declared that it will not provide offensive capability weapons. In any event, what right does India have to dictate to Sri Lanka the source of the latter's weapons purchases?

It may not sound threatening but given India's record this could be a first stage preparation for something akin to an intervention or even invasion -- euphemistically always termed as an invitation to intercede! Only recently, the Indian Defence Minister, in the Lok Sabha, accused the Sri Lankan Navy of killing 77 Indian fishermen during a 16-year period -- but furnishing no proof to substantiate this accusation. So there we are -- focused on internal crises but facing a destabilised external environment, even without taking into account the mess that is Afghanistan. Within this milieu, to have external players become ever more intrusive in our internal dynamics bodes ill for the nation.



The writer is director general of the Institute of Strategic Studies in Islamabad. Email: smnews80@hotmail.com

http://www.thenews.com.pk/daily_detail.asp?id=61220
__________________
_____________________________________________

A Man Would Do Nothing,
If He Waited Until He
Could Do It So Well
That No One Would Find Fault
With What He Has Done.
Reply With Quote
  #54  
Old Friday, June 22, 2007
Sureshlasi's Avatar
Senior Member
Medal of Appreciation: Awarded to appreciate member's contribution on forum. (Academic and professional achievements do not make you eligible for this medal) - Issue reason: Best Moderator Award: Awarded for censoring all swearing and keeping posts in order. - Issue reason: Best ModMember of the Year: Awarded to those community members who have made invaluable contributions to the Community in the particular year - Issue reason: For the year 2007Diligent Service Medal: Awarded upon completion of 5 years of dedicated services and contribution to the community. - Issue reason:
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: پاکستان
Posts: 2,282
Thanks: 483
Thanked 3,082 Times in 760 Posts
Sureshlasi is a name known to allSureshlasi is a name known to allSureshlasi is a name known to allSureshlasi is a name known to allSureshlasi is a name known to allSureshlasi is a name known to all
Default From Mountbatten to Emma Nicholson

From Mountbatten to Emma Nicholson

Friday, June 22, 2007
By Shireen M Mazari


The EU Rapporteur on Kashmir, Baroness Nicholson has shown in her report "Kashmir: present situation and future prospects" that politicians of British origin continue to be afflicted by three major traits of their now-dead imperialism -- duplicity, deceit and deception -- at least when it comes to Pakistan and Kashmir. The historical record on Mountbatten's deceit and deception on Kashmir is an established fact and the Nicholson Report on Kashmir shows the same characteristics and is filled with half-truths and distortion of facts -- if not outright lies. To call it controversial is giving it too much credit. Before one goes into the highly questionable process which finally produced this report, let us look into some of the passages of the report that prove my contentions regarding the content.

The preamble is interesting in that it specifically refers to certain European Parliamentary resolutions, including those on the EU-India strategic partnership and EU's economic and trade relations with India as well as the 2004 resolution on the situation in Pakistan. So right from the start, the bias is built in given that the Indo-EU strategic partnership is a major factor motivating the report as is the issue of Pakistan's internal matters -- a biased start if ever there was one! The report then goes on to declare, still in the preamble, that "whereas much of Jammu and Kashmir, in particular Azad Jammu and Kashmir, suffers from abject poverty…" Now most data would point to Occupied Kashmir as being particularly suffering from abject poverty, but we know what the intent of the Baroness was.

For those still willing to give some benefit of objectivity to the Baroness, the section on the October 8, 2005, earthquake should be an eyeopener. While the Pakistan government is berated for its inadequate response which, according to the Baroness, allowed "extremists" to move in, the Indian government is commended for its competence in the emergency -- despite Indian press and eyewitness accounts to the contrary. Where the Baroness picked up her information is known and discussed below, but clearly it is incorrect. Of course, the Baroness also uses the opportunity to condemn Pakistan for only offering minimal basic "rights" (her inverted commas) to the AJK Kashmiris, no political rights and so on. The fact that Pakistan has not usurped AJK and made it an integral part of Pakistan as India has done, quite contrary to UN Resolutions, which incidentally are cited as a reference point for the Report in the preamble, is condemned also by the Baroness. In contrast, there is not a word about the suffering of the Kashmiris in Occupied Kashmir after over a decade under the repression of Indian security forces. Ironically, she actually commends Article 370 of the Indian Constitution which is one of the reasons why the Kashmir dispute is facing difficulty in being resolved.

In fact as one goes through the Report, there is less on ways to bring about a resolution of the Kashmir dispute and more on condemning Pakistan -- including on issues unrelated to the dispute such as the Hudood Ordinance and the "difficult situation faced by homosexuals"! Just out of curiosity how many homosexuals did Nicholson interview to come to this conclusion? These are just some of the examples of the truth distortions and incorrect statements contained in the Report.

In a similar vein, some recommendations also have little to do with resolution of the Kashmir dispute. For instance, Nicholson recommends exchanges between the national defence colleges, a Joint Pakistan-India Parliamentary Committee and cultural and other exchanges already on the dialogue agenda. Not much here on actual modalities for conflict resolution.

Why is that so? Because the objective of Baroness Nicholson is not to suggest conflict resolution beyond the legitimation of the existing status quo. In fact, the Report of the Baroness echoes the ideas of the Delhi Policy Group (DPG) publication on "Frameworks for a Kashmir Settlement" which cleverly seeks to force a solution within the Indian Constitution. The link between the DPG and Baroness Nicholson is not surprising since Radha Kumar, the co-author of the DPG publication, effectively devised the Baroness's agenda in India and stayed by her side throughout in Occupied Kashmir as well as in New Delhi. So much for confidentiality. That is why the Baroness never met the any of the Hurriyat leaders -- neither from the JKLF, JKDPF or any other faction. She only met the pro-India leadership. She then basically lied to the European Parliament's Foreign Affairs Committee in a meeting on 28 November when she insisted she had met the Hurriyat leaders in Srinagar.

The DPG also helped the Baroness organise a post-Report Conference in Brussels where, inexplicably, the Afghanistan ambassador was invited! It is absurd for a European Parliamentary rapporteur to be publicly aligning with a party which has a direct linkage to the issue of the rapporteur's report. But it was absurd for Nicholson to have been appointed rapporteur in the first place -- she apparently volunteered her services -- given that she is a founding member of the EU Parliament's Friends of India Group. Additionally, her South East England constituency has a large population of Indian origin -- almost 3 per cent in contrast to a less than one percent body of Pakistani-origin constituents. So the India connection is strongly ingrained in Baroness Nicholson.

It is not that there is something inherently devious about Nicholson, but in the context of South Asia and Kashmir she is simply following British imperial tradition -- a tradition that renders her highly biased and unsuited as a credible rapporteur on Kashmir. Therefore, her appointment and the strange manner in which the Report was written begs the question as to what is the EU agenda on Pakistan and Kashmir?

Meanwhile, linked to all these goings-on, there seems to be a needless confusion arising in Pakistan over the Siachin issue. India has now rejected the format of the 1989 blueprint for an agreement and instead is demanding that Pakistan authenticate the positions from which Indian troops withdraw. This cannot be acceptable for Pakistan since it would effectively legitimise Indian occupation of Glacier. In our present mode of reaching out to India as much as we can, there is some talk of a "compromise" whereby while we would not formally authenticate the positions of Indian withdrawal in an agreement, we would add an annexure where we would give a schedule of disengagement, which means stating each position from where withdrawal takes place. Now, legally, under international law and the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (1969), any exchange of documents and correspondence is to be regarded as a treaty obligation. While Pakistan and India are not Parties to this Treaty, the Treaty is regarded as a declaration of customary international law. So unless a detailed textual provision is added, narrating our position clearly, the envisaged annexure will be as good as authenticating withdrawal positions. Therefore, we should stick firmly to our 1989 position on Siachin and not be in an unseemly hurry -- given India's increasing hard line approach on conflict resolution. We need to be wary of the diplomatic games India is playing in a most offensive manner and not become victims of a needless weariness.



The writer is director general of the Institute of Strategic Studies in Islamabad. Email: smnews80@hotmail.com


http://www.thenews.com.pk/daily_detail.asp?id=34465
__________________
ஜ иστнιπg ιš ιмթΘรรιвlε тσ α ωιℓℓιиg нєαят ஜ

Last edited by Last Island; Friday, June 22, 2007 at 02:51 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #55  
Old Wednesday, June 27, 2007
mtgondal's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: On earth
Posts: 552
Thanks: 123
Thanked 56 Times in 42 Posts
mtgondal will become famous soon enough
Default

Our own worst enemy




Shireen M Mazari
Wednesday,June 27,2007

In all my years of studying or travelling abroad, I had always felt proud to identify myself as a Pakistani whenever asked where I was from — especially in Europe, since in the US, beyond the main Eastern cities, people are not very well versed in world geography so one lived in dread of having to explain the geography of South Asia after identifying oneself as a Pakistani. That is why I have been upset by the fact that on this trip abroad, with my children, I have not had that same sense of pride when identifying where I was from, although neither have I hesitated to state my identity. But I do know why I have a sinking feeling now everytime I am asked where I come from. The vision of enlightenment and hope that was Jinnah’s Pakistan has all but vanished as we have put ourselves on a self-destruct course despite our country’s beauty, natural wealth and the potential it promised. We have allowed the corrupt and the extremists to destroy what was our innate compassion and tolerance. Worse still, we have gone back in time and undermined whatever was built up in the early years of our independence — be it in terms of quality (as opposed to the present trend of the numbers game) education, industrialisation or agriculture. Just look at the state of PIA which in earlier decades helped set up Singapore Airlines, Alia (Royal Jordanian), Emirates and so on. Look where these enterprises are and look where PIA is. It has to be truly distressing for any Pakistani to watch this steady decline in national institutions, and regardless of who has been in power the rot has continued. And this is just one instance of the national malaise that is sending our best and our brightest out despite the hurdles they face post-9/11.

Even as people, we have become increasingly intolerant of the diversity, which was our richness and our strength, and sought to harass minorities and impose a uniformity of caste and sect that was never there to begin with. We have no qualms about killing and cheating each other; and intolerance and disrespect for “the other” is rampant today as the human dignity deficit increases within the country.

So there we were in the idyllic setting of Capri, when the only English-language Channel, CNN, suddenly reported the kidnapping of Chinese by the Lal Masjid law-breaking extremists followed by their subsequent release. It was truly humiliating to find our state allowing this bunch of law-breaking bullies to continue in their challenges to the writ of the state and threatening vigilantism. Clearly, their intent was to destroy relationship with our one true ally China, which has seen its citizens murdered and now this kidnapping incident. How long will China and its civil society tolerate such harassment of its citizens by its so-called “all-weather” friend? And who gains? Not us Pakistanis. Perhaps the US, which would like to see distance created between us and the Chinese, but surely the Lal Masjid law-breakers cannot be in an unholy alliance with the US?

In any event, at the end of the day it is the state that must take responsibility for the acts of its citizens and certainly in the case of the Lal Masjid, the continuing tolerance for these lawbreakers is totally inexplicable. What will it take for the state to deal with this dangerous challenge to its writ right in the heart of the country? Ironically, the leaders of the Lal Masjid come from the same Mazari area where the Nazim of Rojhan Sharqi recently beat up a Hindu doctor who refused to give a false medical certificate. Again no action was taken against this thug nazim.

In fact, it has been equally distressing for one’s Muslim identity to witness the increasing savagery with which we are killing each other and allowing our enemies to fulfil their agendas of destroying Muslim states to redraw boundaries in the rising tide of neo-imperialism emanating from the US and its European allies. As if the cruelty and killings inflicted on the Palestinians by Israel was not enough suffering, the Palestinians have turned on each other with some becoming surrogates for Israel and the US despite bitter historic experience. The US’s democracy agenda came to a standstill with the victory of Hamas and they have been squeezing the Palestinians since then, along with Israel and Europe, to punish the Palestinians for supporting Hamas! It is indeed tragic to see Fatah officials now succumbing to US-Israeli designs and taking on their own people, all for the sake of holding on to power. How easily have they forgotten that they lost their people’s support in the first place because they had lost credibility? Unfortunately, some Muslim states have also decided to play the US game and try to bolster Fatah by inviting them to a conference while isolating Hamas. How different is this effort on the part of some Arab states from the effort by Saudi Arabia earlier to try and seek understanding between Fatah and Hamas. So now that Fatah has taken on Hamas, the Israelis have released the Palestinian funds they were holding illegally. After decades of struggle, is this what the Palestinian struggle is being reduced to — destroying each other so that Israel can finally ensure the safety of its occupation of Palestinian lands?

Beyond Palestine, we have Lebanon in the throes of internal war once again with the US pumping in arms lest there be any let up in the bloodletting. As for Iraq, the US invasion may have rid the Iraqis of dictator Saddam, but the bloodletting that has followed has destroyed this nation. Where all the sectarian killings may eventually lead is hard to imagine, but in the process some of the hallmarks of Muslim history may well be destroyed along with the people of Iraq.

Closer to us we have Afghanistan and the continued killing of civilians in what is cruelly termed “collateral damage”. Finally Mr. Karzai has woken up to the reality that he has to protect his own citizens from the gung-ho free-wheeling approach of NATO forces towards Afghans — especially Pashtuns who may or may not actually be Taliban, and it is difficult for anyone to distinguish between the two.

As if all these intra-Muslim killings were not enough, we have efforts by the US to destabilise Iran — except that so far they have been unsuccessful, not for want of trying though given how in their desperation they have even sought the help of the terrorist group Jundullah.

No wonder then that Muslims are easy prey for the non-Muslim world. We have undermined our credibility by allowing space for the extremists in our midst and we have allowed outside powers the space to aid and abet our internal polarisations because of the rising tide of intolerance for any dissent from within and the increasing deficit of human dignity. The elites of the Muslim World, by and large, may fall over backwards accommodating “the other” from outside, but there is little tolerance for “the other” from within. That is our tragedy today — be it Pakistan or the Muslim World at large. We are our own worst enemy.

The writer is director general of the Institute of Strategic Studies in Islamabad. Email: smnews80@hotmail.com

http://www.thenews.com.pk/daily_detail.asp?id=62150
__________________
Time is like a river.
You cannot touch the same water twice,
because the flow that has passed will never pass again.
Enjoy every moment of life.

I have learnt silence from the talkative, toleration from the intolerant, and kindness from the unkind; yet strange, I am ungrateful to these teachers.
Reply With Quote
  #56  
Old Wednesday, July 04, 2007
Last Island's Avatar
Royal Queen of Literature
Medal of Appreciation: Awarded to appreciate member's contribution on forum. (Academic and professional achievements do not make you eligible for this medal) - Issue reason: AppreciationBest Moderator Award: Awarded for censoring all swearing and keeping posts in order. - Issue reason: Best ModGold Medal: Awarded to those members with  maximum number of  reputation points. - Issue reason: For the year 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011Member of the Year: Awarded to those community members who have made invaluable contributions to the Community in the particular year - Issue reason: 2008Diligent Service Medal: Awarded upon completion of 5 years of dedicated services and contribution to the community. - Issue reason: More than 5 years of dedicated servicesModerator: Ribbon awarded to moderators of the forum - Issue reason:
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Forest of Fallen Stars
Posts: 7,585
Thanks: 2,427
Thanked 15,848 Times in 5,006 Posts
Last Island is headed toward stardomLast Island is headed toward stardomLast Island is headed toward stardomLast Island is headed toward stardomLast Island is headed toward stardomLast Island is headed toward stardomLast Island is headed toward stardomLast Island is headed toward stardomLast Island is headed toward stardomLast Island is headed toward stardomLast Island is headed toward stardom
Default

GOD SAVE US FROM BLAIR

Wednesday, July 4, 2007

By Shireen M Mazari

If there was any doubt at all about the revival of a most threatening form of neo-imperialism emanating from the direction of the US and Europe, the appointment of Tony Blair as a Middle East ìpeaceî envoy (whatever the exact grandiose title) should put such doubts to rest. Who can forget the earlier British meddling in West Asia which led to underhand deal cutting and eternal misery for the Arab people -- especially the Palestinians. In present times we have had the murderous invasion of Iraq by the Bush-Blair combine and the strangulation of the Palestinian people for their audacious expression of their democratic rights, by this same combine in cahoots with Israel and other European states. Of course the dubious record of the Bush-Blair combine is not restricted to West Asia (the ìMiddle Eastî as the imperialists have tended to refer to that area) but since Blair is now going to continue asserting the neo imperialist agenda specifically in that unfortunate region, it is that record that is relevant. Here, of course, one should not forget the timing of the British knighthood for Salman Rushdie for there are always patterns that reveal a certain agenda and we need to be aware of them.

In any event, a crucial factor that was always present and has now been highlighted in the sordid episode of Blairís appointment as the Quartetís Middle East envoy is the US-loyal mindset of the new UN Secretary General. This is unfortunate and will certainly push the UN further into becoming a legitimiser for US global policy rather than an instrument for international peace and security. As for Blair, it is already evident what his new mandate will be since the US (loyally supported by Britain) and the EU (with Israeli approval) have already shown which direction they intend to move in on Palestine. This direction is basically to resolve the issue primarily in terms of a two-state solution but involving a truncated and deferential -- to the US-Israel-EU combine -- Palestinian state. Such a design has no room for the legitimate democratic expression of Palestinian will, or for parties such as Hamas. Instead, Hamas has been isolated in Gaza and Israel has been allowed to conduct mass killings of Palestinians in that territory while the Fatah leadership in the West Bank is now feted and given economic assistance. Israel has also now agreed to release the illegally-blocked Palestinian funds but all this will go to Mahmoud Abbasís US-loyal emergency government. So the old imperial policy of divide and rule has seemingly been successfully employed in the Middle East. Undoubtedly, Blair is meant to carry this further. What a tragedy for the Palestinians to find themselves fatally divided by external vested interests.

Of course, in the Arab World, beyond Arab officialdom, there are few takers for Blair. He lacks credibility amongst the Arab people -- in fact amongst Muslim people as a whole, since his anti-Muslim record is reflected in his Iraq adventure and hostile approach to the Palestinian cause, as opposed to the Zionist cause. Even in Britain, the Blair government has managed to increase the polarisation between its Muslim citizens and the rest of British civil society. After all, it was Jack Straw, a member of the Blair cabinet, who asked his Muslim constituents to come to him without the veil if they wanted to seek his assistance. Now Straw is the Justice Secretary of State as well as Lord Chancellor, in the Brown cabinet-- again at a time when the whole issue of religious dress is under legal debate.

Meanwhile, since the Arab World has been presented with a fait accompli in this neo imperialist appointment of Blair as the Quartetís Middle East envoy, let us at least be clear as to whoís interests and whoís agendas he intends to fulfil through this appointment and let us not accept his benefactorsí efforts to couch their designs in high-sounding but meaningless moral terms. Even the term peace has now been given a highly tainted meaning in the wake of the killings of the innocent in Iraq, Gaza and Afghanistan by the US, Israel and Britain. State terrorism is certainly offering stiff competition to the terrorism carried out by non-state actors like Al Qaeda or the LTTE.

Which brings up an interesting pattern in terms of the attacks against civilians. Is it a mere coincidence that the attempted terrorist act in central London recently was immediately followed by NATOís killing of civilians in Afghanistan? Even more terrifying were developments in Scotland after the Glasgow airport attack when wall chalkings appeared declaring ìkill all Pakisî. Such is the level of hatred Blairís Britain now harbours. Also, ìcoincidentallyî, NATO troops again went on a rampage against civilians in Afghanistan. One really begins to wonder what is the fine line that divides terrorist killings from ìcollateral damageî killings?

In October 2006, The Lancet published the findings of research undertaken by Johns Hopkins University, into the number of deaths that had taken place in Iraq since the US-UK invasion and the figure they came up with then was around 655,000. Add to that the exceptionally high ìcollateral damageî of deaths in Afghanistan at the hands of the US-NATO combine and the continuing deaths of Palestinians especially in Gaza and for a Muslim it is difficult not to conclude the inevitable: That Muslim life is considered cheap in the wake of 9/11 (which had resulted in around 3000 tragic deaths) and can all be rationalised as so much collateral damage.

But we have ourselves to blame also. We are divided and at war with ourselves and more eager to please the forces of neo imperialism than sate our own peopleís aspirations. This is why we have allowed extremists to gain ever more space in our midst and that is being exploited by the neo imperialist forces to attack us from outside. Pakistan has suffered particularly on this count, especially at the hands of the Brits who find it so convenient to label their errant Muslim citizens as British Muslims of ìPakistani originî.

This abuse of Pakistan has become so rampant that we need to take some extreme and drastic measures. For instance, we need to restrict Pakistani citizenship to those born in Pakistan rather than allowing those who have neither been born here nor lived here to lay claim to being Pakistani. This should not detract anyone from investing in Pakistan or buying property here but it will restrict those who can be called Pakistani. Let the British be responsible for their errant Muslim youth and let not those who have no ties to Pakistan --- save ancestral ones -ñ claim to be of Pakistani origin.

In fact, in these trying times, I feel those who have chosen to hold dual nationality (hedging their bets as it were) should also be asked to choose one or the other nationality. Let those who claim to be Pakistani stick by their green passport, despite the hardships it may present right now. After all, we should ensure that we move in directions where these difficulties are obliterated rather than simply discarding the green as and when it suits us as individuals. The battle lines are becoming ever more well-defined between the forces of neo imperialism and the Muslim world and difficult choices have to be made.


The writer is director general of the Institute of Strategic Studies in Islamabad. Email: smnews80@hotmail.com

http://www.thenews.com.pk/daily_detail.asp?id=63064
__________________
The Me you have always known, the Me that's a stranger still.
Reply With Quote
  #57  
Old Wednesday, July 11, 2007
mtgondal's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: On earth
Posts: 552
Thanks: 123
Thanked 56 Times in 42 Posts
mtgondal will become famous soon enough
Default

An inevitable end




By Shireen M Mazari
Wednesday,July 11,2007

The writer is director general of the Institute of Strategic Studies, Islamabad

The inevitable finally happened in the Jamia Hafsa-Lal Masjid saga and the military operation against the terrorists commenced – and still continues at the time this column is being written. While dialogue and negotiations were attempted by Ulema and politicians before and after the preparations for the operation had begun and the area was cordoned off, the language of the leaders of Lal Masjid remained uncompromising. They were simply not prepared to subject themselves to the law of the land. In other words, they were quite prepared to use women and children and adult hostages as human shields until the state allowed them their freedom – or what they referred to as "safe passage". This safe passage was demanded not just for the leadership but also for the mass of dangerous home-grown and foreign militants who had been gathering at the Lal Masjid over the last few months when the state had effectively withdrawn its writ from this area and allowed total freedom of movement to and from the Lal Masjid and Jamia Hafsa – raising some critical questions relating to the state's "linkages" with these people. After all, it was simply inexplicable as to why the state was not only refusing to act against a clear and dangerous defiance of the writ of the state but was also not restricting free access in and out of the occupied areas.

The surprise as to the strong level of resistance, the impressive military training of the terrorists and the large cache of lethal weapons and communications' hardware clearly reflects the lack of human intelligence that could have been gathered over the last few months if the activities had been carefully monitored. Also, some of us had been warning that with the successful separation of foreign militants from some of the tribals in FATA, the former would be seeking to move out and would try to "disappear" into the populated urban centres of the country. It seems that that is what happened in the case of the Lal Masjid where a number of well-trained foreign terrorists had amassed.

Interestingly, a number of foreign journalists and analysts, especially American, were in frequent contact with Abdul Rashid Ghazi and had been allowed to view the military hardware he had surrounded himself with (and some had reported this in their stories/articles). As one of these analysts put it: Ghazi was liked by the American journalists because he was familiar with western idiom! Given this level of superficiality, one wonders whether his action against the Chinese endeared him further.

Meanwhile, during the course of the over six-day direct stand-off between the state and the Jamia Hafsa-Lal Masjid combine, a strange theatre of the absurd began to unfold – with the burqa escape attempt being just one reflection of it. What was more distressing was how the Lal Masjid leadership had continuous and free access to the media which was used skilfully in efforts to give some level of rationality to the extremist agenda. The human angle of innocent children and women being held captive was also successfully exploited through the media which, at times, lost sight of the dangerous designs of the Jamia Hafsa-Lal Masjid combine.

The role of the media, in fact, became central to the whole issue and its public face, as journalists risked their lives to provide on-the-spot reporting. One cannot help but admire and commend the emerging independent Pakistani media for their commitment to report from the frontline. However, what is more debatable is the discernible shift the media affected in its own role – from being observers and reporters of events to advisers and aspiring mediators on possible courses of action. As the sleepless nights and pressure began to tell on the media, some showed a tendency to hysteria and there was one bizarre instance when the government sought, unnecessarily, to vacate the press club by force and in response a media man declared that he would reveal all as to how the security personnel were deliberately targeting-to-kill journalists.

That the Lal Masjid incident was going to have countrywide repercussions was also clear early on in the week when security forces were attacked and once again innocent Chinese lost their lives – this time in Peshawar. Clearly, the terrorist networks linked to Lal Masjid sought to undermine the Pakistan-China relationship in an effort to weaken the Pakistani state. With the actual commencement of the military aspects of the operation, one has already heard reports of protests in NWFP and efforts to block the KKH – again revealing an indirect attack on the Pakistan-China relationship. Is it a mere coincidence that the militants and the US have a similar anti-China design?

What the final toll of this operation will be in terms of innocent lives lost remains to be seen but even one innocent Pakistani life lost is one too many. But sometimes the state has little choice and in this case any more leeway given to the terrorists would have emboldened them into further acts of terror. After all, this is what had happened so far with the kidnappings and blackmail in order to get their militant agenda furthered. With each act of defiance and kidnapping, there were negotiations and dialogue on the part of the state, followed by yet another defiance of the law.

As for the state, it must learn some hard lessons from this whole incident, not the least of which is not to allow such a situation to develop again. Why was the stand-off allowed to fester for months with not even a cordoning off of the area so that movement of personnel and material could at least be monitored if not stopped? Equally important, once the wherewithal for the operation was being put in place, some media-access restrictions on the Lal Masjid leadership should have been enforced. Similarly, the problems for locals of the area should have been anticipated and dealt with in an effective contingency plan. That these ordinary Pakistanis suffered with infinite patience is a testimony to their national commitment.

As time lapsed, while efforts to remove the hostages failed, the terrorists got sufficient time to lay their traps and plan their operations. Perhaps formal negotiations, which had begun a day before the operations commenced could have been put in place earlier. Perhaps the most important aspect was the need to have absolutely correct intelligence of the actual lay of the land inside.

Finally, despite the sceptics who felt, and may still do, that this whole incident was timed for political exploitation, there was a need to deal firmly with this challenge to the writ of the state. Whatever the political divides within the state, extremism and such violent challenges to the writ of the state cannot be tolerated. Equally, as has become evident, a state that accommodates criminals and lawbreakers within its official structures will find the nation unconvinced when it deals with large scale challenges to its writ. If the nation is to unite in upholding the writ of its state, then the state must maintain a credible transparency and responsiveness towards civil society. No government should exploit such a tragedy politically.

This is a time for introspection and sober reflection for both state and civil society – especially for the religious leadership – as we face the fallout of this incident. The suffering of the innocent children of Lal Masjid should lead us to reassert the Quaid's vision of Pakistan. In that lies our only salvation as a nation.



Email: smnews80@hotmail.com

http://www.thenews.com.pk/daily_detail.asp?id=63914
__________________
Time is like a river.
You cannot touch the same water twice,
because the flow that has passed will never pass again.
Enjoy every moment of life.

I have learnt silence from the talkative, toleration from the intolerant, and kindness from the unkind; yet strange, I am ungrateful to these teachers.
Reply With Quote
  #58  
Old Wednesday, July 18, 2007
Sureshlasi's Avatar
Senior Member
Medal of Appreciation: Awarded to appreciate member's contribution on forum. (Academic and professional achievements do not make you eligible for this medal) - Issue reason: Best Moderator Award: Awarded for censoring all swearing and keeping posts in order. - Issue reason: Best ModMember of the Year: Awarded to those community members who have made invaluable contributions to the Community in the particular year - Issue reason: For the year 2007Diligent Service Medal: Awarded upon completion of 5 years of dedicated services and contribution to the community. - Issue reason:
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: پاکستان
Posts: 2,282
Thanks: 483
Thanked 3,082 Times in 760 Posts
Sureshlasi is a name known to allSureshlasi is a name known to allSureshlasi is a name known to allSureshlasi is a name known to allSureshlasi is a name known to allSureshlasi is a name known to all
Default

A healing touch needed


By Shireen M Mazari
The writer is director general of the Institute of Strategic Studies, Islamabad

Wednesday, July 18, 2007

Following from the state's action against the Jamia Hafsa-Lal Masjid law-breakers, the country has been witnessing an upsurge in terrorist attacks against security personnel. Meanwhile, civil society is being ill-served by vested interests seeking to play upon its frayed emotions for their own political ends so the state is in a no-win situation and confronted with an increasingly polarised society. The religious right has closed ranks in a new assertiveness, with all those coming out of the Jamia Hafsa and Lal Masjid vociferously continuing to support their doctrine of violence and hatred. As for the moderate elements, or those normally seen as thus, they are, for one reason or another, in a state of disarray -- sometimes almost sounding like the extremists or their sympathisers within the religious right; at other times exposing their own contradictions and uncertainties simply in an effort to ensure a distancing from the state at all costs.

In the face of an increasingly besieged and divided nation and state, a healing touch is desperately needed. But it appears no one is interested in taking the first step towards this. In fact, trends point in the opposite direction with truth having become a major victim of this polarisation process. This is unfortunate and tragic, as presently the Pakistani state and nation are also besieged from external sources. While we have all been focused on internal developments, Pakistan's perennial detractors have increased their bellicosity against the country. Over the last month and still continuing, a US think tank has been organising conferences all over Europe and the US on how to deal with Pakistan with the usual coterie of Pakistani intellectuals (the same coterie is being transported to different EU capitals and US cities) there to provide the native touch, although some are now based in the US itself! Why is it not a surprise to find that the initiators of this project are Ashley Tellis, George Perkovich and Frederic Grare -- all known Indophiles who have been churning out anti-Pakistan propaganda for a while now.

More important, the official voices within the US and its European allies have increased their bellicosity in terms of accusations that Pakistan is not doing enough in terms of the global war on terror. While our whole state and society has been rent asunder as a result of the global war on terror, we can never satisfy the US and the EU. Nor should that be our prime concern; but coming back to these external pressures, let us ask ourselves where extremists like the Jamia Hafsa-Lal Masjid combine managed to get weapons like the bullet-proof and explosion-proof blankets which, according to official government sources, even the Pakistan military does not possess?

We are all asking the question as to why the state allowed the large arsenal to collect in the heart of the capital. Perhaps we also need to ask who facilitated the extremists' acquisition of such weaponry that increased their capability to challenge the writ and power of the state? Was it a mere coincidence that US journalists and analysts had tremendous access to the leaders of the Lal Masjid and seemed to show a fair bit of sympathy for them till the commencement of the Operation? Again, was the kidnapping of the Chinese simply a coincidence, given that the US has always been uncomfortable with the strategic nature of the Pakistan-China relationship? Has it been merely a series of coincidences that Chinese have been targeted at critical times in Pakistan ever since the operationalisation of the Gwadar project? It cannot escape anyone's notice that given enough attacks on Chinese in Pakistan, the relationship between the two countries would intrinsically be impacted upon, to Pakistan's detriment. The interview given by the Chinese ambassador to The News (14 July) was as clear a message to this effect as any we will get from the circumspect Chinese.

Nor should one lose sight of the rabidly sectarian outlook of the Lal Masjid leadership which would have provided a sympathetic ear for the anti-Iran rhetoric of the US. After all, if the US can use Jundullah in its efforts to destabilise the Iranian state, who knows how far its reach is in this regard? Let us recall that till the Soviet Union folded up, there was a US-Mullah alliance that ran through the anti-communist goals of the former.

Was it also a mere coincidence that the CNN, through lies and deceit, chose to air a documentary targeting the Pakistan military around the time of the Jamia Hafsa stand- off? Apparently, they went through an elaborate charade to get support for their filming, including supposed interviews with concerned officials and politicians! We should learn a lesson from this and contain our eagerness to provide more access to the foreign media than to the local one.

What, one may ask, would be the long term intent of these external pressures and designs? To get the Pakistani state to act more rigorously against extremists; to end what some call the "Mullah-Military alliance" -- a misnomer if ever there was one since all political forces in Pakistan since the end of the Zia period have allied with the "Mullahs" at one time or another? Perhaps all of these goals, but more important is a longer term goal of weakening the Pakistani state and eventually taking out its nuclear assets.

Within this parameter, one should also not rule out the direct and sustained intervention of NATO-US forces across the international border with Afghanistan. If anyone has any doubts, they should have heard US analyst Bill Kristol, a conservative, reflecting the Bush mindset, stating in a Fox News programme on July 12, that the US should carry out attacks in Waziristan over the next few weeks, without informing Pakistan. As we know, NATO has already been attacking Pakistani citizens and territory. Link all this up with the alarmist statements emanating from the British military declaring that the present Pakistani government would be overthrown and "Islamists" would takeover (The News July 16), resulting in a strategic catastrophe in Afghanistan, and one should not rule out an attempt by the US and NATO to intervene more directly into Pakistan -- the eventual target being our nuclear assets.

The pretext would be the increasing violence and terrorism, which is why the new upping of the ante against the security forces by the extremists serves only foreign

interests -- especially the US. In the face of this bizarre internal-external threat, never has the need for national reconciliation been greater than it is presently. Here, the onus is on the state to take the first step by reaching out to all peace loving and moderate Pakistanis who have only one country they can call home and one nation that they identify themselves with. Admitting to bad advice, especially in the context of the judicial crisis, and backtracking on that advice will show the inner strength and national commitment of the leadership and will be a critical first step in a process of national healing that should be the primary aim of the state today. The people want a sensitised and responsive leadership and proactive moves in this regard will find a ready response within the silent majority that today finds itself isolated, emotionally drained and wondering what has happened to Jinnah's Pakistan that held the promise of tolerance and respect for the diversity that was to be our unifying force.



Email: smnews80@hotmail.com


http://www.thenews.com.pk/editorial_detail.asp?id=64825
__________________
ஜ иστнιπg ιš ιмթΘรรιвlε тσ α ωιℓℓιиg нєαят ஜ
Reply With Quote
  #59  
Old Wednesday, July 25, 2007
Last Island's Avatar
Royal Queen of Literature
Medal of Appreciation: Awarded to appreciate member's contribution on forum. (Academic and professional achievements do not make you eligible for this medal) - Issue reason: AppreciationBest Moderator Award: Awarded for censoring all swearing and keeping posts in order. - Issue reason: Best ModGold Medal: Awarded to those members with  maximum number of  reputation points. - Issue reason: For the year 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011Member of the Year: Awarded to those community members who have made invaluable contributions to the Community in the particular year - Issue reason: 2008Diligent Service Medal: Awarded upon completion of 5 years of dedicated services and contribution to the community. - Issue reason: More than 5 years of dedicated servicesModerator: Ribbon awarded to moderators of the forum - Issue reason:
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Forest of Fallen Stars
Posts: 7,585
Thanks: 2,427
Thanked 15,848 Times in 5,006 Posts
Last Island is headed toward stardomLast Island is headed toward stardomLast Island is headed toward stardomLast Island is headed toward stardomLast Island is headed toward stardomLast Island is headed toward stardomLast Island is headed toward stardomLast Island is headed toward stardomLast Island is headed toward stardomLast Island is headed toward stardomLast Island is headed toward stardom
Default

A FATAL U.S. DESIGN

Wednesday, 25th July, 2007
By Shireen M Mazari

For some it may seem surprising to find that even as the Pakistani state ups the military ante against terrorists in the country, and the nation suffers an increase in targeted suicide attacks, the US also ups the ante in terms of accusations against the Pakistani state and histrionics relating to Osama bin Laden's purported presence in Pakistan. However, for many of us who feel the US has a particular design for Pakistan, the present US vitriol relating to Pakistan and terrorism is not unexpected at all. In any event, the point-counter point statements of the US threatening to take military action in Pakistani territory and Pakistan absolutely rejecting such action is more of a charade because the US and NATO have been violating Pakistani sovereignty since they began military operations in Afghanistan post-9/11. In fact, it is precisely this sort of adventurism on the part of these forces that makes the Pakistani state's own fight against terrorism more difficult because accusations of acting on US behest immediately begin to flow by opportunist political forces. No matter that our own state and nation are threatened directly by these extremist terrorists who are also playing the US game of polarising our state and society.

So what are US designs towards Pakistan? Certainly, even though they may intrude into our territory for limited military objectives, their real intent is not so much to invade and occupy Pakistan as it is to destabilise and perhaps push it to disintegration into smaller Muslim "states" -- potential client states for the US. As has been stated earlier in these columns, the US has been seeking to destabilise, break down and reconstruct the Greater or Broader Middle East to its own liking. It was not a coincidence that a retired US Army Intelligence Officer, Ralph Peters' now infamous article, Blood Borders, was published in the US Armed Forces Journal in July 2006 just when US Secretary of State, Miss Rice, was looking favourably on the death and destruction being wreaked on Lebanon by Israel as simply the "birth pangs" of a new Middle East. The expression of intent was clear in both these statements -- the division and restructuring of the Muslim states of the region. Of course, let us accept the complicity, either intentionally or unwittingly, of our own people in these lands, to the US neo imperialist design.

After all, since these clear expressions of US intent in our region (since we are now part of the so-called Broader Middle East) we have witnessed the following: a bloody split between Hamas and Fatah; renewed violence and chaos in Lebanon; renewed efforts by the US to destabilise the Iranian regime aided and abetted by some Muslim factional interests; upsurge of violence and terrorism in Pakistan with an inexplicable flow of weapons in the terrorists' hands -- weapons that even the Pakistani military does not possess!

It is within this new US design that we must see its policies towards Pakistan wherein the division of Pakistan is being contemplated so that eventually it comprises only Sindh and Punjab, with a "Free Balochistan" to be carved from Pakistani and Iranian territories and, equally bizarre, NWFP to be given to Afghanistan to compensate the latter for its loss to Persia in the West -- as the Peters design states! So one would have a set of client states perhaps more dependent on and compliant to the US. Sounds absurd but look at the developments that have and are taking place presently.

Earlier this year, the US Congress passed a bill relating to the implementation of the 9/11 Commission recommendations. The section on Pakistan effectively takes Pakistan-US relations to the Pressler days with restrictions placed on US security assistance to Pakistan in the form of a Presidential waiver. Worse than Pressler times, such a waiver would now require US Presidential certification not just on nuclear non-proliferation but also on a whole range of intrusive issues relating to terrorism and the setting up of secular state schools.

Alongside this action from the US Congress, we had John Negroponte's testimony in the US Senate in January 2007 in which he accused Pakistan of being a "major source of Islamic extremism" and a safe haven for Taliban and "home for some top terrorist leaders." Alongside, he also raised the proliferation issue which showed once again that the real intent of the US is to undermine our nuclear assets over the long term. No mention has ever been made of the Indian treaties of nuclear cooperation with Saddam's Iraq and with Iran.

Now we are seeing this rhetoric against Pakistan becoming more intense with high ranking US Administration members and the Christian zealot Bush himself declaring that support was being provided for not only the Taliban but also al-Qaeda within Pakistan. We have also had the declassified section of the US National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) released earlier this month, which has declared that al-Qaeda is regrouping in Pakistan's tribal areas.

Never mind that the US intelligence can hardly be treated credibly given its deliberately concocted lies to justify the US invasion of Iraq, the problem is that it has provided fodder for the US which seeks desperately to have some diversion to its growing failures in Iraq and Afghanistan. Sure enough, the US policy makers have followed with histrionics about the US need to attack inside Pakistani territory -- perhaps without informing Pakistan and in any case certainly without seeking permission from Pakistan! The final note of bellicosity has come from the new US intelligence Chief -- that Osama is alive and in Pakistan (rationally, bin Laden's chances of still being alive are minimal).

Beyond all this rhetoric, if we keep in mind the old and historic links between the rabidly anti-communist Islamists and successive US regimes; the continuing failure of the US Administration to declare the BLA a terrorist organisation; the refusal of the US-propped Karzai regime to close down the BLA office in central Kabul; the Indo-US strategic partnership and India's questionable activities in Afghanistan; and reports (not denied by the US Administration) from the US media that the US was using the terrorist group Jundullah to destabilise the Iranian state; we can see a clearer pattern of the US neo-imperialist designs against Pakistan and other Muslim states. Add to this another interesting fact: terrorist Abdullah Mehsud, who was taken from Afghanistan to Guantanamo then released to Kabul found his way back to Pakistan and one of his early terrorist actions was targeting Chinese engineers (Mehsud reportedly died during a raid in Zhob district on Tuesday). All a mere coincidence? Perhaps, but too many dots can be connected if one looks at the larger picture to ignore an unholy alliance between the Mullahs and the US. After all, those who do not believe in temporal state boundaries amongst Muslims have no loyalty to such national entities. This fits in perfectly with US designs for the Broader Middle East.

The question is: when will we in Pakistan wake up to this US design and forge a national consensus to deal with our own fifth columnists aiding and abetting this nefarious design? Only if we heed Jinnah's advice to the state and its people, which has a resonant clarity in terms of the place of religion within the state and relations amongst the citizenry and between them and the state. Too many compromises and fears have blurred the raison d'etre for Pakistan. It is time to clear where we are coming from so that we know clearly where to head for in the future.


The writer is director general of the Institute of Strategic Studies in Islamabad. Email: smnews80@hotmail.com

http://www.thenews.com.pk/daily_detail.asp?id=65635
__________________
The Me you have always known, the Me that's a stranger still.
Reply With Quote
  #60  
Old Wednesday, August 01, 2007
Last Island's Avatar
Royal Queen of Literature
Medal of Appreciation: Awarded to appreciate member's contribution on forum. (Academic and professional achievements do not make you eligible for this medal) - Issue reason: AppreciationBest Moderator Award: Awarded for censoring all swearing and keeping posts in order. - Issue reason: Best ModGold Medal: Awarded to those members with  maximum number of  reputation points. - Issue reason: For the year 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011Member of the Year: Awarded to those community members who have made invaluable contributions to the Community in the particular year - Issue reason: 2008Diligent Service Medal: Awarded upon completion of 5 years of dedicated services and contribution to the community. - Issue reason: More than 5 years of dedicated servicesModerator: Ribbon awarded to moderators of the forum - Issue reason:
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Forest of Fallen Stars
Posts: 7,585
Thanks: 2,427
Thanked 15,848 Times in 5,006 Posts
Last Island is headed toward stardomLast Island is headed toward stardomLast Island is headed toward stardomLast Island is headed toward stardomLast Island is headed toward stardomLast Island is headed toward stardomLast Island is headed toward stardomLast Island is headed toward stardomLast Island is headed toward stardomLast Island is headed toward stardomLast Island is headed toward stardom
Default

AWAKENING FROM U.S. STUPOR


Wednesday, August 1, 2007
By Shireen Mazari

To find Pakistanis still surprised over negative US behaviour towards Pakistan is by now a trifle irritating since there has been a clear pattern to this behaviour over the decades. Very briefly, the US relationship with Pakistan is a cyclical one on which the US engages with Pakistan whenever it has regional compulsions to do so -- rather than an innate interest in Pakistan itself. It was the communist bogey in the fifties and sixties; the Soviet incursion into Afghanistan in the late seventies and eighties; and, of course, the so-called Global War on Terror (GWOT) post-9/11. In between these interludes, Pakistan has either seen a total absence of US interest or at best a negative interest in terms of its nuclear programme in the form of sanctions. As for the interludes of cooperation, they have always followed a four-year cyclical pattern, beginning with an intensely positive interaction to a more critical and intrusive one on the part of the US and finally the cycle comes full circle with a growing estrangement and divergence of interests especially on the part of the US. This pattern is dependent not only on the ground situation in the region, but also on US domestic politics, including both Congressional and Presidential elections. At present, we are nearing the completion of the prevailing cycle and should expect a growing adversarial relationship with the US -- regardless of the outcome of the next US presidential elections.

Why have we not been able to break out of this cyclical pattern? Partly because US interest in us has been linked to its strategic interests in the region; but also because we do not have strategic interests in common. In fact, what Pakistan has to accept is that its strategic interests are directly opposed to some of the primary US strategic interests relating to this region -- apart from the post-9/11 US design to restructure the Muslim World or Greater Middle East, details of which were discussed in this column last week.

In terms of Pakistan's strategic interests, its relationship with China is critical and we would wish to see an increasing Chinese presence, involvement and influence in this region, including the development of an economic and energy corridor from the Gulf to China. This would require development and stabilisation of the country from Balochistan to the NWFP. The US, on the other hand, would prefer to see a contained Chinese influence.

Again, we would like to see a greater level of interaction and cooperation with Iran, including opening up of the economic potential of Balochistan which would inevitably provide Iran greater economic access eastwards -- at a time when the US is seeking to isolate Iran. As for India, while we are seeking a better relationship with our eastern neighbour, we would always seek to balance India regionally rather than bandwagon with it -- in terms of accepting its hegemony. The US, on the other hand, sees India as a regional power manager and has sought to push for Indian hegemony including through the de-linking of the Indian nuclear programme from the Pakistani one. The US has broken its international non-proliferation commitments, including under the Non-Proliferation Treaty (Articles I and III:2), to give recognition to India's nuclear weapon status and accommodate its nuclear material demands through the Indo-US "civilian" nuclear agreement.

Even on the GWOT, while Pakistan has a commitment to fight terrorism because of its own internal terrorist and extremist threats, the military-centric approach of the US has only succeeded in creating more operational space for the terrorists across the globe. Additionally, US statements berating and threatening Pakistan and actual violations of Pakistani sovereignty by US and NATO forces, have all aggravated Pakistan's terrorist threat and the state's efforts to deal with it.

So, all in all, Pakistan and the US have divergent strategic visions and goals. This means that while there can be issue-specific cooperation with clear and transparent quid pro quos, Pakistan has to learn to resist the temptation to open itself up completely to US intrusions. If we are clear on these divergences, we will not be taken by surprise every time the US moves into a negative mode against us. At the end of the day, the US would like to see a weak Pakistani client state unable to assert its rightful place in the region and within the Muslim World -- and a state with a rolled back if not totally renounced nuclear status. Certainly, a robust and credible nuclear Pakistan does not sit comfortable with the US.

That is why the debilitating section on Pakistan in the Bill on the Implementation of the 9/11 Commission Recommendations should not have come as a surprise especially since it was in the Congress since early this year. Yet we are only now hearing of the Foreign Office taking up the contents relating to Pakistan with the US Administration. In January 2007, in these columns, I had pointed out the excessively intrusive conditionalities that were contained in the Pakistan section of the Bill, but officialdom seemed unconcerned at that time. Pressler was nothing compared to the conditionalities requiring Presidential certification under this Bill which Bush is expected to sign into law very soon. It is not just nuclear proliferation or democracy or the war on terror that are issues to be used as pressure points for Pakistan. Included in the conditionalities is also a requirement to certify that the Pakistani state is setting up secular public schools -- which in US definitional terms means no religious instruction at all. Is it not time for some reciprocal negative moves on our part in terms of access denial and so on to the US within Pakistan? Are we aware of the long term consequences of even innocuous moves like the US offering "exchange" visits for impressionable Pakistani high school students to the US where they spend a year with an American family? Have we seen the impact on perceptions of these children after they return? Of course exchange programmes are good for furthering understanding, but an exchange implies two-way traffic and we have not heard of US students coming to Pakistan to spend a year with a Pakistani family -- so where is the element of exchange? Has anyone raised this issue officially with the US? Also, are we so fearful of the Marines marching in or is there a psychological confidence deficit that is paralysing us from responding to the political blackmail from the US?

We have too many of our own issues now and we need to focus on them and seek indigenous remedies for dealing with the threat from extremists and terrorists -- keeping in mind also the historic Mullah-US alliance. Just as we must be clear as to whom amongst our nation threaten the very ideals of Jinnah on which Pakistan was created, we must also be ready to accept an uncomfortable reality that in the long term our strategic goals differ innately from US strategic goals in this region. To have them impact our external strategic imperatives is to undermine regional stability and our international potential in the region; to have them broker the domestic political architecture is akin to national suicide.


(The writer is director general of the Institute of Strategic Studies, Islamabad. Email: smnews80@hotmail.com)


http://www.thenews.com.pk/daily_detail.asp?id=66482
__________________
The Me you have always known, the Me that's a stranger still.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
development of pakistan press since 1947 Janeeta Journalism & Mass Communication 15 Tuesday, May 05, 2020 03:04 AM
Pakistan's Lessons from its Kargil War 1999 Sumairs Pakistan Affairs 7 Saturday, December 11, 2010 12:00 PM
PAKISTAN Press, Media, TV, Radio, Newspapers MUKHTIAR ALI Journalism & Mass Communication 1 Friday, May 04, 2007 02:48 AM
indo-pak relations atifch Current Affairs 0 Monday, December 11, 2006 09:01 PM
international news agencies Muhammad Akmal Journalism & Mass Communication 0 Tuesday, June 06, 2006 11:33 PM


CSS Forum on Facebook Follow CSS Forum on Twitter

Disclaimer: All messages made available as part of this discussion group (including any bulletin boards and chat rooms) and any opinions, advice, statements or other information contained in any messages posted or transmitted by any third party are the responsibility of the author of that message and not of CSSForum.com.pk (unless CSSForum.com.pk is specifically identified as the author of the message). The fact that a particular message is posted on or transmitted using this web site does not mean that CSSForum has endorsed that message in any way or verified the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any message. We encourage visitors to the forum to report any objectionable message in site feedback. This forum is not monitored 24/7.

Sponsors: ArgusVision   vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.