The News On Sunday:"Special Reports"

siddiqui88 · #1 Sunday, July 29, 2012

July 29, 2012

BALOCHISTAN INSURGENCY

Editorial

Every few months we are reminded of Balochistan, on one pretext or the other. The last time the media approached the issue with some degree of seriousness was when the Republican legislators’ resolution came, demanding right of self-determination for the Baloch.

Other than that, the issue gets picked up, albeit superficially, with the chief justice of the Supreme Court raising it, while sitting in the capital or actually going to Quetta with fellow judges.

This time we were compelled to focus on Balochistan when the newly elected prime minister Raja Pervaiz Ashraf addressed a national workshop at the military-run National Defence University in Islamabad. The thrust of his statement was that there was unrest in small pockets in Balochistan that could not be equated with insurgency and that his government would not negotiate with those who did not respect the Pakistani flag.

It came as a stark reminder of how close the PPP government stands to the military vis-a-vis Balochistan — one is not sure if it actually believes in this position of denial or is it only for public consumption.

The saner elements have taken strong exception to his statement and have reacted accordingly. The decision to not talk with those who do not respect the Pakistani flag has been a subject of criticism for a government that has repeatedly announced opening the channel of talks with militant extremists in other parts of the country.

Serious analysts count Balochistan as one of the top most failures of the PPP government. From its encouraging announcements in the earlier parts of its tenure, its position has only hardened with passing time and this has only aggravated the situation. It now seems in agreement with the military’s solution of the problem, ruling out any kind of political solution. The lessons of East Pakistan are left for academic discussion only.

Meanwhile, an added ethnic and sectarian dimension has been added to the complicated Balochistan problem, raising the level of violence many times over. The Baloch youth are now completely disgruntled and chances are that when the government talks of refusing to talk to those who do not believe in Pakistan, it is referring to a majority of Baloch youth.

Our analysts for today’s Special Report warn that time is running out and Baloch problems must be addressed sooner and in better ways than suggested by the prime minister. We wonder if someone will pay heed since all earlier warnings seem to have fallen on deaf ears. As always, all analysts are based outside Balochistan.

siddiqui88 · #2 Sunday, July 29, 2012

Balochistan within and without

By Mir Mohammad Ali Talpur

Prime Minister Raja Pervez Ashraf, addressing the National Workshop on ‘Balochistan situation: perceptions and realities — the way forward,’ organised by the military-run National Defence University (NDU), in Islamabad, warned that if the “unrest in small pockets” is not quelled immediately, it may seep into other areas. Later, downplaying it, he added that unrest in “small pockets” couldn’t be equated with an insurgency.

He was wrong on both counts: there is insurgency and it is widespread — and little wonder the establishment is extremely perturbed and nervous.

Let’s examine insurgency in Balochistan’s context. Balochistan is presently experiencing political as well as armed insurgency. Political insurgency as a rule is more pervasive in depth and scale, hence more debilitating for the state. Political and armed insurgencies always complement and supplement each other in a deadly combination. Insurgency is defined as “an organised movement aimed at the overthrow of a constituted government through the use of subversion and armed conflict.” Insurgencies and guerilla warfare are often assumed to be synonymous with terrorism but the key difference is that an insurgency is a movement — a political effort with a specific aim and this sets it apart from terrorism. The ultimate goal of an insurgency is to challenge the existing government for control of all or a portion of its territory, or force political concessions in sharing political power. The Baloch insurgents are challenging the state for political and physical control of Balochistan.

Insurgencies require active or tacit support of some portion of the population involved; Baloch insurgency enjoys widespread support as proved by the government’s failure to contain it in spite of the extremely repressive measures.

Baloch nationalists, realising that slow track genocide and demographic changes envisaged by mega projects like Gwadar could soon turn them into a minority in their own land, made a conscious choice of using force to counter threats to their survival as a nation because they realised historical and political arguments for their right to independence were futile as the powers that call the shots here heed nothing but force.

Baloch nationalism is not a new phenomenon as the natives have always determinedly defended their land against the invaders as proved by their resistance to the British colonialism. All Baloch identify themselves with the anti-colonial struggle and take pride in it. The international political events in the first quarter of last century buttressed Baloch nationalism with political awakening and helped it transcend the tribal barriers and it gradually became truly national in spirit and substance.

Insurgency in Balochistan has persisted since 1948 with varying degrees of depth and intensity. Over time Baloch attitudes and resolve have been hardened and strengthened by the continuous and arrogant disregard of their rightful demand of control over their political future and resources. The present phase is to date the hardest fought and widespread and, like each preceding one, is on a qualitatively higher stage in all respects.
This widespread and protracted political and armed insurgency cannot be airbrushed as ‘perpetrated by foreign-inspired elements’. It mirrors the intensity and scale of the resentment and desperation of Baloch people at the repression and deprivation and underlines their wish for a radical change.

The forced illegal annexation of Balochistan to Pakistan in March 1948 further galvanised the Baloch nationalism and their national struggle acquired truly political character. Each new state aggression resulted in more widespread identification with aims and goals of freedom struggle from diverse strata’s of Baloch society. The July 15, 1960 hanging of seven Baloch martyrs in Hyderabad and Sukkur Jails after summary military trials gave further impetus to the nationalist dream of an independent Balochistan and led to Mir Sher Mohammad Marri and Ali Mohammad Mengal’s struggle in Marri and Mengal areas respectively.

However, it was the February 1973 illegal dismissal of Sardar Ataullah Mengal’s elected government by Zulfikar Ali Bhutto and consequent military operation which truly ignited the Baloch freedom struggle and has seen the uncompromising stance for freedom become the primary nationalist goal.

The present phase began with the arrest of Nawab Khair Bakhsh Khan and his supporters on trumped-up charges of murder of Justice Mohammad Nawaz Marri in January 2000. Then the murder of Nawab Akbar Bugti in 2005 followed by that of Mir Balach Khan Marri in 2007 put paid to any chances of reconciliation.

With Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) inaugural in March 2008, its first test on its commitment to resolve Balochistan issue came in the form of SardarAkhtar Mengal’s continued detention and it failed miserably. Arrested in November 2006 for alleged mistreatment of two army intelligence operatives by his attendants, he remained incarcerated till May 2008 in spite of PPP’s promises. They could not release him without army’s consent. All civilian governments are beholden to ‘military will’ and cannot decide independently on Baloch or Balochistan.

The PPP government has only paid lip-service to the resolution of the Balochistan problem with promises, offers, amnesty and toothless commissions. The Baloch have suffered worst atrocities during its tenure and Raja Pervez Ashraf’s recent utterances do not bode well.

The state’s misgivings against Baloch, who have always been viewed with suspicion, have now become more entrenched and uncompromising. There is a reason behind the uncompromising attitude of the state regarding Baloch. The ‘establishment’ has Balochistan’s valuable real estate and resources as its only priority — and this is a replication of its folly in Bangladesh.

This flawed and dangerous establishment’s Baloch policy is too entrenched, too consolidated and too committed to even allow measures which would give the nationalists an excuse to at least agree to talks. Through the army’s financial, commercial and strategic interests in Balochistan, it manages economic projects like Chamaling and Kasa Hills marble projects and even stage manages the August 14 celebrations, preclude any voluntary roll back of present repressive and uncompromising policy or allowing the civilians to have a say in affairs there.

An amicable and peaceful solution of the Baloch issue based on the projected desire of the civilian government or the political opposition leaders is unachievable as long as military’s stake and influence in Balochistan not only continues to overlap the civilian control but in fact supersedes it — as is borne out by Balochistan’s governor, chief minister, speaker and sundry ministers public accusations that the Frontier Corps runs a parallel government in Balochistan.
The Supreme Court, powerful enough to depose a prime minister finds itself helpless against law flouting and stonewalling FC. In spite of hard evidence of FC involvement in abductions and killing of Baloch no one has been charged. The FC is stonewalling to avoid giving up its arbitrary powers and this precludes termination of ‘dirty war’ against Baloch anytime soon.
An ineffective Aghaz-e-Huqooq package and the lame NFC awards are not enough to deflect the resentment and outrage at the ‘dirty war’ being waged against the Baloch. In the last 18 months alone, more than 500 bodies of abducted Baloch have bloodied the province’s landscape. The Baloch stance, too, has naturally hardened and found expression in the present sustained and widespread insurgency. With the situation as it stands, there hardly is any hope of an amicable solution in foreseeable future.

The establishment doesn’t understand that repression and ‘dirty war’ tactics are certainly not the way forward in Balochistan.

siddiqui88 · #3 Sunday, July 29, 2012

The ‘foreign’ Factor

Does Balochistan work on foreign agenda or does itreceive foreign assistance to spread its agenda?

By Aoun Sahi

On April 23, 2009, Rehman Malik, the then Interior Minister, during an in-camera session of the Senate, made a presentation of what he called “evidence of the involvement of India, Afghanistan and Russia in Balochistan and other parts of the country.”

One of the senators who was also present at the session told TNS, requesting anonymity, that Malik had documentary evidence — “video clips” — of the involvement of the abovementioned countries in incidents of terrorism in Pakistan. “Malik told the session that the Balochistan Liberation Army of Brahamdagh Bugti, who now lives in Kabul, is funded by Russia and India. Besides, around 1,000 students have trained in Russia and now they are back in Balochistan.”

The senator also said that in 2008, the then DG military operations Ahmed Shuja Pasha had briefed a joint session of the parliament about the involvement of India and Russia in Balochistan. “Pasha told the parliament that India had established as many as nine training camps along the Afghan border to train BLA activists.”

The ‘foreign hand’ factor in Balochistan, Pakistan’s largest province area-wise and smallest population-wise, has to do with its huge strategic importance. The province is rich in natural resources, has a long coastline that provides the closest link through Arabian Sea to Afghanistan, China and Central Asian states. Frederic Grare, a Balochistan expert at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, is of the view that there are about 20 countries which can benefit hugely from development work at Gwadar port.

“Balochistan is also important on the world’s ‘war arena’ as it borders with both Afghanistan and Iran and can easily be used to monitor China, Central Asian states and Persian Gulf.”

The Pakistani security officials believe several countries are ‘working’ actively in Balochistan. On June 2, 2012, Maj Gen Obaidullah Khan Khattak, Inspector General of Frontier Corps (FC), told the media at a press conference that 20 foreign intelligence agencies were active in the province.

Justice Javed Iqbal, head of the Judicial Commission on missing persons in Balochistan, believes foreign elements are involved in the region’s unrest. “The foreign intelligence agencies want to worsen the Balochistan situation in order to destabilise Pakistan,” he said on June 10, 2012 in Quetta.
According to a leaked US memo, former president Pervez Musharraf also took up the issue with the US officials in September 2007. “He asked the US to intervene”, says the memo. Musharraf also told US officials that Pakistan had proof of India and Afghanistan’s involvement in efforts to provide weapons, training and funding for Baloch extremists through Brahamdagh Bugti and Baloch Marri, two Baloch nationalists. “We have letters instructing who to give what weapons [and] to whom.”
Maria Sultan, Director, South Asian Strategic Stability Unit, says “Most of the arms and ammunition being recovered from the Balochi insurgents are foreign-made, though they do not bear any brand names.”

According to the available data on years 2009 to 2012, 810 IED attacks, 390 rocket attacks and 325 mine attacks were carried out in Balochistan that killed over 400 people while more than 735 people lost their lives to target killings in the province during the same period. “Balochi militants cannot carry out such massive attacks without foreign help,” she says.
Dr Ayesha Siddiqa, leading security analyst, says she would be surprised if no foreign agencies were involved in Balochistan. “Several Baloch leaders have said on record that they would not shy away to get foreign help,” she tells TNS. “But there may be help which is limited.

“Pakistan is also not pleading as much on international forum about foreign involvement as it could have.”

Siddiqa also says the Baloch are weak and they are not a huge number. “Our establishment knows very well this is not a 1971-like situation. Back then, the Bengalis were in majority but the Baloch are not, even in their own province.”

She believes the foreign involvement in the province is not to the degree where it can disallow a serious political dialogue. “I do not buy the narrative that a foreign country wants disintegration in Balochistan. It does not suit anybody in the region. We should not give that much importance to the research papers of the US think tanks. Most of these think tanks, like ours, are insignificant.”

Siddiqa believes Pakistan needs to plead its case at the international forum in a proactive way.

Senator Hasil Bakhsh Bizinjo, a leading Balochi voice, says it would be wrong to say that there is no foreign involvement in Balochistan. “No militant movement can operate without foreign assistance. But there are two types of such movements — one that works on foreign agenda and the other which is indigenous and receives foreign assistance to spread its agenda. There is a need to have different strategies to tackle an indigenous movement.”

He considers it the duty of the state and the agencies to stop the foreign involvement. “In Balochistan, even today, we have low insurgency as those killed in different attacks are mostly civilian. It is true that India is anti-Pakistan but I believe it does not want to disintegrate Balochistan. It does not suit China, Iran and even Afghanistan because once this process of disintegration of a country on the basis of ethnicity starts in the region there will be no stopping it.”

A military source in Islamabad says that along with the US, Afghanistan, Russia, India and China, other “brotherly Muslim countries” are actively involved in Balochistan. “Some want to destabilise Pakistan while others do not want to see an operational Gwadar port as this would hurt the business of their ports badly.

“Sectarian killings in the province are also part of the activities of the foreign agencies,” the source says. “Some US media reports have also suggested that Israel’s intelligence agency Mossad was active in Balochistan.”

Military officials say it is difficult to stop infiltration through the 1,200-km border with Afghanistan. “There are 212 border passes on Balochistan and Afghanistan which makes monitoring it too difficult. Arms and ammunition illegally enter Balochistan through the porous Afghan border, Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa and even through Sindh and the sea routes.”

siddiqui88 · #4 Sunday, July 29, 2012

Being young and Baloch

The government’s timely response will decide who the young Baloch will support and join in near future

By Malik Siraj Akbar

In a chapter focusing on the Pakistani youth in the newly published book The Future of Pakistan, Moeed W. Yusuf, the South Asia Advisor at the Washington-based United States Institute for Peace (USIP), says 79 per cent of the youth in Pakistan “feels proud to be a Pakistani”. The response of the youth from Pakistan’s largest province of Balochistan, nonetheless, stands strikingly different from the rest of the country.

“The figures from Balochistan [about being proud to be a Pakistani] were the bleakest,” he concluded, after analysing three recent major youth surveys.

According to Mr Yusuf, the findings of these surveys conducted by the British Council, Centre for Civic Education and Herald magazine do not collectively bode well for the Pakistani federation in the coming years.

“Baloch youth stand out as most distraught with the federation.Except for a minority, they are least enthusiastic about being part of Pakistan and are least proud to be Pakistanis,” he wrote. “They are the keenest to leave Pakistan and they oppose the military and state institutions more staunchly than youth in other provinces.”

Parveen Naz, a social activist in Quetta, says the Baloch generally see a “very bleak” future for themselves in Pakistan. While no access to quality education or employment opportunities is one thing, she says, the “kill and dump” policies have further poisoned the minds of a new generation of the Baloch.

“The security apparatus in the country has made life miserable for the Baloch. They cannot enter in any walk of life, nor can they undertake entrepreneurial initiatives because the federal government has waged a war against the Baloch. The youth is punished whether it is politically involved or totally indifferent. Islamabad sees no difference and treats all the Baloch with the same stick.”

According to Abdullah Jan, a youth development expert based in Quetta, there is a “huge cultural and political difference” between the Baloch youth and their compatriots in the rest of Pakistan. The Baloch youth does not see any opportunity in the state institutions. They are disappointed and ever disparate against the state policies. According to him, a “communication gap” between the Baloch youth and the state policymakers at the official level has remarkably widened the gulf.

Since the inception of the current military operation, desperation, alienation and frustration among the Baloch youth has dramatically increased. While economic marginalisation, inadequate health and education opportunities and underrepresentation in the mainstream state institutions have remained some of the key factors for the disillusionment of the Baloch youth, the military operation in the province has generated new alarming trends.

Mr Jan estimates that nearly 60 per cent of Baloch students have become “psychologically ill,” alluding to depression caused by increasing incidents of arbitrary arrests, enforced disappearances, torture and killing of hundreds of Baloch youths allegedly by security forces.

“These kids see their peers, friends getting killed or disappeared every day. They see the bullet-riddled dead bodies of their class fellows on a regular basis. Depression and anxiety are a natural byproduct of such a situation,” he says.

Mr Jan, who has worked with several non-governmental organisations for more than two decades, argues that the Baloch youth is deeply involved in politics and political discussions. Yet, the youth politics in Balochistan is different from the rest of the country because most of the Baloch have a Leftist approach and their political heroes are Che Guevera and Baloch guerillas, such as Dr Allah Nazar and Balach Marri who support an independent Balochistan.

A lecturer of sociology at the University of Balochistan, who did not wish to be named, says it was not possible to discuss the economic marginalisation of the Baloch youth by keeping aside the country’s politics. For instance, he says, there is no proper mechanism in the Pakistan army and other security forces to hire and accommodate Baloch youths in the country’s security forces.

“Most of the vacancies in Balochistan in the army, the Frontier Corps (FC) and the Coast Guards are filled by non-natives coming from other parts of the country. The Baloch youth sees no opportunity in the armed forces,” he says. According to him, some young Baloch had joined the Pakistan army but eventually quit their jobs and returned home. They complained about the use of abusive language by senior army officers about Baloch leaders like Nawab Akbar Bugti, Bramadagh Bugti and Hairbayar Marri.

“The people the Baloch youth see as their heroes are generally depicted as the enemies of Pakistan by the army,” he said. “Religiosity is another issue that often compels Baloch youths to quit the military because the former are secular in nature. Some of them even do not pray five times a day or fast in the month of Ramzan which does not position them in the good books of their senior officers. Frankly, most Baloch are not anti-India either.”

The youth in Balochistan complain about the scarcity of opportunities and avenues to present and promote their talent.

Qaisar Roonjha, a young trainer who comes from a village in Lasbela District but offers services to highly reputable organisations such as the British Council as a Global Change maker, says the youth in Balochistan is full of talent but they face lack of encouragement. While the absence of official encouragement prevents some from taking initiatives, Mr Roonjha says he still knows many young people who are embracing the challenge to pursue their personal and professional dreams.

“Instead of waiting for the right time, everyone should play their role towards a fairer society,” he suggests, referring to a quote by Mother Teresa: “Don’t wait for leaders; do it person to person.’’

In Quetta, when Eeman Sahal Baloch, a young talk show host, started Subh-e-Bolan, a Balochi language morning show on Pakistan Television (PTV-Bolan), to explore the hidden talent among the youth in Balochistan, she was amazed at the extraordinary wealth of talent.

“Five months into the show, I had hosted around 1,000 talented boys and girls from across Balochistan. We found talented youth from remote towns of Panjgur, Turbat, Awaran, Gwadar, Mund, Hub, Quetta, Sibi, Mastung, Lasbela and other places,” she said. “They were all smart and talented people who offer much promise if empowered and trusted. The youth in these rural areas urgently need help and government attention for a better future.”

These are indeed defining times for the youth in Balochistan. Youth development and empowerment do not seem to be a priority of the governments in Islamabad and Quetta. The provincial assembly in Balochistan rarely debates the issues of the youth. Thus, the Baloch youth is easily available to be exploited either by the government with job offers and scholarships or the nationalists to avenge the killings of their peers and seek an independent Balochistan.

The government’s timely response, not with military operations but with respect and abundant opportunities for the Baloch, will decide who the young Baloch will support and join in near future. Islamabad must act swiftly because Balochistan does not seem to have much time left.

siddiqui88 · #5 Sunday, July 29, 2012

The Growing Nexus

Ethnic/sectarian violence is expected to continue to be a long-term challenge

By Muhammad Amir Rana

Owing to a number of insurgents — religious extremist and sectarian groups — the security landscape of Balochistan has become very complex.

In recent history, the death of Nawab Akbar Bugti on August 6, 2006, in a military operation, instigated the current phase of Baloch insurgency — fourth one, to be precise — and the Baloch insurgents have since continued attacks on state institutions, security forces, gas and power installations and also the non-Baloch.

On the other hand, the religiously-motivated militant and sectarian groups have also grown in number as well as strength and expanded their areas of operation across Balochistan. Quetta is becoming a hub of local and foreign religious militant groups and sectarian outfits. Media has reported many incidents of attacks on barber shops, music shops and other places where so-called “un-Islamic” activities were going on.

Meanwhile, the Hazara tribesmen in Balochistan, numbering around 300,000, are currently under direct threat, mainly from the sectarian militant groups. The incidents of terrorist attacks and target killings, mainly perpetrated by the Baloch insurgents and religious extremists, have increased gradually, particularly from 2006 onwards.

In 2011, Balochistan suffered the highest number of fatalities in sectarian attacks for any region — 106 people killed in 21 attacks — all concentrated in the cities of Quetta and Mastung. According to a Pak Institute for Peace Studies (PIPS) annual security report, the figure for Balochistan represented 33 per cent of the total sectarian-related fatalities in Pakistan in 2011.

Afghan Taliban, al Qaeda and local militant outfits like Tehrik-e-Taliban Balochistan, sectarian outfits like Lashkar-e-Jhangvi, Sipah-e-Sahaba Pakistan (SSP), Imamia Student Organisation (ISO) and Sipah-e-Muhammad and an ethno-sectarian group Jundullah have their presence in the province in one way or the other. These organisations are pursuing their own parallel agendas while the Baloch movement continues to occupy the centre-stage in the broader Baloch conflict.

The PIPS report, titled ‘Conflict and Insecurity in Balochistan’, identifies four support factors for the possible presence of Afghan Taliban in Balochistan: first, a free cross-border movement along Durand line from the times of Soviet-Afghan war; secondly, the presence of Pakhtun community in the province; thirdly, widespread network of Deobandi madrassas particularly those belonging to Jamiat Ulema-i-Islam, and fourthly, the Afghan refugee camps.

At present, Afghan Taliban and their local associates may be using Baloch territories as safe haven for retreat and focusing on their activities in Afghanistan but their long-term presence can trigger the process of Talibanisation in the province in the future. Armed jihadist groups are present in the province and can be mobilised by the Taliban leadership.

Jundullah has emerged as a new phenomenon in Pakistan blending religious sectarian agenda with nationalist separatist ideology. It is an anti-Shia and anti-Iran militant outfit which operates in the Iranian province of Sistan–Balochistan, bordering Pakistani districts of Chaghai, Kharan, Panjgur, Kech and Gwadar. The number of Jundullah activists is now estimated to be around 800. According to an ABC television report, the group is also getting fund from America’s Central Investigative Agency (CIA).

Jundullah’s activities are growing in Iran that have hurt the Pak-Iran relations. The group is also said to be aligned with the local anti-Shia outfits like Lashkar-e-Jhangvi and Sipah-e-Sahaba Pakistan to target the Shia Hazara community.

Sectarian outfits have a significant presence in Balochistan. Target killings, especially of Hazara community, have become a common phenomenon. These outfits are pursuing their agendas with relative freedom and independence compared to insurgents and Afghan Taliban. The government does not deny the presence of sectarian groups in Balochistan, particularly in Quetta, such as Lashkar-e-Jhangvi, Sipah-e-Sahaba, Sipah-e-Muhammad, and Sunni Tehreek; the officials only link the Shia-Sunni clashes with their ‘donors’ Iran and Saudi Arabia. They believe the religious clerics of both the sects have a lot of funds to promote the agendas of their donors.

SSP has a big support base in Balochistan. It was banned twice by the government but in Balochistan it remains intact and provides the ground support for LeJ terrorists.

Lashkar-e-Jhangvi (LeJ) is another anti-Shia Sunni outfit which operates in and around Quetta. Two groups of LeJ, known as Usman Kurd group and Qari Hayi group are active in Balochistan. Whereas LeJ concentrated on Balochistan and other parts of Pakistan after its terrorist camps in Kabul and Kandahar were destroyed during the US forces attacks on Afghanistan in 2001, outlawed Sipah-e-Sahaba Pakistan (SSP), the mother organisation of LeJ, remains a silent supporter of LeJ.

It has become a wider group and attracts other jihadist organisations into its fold as well. Few factions of Jaish-e-Muhammad’s defunct group have established operational relationship with LeJ. A big number of Harkatul Mujahideen and Harkatul Jihad-e-Islami (HUJI) have also joined the group.

Imamia Students Organisation (ISO) is a well structured group with a huge influence on the Shia youth as well as mainstream Shia politics. Its president Nasir Shirazi claims that ISO is not a sectarian organisation but it has always played an important role in sectarian-based violence. The Shia outlawed sectarian group Sipah-e-Muhammad Pakistan (SMP) has former ISO members in its fold. In Quetta, ISO has remained engaged in clashes with other sects.

Security experts believe sectarian violence will continue to be a long-term challenge because of the growing nexus among the various sectarian groups, Taliban and al Qaeda and the reorganisation of the violent Shia sectarian groups as a reaction, especially in the context where the law enforcement agencies have consistently failed to keep up with the emerging challenges.

siddiqui88 · #6 Monday, November 26, 2012

Ceasefire in Gaza
Editorial

November 25,2012

Some one used the word déjà vu in one of the pieces here. The recent Israeli attacks on Gaza and the retaliatory rocket attacks allegedly by Hamas — or was it vice versa — brought to mind an earlier attack in January 2009. The magnitude of the losses was much bigger then — death toll for the Palestinians was more than 1000 — but the context and impact were pretty much similar.

Israel’s aerial bombardment, killing civilians, women and children, was thought to have been aimed at achieve an electoral success in the impending elections in February 2009.

That is exactly how some people have explained the current round of violence. This was Israel’s ruling party’s last chance of showing to its people how committed it remains to their cause.

Beyond this election campaign timing, the recently concluded eight day war also has a fresh context. There is now a Muslim Brotherhood president in next door Egypt who is said to have a bigger role in whatever happens in the Middle East; the level of Egypt’s involvement in shaping up the ceasefire arrangement is only one indicator of that role. There is an Iron Dome anti-missile defense system in Israel now. There was talk about Israel sending ground troops into Gaza and the anti-missile defense system, by reducing the number of Israeli casualties, is said to have prevented that.

Even though the cease fire has been hailed by all sides, the fact remains that the Hamas appears to have been a bigger beneficiary in practical terms; Israel has lost its moral case yet again. The Islamist government in Egypt has also made many gains by exercising a leadership role and getting recognized for that, even if the other mediator was the US as always. The US hegemony in diplomacy over the Middle East dispute remains, the cyber attacks by Anonymousnotwithstanding. The Palestinian Authority led by Mahmoud Abbas is said to be a loser by virtue of the sheer gains made by the Hamas.

These small tactical victories aside, the larger issue of Palestinian rights and Israeli occupation remains unsolved, and the two-state solution, brought to fruition by the Oslo Accords, is increasingly turning out to be dead-end. Till both the Palestinian and Israeli political leadership thinks it fit to convey the benefits of a one-state solution to their respective people and a consensus to that effect is reached, we shall continue to see more such attacks and brutal killings.

siddiqui88 · #7 Monday, November 26, 2012

context
Ceasefires do not hold unless they are meant to.

By Ziyad Faisal

Negotiations for a ceasefire continued behind the scenes, mediated by Egypt, even as TV screens worldwide were flooded with the latest round of images of Palestinian casualties and Israeli firepower. To talk about the future of the Israel-Hamas ceasefire, a fundamental fact must be first acknowledged. Israel’s political and military leadership are primarily concerned with collective punitive action against the population of Gaza. It is a common theme in Israeli popular discourse, especially in areas closer to Gaza, and it runs like this: those who elected Hamas must be punished for its unwillingness to come to terms with Israel, for failing to follow the lead of the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank. This theme of collective punishment in Gaza has been repeated time and again by public figures in Israel’s leadership, sometimes with shocking explicitness.

The context for ceasefire negotiations is further complicated by the fact that both Egypt and Israel, for their own reasons, would rather have Hamas in place than have the Gaza strip dissolve into complete lawlessness. It is conceivable, in theory, that Israel could “destroy” Hamas completely. For one, this would require the use of much indiscriminate force against Gaza’s civilian population which has never been one of the top concerns for the Israeli leadership. However, the consequences of destroying Hamas authority in the Gaza would be highly unpalatable for both Israel and Egypt. The survival of the Hamas administration in some form is an ideological imperative for Egypt’s government, drawn from the ranks of the Muslim Brotherhood like Hamas itself.

Moreover, the Egyptian military is already engaged in operations
against the ultra-militant jihadist groups operating in the Sinai desert. Israel itself, despite having no love lost for Hamas, would rather have to deal with the Islamic-oriented national liberation agenda of Hamas than the indiscriminate and unpredictable attacks which international jihadist groups are capable of.

As of Thursday afternoon, November 22, 2012, a ceasefire agreement has been in effect for 24 hours already. The major stumbling block in negotiations was over the scope and nature of the ceasefire itself. The Netanyahu government insisted that Hamas provide some form of guarantee of good intentions. For the Israeli leadership, this means that the ceasefire must hold for at least 90 days before a more permanent ceasefire is reached. Considering that Israel operates a tight siege of Gaza and essentially chose to initiate this particular round of violence by assassinating Hamas military chief Ahmed al-Jabari, it is quite absurd of Netanyahu’s government to make such conditions. The ghastly irony of this is not lost on Hamas.

Another major point of contention is Israel’s demand that Hamas cease not only the rocket-fire from its own armed wing, the Ezz-el-din al-Qassam Brigades, but also from the other armed organisations in Gaza.
It must be noted that the Palestinian Islamic Jihad, the leftist Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) and other organisations in Gaza maintain their own political leadership and armed wings and are quite capable of launching attacks on the Israeli occupation forces by themselves. Even if Hamas were to somehow fully agree to the need for curbing their activities, it would find it difficult to actually stop them.
Israel also demands that weapons no longer be smuggled into the Gaza strip through tunnels connecting it to Egypt. This is a frivolous demand as long as the Israeli blockade of Gaza continues. The tunnels serve as Gaza’s economic artery, and contributed (along with investment from Arab states) to something of a boom in Gaza’s economy until this current round of escalated violence. There is no reason to suppose that these tunnels will be closed any time soon, or that the goods being trafficked through them will exclude military material.

In short, it should be clear to any observer that the ceasefire cannot last in the short-term and might well be ripped to shreds tomorrow by a fresh round of bombardment from Israel.

This brings us to the larger question of what this current round

of violence against the people of Gaza means for the larger cause of the Palestinian national liberation and the Israeli occupation. An increasing number of informed analysts of the conflict have been pointing out that the two-state solution (an independent Palestine within the 1967 borders alongside Israel) is essentially dead. The Oslo Accords, which led to the mirage of a two-state solution, are now relevant only in highlighting the political impotence of the Fateh-led Palestinian Authority administration in the West Bank. The PA administration is known to be corrupt, repressive and thoroughly dependent on Israeli and Western goodwill.

Hamas itself cannot offer a way out under the current circumstances. It adheres to its policy of refusal to surrender before Israeli diktat, it holds on with grim determination in Gaza and it continues to talk of resistance. In military terms, the rockets launched by Hamas and others from Gaza are of the same significance as the stones thrown by Palestinian children at Israeli occupation tanks: that is, symbolic.

Increasingly, there is talk of a one-state solution. At the risk of doing injustice to this proposed solution by summarising it so much, it essentially involves a struggle to get Israel to lift its occupation of all Arab land, allow refugee Palestinian Arabs the right of return to their homeland and set up the framework for a democratic polity which treats Jew and Arab as fully equal citizens.

More and more global leaders and public intellectuals have begun describing the Palestine conflict in terms of a struggle against apartheid, as represented by the Zionist Israeli state. Representatives of Palestinian armed groups (including those from Islamist-oriented factions) are now on record having taken a positive view of such a solution. What is unclear, however, is whether the Palestinian national movement can set up the institutional and intellectual framework for such a solution. And, perhaps, even more importantly, it remains to be seen what will convince Israel’s political leadership and general public to countenance a solution which has so far been anathema to them.

Until then, it is painfully easy to foresee many more rounds of terror against the Palestinian people, especially in crucified Gaza. Ceasefires do not hold unless they are meant to.

siddiqui88 · #8 Monday, November 26, 2012

accord
Eight days of war

By Mazhar Khan Jadoon

It is the same pattern; a déjà vu of what normally happens when an overwhelmingly strong Israeli army retaliates on minor provocation and leaves behind a trail of blood and gore.

A ceasefire finally came into force Thursday in and around Gaza after a week of 1,500 missile strikes that killed at least 155 Palestinians. How long will the truce hold when core of the conflict is untouched? Pushing the burning issue under wraps might risk turning the whole region into powder keg.

The announcement of ceasefire set off celebrations in Gaza, where thousands poured into the streets, firing guns in the air, honking horns and waving Palestinian, Hamas and Egyptian flags. Hamas celebrated it as their victory, while Israel also claimed it had achieved what it wanted to. In Israel, however, small demonstrations were held in communities that were struck by rockets. Protesters said the military should have hit Hamas harder and some held signs demanding security and denouncing “agreements with terrorists,” says media reports.

The post-Arab Spring Egypt this time took a centre stage in resolving the conflict. Islamist President Muhammad Morsi emerged as the regional leader who could ensure peace by brokering the ceasefire. Morsi, who has been in a flurry of meetings and conversation with the US and European governments, also earned the rare US praise for his role. But for how long can he resist the growing resentment among the rejuvenated Egyptians and Arabs demanding a firm ‘shut-up call’ to a chesty Israel.

The accord, according to media reports, calls on Israel to “stop all hostilities... in the land, sea and air including incursions and targeting of individuals” and urges the Palestinian factions to end “rocket attacks and all attacks along the border.”

Israel would be obliged to ease restrictions on Gaza residents under the accord which specifies that “procedures of implementation shall be dealt with” 24 hours after the ceasefire went into effect on opening Gaza’s border crossings and allowing the free movement of people and goods. However, there is nothing in place to ensure that the accord is implemented or what penalty the violator will pay.
Whether Israel follows the accord or not, it is safe and strong until the United States watches its back and the impotent Arab League and Organisation of Islamic Cooperation sit silently. A military elephant boozing on latest warfare technology will keep bulldozing the shanty settlements of poor Palestinians defending themselves with catapults.

It is pointless at this time to look for who started the war. The cost is too high. As senior journalist and expert on Middle East Robert Fisk puts it “one hundred Palestinians for one Israeli.” He adds, “The new exchange rate in Gaza for Palestinian and Israeli deaths has reached 16:1. It will rise, of course. The exchange rate in 2008-9 was 100:1.” At the time of writing this report, the exchange rate is 31:1.

The graphic visuals of bleeding Palestinian women and children running for safety as Israeli jets and drones rained down missiles once again failed to give heart and courage to international powers to find a lasting solution. Nothing is new — the same aggressor, the same victim, the same wailing children and women and the same venue. For the last 64 years, Israel has been repeatedly creating terror by trying to exterminate the resilient Palestinians struggling to find some breathing space against an expansionist foe.

Emboldened by the Arab Spring and expecting support for its objectives, Hamas again fell into the trap and tried to test its rockets at a wrong place and at the wrong time. Hamas miscalculated the move and provided Israel another opportunity to test its ‘Iron Dome’ system. The success of the Iron Dome defence system means Hamas will have to wait for years to properly arm itself for taking Israel head on.

Operation Pillar of Defense proved that the expensive new defence system performed unexpectedly well against Hamas’ Fajr-5 missiles, intercepting some 85 per cent of the rockets that were launched at Israel by Hamas, according to the reports. The Dome is designed specifically to track and destroy rockets that are headed over populated areas. By the end of the week, there were reports of Israelis staying outside during air strikes to watch the Dome at work.

Events in the region are witness to the fact that Israel always rubbished peace deals whenever it wanted to test its military muscles, showing the neighbours around and the public at home that Israel is strong enough to guarantee its security.

In 2005, Israel withdrew its troops from the Gaza Strip and removed thousands of Israelis who had settled in the territory. Since the Israeli withdrawal, Hamas has been engaged, sometimes, in a violent power struggle with its rival Palestinian organisation Fatah. On January 25, 2006, Hamas won a surprise victory in the elections for the Palestinian Legislative Council. In 2007, Hamas overthrew Fatah forces in the Gaza Strip again giving Israel the opportunity to blockade Gaza.

In March 2008, the Israeli blockade of the city had caused the worst humanitarian situation in Gaza since Israel occupied the territory in the 1967 Six-Day War. In 2008, Israel launched strikes in response to the alleged repetitive rocket and mortar attacks from the Gaza Strip into Israel. In January 2009, at least 1,300 Palestinians were killed in the ‘Operation Cast Lead’.
The recent ‘Operation Pillar of Defense’ had two strategic goals — one, to neutralise the Hamas rocket capability and pulverise the already poor infrastructure of Gaza, literally pushing the Palestinians to stone age, and two, sending threatening signals to Egypt after the Muslim Brotherhood came to power and forcing Morsi to play the security game on Israeli terms. However, the official version of the operation is always ‘peace’.

What else is the solution if not violence? Experts believe a United Nations mandated Palestinian state inclusive of all the occupied land with Jerusalem as its capital is the only permanent solution. Will Israel agree this time?
All is set for the vote on Palestinian statehood in the UN on November 29. Just before the Operation Pillar of Defense, Israel’s Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman was attempting to intimidate the Palestinians into quitting their bid. Reportedly, Israeli Ambassador Ron Prosor recently said that “they should change their request from a Non-Member State to a Non-Member Terrorist State.” Rumours were in the air when the operation began that the assassination of Hamas militant leader Ahmed Jabari was also an attempt aimed at torpedoing the UN bid to allow Palestinians to have their own homeland.

siddiqui88 · #9 Monday, November 26, 2012

Systematic engagement

By Dr Arif Azad

Like the 2009 aggression in Gaza, Israel has managed yet again to fog its uncritical western backers by using sympathy-eliciting language which privileges Israeli life over Palestinian life. Rather than challenging Israel over its latest genocidal operation in Gaza, both the western media and the politicians have uncritically ignored Israel’s killing spree as a series of justifiable retaliatory acts conducted in self-defence.

The much-touted veneer of self-defence, to cover Israeli racist genocidal aggression, has killed more than a hundred Palestinians, including scores of children. On the other hand, Israel’s fatalities remain just a few.
This asymmetry lays bare Israeli sophistry which has involved portraying Israel as a tiny enclave of peaceful, civilised and democratic westerners, living among a sea of uncivilised, terrorist-minded and undemocratic Arabs.

In line with this warped logic, widely accepted in the western capitals, Israel has been systematically engaged in annihilating any traces of Palestinian presence by further colonising Palestinian lands through settlements, closure of all entry-exit points and emasculating economically and politically as a whole. And, the West, with some very few exceptions, has been solidly behind this exterminatory campaign.
In 2009, Israel launched a similarly grand ‘Operation Cast Lead’ which killed an estimated 1,400 Palestinians while Israelis suffered only 13 fatalities. As well as the disproportionate number of Palestinians killed, Israel took special delight in destroying Palestine to rubble as part of its broader exterminatory strategy (Israel also undertakes serial destruction of Lebanon which constitutes commercial challenge as tourist rival).
Yet the invasion failed to dismantle Hamas. Rather, the invasion resulted in Hamas’s increased popularity as a resistance force while eclipsing the secular alternative PLO.
This brings us to 2012 with the second edition of earlier Gaza operation being replayed — with same arguments and issues revived.

The new operation, though grandly titled ‘Operation Pillar of Defence’, is ‘Operation Cast Lead 2.0’. The latest operation is geared more towards burnishing the electoral fortunes of the Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Other reasons for the latest edition of Israeli aggression are spurred by a medley of mixed strategic motives. First, testing out Israeli anti-missile technology; second, gauging world opinion in case of Israeli strikes on Iran (indeed some ground is being prepared by reference to Gaza-fired missile as being of Iranian origin); third, to test the resole of new democratic government such as Egyptian’s Muslim Brotherhood government which is ideologically close to Hamas; and lastly, to provoke Hamas into exposing its missile storage sites in Gaza and decapitating the arsenal.

Having said that, the latest Israeli aggression took place against changed regional background, too. Israel’s claim of being the only democracy in a region of Arab potentates has come under severe challenge in the wake of the Arab Spring which has returned democratic government in some countries, such as Egypt. This changed scenario may pan out differently this time round. Egyptian President Mohammad Morsi is under pressure from the Egyptian street, to act tough as opposed to previously supine positions taken by Egyptian leaders. Reacting to this popular groundswell, President Morsi sent his prime minister to Gaza to show solidarity with the besieged city and its democratic government. This means that despite Egypt’s other strategic compulsions the government would have to act in a more pro-Palestinian way than has been the case under previous non-democratic governments.
This placed Egypt in pole position to determine the direction of the current round of Israel-Palestinian hostilities. The obvious sign of this influence in reflected in the ceasefire arranged on Nov 21. This has put a stop to the Israeli threat of ground invasion which would have been difficult to execute surgically due to the possibility of new pro-Hamas government in Egypt opening up Raffah border — thus opening up supply and arms routes into Gaza. The upshot would have been Israel’s prolonged entrapment in guerilla war in case of full-scale Israeli ground invasion.

Looking beyond the ceasefire, the West has a moral responsibility to encourage Israel to become part of the Middle East rather than supporting Israeli narrative of western-style democracy under siege from undemocratic Arab neighbours. Abetting this line is the surest recipe for further conflict.

Here the West has a historical role to play by steering its test tube creation in a regional peace and prosperity direction.

siddiqui88 · #10 Monday, November 26, 2012

#Op-Israel
The barrage of disruptive cyber attacks on Israel is unprecedented in history

Z. Faisal

Anonymous, the collective of cyber-activists which has made headlines over the last few years by challenging the cyber-security apparatus of many states and corporations, jumped into the fray when Israel begin its bombardment of Gaza last week. In typical fashion, the collective issued a “warning” to the Zionist state, saying that the members and supporters of Anonymous had watched Israeli actions for a long time and were now convinced of the need for cyber attacks to register their disapproval of the military escalation against Gaza. In accordance with its standard procedure, Anonymous named the cyber-attacks on Israel by the hash-tag #Op-Israel.

The resulting barrage of disruptive cyber attacks on Israel is unprecedented in history. The Israeli government reports millions of attacks on the websites of the Israeli president, foreign ministry and prime minister. Anonymous itself reports having targeted around 700 Israeli websites as part of its cyber campaign. Israeli financial institutions such as the Bank of Jerusalem also came under cyber attack as part of this campaign.

The attacks by Anonymous highlight the new possibilities for conflict in cyber space. As states and corporate interests begin to increasingly claim and regulate larger swathes of cyber space, the reaction from groups such as Anonymous and others has been fierce.

States are increasingly capable of controlling information flow over the internet, but are also increasingly vulnerable to avenues of attack from cyber space. Anonymous itself has been described as something of a “hive-mind”, in that it represents the collective will of thousands of cyber activists, hackers and supporters who pool together both their resources and their ideas. The result has been a distributed network of activists which is impossible to crack.
There is every reason to believe that Anonymous and other “hack-tivist” groups will increasingly clash with states and other entities whose actions appall them. Anonymous assures us that #Op-Israel was merely a beginning within a beginning.

Source: The News Special Report

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
What is News	khuhro	Journalism & Mass Communication	4	Saturday, April 13, 2019 10:50 PM
News agencies of the world	Shazi76	General Knowledge, Quizzes, IQ Tests	0	Saturday, February 19, 2011 08:25 PM
Study Material	Perhar	Journalism & Mass Communication	1	Tuesday, August 24, 2010 08:44 PM
PAKISTAN Press, Media, TV, Radio, Newspapers	MUKHTIAR ALI	Journalism & Mass Communication	1	Friday, May 04, 2007 02:48 AM