Owl's Tree

It’s the Economy Stupid

2011-10-01T10:24:00.000-07:00

No one can ever blame Pakistani media for suffering from ‘Attention Deficit Disorder’, rather it often suffers from ‘Obsessive Compulsive Disorder’. Admittingly, most of their obsessions are not devoid of a good reason; nevertheless, every now and then it does indulge in mass-hysteria. An imminent American attack(s) on the Pakistani soil is the latest example of such hysteria. If you were to pick a Pakistani paper or observe its electronic-media, you would be deluded in believing whole world is holding its breath over the “Pakistani-American War”.

Hysteria aside, the odds of Iraqi modeled or even Libyan modeled American invasion are slim to none. For the curious minds, America will not invade for the following reasons: it cannot afford an invasion for three reasons: 1) Scarcity of funds. 2) Little to no public appetite for another military conflict. 3) Global recession.

American public debt is already tipping the scales around $14.7 trillion, which is almost as its GDP ($15.2 trillion). American Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates the costs of both Afghan and Iraq Wars will be $2.4 trillion, or around one-sixth of the total American debt. Growth of American economy (approx. 1.4% GDP) is dismal at the best. Add the Libyan war costs and ever-rising oil prices, and you get a perfect recipe for a prolonged economical recession. Meaning, America is simply out of cash to start any new wars.

Unlike third-world despots, who couldn’t care less for the public opinion, American presidents still care and abide by the popular public sentiments. Currently, American public is no mood to support new wars. In a recent Washington Post/ABC poll, over 70% of Americans said they want President Obama to withdraw troops from Afghanistan. It’s not only American populace that are suffering from the war-fatigue, even the rank-and-file of the American military, most of whom are on their third or fourth tour of duty are increasingly voicing their frustrations with the longest war in the American history. According to a The Military Times survey, “Less than 50% of U.S. troops believe Afghanistan war is winnable.” If American military personnel are losing the will to fight the Taliban, then only a most foolish military commander would dare to push its men in a new Af-Pak quagmire.

In this age and time, no one nation can afford to wage a war unilaterally. Only coalitions have been able sustain full fledge wars. Even the closet American allies, Canada and UK have openly expressed their desire to pull out of both NATO led wars, Afghan and Libyan wars. Well over 80% of Canadians want their troops to be brought home, at the earliest. Even back in 2006, Bloomberg reported, in just 5 years, the financial cost to the UK of the Afghan war was more than £4.55 billion ($9 billion). Experts believe UK’s ailing economy can no longer sustain the Afghan war, not to talk of a new war with Pakistan.

Ironically, a typical gung hoe American political party, the Republicans tied their own hands from financing any new conflicts. Their Political strategy of downsizing the government and national debt has boxed it into opposing any significant military adventurism. Republican obsession with funding cuts was highlighted when its leader Eric Cantor said they would tie hurricane and earthquake Disaster Aid to spending cuts. By all accounts, the odds of appropriating funding for a war by a party obsessed with playing the financial card and that too in the middle election season are far and few.

However, despite all the odds against the war, like apprehensive public mood and tough American economy, doesn’t mean President Obama would not be tempted to order limited scope shoot-and-scoot military strikes well inside the Pakistani territory. America will attack Pakistani interests in the same manner that it had been doing for a while.

Smack within the rough presidential election year, President Obama who is suffering from the all time low approval ratings is in a desperate need of bunch of rapid victories, like the Osama-bin-Laden killing to prove his mantel as of a resolute Commander-in-Chief. What better way for President Obama to earn quick political mileage than bunch of small military victories via drone attacks and/or special operations strikes on Pakistani interests?

Unlike, Pakistani hysteria of imminent American invasion, one would be hard pressed to find a single person in the US who thinks America is about to attack Pakistan. Why not? Because it’s the economy stupid!

http://owlstree.blogspot.com/2006/07/articles-by-adnan-gill_26.html

Enough with Pakistan Bashing

2011-05-14T09:53:00.000-07:00

By Adnan Gill

Osama bin Laden’s death has opened hell’s gates on Pakistan. One would be hard pressed to find an American commentator who missed the Bash Pakistan Bandwagon. Their most prevailing argument revolves around, we give Pakistan billions of dollars every year and look how they repaid us? They cheated on us by sheltering world’s most wanted terrorist.

To begin with, President Obama said, “it's important to note that our counterterrorism cooperation with Pakistan helped lead us to bin Laden and the compound where he was hiding.” Did President lie about Pakistani cooperation or do the Pakistan Bashers suffer from selective amnesia?

Yes, it’s true Pakistan is an American Foreign Aid recipient, it’s true Osama was caught hiding in Pakistan, but would it be prudent to ignore the larger picture of how much Pakistanis had been helping America? Absolutely not. Well it’s high time to place things in its right perspective.

According to the US Census Bureau, between 2001-08, Pakistan received an average of $.768 billion per year, or a total of $3.841 billion in economic and military aid from the US. While Pakistan claims, the War on Terror has cost it $35 billion, or about $4 billion per year. It might be worth noting that during the same time US gave India $.988 billion, Egypt $8.530 billion, Israel $13.030 billion and Afghanistan $20.801 billion in Economic and Military Aid. Can the same critics point the last time any of these allies delivered anything worth mentioning to the US for the billions upon billions of dollars they received?

Let’s rewind couple of decades back when the Free-World lead by an American-Pakistani coalition drove the last nail in Soviet Union’s coffin; resulting in the fall of the Berlin Wall. Was it the Israel (largest US military aid recipient) that pushed Soviets over the cliff? No, it was the Pakistan.

During the first Gulf-War who sent its troops against Saddam? Was it India? No. It was Pakistan.

Who was the part of peace keeping force in Bosnia? Was it India or Israel? None. But it was Pakistan.

Who pulled the American troops out of raging battle in Somalia? Were they Afghans or Egyptians? Try again. It was the Pakistani Army.

Who saved the American allies in the deep jungles of Africa? Yup, Pakistanis did.

Who trained American Special Forces in high altitude warfare; Afghans, Indians or Israelis? Only Pakistanis did.

Let’s take a gander over what Pakistan had been doing since the 9/11. Since the day one Pakistan literally handed over Navy and Air Force bases (like Omara, Pansi, Shamsi and Jacobabad) to the US, exclusive air corridors, and land transit right to the coalition, ISAF.

It wasn’t the Afghans, British, Egyptians, Indians, Israelis or the Saudis who had consistently captured and handed over some of world’s most wanted terrorists. It is the Pakistanis who had come through time and again. To name the few Pakistan handed over to the US: Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, Abu Zubaydah and Abu Faraj al-Libi.

Between 9/11 and 2009, Pakistan lost 78 military officers and 2,273 soldiers to the War on Terror, additionally they killed or captured 17,742 militants. During the same time ISAF lost about 1,500 personnel. By any measurement Pakistani military has lost more men during the war than rest of the coalition members combined.

Between 2004-11, at least 2,290 Pakistanis died from 234 American Drone strikes. According to the Brookings Institution, for every militant killed through drone strikes "10 or so [Pakistani] civilians" are killed. Can the critics name a single other sovereign nation with a proven capability to shoot down drones who has allowed such deadly attacks?

Some of the (modern) Joseph McCarthies don’t want to miss the Pakistan bashing train, because they don't want to appear out of the loop; while others like the Congressman Peter King have deeper political agendas, like expanding their fear-cult following. Regardless of their motivation, voices in the media are chanting unanimously to punish Pakistan. The last time Pakistan was heavily sanctioned, it became a nuclear power and diverted the extremists to Kashmir. This time, Pakistan would likely replace the US with China.

Everyone, including Pakistanis are jubilant over Laden’s killing; however, nearly all feel cornered and insulted over extremely harsh American reaction to its embarrassing security lapse. They retort, were the CIA or FBI in collusion with the Al-Qaeda when the jetliners flew into World Trade towers on the 9/11 or was it also an unintentional security lapse? If American sleuths could be forgiven for failing to prevent the 9/11 attacks, then why there is a mob bent on publicly lynching Pakistan for a similar blunder?

Prudence requires, a well balanced analysis of Pakistan’s intelligence failure, to prevent future security lapses. Undue antagonization and public humiliation of Pakistan, a reliable and time-tested American ally, would most likely result in undesired results.

Source: The News

Food for Thought

2011-05-14T09:50:00.000-07:00

by Adnan Gill

As expected, Osama’s death has opened on endless worldwide debates on if, who, when and why killed Osama bin Laden? While the debate is hot, based on circumstantial evidence, one might as well ponder over some questions and theories.

Here is food for thought. Xe/Blackwater executed the Get-Osama operation and not the Navy Seals. Why use Xe? Plausible deniability, in case the operation goes south.

Where’s the proof of Blackwater’s involvement? American government claimed that two Chinook/Sea Knight and two Blackhawk/Seahawks (standard transport air-assets used by the SEALS) took part in the raid. It admitted losing one Seahawk during the operation. However, on a close study of the pictures of the helicopter wreckage, the claim falls flat on its face.

Why did the Americans went through the trouble to burn the wreckage of the crashed helicopter? Obviously, they didn’t want the world to find out the identity of helicopters that took part in the raid. Widely available pictures of the tail section of the crashed helicopter clearly do not match with any model of CH-46/Sea Knight or UH-60Seahawk. Neither helicopters come with split horizontal stabilizer nor do they come with tail-rotor disk. However, the boom (a much smaller and lighter to be of a UH-60), stabilizers and quad tail-rotor configurations match with the modified S-76 helicopters that Blackwater frequently used in Iraq. Contrary to rumors of supposed stealth helicopter (Comanchi or Silent Hawk), the pictures suggest the wreckage to be of a S-76, and certainly not of Blackhawk’s. Hence, Blackwater’s culpability.

One also has to question the need for the Pakistan Army to evacuate the wreckage covered under the tarps? Clearly, they had an interest in covering something more than mere identity of the helicopter wreckage. Like, Blackwater is running wild in Pakistan with the full knowledge and probably tacit consent of the Pakistani military.

Mystery deepens, considering, in less than 24 hours of Osama’s killing the American government announced a rather hasty burial of his body in the Arabian Sea. Earlier, within 12 hours of Laden’s death, President Obama confirmed Osama’s identity, citing, among others, a DNA test. However, the problem remains, there is no scientific method that can positively confirm a DNA test within 24 hours. In reality, a paternity DNA tests take at least 2-3 days and an extended family testing takes 5 weeks to confirm a match. Was it a slip of tongue or did President Obama purposely misstated? Hopefully, time will uncover the mystery.

Everyone seems to be focused on the question, why the American government wouldn’t publicize pictures of Laden’s body and put the mystery to rest? Answers could range from: disbelievers would never be convinced, he isn't killed and in custody for interrogation, or body still in custody for further tests.

Finally, why would Obama go through so much trouble to open Pandora’s Box? Simple answer, to save the American economy from an imminent collapse. Three wars are literally sucking life out of the American economy. It is estimated that in addition to secret funds, currently US is spending over $1 trillion/yr on military through appropriated and discretionary funds. As of March 25, 2011, total American Public Debt Outstanding was $14.26 trillion. Cutting military spending to half alone could amount to 25% reduction of yearly deficit.

Osama’s death will hopefully serve as a closure to the American public, which will allow Obama to windup and initiate American exit from Afghanistan by 2012. Just in time for the next presidential elections!

Shortest line-of-sight distance between Afghan border and Abbottabad is about 120 miles. Meaning it would take close to one hour flight time each way, even if CH-46/Shinook’s would fly from point A to point B at its max cruise speed of 137 ml/hr.

Meaning, Americans were in the Pakistani airspace for at least 2 1/2 hours.

http://thenews.com.pk/TodaysPrintDetail.aspx?ID=46129&Cat=9&dt=5/10/2011

No safe passage for Corrupt Zardari!

2009-11-02T19:54:00.000-08:00

Zardari's Manhattan Luxury Apartment!

By Adnan Gill

As Zardari Mafia goes on final looting spree of the Pakistani coffers; its time that I expose some of his property he bought with the looted money.

Following are official copies of Don Zardari's Manhattan (luxury) apartment's legal papers. Despite having his luxury apartment vacant, during the visit to the USA the shameless person stayed in $6,000 per night Presidential suites on Pakistani public's money!

He needs to leave Pakistan alone! No more safe passage for another dictator!!!

An American and A Pakistani

2009-07-16T10:14:00.000-07:00

An American and A Pakistani

By Adnan Gill

Way back when; circumstances crossed paths of an American and a Pakistani. While the American didn’t think much of it; the Pakistani couldn’t forget the chance encounter. The Pakistani would spend next four decades looking for the American. Finally, his perseverance paid off. With the help of an American General, the Pakistani tracked down the American in California; the very same American who saved his life 38 years ago.

Believe it or not, there was a time when Americans and Pakistanis were actually allies in letter and spirit. It was the time when Gitmo and suicide-bombers were not part of lexicon. It was the time when Cold War was at its height. The stage was Calcutta and the year was 1971. That’s when a young US Marine Sergeant saved the life of a young Pakistan Army Captain on the run for his life. He just escaped from an undeclared Indian Prisoner of War (PW)/concentration camp. It turns out, the Capt. was the first ever Prisoner of War (POW) to have escaped from the Indian PW camp at Panagarh, about 100 km west of Calcutta. It turns out that he was the first ever PoW to have escaped from Indian PW camp. If it wasn’t because of the Marine, the hunted Pakistani would have been shot at sight.

Back in 1969, an acquaintance invited the Captain to stop by when he would be in Calcutta. Somehow, the young man never forgot the address. Upon escape, he knew he would be saved only if he could reach her home; only to discover the address to be of a tailor shop.

There was no time to dwell over the artifice. Deeply disappointed but not incorrigible, the young man immediately sprung to his backup plan. In a sea of Indians, he navigates his way to the American Consulate General. The consulate was only stone throw away. But it’s as if the lady luck was bent on making an ugly example out of the escapee. Anything that could have gone wrong, did. The hunted man had to quietly pass by the Consulate, because all the access points to it were blocked by the police.

The young Captain hadn’t escaped the concentration camp to give-up. In a secluded corner of a park he contemplates his next move. Dusk was approaching fast; which meant, curfew time. Something had to be done fast. Somehow, the Pakistani manages to call the American consulate. A young American Marine Sgt. answers the phone. Tells the Pakistani to stay put, as he makes his way to rescue him.

With no time to spare, the duo decided to run the gauntlet armed with confidence only. By now, the lady luck had enough too. Alas, she breaks a smile. Both men walk through the police checkpoints as if another ordinary local. The gamble paid off; both entered the Consulate safely. Even though, it looked like the worst was over, the Pakistani isn’t out of woods yet. He still had some way to go before he reached safety in Pakistan. To cut a long story short, loaded with courage and ingenuity, and with the help of Americans, the Pakistani beats all odds stacked against him.

The escapee couldn’t wait to debrief the mountain of information he brought with him. He thought the information on enemy’s strength and tactics would be a gold mine for the Pakistani intelligence. Regrettably, that’s all it was, a thought.

Since his father was a Punjabi and mother Bengali, the young Captain received a welcome party, Pakistani style. There were no parades and no pictures in the newspapers of the first ever escapee from Indian concentration camp. Instead, he was greeted with deep suspicion and charge-sheeted for ‘overstaying leave’! A far cry from the risks Americans in general and Marine Sergeant in specific took to save the life of an ally. Though later on in December 1971, his commanding officer field-promoted the Pakistani Captain for his valor to the rank of Major and re-named Delta Company 44 Punjab (now 4 Sindh) to “Sehgal Company”.

No, it's not fiction. As thrilling it may sound, the story is true. The name of the young Pakistan Army Captain is Ikram Sehgal, and the name of the American Marine Sergeant is Frank Adair.

An accomplished helicopter pilot and a war veteran, Maj. Sehgal went on to become a Publisher of the Defence Journal, and a successful businessman whose business empire would employ 17,500 Pakistanis in 132 cities/towns.

For his part, after serving his country with honors, Sgt. Frank Adair joined the Los Angeles Police Department. Later he retired from the LAPD as a detective.

Ikram would spend next 38 years looking for Frank. Yet one more time, the Marines would help out the Pakistani. Courtesy of good offices of Lt Gen John Allen (Deputy Commander US Central Command), Ikram would get the contact information of Frank.

This is where I come in the story. Mr. Sehgal, barely able to contain his excitement, asked me (a Los Angelonion) if I could talk to Mr. Adair for him? How could have I passed an opportunity to meet a person whom my mentor owes a lot of gratitude?

After few phone calls and emails later Frank and I met at a restaurant for lunch. When I asked if he got in trouble for helping Ikram; Frank responded, how could I have not helped a fellow soldier? Time flew as Frank shared his experiences. There was too much to share in a single meeting. We parted with a promise to meet again soon.

I believe, out of Ikram, Frank and I, I am the lucky one who enjoys the trust of heroes in their own right. And best of all, I walked away with a true story of luck, valor, courage and Marine memorabilia. Special thanks to the American and the Pakistani; Sgt. Adair and Capt. Sehgal.

ANP’s Rhetoric

2009-07-07T11:56:00.000-07:00

ANP’s Rhetoric

By Adnan Gill

A brigade of ANP ministers circling TV talk shows circuits, never miss an opportunity to pin the blame for the current national crisis -- unfolding in the NWFP -- on the Pakistani support of Mujahideen during the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan.

For a moment, let’s overlook ANP’s usual rhetoric of racial victimization, its historical opposition to the creation of Pakistan and its socialist lineage, and focus on bud of its criticism; i.e. Pushtoon are paying through their blood for the Punjab hatched conspiracy of supporting the Americans against the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan. Their rhetoric begs the question: what makes them think, Soviets didn’t had their eyes set on occupying Pakistan next?

Anyone cognizant of ANP’s habit of playing on both sides of fence (like the JUI-F) knows, had Soviets occupied Pakistan, ANP would have cried Bloody Mary over the spillage of Pushtoon blood, followed by signing a peace treaty with the Soviets; only to renounce it after a severe criticism. Then it would have blamed Ayub Khan’s government for the Soviet occupation, because Pakistan fought a war with India.

Ironically, both ANP and JUI-F who could have disrupted the Talibanization during its infancy, looked the other way and pretended everything was hunky-dory. Instead of dealing with the festering menace, both chose to concentrate on grabbing federal ministries and wasted their energies on inconsequential issues like renaming NWFP to Pushtoonkhawa. During their spare time or when Zardari asked, both bashed Punjabis. Of course, until the MQM and Sindhi Nationalists showed their true colors, Punjabis remained their punching bag.

Whether deliberately or otherwise both miserably failed to show the responsibility and leadership expected from them. Even when the monsters were knocking at their door they kept their heads buried in sand, or at best, chased federal ministries. When water ran over their heads, they ran pillar to post blaming any and everyone but themselves for their incompetence. For his part Musharraf with all of power and global support dealt with the Taliban with kids gloves.

Back to ANP’s current scapegoat; i.e. Zia-era support of Mujahideen against the angelic Soviets. Frankly, their rhetoric is plain and simple nonsense. The mistake wasn’t made when Pakistan joined CIA’s war; mistakes were made when every stakeholder disowned the Mujahideen immediately after the Soviets were defeated. Americans didn’t bother to say even goodbye, Saudis saw an opportunity to raise an unaccounted Sunni militia, Arab nations released their Jihadis into Afghan wilderness; and the Pakistanis occupied themselves with pulling legs of successive elected governments.

Instead of helping Afghanistan get back on its feet, whole world moved on to its business. Nobody bothered to rehabilitate the idly sitting army of Muslim fighters who were trained to fight guerilla warfare and nothing else. Not a single dime of financial aid was spent on social recovery projects, like building roads, hospitals or schools. Arab nations turned Afghanistan into a massive dumping ground for the banished, sort of Guantanamo prison on steroids. For example, Osama bin Laden was banished by the Saudis and Ayman al-Zawahiri was dumped in Afghanistan by the Egyptians. With no hope of returning to their native countries, the religiously charged extremists collaborated with the cash strapped locals to form their own style of government.

The dye was cast for the global terrorism. During the lost decade of 90s when Americans were basking in their sole superpower status and Pakistanis were experimenting with democracy, the forgotten religious zealists were looking for new enemies to fight. After beating the Northern-Alliance – raised and nurtured by the Indians, Iranians and Russians – the Taliban set their sights outwards to set the world straight according to their perverted vision. And rest is history.

No matter how hard we imagine: a problem sticks around till we fix it in reality too. The menace of Taliban is a manifestation of collective abandonment of people we used to fight our battles. Let the lesson be learned, never leave the battle ground without cleaning and restoring it first; or its ghosts will haunt, till the end of time. Why the architects of most productive Marshal Plan left the Afghans high and dry to fend for themselves is a trillion dollars question?

However, there is no sense in bickering over who should be blamed for the mess we created in Afghanistan. The responsibility to clean the mess falls upon whole civilized world. Sadly, there are no quick fixes to the problem. If today, we neutralize the Taliban leadership in concert with building roads, bridges, factories, electric power stations, hospitals, police stations, courts, city halls, airports, and most importantly, schools and universities, then hopefully 20 years latter, we could see the initial crop of civilized society in Afghanistan and Pakistani tribal belt.

If shifting blame could rescue the lost generation then there is no better party at the helm than the ANP. If it truly cares for the wellbeing of Pushtoon, then instead of hugging to the ministries tight and blaming whole world for their failures, it should start by bringing its leaders back to their constituencies. Then it should threaten to leave the Zardari coalition, unless the federal government guarantees unrestricted movement of the refugees throughout the Pakistan, including Karachi. Only opportunists take refuge behind racially loaded rhetoric.

http://www.pridenews.co.uk/eng.story.php?b=L2VuZy5zdG9yeS5waHA/Yj1MMlZ1Wnk1dVpYZHpMbU5oZEdVdWNHaHdQMk5oZEdWSlJEMHpPUT09PSZuZXdzSUQ9Nzk3NQ===&newsID=8199

Zardari Remembering Benazir Bhutto

2009-07-03T22:39:00.000-07:00

Zardari Remembering Benazir Bhutto

By Adnan Gill

Recently, Asif Zardari wrote an Op-Ed piece, Remembering Shaheed Benazir. Following are a few of my observations and comments.

Mr. Zardari, when are you going to stop riding on Benazir Bhutto’s coattails? When are you are going to become a leader in your own right? So far, the only legacy you could leave is of a long list of broken promises and over half of your time in presidency spent abroad in luxury hotels.

If you have initiatives (like Iran-Pakistan- India gas pipeline or Pakistan-India relations) to sell to the nation then please stand next to a portrait of Pakistan ’s founder Muhammad Ali Jinnah; relate it to his vision, and not next to BB’s portrait and her philosophies. As much you or your party would wish to follow in BB’s footsteps, the only footsteps that should matter to the whole nation should be of its founding fathers, like Mr. Jinnah and Alama Iqbal.

You exhausted BB’s political capital the day you produced a handwritten note to became the co-chair of PPP. If you genuinely want to serve the nation, then please start with spending more time in Pakistan , honor promises you made, and stop posing for photos with habitual Pakistan bashers like Hamid Karzai.

Mr. Zardari, it’s high time you realize BB’s legacy can get you only so far. Please start building your own.

2009-06-10T20:44:00.000-07:00

One and the Same

By Adnan Gill

Just as the Pakistani Tehrik Nifaz Shariat-e-Muhammadi (TNSM) chief Maulana Sufi Muhammad’s rhetoric is becoming unbearable for anyone’s comfort, so is the drumbeat from none other than Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. Both are equally belligerent with their rhetoric; both believe in their narrow interpretation of good and evil; and worst both believe in enforcing their vision at the barrel of gun. Before the civilized gentry runs to Hillary’s defense they may want to remind themselves of Hillary’s wild side too. Just last year, when Senator Obama and Senator Clinton were trampling over each other to secure the Jewish vote, the presidential hopeful Clinton threatened, "In the next 10 years, during which [Iran] might foolishly consider launching an attack on Israel, we would be able to totally obliterate them.". Obviously, Secretary Clinton is convinced in America’s responsibility to police the world with a big stick. If that takes obliterating a nation, so be it.

Similarly, Mullah Sufi is convinced in setting the world straight, according to his perverted interpretation of Islam. He believes, he is ordained by a higher authority to set the humanity straight. If it takes flogging minors, blowing girls’ schools or slitting throats of government officials; so be it.

Ideologically, Hillary and Sufi are as far apart as it gets. One is the self-professed guarantor of the freedoms afforded under the democracy, while the other is the self-appointed enforcer of the code-of-conduct foreordained by God. However, upon a closer look, Hillary and Sufi are as similar as peas in pod.

Conspicuously, the similarities don’t end at their disposition to back their ideologies with the deadly force. Both are doing their best to generate hysteria, Pakistan is about to fall in the clutches of the dreaded Taliban. Secretary Clinton opened the salvo, nuclear-armed Pakistan “poses a mortal threat to the security and safety of our country and the world.” On queue, Western media too went into wild frenzy; sky is falling, sky is falling!

Not to be left behind, Defense Secretary, Robert Gates rang the alarm bells as hard as he could. He did his best to jolt the slumbering Pakistani leadership into defensive positions, “My hope is that there will be an increasing recognition on the part of the Pakistani government that the Taliban in Pakistan are in fact an existential threat to the democratic government of that country.” He pleaded, “…it is important that they not only recognize it, but take the appropriate actions to deal with it.” But what good would be hysteria without the deeply worried Numero Uno, President Obama. White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs, told reporters, "The news over the past several days is very disturbing."

Ladies and gentlemen, better say your prayers; because Taliban are only 60 miles from running over the Pakistani capital. Half a million strong Pakistani military is no match to 400 to 500 heavily armed Taliban who have already captured the strategically important district of Buner. Once their flag is planted on Islamabad, it will be the beginning of Armageddon. Islamabad is littered with nuclear tipped ICBMs. The captured nukes will rain down on every city on earth. We need to do something right now to stop these savages in their tracks, or life as we know will cease to exist!

Yet, there is eerie silence from all quarters that could save the humanity. Either it’s a classic case of deer caught in headlights, or there is something seriously amiss. For the last few years, Mullah Sufi had been spewing venom through an illegal FM radio transmitter. Let alone, blowing it to smithereens, courtesy of a HARM missile strike, no one has even bothered to even jam its signal. For whatever reason(s) Pakistani military hasn’t taken the transmitter out, the question is why CIA hasn’t? It’s not like CIA is shy of launching deadly missile strikes deep inside the Pakistani territory. Then what has kept it from taking out easily triangulated source of vicious propaganda?

Oddly, President Zardari (allegedly an American puppet), who called the Taliban murderers of his wife, signed surrender to them. Zardari’s capitulation legalized ANP’s cowardly surrender of the Sawat Valley to Mullah Sufi. If the surrender wasn’t embarrassing enough for the secular ANP, its passionate defense of the despicable deeds of the monotheist Taliban, only deepens the mystery.

The plot thickens; considering the alleged Taliban who took over the district of Buner, are said to be Afghan Tajiks. According to a The News report, a Buner refugee claimed, “I can swear on Holy Quran that those who have captured our village are Afghan nationals. You people sitting in Islamabad cannot imagine what sort of hell they have unleashed on us after advancing from Swat to our areas.” His shocking claim was corroborated by many others who also reported similar stories. Another refugee asked, “For God sake, why don’t you people listen to our cries as we have been invaded by the Afghan Tajiks, not Pakistanis. Our families and honour are in danger.”

The puzzle becomes even more complex. On one hand, alarm bells are going off over the Pakistani peace treaty with the TNSM; on the other hand, there had been deafening silence when similar deals were reached in Afghanistan. American stooge, President Karzai disclosed that he requested the Saudis to help him in striking a peace treaty with the Taliban. Karzai said, "For the last two years, I've sent letters to the king of Saudi Arabia, and I've sent messages, and I requested from him as the leader of the Islamic world, for the security and prosperity of Afghanistan and for reconciliation in Afghanistan ... he should help us." Strangely, sky didn’t fall when the NATO allies also struck secret deals with the Taliban; e.g. when British troops conceded Musa Qala to the Taliban.

However, the peculiarity of mystery doesn’t lay in peace deals with the Taliban; it lays in the inaction of all parties deeply involved in the conflict. How hard could it be to quash Mullah Sufi and his Tajik mercenaries (dubbed as Taliban) within a week or two? It’s not like Mullah Sufi stays cloaked like the Taliban leader, Mullah Omer. With a huge fanfare, Mullah Sufi boldly moves around in broad daylight and remains readily available on the phone for interviews. Still, why nobody has taken him out should be a matter of more than mere curiosity. Conspicuous dormancy of the military powers, along with the hysteria emanating from the West should raise the question, who is pulling wool over our eyes? Even more importantly, why they are blindsiding us?

2009-06-10T20:12:00.000-07:00

Asian Valhalla

By Adnan Gill

With a set of old glories neatly arranged in the background, flanked by his Secretaries of State and Defense, President Barack Obama announced a comprehensive strategy on Afghanistan and Pakistan (or Af-Pak Strategy). The President announced, “So I want the American people to understand that we have a clear and focused goal: to disrupt, dismantle and defeat al-Qaeda in Pakistan and Afghanistan, and to prevent their return to either country in the future.” Apparently, the strategy was more of an escalation of Bush policy than a policy shift. However, foreign policy experts like Henry Kissinger and Zbigniew Brzezinski remain skeptical of the goals set for, what Secretary of Defense Robert Gates called, “long slog” war.

Not long before President’s announcement, Secretary Gates was lowering nation’s expectations for winning the war. Testifying before the Senate Armed Services Committee, he cautioned against setting unrealistic goals, “This is going to be a long slog, and frankly, my view is that we need to be very careful about the nature of the goals we set for ourselves in Afghanistan”. He warned, “If we set ourselves the objective of creating some sort of central Asian Valhalla over there, we will lose, because nobody in the world has that kind of time, patience and money”. Considering, no power has ever been able to hold Afghanistan for too long, his warning was right on the money.

Despite bipartisan approval of Obama Af-Pak Strategy, experts believe the policy is fraught with unrealistic optimism, unattainable goals and erroneous calculations. Even worst, it fails to meet the tenets of the Powell Doctrine. Many analysts hail the doctrine to be the Holy Grail of modern warfare. According to the Doctrine, before America takes a military action its tenets would have to be answered affirmatively:

1. Is a vital national security interest threatened?
2. Do we have a clear attainable objective?
3. Have the risks and costs been fully and frankly analyzed?
4. Have all other non-violent policy means been fully exhausted?
5. Is there a plausible exit strategy to avoid endless entanglement?
6. Have the consequences of our action been fully considered?
7. Is the action supported by the American people?
8. Do we have genuine broad international support?

Coincidently, with the exception of the first tenet, Obama policy falls short of affirming every other tenet. However, before glancing over the negations, a retrospective accounting of genesis of the Af-Pak crisis might assist in understanding the crisis.

Roots of the current mess can be traced back to the political and administrative vacuum left by the CIA, when it suddenly left Afghanistan without even saying bye to its wartime partners, Inter Services Intelligence (ISI) and the Mujahideen – who used to frequent White House as state guests. Its premature departure was resented by the abandoned, which gave birth to equally cold-hearted phenomenon of Talibanization. They controlled over 80% of Afghanistan; hence, they became its default government. In exchange for financial support, the cash-strapped Taliban provided safe heavens to terrorist organizations, like Al Qaeda.

At least initially, al-Qaeda’s core was made up of the CIA funded and trained Mujahideen; who should been rehabbed after the Soviets withdrawal. Unsupervised and forsaken by Americans and their native countries, these fighters who knew no other trait but guerrilla warfare searched for new causes. When none found, they invented their own.

Similarly, Pakistanis also found themselves deserted and heavily sanctioned by their allies. On its Eastern borders India was still as hostile as ever. Pakistanis decided to defend themselves by creating a buffer through a proxy. Pakistanis diverted thousands of idle guerrilla fighters from Afghanistan to Kashmiri. The buffer kept India engaged in an asymmetrical warfare.

After the 9/11 attacks, instead of seeking assistance of the patrons of Taliban and its time tested partner ISI, America aligned itself with a pro Indo-Iran-Russian mercenaries, the Northern-Alliance (NA). Soon after the American lead invasion, the Taliban dispersed into the civilian population. By placing an ethnic minority NA government (Tajiks, Hazaras and Uzbeks) in Kabul, the allies further alienated the Pashtoon majority.

If things weren’t already complicated enough, Bush’ team made the worst possible mistake; it allowed a massive Indian influx into Afghanistan. Indians who were itching to settle scores with Pakistan wasted no time in opening at least 11 consulates on the western borders of Pakistan. Pakistanis viewed these consulates as launch pads for the subversive elements tasked to destabilize Pakistan. The Pakistanis felt entrapped by what they interpreted as a hostile Indian encirclement. They countered the move by reassembling the Taliban proxy.

That is when an Afghanistan, which was apparently turning to normalcy, took a turn for the worst. It became the shooting gallery for many; including the NATO, India, Iran, Pakistan, and non-state elements like al-Qaeda, Pakistan Sponsored Taliban (PST) and RAW/CIA Sponsored Taliban (RCST). The RCST were primarily tasked to infiltrate PST and to conduct subversive activities inside Pakistan. Additionally, it was meant to erode public support for the PST and to generate anti-Taliban sentiments among the global community. The risky strategy runs a too realistic danger of destabilizing nuclear armed Pakistan to a point of no return. Pakistan may end up fracturing into multiple unmanageable pieces, each with its own share of extremists. Clearly the strategy violates tenets 2 and 3 of the Powell Doctrine.

While analyzing President Obama's European (G20) trip with Charlie Rose, both Henry Kissinger and Zbigniew Brzezinski offered their criticism of Af-Pak review. Henry Kissinger warned of an unmanageable mess, if something is not done soon to stabilize deteriorating conditions in Pakistan. He called Af-Pak policy a “fluid military strategy.” Mr. Brzezinski was more specific with his criticism. He asked, “how do we really get Pakistan to help us?” Then he answered, “Pakistanis are convinced they are under threat from India.” But Af-Pak policy does exactly the opposite. It recommends a greater role of India in Afghanistan, which only adds to Pakistan’s fears and goes against the prevailing wisdom of stabilizing Pakistan. A contradiction of the 3rd tenet.

President’s special representative, Richard Holbrooke announced Af-Pak exit strategy, “The exit strategy includes governance, corruption, but above all, and this is the single most difficult aspect of what we are talking about today, it requires dealing with Western Pakistan.” The unattainable and ambiguous exit strategy stood in stark contrast of the 5th tenet of the Powell Doctrine. He explained, “If the current situation in Western Pakistan continued, the instability in Afghanistan will continue.” Meaning, success in Afghanistan is tied to the threats in the ‘Western Pakistan’. An interdependent strategy gives birth to a range of new complexities: either, the U.S. will have to depend on Pakistan’s resolve and capacity to deal with the extremists, or it will have to root them out itself.

America has already voiced its mistrust of Pakistan’s resolve to fight the extremists. If Pakistan cannot be trusted then US will have to do it itself. It will have to: either divert the resources from Afghanistan, or send additional troops to Western Pakistan. But the resources from Afghanistan cannot be diverted, until Afghan National Security Forces are first brought up to a level where they could function independently; an ambitious goal, considering Afghan president still can’t leave his Kabul palace without the protection provided by the U.S. Navy SEALS. The other option is equally impractical, because it will require pumping-in additional American troops – paralleling the numbers deployed during the ‘Gulf War’.

Since American allies are already fatigued from the long drawn Afghan war, they want to leave Afghanistan altogether. Allies, like Air Chief Marshal Sir Jock Stirrup (head of Britain’s armed forces), also expressed their reservations over the practicality of the American strategy. He advised, “Just as in Afghanistan, that kind of insurgency cannot be defeated by conventional military means. It can only be dealt with, in the long term, through politics.” An obvious negation of tenet 8 of Powell Doctrine.

U.S. will have to dip into its own pool to exercise the second option, because no amount of covert/shoot & scoot missions can stem the militancy. No Pakistani government will be able to ignore populous’ demands to fight the invaders. It will be compelled to fight with any or all means at its disposal. Naturally, a Pakistani reaction cannot be calculated, without invoking the forbidden phrase of ‘nuclear exchange’. Much to be desired to affirm the 6th tenet.

Reportedly, even Vice President Joseph Biden argued against the troop surge in Afghanistan. Moreover, American public is not in mood to embark on another never-ending war. Besides, neither the US nor its allies’ economies are hardly in a shape to be able to afford yet another trillion dollar war. Cardinal sins, per 7th and 8th tenets.

Despite thumbs up from the Afghan and Pakistani presidents, the public remains extremely suspicious and resentful of the American policy. Reportedly, between Jan. 14, 2006 and April 8, 2009, 60 UAV hits in Pakistan killed 14 al-Qaeda men, 687 innocent civilians, including women and children. Fairly or unfairly, an ordinary Afghan or a Pakistani believes, West is in there to destroy their faith, their country and the Muslim world altogether. If the war is to be won, then Obama’s team will have to reevaluate and reform its strategy.

The emphasis should be on winning hearts and minds of Afghans and Pakistanis. Before exercising the military option, a really heavy dose of diplomacy, political and financial support will have to be thrown in the mix. Above all, U.S. will have to win back the trust and goodwill of their Pakistani counterparts. Suspension of UAV attacks and phenomenal reduction of Indian presence in Afghanistan would be good starting points in generating goodwill and normalcy in the region.

Secretary Gates was prophetic when he said, “If we set ourselves the objective of creating some sort of central Asian Valhalla [in Afghanistan], we will lose, because nobody in the world has that kind of time, patience and money”. Listen to him!

Open Letter to President Obama

2009-05-30T21:24:00.001-07:00

Open Letter to President Obama

President Barak Obama,

Please allow me to open by thanking you for your exemplary leadership and services to our nation.

However, a lot of work remain to be done. We still need to take lead in assisting nations like Pakistan where 60 years latter, democracy has yet to find a firm foothold. Besides, numerous military takeovers and wave of religious extremism, rampant corruption is the primary reason for its instability. Paradoxically, while it’s ordinary citizens are inching ever closer to destitution, its leadership is becoming even wealthier. By smuggleing billions of dollars of public funds to secret overseas accounts, the elite have built financial empires abroad.

Mr. President, no amount of financial aid or blind support of the Pakistani rulers will turn its fortunes for the best. If we are serious about helping Pakistan then we will have to force them to become fiscally responsible. Towards that goal, demanding transparency and accountability could be a prudent opening step. Since we pour billions of dollars in Pakistan, we should require its President, Prime Minister and rest of the parliamentary members to publicly declare their total assets, both domestic and abroad.

To this day nobody knows the nature of assets of President Zardari. The Western media puts his assets’ worth at minimum of $1.5 billion. For 3 years Zardari lived in his 2,800 sq. ft multi-million dollar luxury apartment in the upper East Manhattan. Though during his last official visit to the U.S., he stayed in the $6,000 per night Presidential Suite at the Roosevelt Hotel. The 3,900 sq. ft suite has 4 bedrooms, a kitchen, formal living and dining areas, and a wrap-around terrace. In addition, he stayed in a $5,000 per night room at the Willard Intercontinental Hotel in Washington.

When millions of Pakistanis are struggling for a single meal; for the life of me, I fail to understand how Zardari could have stayed in a $5,000 per night luxury suite, paid for by public (foreign) funds? If such actions are not unconscionable enough, while he was on the official visit to the U.S. with a begging bowl, he was busy with personal affairs, in addition - for example, on May 12, he put up his upper Manhattan for sale. Asking price: a cool $4.5 million.

Even more tax-payers money was wasted on his son and the army of ministers who accompanied him. Media reports allege, his minister Qamar Zaman Kaira and Nazar Gondal were caught indulging in ungentlemanly activities like a bar brawl, and $14,000 in tips were showered on dancers of an Indian dance club, known as ‘Ghunghroo’. Eyewitness even noted the license plate number of the Jeep in which Kaira was whisked away before police arrived at the scene of the brawl.

The question before us is the following: how a president of a country in war, with 1.5 million refugees, on the verge of defaulting, and begging for billions in U.S. taxpayers’ dollars decide to stay in a $6,000 per night suite? Why couldn't he stay in a $600 per night luxury suite available at the same hotel; or even better, why couldn’t he stay in his vacant luxury apartment? On the other hand, ex-President Musharraf packed and moved to London. We still don’t know what he did with the $10 billion we spent in Pakistan, during his era alone. All we know is that Musharraf along with ex-Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz own multi-million mansions near Islamabad in Chuck Shahzad.

Mr. Presidents, if our presidents like you can publicly declare their assets and taxes then why couldn’t the same be expected the Pakistani so-called leadership when we and others fund their actions? In fact, every public official in Pakistan elected or otherwise is expected to declare his (or her) assets. Zardari is taking advantage of an anomaly that this is not specifically stated for the President's office.

Only good governance can bring Pakistan from the brink of failure. Good governance starts from the top; therefore, we should demand transparency and accountability from the top. It should be stipulated that every top elected and unelected Pakistani official declares his/her total assets, before a single penny is earmarked to their constituency or their pet-projects.

Rome wasn’t built in one day; similarly Pakistan will not become a vibrant democracy either with just a money transfer. In my humble opinion, one way to help Pakistan to overcome its challenges is by introducing accountability of its leaders. And what could be better way to introduce accountability then demanding transparency? One of the ways we can push transparency is by requiring the leadership to fully declare their assets in and outside Pakistan.

Sincerely,

Adnan Gill

Watch Musharraf on Fareed Zakaria's GPS - CNN.com. Part -2

2009-05-18T19:20:00.000-07:00

When it come to defending Pakistan's image overseas, Musharraf will be remembered respectfully. A must watch Musharraf interview with CNN's Fareed Zakaria.

Watch Musharraf on Fareed Zakaria's GPS - CNN.com. Part -1

2009-05-17T20:01:00.000-07:00

We all to hate Musharraf, and for good reasons too; but when it comes to defending Pakistan's image, he is one of the best patriot...

2009-04-04T21:00:00.000-07:00

Obama’s War

By Adnan Gill

About a half a century ago, a young, ambitious and charismatic American president inherited a confined war. Soon after his inaugural, he owned the war! His name was John F. Kennedy and he owned the disastrous Vietnam War. About 50 years latter, another young, brilliant and charming president owned yet another inherited war. His name is Barack H. Obama and he is on way to own the Afghan War. Could it be a classic case of history repeating itself? Time will tell.

President Kennedy essentially remained committed to containing Communism, a Cold War foreign policy inherited from the Truman and Eisenhower administrations. In his inaugural address, he pledged to “pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, in order to assure the survival and success of liberty.” Kennedy was determined to prevent a communist victory in Vietnam . He said, “Now we have a problem making our power credible and Vietnam looks like the place”. And just like that, he owned the Vietnam War.

President Obama drew the line in sand against terrorism, when he disclosed the enemy, “So let me be clear: Al Qaeda and its allies are in Pakistan and Afghanistan .” Then he identified the battlegrounds, “We have a clear and focused goal to disrupt, dismantle and defeat Al Qaeda in Pakistan and Afghanistan , and to prevent their return to either country in the future.” Though, the modus operandi and the timelines of such a fickle goal remain as allusive as the search for the ‘weapons of mass destruction’ in Iraq .

Reverse the clock 30 years back. A superpower of the time, Soviet Union , also tried to ignore the harsh lessons of history by entering the graveyard of empires. Betting on brute military force, the Soviets entered Afghanistan with around 1,800 tanks, 80,000 soldiers and 2,000 AFVs. In one week alone, Soviet aircraft flew close to 4,000 sorties into Kabul . Latter, two additional divisions pushed the strength of Limited Contingent of Soviet Forces (LCOSF) to over 100,000 personnel. By the height of occupation, the Soviets tipped the scales with some half million personnel. In addition, Afghan armed forces were raised to a strength of 300,000 men. A decade latter, Soviets had to leave Afghanistan financially exhausted, demoralized and defeated. Ignoring the lessons of history came at a punishing cost of about 15,000 dead, 469,685 sick & wounded, and some 500 MIA. Brute force alone failed to maintain a hold on Afghanistan . The war of choice bankrupted the mighty Soviet empire; hastening its ultimate disintegration.

The 9/11 (2001) attacks set the stage for an American led Afghan invasion. It was spearheaded by a dozen or so CIA (Special Activities Division) operatives on horsebacks; mostly armed with suitcases full of $100 notes. By March 2009, the strength of International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) jumped to approx. 61,960 troops; out of which 29,820 are American. An eerie reminder of mission-creep (a fundamental cause of the Vietnam defeat) came when President announced a troop surge. In addition to already ordered 17,000 combat troops, President Obama promised additional 4,000 troops for training of Afghan National Security Forces (ANSF). Recently, an increase of ANSF strength from current 82,780 to 134,000 personnel was approved. Déjà Vu; just like the Soviets, who tried to raise loyal Afghan armed forces; now the coalition too is building ANSF.

Another example of mission-creep stood out when the focus of Afghan-Pakistan/Af-Pak strategy shifted from fighting Taliban in Afghanistan to hunting terrorists allegedly growing stronger inside Pakistan . In a stated objective of its policy, US declared Pakistan to be the ground-zero for the war on global terrorism. It accused, its one time partner, the ISI of cultivating terrorist organizations. It also set a pretext for possible military operations inside Pakistan . It stated, “Disrupting terrorist networks in Afghanistan and especially Pakistan to degrade any ability they have to plan and launch international terrorist attacks.” Could it be another wild goose chase, like the Iraqi ‘Weapons of Mass Destruction’ hunt? Time will decide.

Apparently, to shore up public support Obama strategy prays on public fears of terrorism threat. Banking on worst case hypothetical scenarios, it suggests the terrorists getting their hands on Pakistani fissile materials. US Policy White Paper warns, “The threat that al Qaeda poses to the United States and our allies in Pakistan - including the possibility of extremists obtaining fissile material - is all too real. Without more effective action against these groups in Pakistan , Afghanistan will face continuing instability.” Interestingly, it doesn’t address the clear and present danger posed by the well documented illegal trade of fissile material flourishing in the ex-Soviet states.

There are numerous similarities between Af-Pak strategy and the failed strategies from the recent wars. If history is any guide, similarities like mission-creep, vague objectives, and confusing exit strategies are proven recipes for loosing wars. Nonetheless, all is not lost. Going back to reliable allies and proven strategies could still save the day.

A recipe to wining the war is very simple:

a. Instead of demonizing, reestablish alliance with the ISI contacts, so a mutually beneficial game strategy can be formulated to root out the terrorist organizations.

b. Tell India to immediately cease destabilization operations in Pakistan , and to dramatically reduce its footprint in Afghanistan .

c. Reserve Predator attacks for the most wanted terrorist leadership only.

d. Stop implanting and supporting milo-political dictators in Pakistan .

e. Encourage formation of Afghan government, bureaucracy and military inline with the ethnic ratios.

f. Involve tribal-leaders in nation building initiatives.

g. Establish diplomatic relations with Iran to pacify their concerns regarding Afghanistan .

h. Above all, stop alienating highly territorial tribals, through the application of brute military force; which more than often multiplies civilian casualties.

Mr. President, win the hearts and minds of the masses, who are tired of violence and hungry for peace, they will win the war for you.

2009-03-26T21:50:00.000-07:00

Bush policy or Obama policy?

By Adnan Gill

Despite what some American foreign policy hawks, like Kim Holmes (Vice President, Kathryn and Shelby Cullom Davis Institute for International Studies) suggest, Obama-Biden team was spot on when they set “Restoring Our Standing” to be one of the prime objectives of formulating the American foreign policy. Thanks to almost a decade long coercive Bush-era foreign policy; today, America is viewed as a maverick on war path. Survey after survey shows a global decline of American popularity among both friends and foes. Even an association with Bush policy cut short political fortunes of many. British Prime Minister Toney Blair and President Pervez Musharraf are among the few who were sidelined for toeing Bush policy.

With the exception of few successes, like Libyan pledge to denounce terrorism and reverse its nuclear program, rest of the Bush policy is fraught with disasters. Iraqi invasion was a direct manifestation of failed Bush Doctrine. The invasion cost America hundreds of billions of dollars and thousands in human lives. Indian nuclear deal is another example of shortsighted Bush foreign policy. It envisioned a one time Soviet and now Russian ally India to be its linchpin.

Now, some pro-India American hawks are aggressively lobbying the Obama Administration for an extension of Bush policy. They argue: to check the rise of China and the common democratic values make India a natural American ally. Though in reality, India is more of a pseudo-socialist democracy; a far cry from the Jeffersonian democracy. The lobbyists go as far as, wanting to share American national security jewels, like nuclear technology and the land-based laser defense system with India.

At the same time, a concerted effort is in full swing to change Obama’s Pakistan policy. They insist on de-hyphenating India from Pakistan; which will remain a pipe dream as long as India and Pakistan remain entangled over one or the other issue. Most experts believe the two will remain in a belligerent relationship till the root cause of their rivalry, the Kashmir issue, is amicably resolved.

India’s huge population with equally impressive middleclass makes it an attractive trade partner. However, neither its humongous population nor its growing economy is meaningful enough to qualify it to become a strategic ally; especially at the cost of its time tested ally Pakistan or its largest trading partner China. In 2008 India imported only $17.4 billion worth of goods from the US. In contrast, China with far better human rights record and business friendly government imported $67.1 billion worth of goods from the US. In addition, American business giants like Walmart and Boeing are impatiently waiting for Obama administration to reverse the restrictive sanctions Clinton administration placed on China.

Even in the 21st century, India is frequently cited for the worst religious persecution and gross human rights abuses by the human rights organizations and US State Department. In fact, Indian record is far worst than what is attributed to China. Indian conservative cum nationalist parties like BJP have been charged for aiding and abetting the religious extremists in caring out communal violence. These parties openly campaign on anti-minority and nationalist slogans. Their ‘akhand Bharat’ (larger India) rhetoric dominates their political ideology. India is one of the few notable countries that still hold border disputes with virtually all of its neighbors. India’s neighbors accuse its intelligence agency RAW for malicious interference in their internal affairs.

The Indio-US nuclear deal was widely criticized even within the Bush Administration. India has a well known nuclear proliferation record, especially in vertical and onward proliferation. In a 2003 interview, the former Secretary of State Colin Powell expressed his reservations over the deal, “We also have to protect certain red lines that we have with respect to proliferation.” However, former Secretary Condoleezza Rice was the driving force behind the hurriedly concocted nuclear deal. It was a brainchild of Secretary Rice’s counselor and longtime colleagues Philip Zelikow and (Bombay-born) Ashley Tellis.

Experts like David Albright, President of Institute for Science and International Security, in a 2005 testimony before the US House Committee described Indian proliferation, “India’s extensive military and civil nuclear programs are often connected, sharing personnel and infrastructure. In addition, some facilities currently have both a military and civilian purpose.” Indian scientist Raja Ramanna also confirmed, India diverted plutonium from the American-Canadian supplied civilian nuclear reactor (CIRUS) for its first nuclear device.

Again, in an October 26, 2005, testimony before the House Committee Dr. Albright warned,

“This [nuclear deal] could pose serious risks to the security of the United States. If fully implemented, it could catapult India into a position as a major supplier of both nuclear and nuclear-related materials, equipment, and technology. With a weak and poorly enforced export control system, [Indians] could become major suppliers [of] the nuclear weapon programs [for the] adversaries of the United States.”

Why India will not violate its obligations this time around should be a matter of great concern for the Nuclear Supplier Group, especially for the Obama Administration.

Simple facts like dubious Indian nuclear proliferation record and its substandard democratic credentials hardly justify seamless continuation of Bush policy. On the other hand, it would be a colossal mistake to unwind American alliance with its nuclear armed strategic partner of 60 years. Pakistan sits on the crossroads of Middle East and the future Middle East, the landlocked Central Asian States; which is sitting on larger oil reserves then the Middle East. Historically, Pakistan had shown greater tolerance for the State of Israel than other Muslim states. Pakistan has also played a lynchpin role in establishing ties between the US and China, and between the US and the Muslim world. Pakistan stood shoulder to shoulder with America to defeat and ultimately dismantle the Soviet empire. Time tested alliance speaks for itself.

Despite serve criticism, Pakistan is still the front-line state in war against terror. Pakistan has lost more men and material in the war than rest of the countries put together. World is still trying to recover from the blowback of premature American departure from Afghanistan after the Communist Soviet Union was defeated. The departure left both Afghanistan and Pakistan high and dry to fend for themselves. Consequently, the resulting vacuum was filled by the religious extremists, Taliban; who in-turn provided sanctuaries to the terrorist organizations like Al-Qaeda.

Post 9/11 invasion, instead of filling the Afghan vacuum with a political solution punctuated by military muscle, the Bush Administration chose to stay in Afghanistan with guns blazing. Even worst, instead of seeking Pakistan’s advice or heading to their concerns, the NATO installed an anti-Pakistan and pro-Indian Northern Alliance government in Afghanistan. If that wasn’t bad enough, under the garbs of nation building, NATO permitted massive Indian buildup in Afghanistan. The buildup deepened Pakistani fears of Indian encirclement, which resulted in reassembling of the Pakistani proxy, also known as Taliban. Pakistan viewed the eleven Indian consulates dotting its western border as command-and-control centers to destabilize and possibly fracture Pakistan, yet again. It goes without saying, a fractured Pakistan runs the risk of loose nukes in the hands multiple players. If true, India might be playing an extremely dangerous game of global consequences.

Instead of heeding to shortsighted calls of continuation of failed Bush policy, Obama administration should immediately reverse the Bush policy. To begin with, it needs to advice India in no uncertain terms, hands off Pakistan. America should also cease the arbitrary drone attacks that account for overwhelming civilian casualties and results in a severe anti-American backlash.

Obama policy should add political and monetary dimensions to the strategy of winning the hearts and minds of highly alienated Afghans and Pakistanis. Finally, it needs to bring both India and Pakistan to the table to hammer out a long lasting solution to the satisfaction of Kashmiris too. A Kashmir solution reflecting the true aspirations of Kashmiris will go a long way in confidence building and normalization of overwhelmingly contentious Indo-Pak relationship.

2009-03-26T21:47:00.000-07:00

MQM, Racism and PCO

Once again, MQM has lived up to its reputation. As usual, on March 15 too MQM stood with the ruling clique. This time too, Punjab was the victim of its racially charged attacks. They hoped to create a rift between Punjab and other provinces, like when they tried to stoke racial tensions over the desecration of Ms Bhutto's shrine. Predictably, MQM's unsubstantiated accusations were followed by empty threats to quit the alliance. By now, everyone and their grandmother knows, if not within the same hour, MQM would retract the hollow threats within 24 hours; as MQM's lust for ministries always trumps its so-called principals. Just like MQM supremo Altaf Bhai, Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam (JUI-F) chief Maulana Fazlur Rehman too specializes in opportunistic politics built on the foundations of racial hatred. He also desperately tried to marginalize the Lawyers' Movement through whipping up racial tensions.

It's hard to speculate on their true intentions or to say who their P.R. advisors are, but somehow these gentlemen always manage to line themselves with the rulers and on the wrong side of the history.

On a separate note; I would dare to give the latest round of political standoff to Mr. Zardari. He shrewdly managed to legalize Dogar appointment. Forced Lawyers' Movement to conclude without giving an inch to the resolution of Punjab crisis. Belligerent Punjab governor is still in the driving seat, and no heads have rolled over the flagrant misuse of the state power. PML-N is forced to roll back its street power, and the legislators are still nowhere even close to clipping dictatorial powers of Zardari. Even worst, it's anyone's guess, the makeup of the Supreme court Chief Justice Chaudhri will inherit, or if there are any strings attached to his restoration? To a layman like I, anything short of a complete reversal of November 3, 2007, PCO should be unacceptable.

Adnan Gill

2009-03-26T21:42:00.000-07:00

Mumbai Evidence!

I don't want to speculate on the alleged Pakistani culpability in the Mumbai attacks. However, I am astounded over the nature of the evidence presented by the Indian investigators. In light of the supposed evidence, one is left with only possibilities; either the terrorists were downright nincompoops, or the Indian propagandists need a refresher course in concatenating evidence.

What kind of terrorists on a suicide-mission carries their national ID cards with them? They might as well have carried their birth certificates too. What kind of terrorists leaves behind evidence/supplies, like a bag of flour, that could be traced back to its origin? They must have been hardcore nationalists who consumed only Pakistani products.

What kind of terrorists on a suicide-mission carries toothpaste and shaving cream with them? They must have been hygiene conscious suicide terrorists! After all, who doesn't wish to look well-groomed for his funeral?

What kind of terrorists stealthily sneak into India on a bright yellow rubber dinghy? Perhaps, they were safety conscious terrorists who didn't want to be accidentally run over by a larger vessel. The 10 terrorists must have been dwarfs with novelty weapons and supplies. Because fitting 10 fully armed men and tons of supplies on a 10x4 ft rubber-dinghy is nothing short of mathematical improbability.

In fact, I am surprised they didn't carry notarized confession letters with them. Even better, videos of in-advance confessions, taped in the presence of the Indian embassy officials in Islamabad!

Adnan Gill

2009-03-26T21:29:00.000-07:00

Indian Bluff

By Adnan Gill

Will India launch punitive strike(s) against Pakistan? Highly unlikely. India would have already struck if it had a choice। It doesn’t have a choice for two major reasons: 1. Indians know, they can start a conflict, but where and how the war ends will not be in their control. 2. By tangling themselves in a war, they run a too realistic risk of delivering a mortal blow to their service-based economy, which may not even survive the brinksmanship Indians are engaging in.

Arguably, Indians suffer from the ‘white man’s complex.’ Urbanite Indians love to mimic the American way of life. They imitate the ‘goras’ in ways ranging from their attire to their manner of speech. So much so, they have named Bombay film industry after an American icon, namely the Hollywood. Somewhere during the last decade or so, Indians became so engrossed with the ‘gora complex’ that they began imagining India to be an economical powerhouse and military superpower equating the Americans. Perhaps, it’s this complex which sullied the better judgment of Indian urbanites and their media in demanding punitive strikes against Pakistan.

Nevertheless, after the initial hysteria will ware down, at least some sane Indians will question, if India could afford such an arrogant behavior? That’s when the reality will hit them like ton of bricks that neither India is America nor Pakistan is Afghanistan.

Despite the ferocious appearance of the Indian military, largely on paper; the fact remains, over 80% of its obsolete hardware is a carryover from the Soviet-era. Indian handicap of obsolete hardware was highlighted during the 2002 India-Pakistan standoff. It was a humiliating experience for the Indians. Operation Parakram cost India about $2 billion in cash and 798 in human cost, and that too without a single shot fired from the Pakistani side.

It was also a disastrous Indian deployment, because even after one year of hostile posturing, they could not cross the border, fearing an all out war ending in a nuclear exchange. That is when India truly lost its supposed conventional superiority over Pakistan. The humiliating pull back effectively closed the doors on India for any future conventional war endeavors; because Pakistani nuclear arsenal was here to stay। During the same time Pakistanis were modernizing its arsenal through the rapid induction of modern weaponry like JF-17 fighters and precision weapons like the Hatf-8 cruise missiles.

Since then, India has dabbled with nonstarters, like ‘cold start’ doctrine. The idea was to catch Pakistan off-guard by sending a comparatively smaller but highly mobile force across the border at a moment’s notice. It was a nonstarter because of Pakistani equalizer (its nukes); plus the Indians realized they would still have to deploy a considerable amount of logistics and men at the front positions, where they would have remained juicy sitting-ducks for the preemptive PAF air strikes.

The other reason India cannot afford a war with Pakistan is, its economy is too young and still too small to survive through a round of war। Regardless, the havoc it will run on the already distressed Pakistani economy, the war will for sure spell an end to the largely service-based Indian economy, which depends on the foreign investments; and the foreign investments inherently depend on peace driven stability.

A brief look will abundantly expose the facade of the Indian economy; which will collapse at the first signs of uncertainty or instability। In 2008, its external debts balooned to around $221 billion. In 2007, Indian exports stood around $145 billion, while imports were around $217 billion; a deficit of $72 billion in a single year.

Its factory output account for 27.6% of the GDP and employs 17% of the total workforce. Rest of the workforce is largely dedicated to the agriculture sector. According to a 2008 World Bank report, 75.6% Indians live on less than $2 per day. It suffers from higher rates of malnutrition than Sub-Saharan Africa. Over 70% its population is either illiterate or educated below the primary level. Indian tourist industry is 1/6 of Las Vegas.

Recently, Standard & Poor's announced, India risk a downgrade from BBB-minus rating to the lowest investment-grade rating। Clearly, Indians are hardly in a financial shape to even contemplate on waging a war.

Indian service industry accounts for over 55% of its GDP. Bangalore is called the Silicon Valley of India. A large number of Information Technology companies are located in the city. It is the largest contributor of India's $33 billion IT exports (2007). IT giants like Infosys and Wipro are headquartered in Bangalore. Other undertakings headquartered in Bangalore are Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL), National Aerospace Laboratories (NAL) and Indian Space Research Organization (ISRO) to name the few.

Bangalore is also called the world's call-centre capital। Foreign IT giants like the IBM, Microsoft, Dell, Hewlett-Packard, Apple and Cisco have also heavily invested in the city by opening call centers there. These call centers bring in major amounts of service-generated foreign revenues. Their 24/7 operations provide the customer-support on a global scale. An interruption of operations for even for a single day could mean loss of millions of dollars for the foreign investors.

As ugly as it may sound, but that’s what wars are, brutal and ugly. Imagine: far short of nuclear strike, only a couple of bombs or Shaheen-II (with an accuracy of 200m) armed with conventional warheads are dropped on the outskirts of Bangalore। Will even a single foreign company think twice before closing their operations for good? Would they stay around to see if they will get lucky through the second round too?

Feel-good slogans like ‘shining India’ don’t help the arrogance clouding the good judgment of war-mongering Indians. They can try to start a war on their terms, but it will definitely not end at their terms. Unless India has somehow overcome their fear of far-superior Pakistani nuclear arsenal, or they have found a way to move whole India under kilometer deep nuke-proof shelters, it will not dare to start a war.

2009-03-26T21:18:00.000-07:00

It’s All In The Perception!

By Adnan Gill

Recently, the Indian Prime Minister Dr। Manmohan Singh labeled Pakistan to be the ‘epicenter of terrorism’. Is it true or a deliberate campaign to manufacture negative perceptions is in full swing? One way to answer the question is through a rhetorical question: do all the terrorists hold Pakistani identity cards, or are trained in Pakistan? Not at all! If the Indians choose to suffer from selective amnesia over their self-indulgences in terrorism (including state terrorism) then a brief introspective look should joggle their memories.

Since Mumbai attacks, Indians are crying, the ‘sky is falling.’ As deplorable as the attacks were, they pale when compared to the Indian state terrorism and the pogroms regularly carried out by the Hindu extremists; which are arguably much worse than the isolated cases of terrorism. But God forbid if even a single crocodile tear is wasted on the victims of Indian sponsored terrorism, both within and outside India. Could it be true that India also has many skeletons in its closet that needs to be exposed too? At the forefront of Indian terrorism is its infamous intelligence agency, Research and Analysis Wing (RAW).

But before visiting the memory lanes, it might be prudent to familiarize ourselves with the definition of terrorism. The Webster’s dictionary defines ‘terrorism’ as: “the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion.”

Following are some of most glaring examples of Indian terrorism:

1. In 1971, at the cost of thousands of deaths, India maliciously severed Pakistan.

2. In June 1984, during the Operation Blue Star, Indian army massacred over 7,000 Sikhs.

3. In November 1984, in New Delhi well over 3,000 Sikhs were cut to pieces by the Hindu terrorists.

4. In 1992, Hindu terrorist groups, such as VHP and Bajrang Dal, demolished the 500 years old Babri Masjid.

5. Since early 1990s, the Indian military systematically exterminated close to 80,000 Kashmiri Muslims.

6. During the last 20 years alone, thousands of Christians are butchered by the Hindu terrorists. A gruesome example of such atrocities stood out when Bajrang Dal’s terrorists burnt alive the Australian missionary and his two young sons.

7. In 2002, Hindu terrorists slaughtered some 2,000 Muslims in Gujarat. Sickening confessions of the VHP's leaders (e.g. Babu Bajrangi’s), responsible for the attacks, are available on the YouTube.

8. In 2007, over 60 Pakistanis were burnt alive in India. The gruesome massacre was the handy work of Bajrang Dal’s terrorist Lt Col Prasad Shrikant Purohit.

9. A brainchild of terrorist RAW, the globally known terrorist organization Tamil Tigers/LTTE was founded in 1972. To this day Tamils are funded, trained and armed by RAW. Its cadre are trained and provided safe-heavens in the southern Indian state of Tamil Nadu.

10. Just last September, VHP terrorists destroyed dozens of Christian churches. They also set a Christian orphanage on fire, and burned to death a 20-year-old Christian teacher.

Pick any of US State Department report on the Religious Freedom in India; one realizes, religious minorities in India had been systematically persecuted far worse than in rest of the world put together. The reports squarely blame the Hindu terrorist groups, like BJP, RSS, VHP and Bajrang Dal for gross human rights violations of the minorities (including Muslims, Christians, Sikhs and Dalits). If that’s not terrorism, then what is?

Since 1968, RAW had been intimately involved in everything that could be considered as terrorism. Its dirty deeds include, but not limited to: drugs trafficking, human trafficking, arms trafficking, coup d'etat in foreign nations, subversive activities, assassinations, nuclear proliferation, and downright recruiting, funding and training of exporting terrorists.

Some of feathers in RAW’s cap are: Creation and support of Mukti Bahini. Mujibur Rahman's assassination. Subversive activities and flagrant spread of terrorism in Sri Lanka. Subversive activities in the Raj of Sikkim. Could it be mere coincidence that dozen or so Indian consulates dot the Pakistani border with Afghanistan? RAW established terrorist training camps in Afghanistan to spread terrorism in Pakistan in general, and in specific to infiltrate terrorists in Balochistan and NWFP. Cultivated, nurtured and armed Burmese terrorist groups like the Kachin Independence Army. Subversive activities in Nepal, Bhutan and Tibet. Nuclear proliferation activities include smuggleing of flow meter units, and feed & withdrawal equipment for the nuclear centrifuge cascades. CIA mole in RAW, Rabinder Singh, who defected to the US with documentary evidence, confirmed RAW’s infatuation with terrorism.

Some Indian Chanakyas are working overtime to capitalize on the Mumbai tragedy by manufacturing a supposed war of civilizations. They want to divide the civilized world between the so-called murderous Muslims and a hapless troika of Hindus, Jews and Christians. If the objective of the Mumbai terrorists was to take on the besieged troika, they must have been out of their minds to spend so many resources to take on the Christians and Jews in India when they could have easily killed many more in Afghanistan, where all the help and resources are readily available.

Ironically, despite the bloodletting of hundred of thousands of minorities and foreign nationals, not a single Hindu or RAW terrorist could be found on UN’s, EU’s or even on US lists of terrorists. Conspicuously, not a peep could be heard from the so-called fair and balanced Indian and Western media, neither over the export of terrorism or the genocides that routinely take place in India.

During the last three decades, Pakistan has experienced more acts of terrorism than rest of the world put together. More Pakistanis had fallen to the terrorist attacks then rest of the world together. More Pakistani soldiers have sacrificed their lives fighting the terrorists (on RAW’s payroll) then all the NATO put together. Naturally, one has to wonder, is the bad reputation systematically forced upon Pakistan: a reality or a perception hyped by the enemies of Pakistan; especially, when their own record is arguably much worst?

Rejoinder to Mr. Tharoor's Malicious Misrepresentations

2008-12-14T20:47:00.000-08:00

Dear Readers,

Following is my letter to the editor of the Time magazine. It is a rejoinder to an article published in it on Dec 8. We should send out letters to the Time, stating Pakistan's position in reference to this article.
The address is letters@time.com

Dear Editor,

This is in reference to Shashi Tharoor’s column ‘After the Horror’.

In his haste to bedevil Islam in general and Pakistan in specific, Mr. Tharoor proclaimed, “a succession of Pakistani military leaders [made] it a point to support, finance, equip and train Islamist militants to conduct terrorist operations in India.” His sweeping statement deserves a brief reminder of India’s checkered past pained red by the Hindu extremists:

1. 1971, at the cost of thousands of deaths, India maliciously severed Pakistan.
2. In June 1984, Indian army massacred over 7,000 Sikhs during the Operation Blue Star?
3. In November 1984, well over 3,000 Sikhs were butchered by the Hindu mobs in the New Delhi.
4. In 1992, VHP and Bajrang Dal men demolished the 500 years old Babri Masjid.
5. During last 20 years alone, thousands of Christians had been butchered by the Hindu extremists. A gruesome example of such atrocities stood out when Bajrang Dal’s activists burnt alive the Australian missionary and his two young sons.
6. In 2002, Hindu fundamentalists slaughtered some 2,000 Muslims in Gujarat. Sickening confessions of the VHP's leaders, responsible for the attacks, are available on the YouTube.
7. Since early 1990s, the Indian military systematically exterminated close to 80,000 Kashmiri Muslims.
8. In 2007, over 60 Pakistanis were burnt alive in India. The gruesome massacre was the handy work of Bajrang Dal’s shinning star Lt Col Prasad Shrikant Purohit.
9. Just last September, VHP extremists destroyed dozens Christian churches. They also set a Christian orphanage on fire, and burned to death, a 20-year-old Christian teacher.

Mr. Tharoor wrote, "This was clearly not just an attack on India; the assailants were taking on the ‘Jews and crusaders’ of al-Qaeda lore." He deserves kudos for cunningly manufacturing a hapless troika of Christians, Jews and Hindus, besieged by the murderous Muslims. However, the reality doesn’t tally with his misrepresentations:
a. Pick any of US State Department report on the Religious Freedom in India; one realizes, Christians had been systematically persecuted far worse in India than in rest of the world put together. The reports blame the Hindu extremist groups, like BJP, RSS, VHP and Bajrang Dal for gross violations of the human rights of the minorities (including Muslims, Christians, Sikhs and Dalits).
b. If the objective of the terrorists was to take on the ‘Jews and crusaders’, they would have to be out of their mind to spend so much resources to execute such a mission in India when they could have easily killed many more in Afghanistan, where all the help and resources are readily available.

Ironically, despite the bloodletting of hundred of thousands of minorities, not a single Hindu could be found on UN’s, EU’s or even on US lists of terrorists. Sadly, not a peep could be heard from the so-called fair and balanced Western media over the genocides that routinely take place in India.

Sincerely,

Adnan Gill

Whose Who of the Hindutva Army?

2008-11-30T12:42:00.000-08:00

By Adnan Gill

Before the self-loathing Pakistanis jump on the Indian bandwagon of ‘Pakistan is bud of all evils’, we need to wait to see if the terrorists involved in the (deplorable) Mumbai attacks were, as usual, carrying their Pakistani national identity cards in their pockets, or if they turnout to be Bajrang Dal’s shinning stars, like Anti-Terrorism Squad’s (serving) Indian Army Lt Col Prasad Shrikant Purohit? However, the purpose of this column is not to pin blame, rather to familiarize ourselves with the heavyweights of the Hindu extremist parties, who are training and using thousands of terrorists to systematically use terror as means of coercion।

A Hindu umbrella group, ‘Sangh Parivar’ (SP) is built around an extremist Hindu party, Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS)। Its members includes parties like the RSS, Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP), Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), and Bajrang Dal (BD, also known as the Monkey Brigade).

Bal Thackeray, an admirer of Adolf Hitler and Nazism, is the founder of an extremist Hindu party ‘Shiv Sena’ (SS, meaning Army of Shiva)। Only his hate for Muslims surpasses his love for Hitler. In 1984, in an interview with the ‘India Today’, he said, "[Muslims] were spreading like a cancer and should be operated on like a cancer. The...country should be saved from the Muslims and the police should support them". According to the Asia Times, Thackeray called on the Hindus to form suicide squads “to take the Muslims head on. Trouble-making Muslims should be wiped out from the country... kick out the [40 million] Bangladeshi Muslims and then the country will be secure". In a deposition before the Srikrishna Commission, Yuvraj Mohite said, Thackeray coordinated much of the January 1993 Mumbai carnage. He claimed, “Balasaheb was sitting and he was getting calls from various places. He would ask what was happening at that particular place… and then he would say, 'Kill them. Send them to Allah'”.

Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh is an Indian extremist party that believes in terrorism। Its involvement in Mahatma Gandhi's assassination got it banned in 1948, only to be banned again during the 1975 Emergency, and then in 1992 for demolishing Babri Masjid. It has an estimated 4.5 million active members.

Vishwa Hindu Parishad, an offshoot of the RSS, is another Hindu extremist cum terrorist party। Their stated objective is to protect the ‘Hindu world’ from other religions. It was formed by Swami Chinmayananda and a former RSS member S S Apte.Apte declared, “The world has been divided to Christian, Islam and Communist… It is necessary in this age of conflict to think of and organize the Hindu world to save it from the evils of all the three।” According to the Human Rights Watch (HRW), VHP was deeply involved in the 2002 Gujarat massacre.

‘Bajrang Dal’ is the armed youth wing of the VHP। The group boasts it has 1.3 million active members. They run terrorist training camps, called ‘Shakhas’, where thousands of Hindu men are trained in using weapons and explosives. In January 1999, BD’s men killed a missionary and his two sons for allegedly converting Hindus to Christians. In 2006, while putting a bomb together, two Bajrang Dal activists were killed in a premature explosion. Its terrorists were also involved in the 2003 Parbhani Musjid blasts.

A member of Sangh Parivar, Bharatiya Janata Party has the largest following of the mainstream Indians। In an anti-Muslim and bigoted statement, BJP’s website states, “The vibrancy of Hindu society was noticeable at all times in that despite such barbarism from the Islamic hordes of central Asia and Turkey, Hindus never played with the same rules that Muslims did... The destruction of the structure at Ayodhya was the release of the history that Indians had not fully come to terms with. Thousands of years of anger and shame, so diligently bottled up by these same interests, was released when the first piece of the so-called Babri Masjid was torn down... The future of Bharat is set. Hindutva is here to stay.”

One of BJP's coalition partners was Shiv Sena। It’s widely believed to be a Fascist party. Its ideology is 'Bhumiputra' (Maharashtrians deserve more rights than others). In 1993, Srikrishna commission accused its leader Bal Thackeray of "commanding his loyal Shiv Sainiks to retaliate by organized attacks against Muslims."

Not to be left behind, the Indian entertainment industry and news media are also fanning the Hindu extremism. Bollywood is churning out movies in which villains are either Muslims or Pakistanis. Every time a firecracker goes off in India, without presenting even circumstantial evidence, the media joins the government’s chorus of Muslim bashing or Pakistani involvement. For example, within hours of Samjhota Express blast the Indian media declared the so-called Muslim fundamentalists were behind the blasts।

During the Gujarati riots at least 2000 Muslims were massacred by the Hindu mobs। Witnesses testified before the Nanavati commission, that the BJP leader Maya Kodnani and BD leader Babu Bajrangi were inciting the mobs. According to another HRW report, mobs of thousands dressed in the RSS uniforms and "armed with swords, sophisticated explosives, and gas cylinders" were guided by the voter lists and printouts provided by the local municipal administration to burn down the Muslim-owned properties.

The New York Times reported, the police "watched the events taking place and took no action against the attacks on Muslims and their property." Gujarati government’s complicity in the pogrom was also reported by the US Department of State, “NGOs report that police were implicated directly in nearly all the attacks against Muslims in Gujarat, and in some cases, NGOs contend, police officials encouraged the mob.” The Telegraph reported, the Indian “Intelligence officials admitted, however, that there had been a deliberate delay by federal and state governments in deploying the army to give Hindu militants a free hand [to kill Muslims].” Instead of showing remorse, the Gujarati Chief Minister Narendra Modi (BJP), shamelessly said, “Every action has an equal and opposite reaction।”

Within couple of hours of Samjhota Express bombings, Indian authorities were pointing fingers at Pakistan। Turned out, the gruesome massacre was the handy work of the Hindu extremists, like Col Purohit. There are countless other, serving or retired Indian military officials, like Lt Col (r) Jayant Rao Chitale and Lt Gen P N Hoon who also train and form the Hindu Suicide Squads. Surprise, surprise! It turns out, besides Muslims; Hindus too can be quite proficient at suicide bombings.

Sadly, none of the Hindu fascist leaders, nay terrorist masterminds, including Bal Thackeray and Narendra Modi, who planned and led the massacres of the minorities were ever arrested or convicted for the crimes against humanity। Even more sadly, neither the United Nations, nor the Western nations have even dared to call these Hindu fascist parties (BJP, VHP, RSS, HSS, Bajrang Dal, and Shiv Sena) for what they are, terrorist parties.

In contrast, if there is even the slightest chance of a Muslim link to an act of terrorism, the West and the Indians go into overdrive of unsubstantiated allegations against the Muslims in general and Pakistanis in particular। Their media is always ready to give an endless coverage, packed with gory details of the incident, along with venomous commentary of the so-called anti-terrorism experts, who never miss an opportunity to squarely point fingers at the Pakistanis. Conspicuously, their governments too frequently break speed records in placing the Muslim charities on the lists of terrorist organizations. Despite the blood of hundreds of thousands of Muslims, Dalits (untouchables), Siri Lankans and Sikhs on their hands, can anyone name a single Hindu extremist organization marked as a terrorist organization?

So what if, year after year, several thousands of Muslims are shredded to pieces by the Hindu mobs, daisy cutters, or by the Predator attacks? But then again, why blame them when the glorious leaders of the Muslim world dispatch their own subjects to Hotel Guantanamo for the ransom money? At least, it’s not like Mr। Zardari tried to handover his ISI Chief to the Indians for the ransom!

2008-04-23T20:10:00.000-07:00

Karachi’s Curse!

By Adnan Gill

Karachi is the financial heart of Pakistan that generates about 65% of revenue mainly through taxes, customs and surcharges. It's world's twentieth largest metropolitan spread over 3,530 km². It hosts a whopping 12.5 million of humanity consisting of a rainbow of ethnicities. Karachi’s racial distribution is: Urdu/Mohajirs 48.52%; Punjabi 13.94%; Sindhi 7.22%; Pashto 11.42%; Balochi 4.34%; Saraiki 2.11%; others: 12.4%. Ideally, ethnic diversity generates ingenuity and creativity that translates into positive progress, like in the case of the United States. However to Karachi’s misfortune, racial diversity has only brought it a never ending curse. But the fault doesn't lay with the Karachiites, who happen to be the victims; rather it’s the politicians with their vested interests who should be blamed for its volatile curse.

In good old days, Karachi used to be known as the ‘city of lights,’ now it’s known as the ‘city of guns and violence.’ By large, till the 70s, Karachi used to be comparatively peaceful, but that changed when by propping up a new party in Sindh, the establishment decided to marginalize the solid hold of PPP in at least Karachi and Hyderabad. In 1984, under the patronage of Altaf Hussain (a taxi driver turned politician) ‘Muhajir Qaumi Movement’ (MQM) was created. The name itself suggested the party was established to exploit the sensitivities of the Urdu-speaking Pakistanis. It took 13 years for the party to realize that its name was a giveaway of its intentions and limitations. Consequently, in 1997, to shed its image of a racist party, it renamed itself to ‘Muttahida Qaumi Movement’.

However, its actions spoke louder than its politically correct name. Almost from the very beginning, MQM was a militant party that believed in doing its business at the barrel of gun. Based on the racial lines, MQM established no-go-areas and also opened up a number of torture cells around the city. MQM is frequently cited for its involvement in terrorist and mafia activities, especially within the city of Karachi. It is widely believed, it generates funds through carjackings, land grabbing, kidnappings, drug running, extortion (Bhatta), etc to sustain its absconder leadership hiding in London. To this day targeted killings remain its most favored modus operandi to silence its critics/opponents, and to put down dissensions within its own ranks. MQM is also documented for making remarkable gains in successive elections through rigging and naked violence.

Within a span of one year, MQM (a diehard ally of General Musharraf) twice demonstrated its unremarkable ability to turn Karachi into the killing fields. On May 12, 2007, thousands of cameras captured its workers massacring at least 40 unsuspected Karachiites, who were on their way to welcome the Chief Justice of Pakistan. A message was sent: stay out! Karachi belongs to only MQM. Then later, on April 9, 2008, upon learning their insatiable appetite for lucrative ministries would not be satisfied; MQM once again set their workers loose on Karachi. This time, they decided to target General Musharraf's nemesis, the Lawyers. Approximately, 40 civilians were shot and 12 were killed; out of which 5 victims were burnt alive in the lawyers’ chambers. As they shot their hapless victims, the killers chanted, ‘Karachi kis ka, MQM ka’. The message was: Altaf Hussain follows up on his threats and Sindh will not be allowed to function without MQM in the government. Every time MQM quenches its thirst with the blood of the innocent, ironically it raises hue cry, that it's them who were the victims. Their crocodile tears do not impress anyone anymore, because everyone knows that not a leaf is moved without Altaf's orders. Considering their iron grip on Karachi, their fabricated lies make their hue and cry look nothing more than regurgitated drama.

The argument whether MQM has become a fascist party has gone beyond hearsay. Virtually every human rights organization, Canadian government, and now even European Union's Election Observation Mission (EOM) has recognized MQM to be a militant organization. In its final report on the 2008 elections, EOM clearly stated how MQM implants racist sentiments, “The agenda of this largely secular party focuses on issues relating to regional autonomy and opposition to Punjabi dominance.” Then the report went over MQM's taste for violence, “The MQM has a reputation for strong control, sometimes including the use of force, violence and intimidation.” (Page 15)

Virtually every political pundit and every politician is of the opinion: bring MQM into mainstream politics. Frankly, it's exactly the wrong approach. Why? The answer is quite obvious, but for some reason it eludes the brightest political minds. It is a common knowledge that MQM is more than a political party; rather it's a cult that revolves around Altaf Hussain. If you remove Altaf, MQM will be left with only hundreds hooligans, also known as the party workers. Unlike other mainstream parties, like PPP and PML-N, the MQM has no middle tier or lower tier leadership. The joke is if you take away the phone, on which Altaf addresses his followers cum hostages, the party will cease to exist. The reality is not that far removed from the joke. Since Lord Altaf and his absconding cronies are luxuriously living abroad, the only way for them to issue their edicts is through phones and/or other electronic medium; sever the lines and the party will be left paralyzed, like a decapitated snake. Because the sole purpose of its leaderless-foot-soldiers in Pakistan is to enforce Lord Altaf's decrees to the letter.

However, what perplexes one's mind is the question, why no one in the mainstream media (electronic and newspapers) ever puts extremely vital questions to the MQM supporters:
1. Why the MQM is allowed to remain under the iron-grip of a British citizen, namely Altaf Hussain, who has also repeatedly renounced the creation of Pakistan?
2. Do they think Altaf Hussain should be tried for the crime of high-treason for renouncing the creation of Pakistan, asking the Indians to intervene in the Pakistani affairs, and that too in front of an Indian audience?
3. Why doesn't MQM leadership, especially Altaf Hussain return to Pakistan? His party was in the local, central and the Sindh governments for the last five years. The Army chief cum the President is also their ally; then what is he afraid of? Why these absconders haven't set a foot in Pakistan in last 18 years? Why don't they show their faces to their constituents?
4. If Altaf Hussain can fly over Pakistan to land in India to renounce the creation of Pakistan then would it have been too much trouble for him to land in Pakistan too to see his constituents for even couple of hours?
5. Why doesn’t MQM leadership renounce violence instead of issuing threats every other day?
6. Why do the Canadian government, EOM and the human rights organizations call MQM a terrorist party?
7. Do they think Mohajir Pakistanis deserve a competent and sincere leadership, or would they rather remain hostages to MQM's racist leaders, whose only job is to dictate the commands of a British national/agent at the gun-point?

One can understand why the media persons are afraid to put such questions directly to Lord Altaf, because their very lives may depend on his mood, but it's nothing short of hypocrisy of media for not laying these questions to the constituents or supporters of the MQM. Nevertheless, it is established that MQM/Altaf Hussain are synonymous with terror. Hardly a day goes by when Altaf doesn't issue threats, which reinforces the fact that he does not and will not part ways with politics of terror. Altaf is set in his ways of running MQM in the same manner as a Don of Mafia does. It is also obvious that the party’s survival depends on Altaf, and politics of division/racism and terrorism. Therefore, it is a totally useless idea to try to bring a person specific militant party into mainstream. What we need to do is, declare MQM as a defunct party, and most importantly to bring Karachiites back under the wings of mainstream parties, like they were before the MQM’s vicious reign of terror. If for any reason the Pakistani Mohajirs are skeptical of the so-called ‘Punjabi dominance’ then they can join parties like the PPP, which is well known for being open to the minorities and had won seats in all provinces.

Pakistan in large, and Karachi in specific, deserves a sigh of relief from MQM’s curse. The only practical way to break Karachi's curse is to read MQM its final rites. May Allah allow the party Dons rest in peace and luxury on Her Majesty's treasury.

http://www.asiantribune.com/?q=node/10675
http://www.thefrontierpost.com/News.aspx?ncat=ar&nid=168

2008-04-21T12:05:00.000-07:00

Best of Pakistani Political Drama

By Adnan Gill

One can always count on Pakistani politics for being full of entertainment. In fact, its twists and turns can not only rival but beat any of the Holly-Bollywood soap operas or action-packed thrillers. The political drama never fails to keep the pundits at the edge of their seats. The best part is, one doesn't have to know its 60 years old history to be entertained. One can jump in at any time and catch up with confidence, that still it will be packed with plenty of comedy, conspiracies, suspense, cheating, switching of partners, vulgarity, arm-twisting, backstabbing, murders, and unadulterated violence.

The roots of the latest drama go back to the time when President Musharraf vainly tried to sack the Chief Justice (CJ) of the Pakistani Supreme Court. Fast forward to October, 2007; assassination of Benazir Bhutto leaves a leadership vacuum in PPP. A behind the scenes power struggle starts within the PPP. Conspicuously, Ms. Bhutto's widower Asif Zardari produces a handwritten living will of Ms. Bhutto, according to which the crown was passed to him and his son, Billawal Zardari.

Through a LFO, General Musharraf clamps second martial-law on his own government, suspends the Constitution and the judiciary, gags the media, and throws some 4,500 perceived opponents into the jails. Unconstitutionally, gets himself reelected as the President for another five years. To guarantee his presidency’s survival, Musharraf signs an unprecedented ‘you scratch my back, and I will scratch yours’ deal, also known as the National Reconciliation Ordinance (NRO). Reluctantly, Musharraf transfers the Army command to General Kiayani. PPP goes through the February 18, national elections under the leadership of Asif Zardari to win 121 seats in the National Assembly, though far less than what political pundits were expecting.

In a stunning development, enraged voters threw out Musharraf's party (PML-Q) from the ruling benches. Rumor is: the credit for the humiliating defeat of PML-Q goes to General Kiayani for allowing free and fair elections to be held in Pakistan.

To the dismay of President Musharraf and his cronies, Nawaz Sharif's political party PML-N emerges as the second-largest winner with 91 seats in the National Assembly. PPP and PML-N, at least on the surface, decided to let the bygones be bygones by joining hands to form coalition governments in the center and in Punjab. PML-Q came at the third-place with 54 seats. MQM, ANP, MMA and PML-F secured 25, 13, 6 and 5 seats respectively; while independents won 18 seats.

Like the Kumbaya singing hippies from the 60s, the politicians were hugging each other like there was no tomorrow. Media elevated Asif Zardari to the status of Nelson Mandela. He was shown going from door to door to hug the leaders of every party in sight. He even remembered to pay homage to the powers to be in the US Embassy to thank them for keeping him in their good graces. Appreciating the complexities of new era in Pakistani politics, a parade of American diplomats also descended upon Islamabad to warn that their multi-billion dollar investments in the dictator would not be flushed down the drain.

Remember, the pesky little issue of sacking of Superior Court Judges? Yes, the one which started when President Musharraf vainly tried to sack Chief Justice Iftikhar Mohammed Chaudhry? It turns out; Justice Chaudhry was becoming a thorn in the sides of the Pakistani elite, including President Musharraf’s and the ex-Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz. Another rumor is, CJ was declared persona-non-grata when he started to look into affairs considered ‘none of his business,’ like the shady sales of multimillion Islamabad Farms, which were allegedly bought for pennies on a dollar. Originally, these farms were sold to the famers at subsidized rates, with the intent of supplying Islamabad with fresh poultry and produce. But oddly, the farms turned out to be an exclusive society of the Pakistani elite, who instead chose to build multi-million mansions on the subsidized farms.

Apparently, CJ’s cardinal sin was his word to the nation, that he will see to it, that for the first time in nation’s history, the court will dispense justice without any bias or prejudice, and according to the Constitution. The court was becoming independent. This meant: the court could have demanded the bureaucracy to justify their actions; the court could have declared General Musharraf’s second presidential term to be unconstitutional and illegal; the court could have ordered an inquiry into May 12, Karachi Massacre, or it could have ordered an inquiry into the mysterious disappearances of journalists who dared to report on the American attacks on the Pakistani civilians; the court could have released the extrajudicially incarcerated citizens; the court could have demanded explanations of why Pakistanis were being extrajudicially deported to Guantanamo or Saudi Arabia; and the worst, the court could have declared the infamous (party specific) NRO to be an illegal ordinance.

Naturally, there was too much at stake for too many players to have allowed the independent Judiciary to do its job. The euphoric hugging and new alliances were forming, not just for show, but they were for real, because almost everybody had their axe to grind against the Judiciary with the exception of PML-N. They had their own axe to grind, but not against the Judiciary, rather against the presidency. The only way for PML-N to have any chances of winning enough seats to make a difference was to capitalize on anti-Musharraf sentiments by jumping on the Lawyers Movement bandwagon. However, it boxed itself by taking up lawyers’ cause of the restoration of Independent Judiciary.

While PPP was hugging and shaking hands with everyone in the name of national reconciliation, in the background, it was contemplating on ways to sabotage the restoration of Judiciary. Obviously, restoration could have meant loss of billions of dollars for Mr. Zardari alone; so something had to be done to keep the PML-N from honoring its mandate. PPP released several trial balloons with nonstarters like ‘minus-one’ formula, meaning restored Judiciary with the exception of Chief Justice Chaudhry.

Since PML-N refused to budge from its stand on Judiciary, and Zardari’s dilemma of, on one hand honoring his promises made to the authors of much cherished NRO, and on the other hand loss of billions of dollars. Something had to be done to bypass PML-N’s stand. To the disappointment of PML-N, and to certain extent, to the disappointment of some of his own party members, Mr. Zardari made an appearance in the infamous Nine Zero MQM headquarters. Human rights organizations blame MQM for practicing politics at the barrel of gun. In a teleconference with its undisputed leader, Lord Altaf Hussain, Mr. Zardari extended his hand in friendship. All of this was done with lot of crocodile-tears and superficial drama. MQM, which has a history of becoming part of every government, only to backstab and demonize its partners later on, could not resist another opportunity to quench its thirst for power and plush ministries. Despite the fact, MQM website still calls PPP a terrorist organization (see: Altaf Hussain’s open letter to the people of Pakistan), despite the fact on May 12 dozens of PPP workers were killed by the MQM men, and despite the fact MQM was suspected to have a hand in the October 18 attack on Benazir Bhutto’s life, in which hundreds of PPP workers were cut down to shreds, but for some odd reason Mr. Zardari chose to become friends with the alleged murderers of his wife and his party workers.

Mr. Zardari stood at an impasse. Either he had to jeopardize his billions of dollars by breaking his promises made to the presidency, or he had to somehow marginalize PML-N. What better way to marginalize PML-N than establish a two thirds majority to veto PML-N’s every move? According to the current composition of the National Assembly, the magic number to establish 2/3 majority is 224. Since, PML-N held 1/3 of seats, Zardari had to scrape the bottom to come up with the magic number of 224. That is why he put up a dog-and-pony show of making mends with the MQM.

Evidently, Zardari’s idea of making mends with the MQM didn't go well even within his own party. At first, he promised MQM few lucrative ministries in the center and a bunch in the Sindh government. However, despite MQM’s public threats it realized, it had a chance of snow flake in hell of getting any ministries in the center, and later, it turned out they were swindled out of any ministries in the Sindh government too. Alas, MQM was left high and dry. MQM was stabbed in the back the way it had been stabbing others for the last two decades. Their so-called friend failed to deliver. The humiliation was too much to bear.

Plan, Marginalize PML-N failed to get off the ground. The freight train of the Lawyers Movement was barreling down the throats of strange bedfellows. The Presidency, MQM, PML-Q, and Zardari had to bring plan-B in motion to derail the Lawyers Movement. It was time for another dog-and-pony show. In a quick succession ex-chief Minister of Sindh Arbab Rahim and ex-Law and Parliamentary Affairs Minister Dr Sher Afgan Niazi were given a humiliating beating in front of live cameras. Even though, Dr. Afgan was rescued by the Lawyers Movement’s leader Aitzaz Ahsan, in a so-called reaction to the beatings by unknown men in whites, the offices of the lawyers and the Bar Counsel were burnt down in Mianwali.

Under the cover of protesting against the beatings of Arbab Rahim and Dr Sher Afgan, General Musharraf's strongest ally MQM decided to remind the newly formed government that the party which flexed its muscles on May 12 -- in which MQM cold-bloodedly murdered at least 40 political opponents -- was still strong enough to repeat the performance. In a premeditated attack, two busloads of MQM armed hoodlums in masks descended upon the lawyers offices in Karachi, where they burnt-alive at least five people in the lawyers’ chambers. By shooting some 40 civilians and killing 12 people, the power-hungry MQM sent a message: Sindh government will not be allowed to function unless MQM is also handed some lucrative ministries. Once again, instead of condemning the violence, General Musharraf unbelievably pinned the blame on the lawyers, like he did when Karachi suffered death and destruction on May 12 and when he threw his fists in the air declaring, people have shown their power.

But what is a drama without a healthy mix of comedy? In his typical style (reminiscent of Hitler’s style), for his party's failure to contain April 9 violence, MQM's Chief Altaf Hussain shed crocodile-tears and tendered his resignation, only to take it back within the next 60 minutes.

Pakistan's longest running soap opera is not over yet. Stay tuned!

http://www.asiantribune.com/?q=node/10583

2008-03-29T11:50:00.000-07:00

Where are Pakistan ’s Heroes?

By Adnan Gill

A nation's path to success and maturity can be measured by its performance in Olympics. More importantly, its character can be judged by how it treats its heroes. However, the nations determined to leave their mark on history turn their ordinary citizens into idols. India seems to have mastered the art of turning their zeros into the heroes. Regrettably, in a stark contrast, Pakistanis have mastered the art of disowning their genuine heroes. The Loin of Kargil, Capt. Karnal Sher Khan and Pakistan ’s father of nuclear bomb, Dr. A. Q. Khan are only couple of examples of Pakistan ’s knack for dishonoring its heroes.

Not too long ago, Pakistani President Musharraf on humanitarian grounds commuted the death sentence of a convicted Indian spy. Ansar Burney, the Pakistani Human Rights minister played a major role in securing Kashmir Singh’s freedom. Minister Burney ensured that Mr. Singh was seen-off to India with a huge fanfare. On the other side of the border, the Indians gave Kashmir Singh a heroes welcome. The hoopla was topped off by the Punjab (Indian) government’s announcement of a lifetime stipend, a house and job for his son for the jail time Kashmir Singh served for his country. As a token of gratitude to the Pakistanis, the moment Singh stepped into India , he mocked the Pakistanis and utterly embarrassed Ansar Burney by publicly announcing, he was indeed an Indian spy. Ironically, Kashmir Singh was an incompetent spy who miserably failed in executing his mission by getting caught, but that did not stop the Indians from turning their flop into a hero.

India must be on its way to leave its mark on history, because it has learned how to turn even their butchers into heroes. By any definition, Narendra Modi (who sat over the 2002 Gujarati massacre of 2,000 Muslims) and Bal Thackeray (the founder of an extremist Hindu party ‘Shiv Sena’, and a self-professed admirer of Adolf Hitler and Nazism) are racist bigots who openly hate Muslims and call for their elimination. Still they are virtually worshiped by a large of Indians who reelect them year after year.

It was 2003, barely a year after the 2002 Gujarat massacre, when the Indian cricket fans were granted visas in thousands to watch the cricket matches in Pakistan . In a heartening display of Pakistani hospitality the Indian fans were welcomed with open arms and open hearts into their homes. But how did the Indians return the favor? They blamed Pakistanis for every ill of theirs. Within hours of Bombay train bombings Pakistan was blamed. Within couple of hours of Samjhota Express bombings, in which dozens of Pakistanis were burnt alive, Indian authorities were pointing fingers at Pakistan .

However, a worst example of how Indians reciprocate gestures of kindness and friendship is when they returned a severely mutilated body of a Pakistani cricket fan. Khalid Mahmood, 30 years old, died on Feb 12 but his family in Pakistan was not informed about his terrible death till March 4. His dead body bore visible signs of horrendous torture he was put through by the Indian authorities. Just couple of months before Mr. Mahmood’s horrific death, he was visited by his elderly mother and a brother. He told them that he was routinely subjected to inhumane torture; among others: electric shocks, nail-pulling, and dowsed with the boiling-water. In a desperate effort to give a ray of hope to his shocked mother, he tried to put a happy face on the situation, by telling his mother that he is innocent, and at maximum, he will be forced to serve for another couple of years in jail.

To the credit of Aaj TVs host Talat Hussain, he is the only notable media personality who took exception to highlight Khalid Mahmood sad story and the plight of his grieving family. While rest of the major media remained obsessed with the endless political debates. For most of them, Khalid Mahmood’s violent death remained a side note. Sadly the Pakistani government also miserably failed to strongly protest the deliberate and malicious murder of its citizen. Only after the lone crusaders like Talat Hussain raised the issue to the national level; on March 10, the Pakistani Foreign Office spokesman Muhammad Sadiq mildly protested, “It is regrettable that India did not inform Pakistan ’s High Commission in New Delhi about the arrest of the deceased as required under international diplomatic norms in such cases.” Obviously such a protest was ‘too little too late’.

Needless to say, had an Indian met such a deplorable fate, their propaganda machine would have gone into overdrive. Indian government would have gone to the UN Security Council demanding apology and restitution for his family. For their part, Indian media would have moved heavens and earth to demonize Pakistan .

Since we carry short memories; this may be a good time to remind ourselves of how, during the Kargil conflict, the Indian government in perfect harmony with their media successfully elevated the sagging moral of their nation. Case in point, upon getting lost dozens of Indian soldiers wandered over to the Pakistani side of LOC. They died when they accidently fell into deep crevices; frequently found in the inhospitable Himalayas . In an example of humane gesture and at the risk to their lives, the brave Pakistani soldiers retrieved their severely lacerated bodies from the dark depths of crevices. Pakistanis returned their bodies with full military honors to the Indians. But who knew, Indians would play the dirty game of vicious propaganda of the dead bodies. Almost immediately, the Indian propaganda machine circulated malicious rumors that the bodies of their soldiers were intentionally mutilated and their body parts, like kidneys, were stolen by the Pakistanis. Certainly, such ingenious propaganda played a huge role in changing the world opinion against the Pakistanis. Indeed, it was a humongous public-relations coup against the dumbfounded Pakistanis.

The point is not to follow Indian example of capitalizing on vicious lies, but it's about unanimously standing behind and honoring every single Pakistani citizen who meets an unfortunate fate outside or for the Pakistan . This begs the question, where are the Pakistani heroes? Why do we consistently fail to make Capt. Karnal Sher Khans and Khalid Mahmoods our heroes whom we can rally around?

http://www.asiantri/ bune.com/?q=node/10191
http://www.thefront/ ierpost.com/ News.aspx?ncat=ar&nid=195

Articles by Adnan Gill

2008-03-20T20:17:00.000-07:00

2008-03-20T20:11:00.000-07:00

MQM, Business as Usual!

By Adnan Gill

Since the February 18 elections, a spate of threats emanating from the highest circles of MQM have served as a rude reminder that the party is still running its business as usual, i.e. meeting their goals through arm-twisting, intimidation, scaremongering and/or naked violence. Fairly or unfairly, Human Rights organizations and the majority of Pakistanis blamed MQM for orchestrating and executing the May 12 Karachi Carnage. Astonishingly, it's if the MQM overlords haven't learned a thing from the severe backlash they received from the May 12 Carnage. Its gung-ho leadership continues with its hallmark heavy-handed tactics to convince or coarse their political foes.

As soon as MQM comes across a perceived hurdle, it tries to bulldoze through it with brute force. Ironically, despite its history of sorting matters through violent means, it's patrons in the West shamelessly project MQM as a secular and a moderate political party. Even though there are several criminal convictions against MQM's undisputed lord Altaf Hussain, still he is afforded security and luxury in London: courtesy of Her Majesty’s government, the United Kingdom. Never mind, if he is held squarely responsible for the massacre of thousands of Pakistani citizens. In a prime example of hypocrisy and violation of international laws, in February 2001, Mr. Hussain who is believed to be one of the worst terrorist, was granted British citizenship with full civil, constitutional rights and privileges available to all British citizens. By granting him British citizenship, the UK violated several international laws, like UNSC Res: 1189 (section 5) and 1368. Why a British citizen so intimately linked with terrorism and a person who has renounced the creation of Pakistan (that too in front of Indian audience) is allowed to run Pakistan 's fourth largest political party is a million-dollar question!

However, neither the majority of Pakistanis nor the human rights organizations share West’s pristine view of the MQM. In a 2007 press release, Brad Adams, Asia director at Human Rights Watch, disputed western establishment’ s portrayal of the MQM. Mr. Adams said, “The political crisis deepened on May 12, when 42 people died in violence fomented by activists of the Mutahedda Qaumi Movement (MQM)”. He disclosed, in order to silence its critics, the MQM frequently resorts to intimidation through death threats. He said, “Mohajir Rabita Council (MRC), an affiliate of the MQM, issued a statement naming 12 eminent Pakistani journalists as ‘enemies.’” Finally, Mr. Adams commented on the long history of human rights abuses by the MQM, “The MQM has a long record of political harassment, extortion, torture and targeted killings”

MQM's lust for power is only rivaled by its founding leader’s iron grip on the party. Even though Mr. Hussain, a British citizen and a taxi driver turned politician, has not set a foot in Pakistan in the last 18 years, yet he remains the overlord of the party. Curiously, he manages to fly over Pakistan to land in India only to renounce the creation of Pakistan , but for some conspicuous reason he can’t find heart to stop by in Pakistan for even few hours. Nevertheless, he enjoys a decent following among the Mohajir Pakistanis from Karachi and Hyderabad . His critics allege, it's because people are forced at the barrel of gun to follow his edicts.

As soon as the 2008 election results became apparent, in its lust for plushy and lucrative ministries, MQM was back at what it does the best, blackmailing and extortion. Once again it tried to muscle its way through by demanding to become a coalition partner of the incoming government. In his typical style, reminiscent of Adolf Hitler's fiery sermons, Lord Hussain led the campaign of intimidation. He threatened, “It will be dangerous for Sindh if certain groups do not respect the mandate of the people.” In an apparent threat to Pakistan People’s Party (the overwhelming winner in Sindh, especially in the rural Sindh), he said, Sindh would face confrontation because ‘certain groups’ were trying to create an urban and rural division in the province. Translation: there will be violence if you left MQM out of the incoming government.

Taking a cue from their Lord's opening shot, his lieutenants backed up Lord Hussain’s campaign of intimidation with their own. The City Nazim Syed Mustafa Kamal said that Karachi can face law and order situation if MQM was not included in the new government set-up. To score the point home, MQM presented a sample to highlight their resolve to backup their words with actions. When PPP’s candidate from PS-110 Habib Jan tried to meet the hospitalized men injured in a shootout in which four people were wounded, and an eight-year-old girl and a man were killed, eyewitnesses reported, armed MQM men surrounding the Civil Hospital roughed up and then fired on Mr. Jan.

Then in a follow-up to his initial threats, Lord Hussain again warned, “The MQM does not want war. This is 2008 and we are ready to give our lives but not ready to surrender or retreat.” Evidently, Lord Hussain had been under the impression that in the 2008 Democratic system too the number of seats don't matter, it's the ‘bully factor’ which matters. Apparently, that is how the MQM had been able to become a coalition partner in the past governments, but this time PPP was in no mood to give in to the threats of unadulterated violence, especially not after MQM's stellar performance in the May 12 Carnage. However, perhaps inadvertently, Lord Hussain confirmed MQM's frequent indulgence in violence and terrorism. He lashed out, “Do not push us against the wall. If anything happens tomorrow, do not hold us responsible. We are against violence and terrorism but we are also human beings and we will never compromise on our self-respect, dignity and honor.”

It is anybody's guess, why the backlash from the May 12 Carnage failed to jolt the MQM leadership out of their deep slumber into the reality, that the days of getting business done through intimidation and pure violence are long gone. They need to listen to their voters’ voice, that they are tired of divisive politics. They are tired of their political leaders who constantly demand unbelievable sacrifices from ordinary workers, but the overlords don't part with the luxury they have accustomed themselves to. They are tired of the leaders safely and comfortably sitting in the West expecting their party workers to do Lord’s dirty work and bare the brunt of retributions resulting from the sins of their overlords. They are tired of the politicians who thrive on pitting Pakistanis against each other on their sectarian and ethnic differences. No longer, do they want to be Balochis, Sindhis, Pathans, Punjabis or the Mohajirs, they just want to be plain Pakistanis. They are tired of violence and killings. They couldn't care less who sits in the assemblies or who gets what ministry. They are more concerned about who can provide them the basic necessities of life, like electricity, atta, and security for their families.

If the MQM overlords are genuinely concerned with the well-being of Pakistanis then they need to stop running their business as usual, part with the security and luxury afforded to them by the foreign-powers, return to Pakistan and serve their constituents without packing a gun in their back pockets.

http://www.thefrontierpost.com/News.aspx?ncat=ar&nid=177

2008-03-03T10:49:00.000-08:00

Stay or Not to Stay in Iraq?

By Adnan Gill

Stay or not to stay in Iraq is the question that may very well decide who will be the next American president? The Republican presidential candidate John McCain wants to continue Bush administration's Iraqi policy, while the Democratic hopefuls want to pull the American troops out almost immediately. The Republicans believe prematurely pulling out of Iraq would amount to giving in to the terrorists, who will follow the Americans to the United States. For their part, the Democrats argue that the Iraqi war is unwinnable that is eating up precious American resources. Before answering the question about staying or not staying in Iraq, it maybe helpful to glance over how Americans got stuck in the Iraqi war and what's at stake now?

Like a scene out of a Cowboy movie, one fine day in May 2003, the Texan cowboy dismounted his Navy S-3B Viking on the deck of USS Abraham Lincoln. In the background, the tower was adorned with a banner that read, "Mission Accomplished." Like a victorious emperor, the US President George Bush declared, "major combat operations in Iraq have ended."

From that day onward, in ironic twists after twists, the glorious victory in Iraq kept turning into violent chaos, and finally into what many called a ‘civil war’. The Anglo-American invasion was immediately followed by an Iraqi resistance, led by the Baathist and Shi’ite groups like Muqtada al-Sadr’s militia. It was a nationalistic response to a foreign occupation. Ominously, the resistance turned into a bloody civil war. Like an ostrich with its head in sand, the Bush Administration vainly tried to mask their failures in Iraq with clichés like "freedom is winning", “Freedom's untidy”, insurgency is in its “last throes,” and “staying the course.”

Neither attacking nor occupying Iraq made the Middle East a bastion of democracy, nor did Saddam’s death bring any respite to the chaos and mayhem spewing out of Iraq. Regardless of how sincere Bush Administration’s decision to invade Iraq was, the bitter truth is over $500 billion, half-million dead Iraqis, and some 4,000 American casualties later, the Iraqi misadventure could turn into a war of civilizations. By the virtue of Middle East being the major energy supplier, the Iraqi misadventure could even trigger the Third World War.

As bad as Bush’s mess is, everyone knows that if Americans would leave Iraq now, the country would be dismembered into at least three states. A Kurdish state in the north, a Shi’ite one in the south, and a Sunni state in the middle and west. While the oil-plush Shi’ite and Kurdish states would enjoy their "freedom", the Sunnis believe they would lose more than just the oil revenues. Sunnis fear, a Shi’ite Iraq atop the most prized oil reserves would create a Shi’ite rule in a broad crescent across the Middle-East. Shi’ite governments will stretch from Iran through Iraq and Syria into Lebanon.

Iran and Syria are said to be already turning Iraq into the first Arab-Shia state. Testifying before a House International Relations Subcommittee the (then) Undersecretary of State for Arms Control and International Security John Bolton insisted that there are strong indicators Syria is assisting the anti-coalition forces in Iraq.

A 40-page security report by the ‘Saudi National Security Assessment Project’ suggested Iran has effectively created a “state within a state” in Iraq, which is providing logistical support to the armed Shi’ite groups. The repot added, while monetarily supporting pro-Iranian Iraqi politicians, the Iranian military is supporting the Shi’ite militias with weapons and training too. The report described the armed wing of the Badr organization as the “key vehicle Iran is using to achieve its military security and intelligence aims.” The (Iraqi) SCIRI party even announced plans to set up a separate Shi’ite state in southern Iraq, modeled after the existing Kurdish state.

Likewise, Sunni states like Saudi Arabia announced, that in case the Americans left Iraq prematurely, they would support the Iraqi Sunni population, because they don’t want to see a contiguous Shia belt encircling them. In a Washington Post article Nawaf Obaid, a Saudi government adviser warned, if America prematurely left Iraq, "one of the first consequences will be massive Saudi intervention to stop Iranian-backed Shiite militias from butchering Iraqi Sunnis." Month before that, the (then) Saudi ambassador to the US, Prince Turki al-Faisal, in no-uncertain terms intimated the Americans, that "since America came into Iraq uninvited, it should not leave Iraq uninvited."

The Kurds who live in Iraq, Turkey, Syria and Iran have long aspired for a Kurdish state, but none of the regional states support their ambition. Turkey and Syria have made it abundantly clear that they will not allow creation of a Kurdish state carved out of Iraq. Ankara fears that an independent Kurdish state in Iraq could also engulf Turkey’s Kurdish regions.

Syria too shares the Turkish concerns. Kurdish state carved out of a fractured Iraq is a “red line” for Syria. In 2004, the Syrian Prime Minister Naji al-Otri warned, the creation of an independent Kurdish state in Northern Iraq would mean the violation of the “red line” for Syria. While visiting Ankara, the Syrian President Bashar Assad also cautioned, "We condemn all approaches that pose a threat to Iraq's territorial integrity."

Turkey blames the war in Iraq for rekindling separatist Kurdish aspirations throughout the region. It is disappointed over the US refusal to take on the PKK insurgents in Iraq, despite Washington's designation of PKK as a terrorist organization. When the Turkish Kurds in the Southeast abandoned the unilateral cease-fire and resumed their fight for independence, the Turkish military attacked the Kurdistan Workers Party insurgents in Kurdish-dominated Northern Iraq.

Turks have consistently warned against the division of Iraq. Its foreign minister warned, "There are those who think that dividing Iraq might be better, that this chaos might end... This is what we say: Don't even think of [such] an alternative because that would lead Iraq toward new chaos." Then he alluded to the possibility of Iraqi conflict turning into an international one, "It would become not only Iraq's problem but the world's problem."

The events unfolding in the Middle-East are matter of serious concern for the global community, but inevitably they are America’s problems as well. If Iraq breaks up, it will drive millions of refugees across its borders. The refuges will bring with them their grievances and weapons. Critiques argue, the Iraqi war has a potential of turning into a regional conflict that could draw Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Iran and perhaps other regional powers as well into the madness.

Contrary to the suggestions of the Democratic presidential hopefuls, America cannot simply wash off its hands from Iraq and go home. It would be difficult to argue against the fact that the Bush Administration is squarely responsible for the Iraqi mayhem. But what is done is done. Now it’s in everybody’s interest to give a chance to the Americans to cleanup the Bush administration’s mess. American ‘Troop Surge’ and their realignment with the Sunni tribes are showing positive signs of stemming indiscriminate violence in Iraq. Reportedly, now there is notably less violence in Iraq than a year ago, particularly sectarian murders. According to the architect of the surge, Army Gen. David Petraeus, the number of Iraqis killed in sectarian violence has fallen by 80%, while the civilian killings are down by an estimated 65%.

If America leaves now, when for the first time since the Iraqi occupation the violence is in downward trend, the insurgents and foreign operators could be back within hours. It would be suicidal to pull the American troops out; as promised by the Senator Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton.

Maybe, one day, the historians will be able to answer: what or who convinced President Bush to open the Iraqi Pandora’s Box? But for whatever its worth, he seems to be smart enough to understand the pottery barn rule, ‘you broke it, you bought it’. Hopefully, the next American president will give President Bush’s policy of troop surge a chance to work. After all, the alternative would be too dangerous, and this maybe the only Bush policy the historians may look upon with kindness.

http://thepost.com.pk/Previuos.aspx?dtlid=147459&src=Adnan%20Gill&date=02/03/2008
http://pakobserver.net/Articles04.asp
http://www.asiantribune.com/?q=node/9842

2008-02-24T12:22:00.000-08:00

MQM'S ELECTION RIGGING IN KARACHI NA-250 AND NA-242

Would you believe the videos were removed last night? Then someone else uploaded them. Now PTCL has blocked Youtube in Pakistan. Then the person who had uploaded the videos, their ACCOUNT on Youtube was somehow terminated. The account was by the name Ikhtiar Baig - opposing the MQM candidate in that constituency, who you might have heard was fired on. There sadly remains only one more video now
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WbpWPoWeG_g Only over a small rigging video, the MQM would have PTCL and other providers block Youtube in Pakistan...what kind of mafia is this?To think they can terminate accounts on an international websites like Youtube...no matter how powerful you consider them, it is underestimating.

MQM has pressured the PTA into banning YouTube... Further proof of this is that even the users who uploaded the videos have removed them from the site!

But we have managed to get one of the videos out.. you can watch it here!
http://www.naitazi.%20com/2008/%2002/23/mqm-%20election-%20rigging-videos-%20works-without-%20youtube/

A Letter to UQAAB by an Eyewitness to MQM Rigging in NA 250 and NA-242, please excuse the English but we wanted to present it to preserve its authenthicity

I was whole day on my field visits polling station of SM law coledge NA250 Presiding officer stamped 400 fake ballet paper in favour of MQM in front of our journalist team, we are enforced for shutting & closeing the eyes ohhhhhhhh dear......oh my goodnesswhen we approched NA 242 FB Area people said when they enter into poling booth to cast vote a person with a badge of MQM's Altaf block every one snached ballet paper & than voters were told by this person "to go back on their way so we count your vote but on according our will so thanks but no thanks ............ ....." Ahmed Mustafa, Karachi, Pakistan

RIGGING BY PPP IN NA-250 ELECTIONS 2008

MQM rigging in Karachi
BLOCKED AND DELETED VIDEOS ABOUT ELECTION RIGGING FROM YOUTUBE (Please note they are gone from YOUTUBE)

The only channel brave enough to play these videos has been Dawn News in Pakistan.It would obviously be too much to ask that pro-MQM channels like Geo and ARY play, or even mention rigging by MQM. Turn the volume up. Open rigging. 8+ ballot papers being given to EACH MQM voter, all the votes having the same fingerprint on them!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j444heT4o14
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6TPUHHFky38Listen to the part where the undercover woman says about ID card numbers, "ID card number koyi bhi daal dein, kis nay check kerna hai?", and the voting officer says, "Jo kerta hai ker lay check! Hehe!"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=luPQfvR2R2Y

Courtesy: http://www.pakistanthinktank.org/default.php/p/articles/pk/1265

2008-02-17T21:36:00.000-08:00

Pakistani Elections: New Slogans, Same Players - Same Games

By Adnan Gill

First time in Pakistan's history a democratically elected government finished its constitutionally mandated time of 5 years. First time in Pakistan's history people are about to elect a successive civilian government without the interruption from the military. For his part, President Musharraf has fulfilled his promise of bringing ‘true democracy’ to Pakistan, a self-professed 3-phase process he started after October 1999 coup. So would it seem that way! However, reality begs to differ with what Musharraf government would love everyone to believe.

President Musharraf, then the Army Chief, unconstitutionally mounted a military coup against a democratically elected Prime Minister, Nawaz Sharif. Angels of mercy smiled on the much castrated General and he became the poster boy of the Americans in a post 9/11 era. 9/11 which brought pain and sorrow to the Americans became a saving grace for the General.

Suddenly, every world leader wanted to pose for a picture with him and wanted to look away as General Musharraf changed the rules of game to consolidate his power. He tinkered with, ripped apart, trashed, bent, added, and slashed Pakistani constitution at will to disqualify any candidates of his disliking and to quantify candidates of his choosing for the 2002 elections.

As a result, he successfully broke Pakistan's two largest political parties, namely the Pakistan People's Party (PPP) and the Pakistan Muslim League (PML). The opportunist party deserters formed their own government with the blessings of General Musharraf. This was also the first time in Pakistan's history that any religious party was able to secure enough seats to form their own governments in 2 of 4 Pakistani provinces.

It was a time when everyone wanted to scratch everyone else's back for their own selfish motives. General Musharraf saw a golden opportunity to legitimize his military rule. He pounced on the opportunity by securing a two thirds majority vote that legalized him as an elected President. Religious parties played a big role in legalizing his military rule in return for his promise to vacate the Chief of Army Staff office in 2004. The promise was effectively broken by the General in due time. Meanwhile, Musharraf's party, PML-Q became the king's party under the patronage of Chaudhry Brothers and in alliance with Pakistan's third largest political party, MQM.

General Musharraf did not need the alliance with the religious parties, as by that time, these parties managed to fall off the graces of the powers to be, Americans to be precise. But luck would have it; the General once again found himself alone at the crossroads and needed political allies to get him reelected for the second term. He knew certain factions in religious parties would not leave him high and dry, so he once again turned to his trusted ally Maulana Fazlur Rehman. Maulana, who was by then a member of All Parties Democratic Movement (APDM)/opposition, saw an opportunity for his own personal benefits and decided to backstab the APDM by giving an opportunity to get General Musharraf reelected.

By that time, only one hurdle remained in Musharraf's smooth sailing of rest of his second term. At the cost of General's popularity, the restored Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry had gained a popular rock star status. Even worse, the Supreme Court was in the process of deliberating on the legality of General running for the office of the President. General Musharraf fearing an unfavorable verdict mounted a second military coup through a Legal Framework Order that effectively suspended the already disfigured Pakistani constitution. General Musharraf took that opportunity to settle political scores by gagging the free-media, by suspending country's highest judiciary, by arresting and jailing opposition party leaders, lawyers, human rights workers, and anyone else he deemed undesirable. At one time, there were approximately 4500 political prisoners rotting in the Pakistani jails.

At the same time, increasingly unpopular General was also coming under tremendous pressure from the West, UK and US in particular, to accommodate PPP's leader Benazir Bhutto in the Pakistani political system. The pressure was so tremendous that he publicly signed a "National Reconciliation Ordinance" with Ms. Bhutto, effectively forsaking and unforgiving any or all legal cases and investigations against her and other Pakistani elites. It was widely believed, that Ms. Bhutto had also struck a seat-adjustment deal with PML-N’s leader Nawaz Sharif. At the time, there was another rumor going around that together PPP and PML-N would sweep the Pakistani elections easily securing at least two third majority; which was the magic number required to remove President Musharraf.

But nature had other plans for Ms. Bhutto, who lost her life in a terrorist attack. Then and even now Ms. Bhutto’s party is widely believed to be in position to win the elections in a landslide. Even though, there are foreign observers, including 112 European Union observers present in Pakistan to monitor the elections, popular belief is 2008 elections are going to be anything but fair and transparent.

To give credence to the popular belief, just a few days ago, the Human Rights Watch released an audio recording allegedly of Pakistan's Attorney General Malik Qayyum in which he too admitted that there would be massive rigging of the elections.

Political pundits believe, virtually everyone up for reelection from King's party, the MQM, religious parties, and the President himself severely lack popular support to be reelected; so rigging the polls is their best chance to return to the government. President Musharraf knows if the opposition would happen to win with two third majority, his days of presidency will be numbered. For him, the best scenario would be a hung parliament.

When all is said and done, PPP along with PML-N, with or without sympathy vote for Ms. Bhutto, are at the verge of massive victory in the polls. But that would spell the end for the king's party, and most probably for the king himself too, which in its all likelihood they will not allow to happen; so what if it takes massive rigging to save one's own skin?

Most formidable political challenger is dead, while some are in jails. Opposition’s political rallies had been systematically bombed and sabotaged, while government machinery remained at king’s party’s disposal; who said, Pakistani elections are going to be anything but fair and transparent?

http://www.asiantribune.com/?q=node/9663

2008-02-08T16:04:00.000-08:00

American healthcare system

By Adnan Gill

Each year the UN publishes a report known as the Human Development Index (HDI). It is a report card that grades the standards of life in 177 nations. Three dimensions are used to measure human development: life expectancy, education, and Purchasing Power Parity (PPP per capita)/income. The US is one of the richest nations that enjoys the PPP of US $ 41,890, only second to Luxembourg (PPP US $ 60,228). Despite its 13 plus trillion dollar economy, it is placed at the 12th place on the HDI.

One of the major reasons why the world’s largest economy was placed at the embarrassing 12th place was its commitment to health of its citizens: resources, access and services. According to the 2007/2008 HDI report, Iceland received the coveted first place on the HDI. Iceland, whose PPP is $ 36,510, spent 8.3 percent of its GDP on the healthcare whereas the US spent a meagre 6.9 percent of its GDP on healthcare. What really separated the two apart was the disproportional life expectancy rate at birth. In Iceland, the life expectancy at birth is 81.5 percent while the same in the US it is 77.9 percent. Paradoxically, a country that spends about 50 percent ($ 450 billion) of the world’s total military spending ($ 910.6 billion) is awarded a dismal 31st place, out of 177 nations, for the mortality rate.

The US is the only industrialised nation in the world that lacks some form of universal healthcare. Roughly 60 percent Americans have access to health insurance through employers and the workers’ contributions. An estimated, 47 million Americans remain uninsured. Health insurance in the US remains very expensive. The ever-increasing insurance premiums outpace the inflation rate, which is unduly burdening the employers and consumers.

According to a study on health, half of personal bankruptcies in the US involve medical bills.

The ominous condition of US healthcare system also stands out when compared to its northern neighbour — Canada. In 2000, the World Health Organization ranked the American healthcare system’s performance at 72nd and Canadian’s at 35th place out of 191 member nations. In 2004, America spent double the amount ($ 6,096 per-capita) on its healthcare system than what Canada did ($ 3,038).

The jury is still out on whose system is better. But it will be hard to overlook certain undeniable facts, like health insurance and drugs, which are much more expensive in the US than in Canada. Supporters of the US healthcare system allege that Americans get bigger bang for their buck. In other words, the medical care in the US is superior to what is available in Canada.

However, the critics retort that what good is the superior medical care if it is not available to 47 million Americans, to begin with? Critics also allege that the American system favours the special interests of those quarters that are more interested in profits rather than the patients, such as pharmaceutical giants and health insurance companies.

Ironically, Americans find that it is much cheaper to re-import prescription drugs from Canada. On average, the Canadian drugs cost as low as one-eighth of the US prices. That is why, in an effort to reduce the healthcare costs, some of the US states are also contemplating on re-importing drugs from Canada. The burden of expensive drugs mostly falls on the elderly and the disabled, many of whom live on fixed incomes and are forced to choose between prescription drugs that can prolong their lives and the immediate necessities of life like rent, food, heat, electric power, telephone service, etc. Consequently, for the last one decade or more, the Americans have been crossing the Canadian border for getting lower-cost prescription drugs.

The mere fact that Americans are forced to travel to Canada in busloads to re-import prescription drugs is a sad commentary on the dysfunctional American healthcare system. It should raise red flags for the policymakers that the system is in dire need to be rescued lest every American have the same chances of surviving an ailment as the citizens of any other industrialized nation do.

http://thepost.com.pk/Previuos.aspx?dtlid=143445&src=Adnan%20Gill&date=08/02/2008

2008-02-04T10:19:00.000-08:00

Her march into history

By Adnan Gill

OPEN a newspaper or tune in a news channel and odds of Pakistan being in the headlines are at least 50-50. But Dec 27, 2007, would sadly be immortalised in the annals of history.

It is the day when the leader of Pakistan’s largest political party, Benazir Bhutto, was assassinated. Despite the fact that Ms Bhutto was not a sitting prime minister, her assassination would be remembered as an event that shook the world, just like the assassination of US President John F. Kennedy did decades ago.

Who is to be blamed for her brutal assassination would be debated for a long time, but there is little doubt that her untimely death will shake the foundations of Pakistan. The gravity and the magnitude of the tragedy could be judged from the fact that virtually every single news media outlet was exclusively focused on her assassination. The news of her death triggered the sell offs on the Wall Street, dipping the stocks deep into negative territory. In impromptu press conferences world leaders like the US President Bush and UN General Secretary Ban Ki-Moon did not lose a moment in condemning her assassination.

It would be hard to imagine how the Musharraf government could have had any role in Ms Bhutto’s assassination; because even a person with marginal intelligence could foresee how even a hint of the government’s complicity in the crime would spell the end of Musharraf’s rule. And still, at minimum, Ms Bhutto’s assassination will write the final chapter of Musharraf’s rule.

Benazir Bhutto was the daughter of Pakistan’s first-elected Prime Minister Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto. Media savvy Ms Bhutto was considered to be a contemporary political genius rivalling the likes of President Bill Clinton. Outside the political arena, Ms Bhutto was widely believed to be a devout mother and a sincere wife. Regardless of one’s political differences, millions upon millions of Pakistanis revered the daughter of Pakistan for the distinction of becoming the first ever female prime minister of a male-dominated Muslim country. One can criticise her for the way she ran her governments in her two terms, but one cannot deny her invaluable services in strengthening the roots of democracy in Pakistan. She proved her resolve by courageously standing her ground in the face of not one but two military dictators. There is hardly any doubt that had she lived long enough, she would have swept the Pakistani elections, but her untimely exit at the verge of political victory over a military dictator will earn her political immortality. History will see to it that Benazir Bhutto’s name will be written alongside the names of political giants like Sir Winston Churchill and John F. Kennedy.

I may add here on a personal note that I have been a hard-hitting critic of Benazir Bhutto’s party and her political career. But I believe in defeating or marginalising a politician through votes or arguments, and not through violence or the cowardly act of suicide bombing. The only time I spoke directly to her was on CNN’s Larry King Live show in the mid-90s. She was kind and courteous to address my concerns in detail. She left me impressed by the depth and clarity of her knowledge.

Rest well, rest well daughter of the east. May your ultimate sacrifice bring sanity and peace in the lives of tired and grieving Pakistanis.

http://www.dawn.com/2007/12/29/op.htm#2

2008-01-31T12:51:00.000-08:00

Why Secure Only Pakistani Nukes?

By Adnan Gill

For last few months, Pakistan's sovereignty and the security of her nuclear arsenal has become the lightning rod for the American opinion-makers, especially for its presidential hopefuls. Pakistan has become the litmus test to grade the foreign policy expertise of the White House hopefuls. Impending presidential elections are only increasing the hysteria of nuclear-armed Pakistan becoming a ‘failed state’ vis-à-vis its nuclear weapons falling in the hands of blood-thirsty Muslim fundamentalists. The candidates are trampling over each other over who can scare the dickens out of Americans the most?

The Republican candidate, Mike Huckabee made a fool out of himself, when instead of commenting on Benazir Bhutto’s assassination, he decided to scare the Americans of the Pakistani bogeyman. He warned, “There were more Pakistanis who illegally crossed the border than of any other nationality except for those immediately south of our border. 660 last year. That’s a lot of illegals from Pakistan.” Such an irresponsible and baseless xenophobic alarm was sounded by a candidate who preaches tolerance.

For his part, the Democrat hopeful Barack Obama warned that he might use force in Pakistan to root out terrorists in their country. But the cake for upping the scaremongering goes to Hillary Clinton. Last year, she refused to rule out the use of nuclear weapons against Osama bin Laden or other terrorists in Afghanistan and Pakistan. Then this year she went even a step further by proposing a joint US-British team to oversee the security of Pakistan's nuclear arsenal, as if they were Iraqi oilfields.

The threat to Pakistani sovereignty hardly comes from the irresponsible statements of the presidential hopefuls. These politicians are only capitalizing on the steady drumbeat of American media and the think-tanks (mostly funded by the special-interests). The systematic ratcheting up of hysteria started when a new map of the Middle East, making circles among the opinion-makers, was leaked to the public. Among other nations, it showed a fractured Pakistan too. Soon thereafter, American news media was buzzing with the statements of undisclosed American officials about plans drawn to secure Pakistani nuclear weapons. Then out of nowhere, the Newsweek declared Pakistan as the most dangerous nation. The New York Times, The Washington Post, and other American media outlets started their own fear-derbies to win the race of ‘who can make Pakistan look the scariest?’ If we didn't know any better, the fear mongers would make us believe that the Taliban armed with the captured Pakistani nukes are on their way to the American continent.

If we were to look beyond the political rhetoric and empty bravado of the White House hopefuls we come to a sad reality, that American presidents are enslaved to the advice of special-interests, who actually form the American foreign policies. These special-interests range from oil industry mega giants to the defense conglomerates. President Bush had virtually nil foreign-policy experience when he became the president, but thanks to these special-interests, as soon as he became the president, isolating China became the focus of his government's foreign policy. Soon after, it shifted to an obsession with the oil-plush Iraq.

Even when the American establishment seemingly shows its confidence in the stability of Pakistan, it leaves a door wide-open for fear mongers. Recently, in an interview with the Washington Post, the CIA director Michael Hayden said, "We've always viewed [al-Qaeda and insurgents] to be an ultimate danger to the United States, but now it appears that it is a serious base of danger to the current well-being of Pakistan." Translation, Pakistan has become an unstable nation.

Lately, Pakistan has experienced an unprecedented number of terrorist attacks and unrest in its historically volatile tribal-belt. But how these law-and-order situations make the Pakistani nuclear arsenal accessible to the terrorists or tribals is a mystery at best? If a parallel could be drawn between the terrorist activities and the insecurity of Pakistani nuclear weapons, then arguably, the nuclear arsenal of virtually every nuclear power should be secured by a global authority.

In the last 15 years, thousands of Americans have lost their lives to the terrorists, does that mean, thousands of American nuclear weapons are about to fall in the hands of terrorists? In the 80s, when the IRA attacks on both British civilians and government were at their height, why the US did not secure Great Britain’s nukes? Maybe the fear mongers could also explain why the French nuclear weapons were not secured when the North African insurgency against the French was at its peak? Conversely, the US and its European allies should also secure Indian nuclear arsenal too; as India is bleeding from at least 50 separatist movements, and over 45% or 2/5 of Indian territory is literally under the influence of Naxalite or other separatists. Similarly, they may also want to explain, why tens of thousands of Russian nuclear weapons are anymore secure than Pakistan's; as Russia is mired in the Chechen insurgency and thousands of its jobless nuclear scientists are in the market willing to work for anyone, for as little as $100 per month?

Last but not least, the tiny nation of Israel experiences far more suicide bombings, separatist attacks, and assassinations from ultraconservative Jewish groups than anyone else. This begs the question, which American will dare to even suggest securing Israeli nuclear arsenal?

http://thepost.com.pk/Previuos.aspx?dtlid=140590&src=Adnan%20Gill&date=24/01/2008

2008-01-30T10:54:00.000-08:00

Pakistan’s Curse

Adnan Gill, Arab News

Pakistan is cursed in many ways; rampant corruption, religious and ethnic divisions, religious extremism, feudalism, social disparity, frequent military rules, corrupt bureaucracy, and the worst, most corrupt politicians. This is not to pin blame on any one politician; rather it’s to highlight the inefficiencies of seemingly rudderless Musharraf government and the rest of political leadership. Their torpid inefficiencies range from opening Pandora’s box by needlessly igniting cover-up theories, to failing to protect public and personal properties throughout the Pakistan.

Just when seas appear to be calming down for clear sailing, somehow, someway, the Musharraf government manages to steer up a storm. Musharraf government has developed a knack for snatching the defeat out of hands of the Angels of Mercy. Since March 9, the Musharraf government can’t tell the head from the tail. Its, one after the other, blundering decisions have won it utter embarrassment and notoriety of the worst kind. The latest feathers in Musharraf’s cap are the back-to-back reversals of his Interior Ministry’s statements on what caused Benazir Bhutto’s death. President Musharraf had to address the nation to cover Interior Ministry’s humongous faux pas. The blunder forced him to grudgingly invite Scotland Yard to investigate Benazir Bhutto’s assassination, which he would have never agreed to, had his top-heavy bureaucrats hadn’t shot his feet off so thoroughly.

The Musharraf government could have weathered the storm by simply laying low for a few days. But the government stirred the hornets’ nest by unnecessarily hairsplitting and disputing the pervasive theory on what killed Benazir Bhutto? Had Musharraf’s overzealous bureaucrats kept their mouth shut, his government would have been criticized for incompetence and dereliction of duty; but now it has to defend itself against the allegations of its hand in the murder of Benazir Bhutto and then the ensuing up. On the morning of Dec., the day after Benazir Bhutto was assassinated the Interior Ministry told the Associated Press of Pakistan (APP) that she died of a gunshot wound to her neck. Later in the evening, the Interior Ministry changed its earlier statement. It told APP that flying shrapnel from a suicide bomb killed her and that she suffered no injuries from bullets shot at her. At this point, the government could have still caught its balance by refusing to give out any more details on the possible causes of her death, till after a bipartisan investigation submits its initial findings. Yet hours later, in yet another reversal, Interior Ministry’s spokesman Brig. Javed Iqbal Cheema declared that Benazir Bhutto died after fracturing her skull on a sunroof latch.

Rule of thumb is, stop shooting if you have already shot one of your feet off. Apparently, the government wasn’t satisfied with playing musical chairs with its statements, Brig. Cheema decided to open and shut the case by pinning the blame on the Baitullah Mahsud and his motives behind murdering Benazir Bhutto.

Probably, by trying to belittle the gravity of the situation, Musharraf’s panicked bureaucrats vainly tried to assert control over how the history would be written. But what remains unclear is how the middle-tier bureaucrats could have gone to such an extent of holding press conferences without the consent, or at minimum, without the knowledge of the highest leadership? It is quite understandable, that the president cannot and does not micromanage investigations every time a suicide bomber strikes, but this was no ordinary act of violence. The Musharraf government insulted our intelligence by releasing the so-called audiotapes of Baitullah Mahsud.

Not to be left behind, the successors of Benazir Bhutto’s party have also done their own best to expose their own incompetence and selfish attitudes. Citing Benazir Bhutto’s living will, the PPP crowned her 19-years-old son Bilawal as the successor. Pakistanis are now questioning the wisdom behind bringing a party in power, which is more of a monarchy, whose leadership does not practice the principles of democracy themselves. Finally, the PPP did a great disservice to the nation when, in a deafening silence, it failed to ask its workers to remain calm when faced with sorrow and grief. For his part, Nawaz Sharif showed his true colors when he ordered his media manager Pervaiz Rasheed to seize tapes of an interview in which, when faced with hard questioning, he made a fool of himself by losing his cool and composure.

Whether the Musharraf government will survive the latest storm remains to be seen, but one can already see how it has left humongous cracks in the foundations of his government, which can be reduced to rubble even by the slightest tremors.

Naturally, Pakistanis wonder, what have we done to be cursed with such an incompetent and self-serving leadership?

— Adnan Gill is a freelance columnist living in the US. He writes on US foreign policy, Middle East and South Asia.

http://www.arabnews.com/?page=7&section=0&article=105491&d=10&m=1&y=2008

2008-01-30T10:48:00.000-08:00

Who is the Boss?

By Adnan Gill

Pakistani media widely reported that during his fruitless charm-offensive in Europe, President Musharraf had a two hour long meeting with MQM’s undisputed leader Altaf Hussain and other MQM Bosses. President’s desperation to please the MQM Bosses became obvious when he ardently rolled out the red carpet for them after hastily canceling a prescheduled visit to the Cambridge University.

Apparently, instead of MQM Bosses showing the courtesy of opening up their schedule for a State dignitary, President Musharraf was so keen to meet Mr. Hussain that he bent backwards to accommodate the MQM leadership into his hectic schedule; as if MQM Bosses enjoyed a stature deserving a higher protocol.

Why Musharraf has developed a taste for making deals with politicians of unsavory character, should be a matter of serious concern. But what should be alarming to the Pakistanis is why their President is holding meetings with a person who runs his party in Pakistan through a telephone and who proudly poses for the cameras with his British passport? Altaf’s own party had been in power since 2002, and still this British Boss -- who voluntarily left Pakistan for good in 1991 -- is conspicuously living in self-exile. Naturally, a question arises, what is keeping Boss Altaf from ending his self-exile? Of course for now, he is enjoying his British citizenship and his party funds more than suffice to support his luxurious lifestyle in the UK, but sooner or later, he will have to come-clean with his followers, as to why they should risk their lives for a voice on a black phone surrounded by microphones? Critics allege, descending voices within the MQM are already questioning the wisdom of staying loyal to a leader who most of them have never seen, and who is too afraid or has no interest in returning to his own constituents? They ask, what is in for them to rot in jails for a leader who constantly demands sacrifices from them, but doesn't believe in parting with the luxury and security he has accustomed himself to?

It was nauseating to see a President of a Nuclear Power bowing to a convicted MQM Boss who has forsaken his Pakistani nationality, and even worse, who has questioned the creation of Pakistan! If we didn't know any better, it must have looked like President Musharraf was begging for mercy, or at minimum, begging for a favor from the Bosses. Why? That would be a million-dollar question. Hopefully, one day General Musharraf will enlighten his nation, why in his infinite wisdom he bent his knees in reverence to the MQM Bosses?

It was heartening to see the Commando President promising to the Bosses that the coming elections would be fair, free, transparent and peaceful. Only to see the Bosses foreordaining the submissive Musharraf to arrange compensation for those who lost property during the violence that followed Ms. Bhutto’s assassination. Then as if afraid of the wrath of the Gods, the servile President sheepishly tried to sooth the anger of the Bosses by informing them, he already ordered the setting up of a commission and directed it to process the compensations at the earliest.

Oddly enough, such a display of courage and concern for the victims of violence came from the same President, who upon learning of the loss of hundreds of lives in the May 12 Karachi-Carnage, triumphly threw his fists in the air, as he asserted, “today [MQM has] shown the real power.” It is the same president who also plainly dismissed any possibility of holding an inquiry or any possibility of finding the killers of unarmed civilians whose only crime was coming to the streets to welcome the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Pakistan.

Instead of giving assurances to Boss Altaf, maybe President Musharraf should have dared him to step into Pakistan to monitor the elections himself. And if he did not, then we have to wonder, why not?

Nevertheless, the mystery remains, who is the Boss; Altaf or Musharraf?

http://www.thefrontierpost.com/News.aspx?ncat=le&nid=224

Never seen before pictures of Bhutto’s assassin - Multiple Assassin Theory. By Adnan Gill

2007-12-29T18:43:00.000-08:00

Image 1

Image 2

In never seen before pictures, at least one of the Benazir Bhutto’s assassin could be clearly seen. The slim built, medium-height, and clean-shaven suspect doesn't seem to be wearing a suicide belt. The first image (courtesy of the Dawn News) clearly shows the suspect in sunglasses discharging his weapon. In the second image (in the red circle) he could be seen in an unbuttoned dark sleeveless vest. According to the Government of Pakistan's claim the alleged suicide-bomber used at least 4kg of explosives and to 2kg of shrapnel. It is not clear how a suicide-bomber could hide his 6kg suicide belt in the open sleeveless vest. Considering the circumstantial evidence, it can be argued that there was a second assassin who triggered the explosives immediately after the first suspect was able to discharge his handgun three times.

Image 3

In the image 3, the suspect can be again seen discharging his weapon, as Ms. Bhutto’s security officials duck in a reflexive action. Note, at this point Ms. Bhutto can still be seen standing through the sunroof.

Image 4

In the image 4, people in immediate surrounding of the suspect could be seen running away from the gunman. However, Ms. Bhutto can no longer be seen standing through the sunroof.

Whether she received fatal bullet wound cannot be ascertained from these images, but it is clear that within fraction of a second, after the shots were fired, Ms. Bhutto was not standing anymore.

2007-12-28T13:18:00.000-08:00

Benazir Bhutto’s March into History

by Adnan Gill

Open a newspaper or tune-in a news channel and odds of Pakistan being in the headlines are at least 50-50. But December 27, 2007, would be immortalized in the annals of history. It is the day when the leader of Pakistan's largest political party, Benazir Bhutto was assassinated. Despite the fact that Ms. Bhutto was not a sitting Prime Minister, still her assassination would be remembered as an event that shook up the world, just like the assassination of US President John F. Kennedy did decades ago.

Who is to be blamed for her brutal assassination would be debated for a long time, but there is little doubt that her untimely death will shake the foundations of Pakistan. The seriousness and the immensity of the tragedy could be judged from the fact that virtually every single news media outlet was exclusively focused on her assassination. The news of her death triggered the sell offs on the Wall Street, dipping the stocks deep into negative territory. In impromptu press conferences world leaders like the US President Bush and UN General Secretary Ban Ki-Moon did not loose a moment in condemning her assassination.

It would be hard to imagine how the Musharraf government could have had any role in Ms. Bhutto’s assassination, because even a hint of government’s compliancy in the crime would spell the end of the Musharraf's rule. Yet still, Ms. Bhutto’s assassination will write the final chapter of Musharraf's rule.

Benazir Bhutto was the daughter of Pakistan’s first-elected Prime Minister Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto. Media savvy Ms. Bhutto was considered to be contemporary political genius rivaling the likes of President Bill Clinton. Outside the political arena, Ms. Bhutto was widely believed to be a devout mother and a sincere wife. Regardless of one's political differences, millions upon millions of Pakistanis revered the daughter of Pakistan for the distinction of becoming the first-ever female Prime Minister of a male-dominated Muslim country. One can criticize the way she twice ran her governments, but one cannot deny her invaluable services in strengthening the roots of democracy in Pakistan. She proved her resolve by courageously standing her ground in the face of not one but two military dictators. There is hardly any doubt that had she lived long enough, she would have swept the Pakistani elections, but her untimely exit at the verge of political victory over a military dictator will earn her a political immortality. History will see to it that Benazir Bhutto’s name will be written next to the names of political giants like Sir Winston Churchill and John F. Kennedy.

May Allah bless her soul and of those who perished along with their leader.

On a Personal note:

As a writer I have been a hard-hitting critic of Benazir Bhutto’s party and her political career. But I believe in defeating or marginalizing a politician through votes or arguments, and not through violence or the cowardly act of suicide-bombing. I spoke to her was on CNN's Larry King Live show in the mid-90s. She was kind and courteous to address my concern in detail. She left me impressed by the depth and clarity of her knowledge.

Rest well, rest well Daughter of East. May your ultimate sacrifice bring sanity and peace in the lives of tired and grieved Pakistanis.

http://www.asiantribune.com/index.php?q=node/8902

2007-12-10T12:27:00.000-08:00

Loose Nukes or Loose Talk?

by Adnan Gill

Once again, an open season has been declared on Pakistan Nuclear Program. Wild, unsubstantiated, and hysterical speculations are thrown around every which way. To be specific, this time around, it's the mass-hysteria of Pakistani nuclear arsenal falling in the hands of Islamic extremists. Depending on whom you ask, the opinions on the security of Pakistani nuclear weapons vary from ‘distorted and exaggerated’ to American ‘contingency plans to secure Pakistani nukes’. It can be argued, that both extremes hold at least a bit of truth.

Among the fear mongers, David Albright of the Institute for Science and International Security had been leading the mass-hysteria. For the last several years, he had been crying wolf to anyone willing to listen, that "Pakistan's nuclear weapons and stocks of nuclear explosive material [are] dangerously vulnerable to theft by militant groups". Joining the chorus, a The New York Times report alleged, that many nuclear experts “considered Pakistan’s arsenal among the world’s most vulnerable to terrorist groups“.

In its defense, the Pakistani government had been ridiculing the mounting fears as nothing more than wild speculations. Recently, in an effort to calm the fears of speculators, the Pakistani Ministry of Foreign Affairs reiterated, as a “responsible nuclear weapon state Pakistan has always attached great significance to the security of its strategic assets. These assets are completely safe and secure under multi-layered security and Command and Control structures that are fully indigenous“. Responding to a question in the New York Times documentary, ‘Nuclear Jihad: Can Terrorists Get the Bomb?’ President Musharraf also assured, “we guarantee that the custodial arrangements that we brought about and implemented are already the best in the world.“

It's hard to rule out, that Pakistani nuclear weapons can never fall in the hands of extremist groups, but this could be true for any other Nuclear Weapons State. In case of the United States, nihilists like Timothy McVeigh wouldn't think twice before using a W-54 nuclear weapon. These low-yield weapons (marked for disposal), with most primitive security devices, could carry a punch of 20 ton fission explosion. Despite having the most sophisticated Command and Control structure, just recently in a major security breach, a US Air Force B-52 flew the length of the US loaded with six nuclear-armed cruise missiles. These missiles carried W-80 warheads of yields up to 150 kilotons. Similarly, if given opportunity, would Jewish militant groups like Hagana Bet, Irgun and Lehi, or Stern Gang be averse of using Israeli nuclear weapons for their cause? Analogously, what would stop the ultra-religious Hindu militant groups, like Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh and Shiv Sena (whose stated ideology prescribes for the extermination of the Muslims) from using the nuclear weapons on Pakistan, or even on one of their own Muslim dominated city?

Western estimates of the number of Pakistani nuclear weapons range from 50 to 200. Experts believe these devices are distributed among half a dozen or more locations. They consider the security around these sites to be extremely tight and multilayered. Some reports suggest Musharraf has improved the security system by centralizing control in a single government agency commanded by the pro-American Lt. Gen. Khalid Kidwai, who has put the Strategic Plans Division (SPD) in charge of operations and security.

These experts are also of the opinion that Pakistan does not use the electronic systems that require the input of access codes to arm warheads; instead these weapons are stored disassembled, with key components kept in separate, secure vaults. The US twice, once after Pakistan's nuclear tests and then right after 9/11, debated on whether to share with Pakistan its one of the most sophisticated and guarded technology, known as “Permissive Action Links,” or PALS to enhance the security of its nukes. What most of experts do not understand, or do not want to disclose is the fact that such a technology is no longer difficult to mimic. It doesn't take billion dollars in research to integrate a bank ATM access-code circuit board with the firing circuits/triggers. Such devices can also cause a small explosion within the warhead to safely render it useless after certain number of incorrect tries, or due to an unauthorized tampering.

In a worst case scenario, even if some militant group is somehow able to get their hands on a Pakistani nuclear device, they will have to either smuggle it out to the target or they will have to get a viable delivery system too (which are stored separately). In addition, they will need expertise in matting the warhead with the delivery system and arming the device. Since the components of Pakistani nuclear devices are allegedly stored disassembled and separately, the rouge group will have to be lucky in securing all of the components. This will be next to impossible to do without triggering security countermeasures. In case, they are able to smuggle out highly enriched material and they have all the expertise at their disposal, still it will be next to impossible to fashion a nuclear bomb. It takes a highly sophisticated infrastructure and other materials to build a nuclear weapon. It may be worth noting, that even the states bent on developing nuclear weapons can rarely put together such an infrastructure; or today there would have been a lot more nuclear weapons states than 10 (declared and undeclared) nations.

Regardless, whatever security measures the Pakistanis might have put in place to safeguard their nuclear devices, it doesn't mean that the US has not drawn up contingency plans to secure, or at minimum, destroy the nuclear weapons and their delivery systems.

Most likely, the US is going to take multi-pronged approach to secure the Pakistani nuclear weapons. First of all, it will be imperative to have actionable intelligence on every single nuclear warhead. Since Pakistanis are allegedly storing their nuclear weapons in at least six different highly classified storages, this means an accurate intelligence cannot be viably gathered through the conventional means, like spy satellites, communication intercepts, and/or through U2 atom-sniffing flights. Therefore, the US intelligence will have to rely on a Pakistani source with a complete knowledge of whereabouts of every warhead. Which means, it had to be a highest rank Pakistani from the SPD? Having access to such a senior and dependable source by itself negates the necessity of US securing weapons, because it would mean, the Pakistani Command and Control is still functioning.

For arguments sake, if we would to assume, that actionable intelligence presents a clear and present danger, requiring the US action to secure the Pakistani weapons; the US will have one of the following or a combination of the following options:

1. Special Services Groups from the Afghan bases and from the leased Pakistani military bases, backed up by the air assets from the Afghanistan and Aircraft Carriers off the Pakistani coast, would be sent to the storage sites to secure and transport the warheads out of Pakistan. At minimum, these Groups will try to permanently disable the warheads. It takes an absolute perfection to cause a nuclear explosion. Neutralization can be achieved by damaging/disabling any single piece of explosion-chain, like a detonator or a piece of explosive lenses. Even a millisecond difference of electrical pulses can render a warhead inoperable. But such an operation is highly improbable, because it can expose the men to fatal doses of radiation, and because Pakistani nuclear storage sites are believed to have multiple layers of security, including antiaircraft weapons.

2. B-52 or B-2 Stealth Bombers carrying GPS guided 30,000-pound "bunker buster" bombs, also known as Massive Ordnance Penetrator or MOP, out of Diego Garcia could be sent to destroy the storage sites. There could be hardly a deep-earth storage that these massive bombs cannot obliterate. As an insurance policy the US bombers can also use B61-11 -- Deep Penetration Nuclear Weapons. The drawbacks of such missions could be profound. Such bombings can release tremendous amount of highly radioactive pollutants in the atmosphere that can be carried by the prevailing winds over and through Afghanistan, China, or India; which can cause a major human catastrophe as well as a Global P.R backlash against the US. Plus such an operation does not guarantee the destruction of 100% nuclear weapons.

3. The safest and cleanest option for the US would be to use the highly classified non-kinetic weapons that will deliver high energy microwave pulses to fry the circuit boards of the warheads and their delivery systems. In all likelihood, these weapons would be employed by the combination of (stealthy) Global Hawk HAE UAVs, and F-22 Raptors. These weapon systems could also be used to paralyze the Command-and-Control systems by rendering the Communications Systems inoperable. The drawbacks of this method would be that these weapons will be of little use on the deeply buried targets, or on systems shielded by lead plates.

4. Most effective option for the US would be to activate its embedded saboteurs who would disable the warheads and their delivery systems through very simple techniques, like pulling out circuit cards; just as departing Italian technicians did after the Iranian Revolution by pulling out and damaging the circuit cards in the Iranian F-14s. The problem with such approach is it takes many years to embed saboteurs in desired places without detection. Pakistani warheads are dispersed all around the country which makes it almost next to impossible to implant saboteurs in all of the sites.

5. As a last line of defense, PAC-3 Patriot missile batteries in Afghanistan, and AEGIS equipped ships off the Pakistani coast will provide layered Theater Ballistic Missile Defense against a missile launch. But such a defense would work only against ballistic missiles and aircrafts, and that too will not cover 100% of Pakistani air space.

When all said and done, the best guardians of their own house and affairs should be their own habitants and not outsiders. There is lot of loose talk about the so-called Pakistani loose nukes, and no foolproof method for securing the weapons. If such a US operation would miss securing even single nuclear weapon, it could turn out to be one too many. Since there are no practical options to secure 100% of Pakistani nuclear warheads, especially when the intelligence is so sketchy that the planners are not even sure about the exact number of nuclear weapons in the Pakistani arsenal, it would be grandiosely irresponsible and monumentally dangerous effort to secure Pakistani nukes. In all likelihood, such a misguided adventure will result in a catastrophe of unparalleled proportions.

The best option would be a political and diplomatic one. Through which the US will provide the necessary technology and training for the Pakistanis to enhance the security of their weapons, so they could not be tampered or used without legal and proper authentication.

Business Recorder
The Post
Asian Tribune

2007-11-14T16:57:00.000-08:00

General You are Tubed!

by Adnan Gill

Like mortals, political parties also go through life-changing events that can elevate their virtually unheard leaders into the stratosphere of prominence and idolization; similarly, it can throw a crown-bearer of a party into the dark depths of ignominy and oblivion. There was a time when it used to take a war or a catastrophe to bring a leader to fame and recognition, or contempt and disgrace. Now, fame and disgrace lay only a blog or YouTube away. In this day and age of satellite TV, cell phone cameras, and internet portals, political carriers are made or trashed at the speed of light.

Megastar Cricketer Imran Khan with global following of millions of fans was virtually an unknown in the cutthroat world of politics. Then came the May 12 Karachi carnage. Dozens upon dozens of MQM workers indiscriminately shooting their political opponents were caught by the prying eyes of digital cameras. Despite the government's best efforts to hide the reality by shutting down the cable operators, within minutes the bloodbath was viewed on YouTube by shocked audiences around the world. This time, MQM which prided itself for bringing a revolution through the wizardry of electronics was fatally stung by the wizardry of information technology. MQM and their infamous leader Altaf Hussain were effectively ‘Tubed’. Cognizant to the potency of YouTube, now MQM volunteers are trying to drown the information through coordinated spamming attacks. At regular intervals, they upload dozens upon dozens of short pro-MQM video clips on YouTube under every possible Tag related to the Pakistani politics. But despite their best efforts bloggers like GeoPakistani.com and PkPolitics.com have marginalized MQM’s spamming attacks by providing an alternative portal for the Pakistani news and views.

Where YouTube drove the last nail in MQM's political coffin, it plucked Imran Khan from obscurity and pushed him into the every-day vocabulary of emotionally drained and frustrated Pakistanis who were waiting for a political messiah to lead Pakistan into an era of stability and prosperity.

Blogs and YouTube once again played a pivotal role when the Pakistani establishment tried to hide the truth through the news blackout when the police busted open the heads of lawyers and journalists in a brutal crackdown outside the Supreme Court. Countless video clips and still photographs on the Internet left no doubt in anybody's mind that the crackdown was premeditated. The global community was left flabbergasted to see how there were more policemen (both in uniform and civvies) than protesters. These well-armored policemen were not only armed with batons and teargas, but they had their pockets filled with stones that they showered on the protesters without any regard to age, gender, or profession. Within hours, the pictures of stone-throwing policemen shamelessly beating and dragging hapless women were flashed around the world. One such picture which stood out was of a policeman hurling a baseball size stone on a woman as she covered her head with her hands while desperately running away from her attacker. Arguably, the glory days of government’s monopoly on tailored information were long gone, and this time the Government was ‘Tubed’.

To the credit of MQM, it was quick at recognizing the awesome potential of YouTube to disseminate information at demand that is why it vainly tries to control the damage through the spamming attacks. However, the Pakistani establishment has not shown any signs of learning a harsh lesson from its mistakes. On November 3rd, once again, it fallaciously tried to gag the news and information about the latest crackdown on the Pakistani judiciary, lawyers, journalists, students, cherry-picked opposition leaders, human rights activists, and anyone else whom the General Musharraf deemed to be a hurdle in his lifelong rule.

The General did not realize that the Pakistani public stepped into the information age years ago. Despite government's best efforts to rob the truth from Pakistanis, the public circumvented the information vacuum through the satellite dishes, SMS messages, phone cameras, blogs, e-mail circuits, and most importantly through video portals like YouTube.

Whether intentionally or naïvely General Musharraf argued that the populace are supporting his second Martial Law, because they did not come out on the streets. What the General does not realize is that even people in the remotest areas, are busy carrying out a bloodless revolution against his regime through the magic of information technology. Thanks to this magic, once invisible politicians like Imran Khan are addressing the nation from hiding, and the expatriates are organizing protests all around the world. These expatriates are lobbying their respective governments to pressurize the General to, at a minimum, reverse his second Martial Law and most importantly to reinstall the pre-November 3rd judiciary. The outcries of expatriates are already bearing fruits. President Bush has already hardened his government’s stance from pussyfooting around to demanding General Musharraf to take his uniform off, and to hold free and transparent elections on time.

India tried to leash the bloggers, recently Myanmar tried to hide its brutal crackdown on the monks, only to realize that the information genie is out, and it can not be caged. It will be in the Generals benefit to grasp the reality that it is no longer possible to keep 160 million Pakistanis oblivious of the truth through censorship and threats of trials of civilians in the military courts. The historic crash of Karachi stock market is the living contradiction of the myth that information can be controlled.

Whether you realize it or not but General you are ‘Tubed’ too.

http://www.paktribune.com/news/index.shtml?194510 http://statesman.com.pk/opinion/op6.htm

2007-11-07T15:27:00.000-08:00

A General to a General

by Adnan Gill

GEN. MUSHARRAF: Hello... Hello...

GEN. MUSHARRAF: Tony, I am calling to tell you something from a General to a General.

GEN. (Retd) ZINNI: Yes, Mr. President, what can I do for you?

GEN. MUSHARRAF: O Baba, please don't call me Mr. President. Haven't you read my PCO? It clearly states, I am a Chief of the Army Staff. So call me Mr. General.

GEN. (Retd) ZINNI: Yes, Mr. General, what can I do for you?

GEN. MUSHARRAF: Well, I just wanted to let you know that I just declared the emergency. Some people are calling it the Second Coup.

GEN. (Retd) ZINNI: What do you mean? How can you go through a coup against your own government? And why are you telling me that? I retired from the service years ago. Why don't you call Ms. Rice to inform her?

GEN. MUSHARRAF: O Baba, what do you mean you are retired? How can a general retire? Was there a coup against you too? Yarr, I did not call Condi, because whenever I talk to her she gives me a lecture on democracy, freedom of expression, and tells me what I can and can not do. How can she expect me to listen to her when I don't listen to 160 million Pakistanis? Please don't make me talk to her; she can be really bossy sometimes.

GEN. (Retd) ZINNI: Okay, Mr. General, was the coup approved by the White House?

GEN. MUSHARRAF: No. Not this time.

GEN. (Retd) ZINNI: Sir, it may come as a surprise to you, but we have hundreds of years old tradition of retiring generals when their service time is over, or when their civilian bosses tell them to. But how can I help you?

GEN. MUSHARRAF: I will never understand how you guys can run a government when everyone retires at their expected time. Tony, can you please brief your President Bush that in the interest of fighting terrorism I have suspended the constitution and basic human rights, clamped down on judges, lawyers, human rights workers, journalists, opposition leaders, and you know every other kind of terrorists who questions my infinite wisdom.

GEN. (Retd) ZINNI: Mr. General, you will have to be more specific about what you are up to now?

GEN. MUSHARRAF: Yarr, if I had known that I will have to be specific then I would have called Gen. Powell. Since I don't have a choice, let me tell you why I have gone through the second Martial Law.

GEN. (Retd) ZINNI: Martial Law?

GEN. MUSHARRAF: O Baba, it's the same. Call it whatever you want. There is no difference between Emergency declared under the PCO or Martial Law.

GEN. (Retd) ZINNI: Please continue with your explanation.

GEN. MUSHARRAF: Well, I had no choice but to fight these terrorists with iron fist, because you know I am not scared of anyone.

GEN. (Retd) ZINNI: Mr. General, I'm sorry, I did not realize that the Pakistani judges, lawyers, human rights workers, and journalists were exploding bombs in Pakistan.

GEN. MUSHARRAF: Yes indeed, did you know that the judges who refused to take oath under my PCO were releasing the suicide bombers? You know how your president says, either ‘you are with us or against us’. These judges were not with me, because they were about to give a ruling declaring that my Presidential candidacy was unconstitutional. Even though the Election Commission was merely supporting the war against terrorism by approving my candidacy without even looking at the papers or checking the Constitution, that doesn't mean these terrorist judges had any right to second-guess my edict. Oh, I am sorry; I meant second-guessing of the Election Commission’s decision. Even after 60 years of subjugation these terrorist judges still don't get it, that the word of man with the gun is the Constitution, and not the rubbish on some piece of paper. If that was not enough, these terrorist judges had the audacity of poking their nose where it did not belong.

GEN. (Retd) ZINNI: Like where?

GEN. MUSHARRAF: Yarr, they were investigating the misuse of farms around Islamabad allotted to the high and mighty of Pakistan, like it was any of their business. It's not like these farms were given at dirt-cheap prices to any one group or party. It was bipartisan loot for the Pakistani Big-Boys Club. Instead of bothering the elites these terrorist judges could have gotten a farm or two for themselves and everyone would have been happy. But no, they had to question us. The club members were asking me ‘what was I going to do about it?’ They were pestering me with questions like ‘why don't I take an action against these terrorist judges?’

GEN. (Retd) ZINNI: But Mr. General, how does that make them terrorists?

GEN. MUSHARRAF: Just between you and me, you know that we don't have time to catch the bad guys so we arrested 61 people at random to show my nation and the white house that we are doing something about the terrorism and nonexistent law and order situation in Pakistan. These terrorist judges embarrassed us and tarnished our image of a frontline state by releasing the 61 people on a silly technicality that they were extrajudicially imprisoned.

GEN. (Retd) ZINNI: What do you mean you don't have time? What could be more important than finding the terrorists?

GEN. MUSHARRAF: O Baba, we don't have supercomputers like you to monitor every phone call, SMS message, or go through the e-mails of these terrorists, so whatever manpower we have we had to assign them to snooping on these terrorists who call themselves judges, lawyers, human rights workers, and journalists. Besides, my intelligence chiefs have better things to do like negotiating a ‘you scratch my back and I'll scratch yours’ deal or ‘you get me reelected and I will forgive all of your crimes’ deal. I'm sure you must have heard of the NRO deal by now.

GEN. (Retd) ZINNI: Yes Mr. General, I have heard of the infamous NRO. Now, what kind of terrorist activities were these journalist and the human rights workers involved in?

GEN. MUSHARRAF: Yarr, these journalists are such a thankless bunch. Instead of praising me all the time for allowing them to set up private channels and breaking the monopoly of state media, these thankless terrorists started to report things as they were. If sharing the truth with Pakistanis was for their benefit don't you think we would have done it in the last 60 years? When I raised the slogan of ‘enlightened moderation’ these news junkies mistook it as raising the social and political awareness of the average Pakistani. Now these newly enlightened average Pakistanis are disrupting the war against terrorism by fighting for their rights in the courts and that too publicly with the help of terrorist media. What these media terrorists don't tell the Pakistanis is sometimes it's important to detain people at random with no due process to increase the odds of catching a terrorist by sheer luck. Just because we haven't caught or prosecuted even a single terrorist doesn't mean we should lose hope catching one by chance. Since our jails are overflowing with unaccounted political prisoners we had to make room by extrajudicially deporting some of them to Saudi Arabia and to the terrorist paradises like Guantánamo Bay. But these pesky reporters and judges don't understand that. I had no choice but to arrest them, beat them up, and throw them in jails to rot for the rest of their lives, because they were demoralizing and paralyzing the administration, which is not used to being answerable to anyone, especially the public. Now you tell me, am I right or what? How can a dictator function when the nosy reporters and judiciary constantly second-guess our dictatorial rule?

GEN. (Retd) ZINNI: Mr. General, I really don't know how to respond to that. But I'm sure you are doing good job at catching the Al-Qaeda and foreign mercenaries within your territory.

GEN. MUSHARRAF: Tony, I can tell, you haven't lost your sense of humor. I thought you always knew that there is no Al-Qaeda and foreign mercenaries, or wouldn’t we have had caught at least one by now? And even if by chance there are some of them on the Pakistani soil, why would we catch them? If we catch all of them then you guys will once again pack up and leave, and forget about us. Who is going to give us unaccountable $10 billion if the war on terrorism ends today?

GEN. (Retd) ZINNI: Mr. General, I am little puzzled. Then who are you fighting with in the Tribal Areas and Swat Valley?

GEN. MUSHARRAF: Yarr, don't tell it to anyone, but they are our own people. We had to kill a few hundred citizens; because Karzai and the White House kept on saying we were not doing anything to fight the terrorists. So we had to put up a show, you know, what you people call collateral-damage.

GEN. (Retd) ZINNI: But Mr. General, we thought there were huge battles going on in those areas. Then who had been taking hundreds of your army men hostages?

GEN. MUSHARRAF: O Baba, don't get me started on that. During the last eight years the civilians had been corrupting my men. Now half of my men have started to think for themselves. They have joined the terrorists. They do not fire blindly on the civilians anymore. Can you believe that the discipline has become so bad that these men now refuse to obey my orders and spare the lives of their countrymen? They actually prefer to become hostages over killing even a single civilian. But little do they know that I have other tricks up under my sleeves. I tell my Air Force and Gunship pilots that Osama is hiding at such and such place. These fools actually believe me and end up bombing whomever I want them to. Beside, I am doing a favor to these civilians, because in the last eight years disparity among rich and poor has only increased, reasonable jobs are almost impossible to find, inflation and unemployment are record high, and it's not like we are producing additional food; so if you ask me, they are better off in heaven than living on this hell on earth.

GEN. (Retd) ZINNI: Hmmn... Mr. General, I am lost for the words. I don't know what to say.

GEN. MUSHARRAF: Ops... Yarr, I was just joking. I didn't mean everything I said. Please forget everything I said. Please don't tell it to President Bush. It will look really bad. I promise I won't do it again.

GEN. (Retd) ZINNI: Mr. General, please don't worry. Because I'm not sure if President Bush will be able to understand even half of what you said. Just keep on saying ‘water on terrorism’, ‘war on terrorism’, and I assure you, you will be A-Okay. I have to go now. Take care, Mr. General. I will talk to you later.

GEN. MUSHARRAF: Okay Tony. Goodnight. And Tony, you promised you won't tell everything to President Bush or Condi, right?

GEN. (Retd) ZINNI: I said, goodbye Mr. General.

GEN. MUSHARRAF: Thank you Sir. Oh, I mean, bye Tony.

Disclaimer: Above transcript is a political satire. All characters are fictional.

http://www.thefrontierpost.com/News.aspx?ncat=le&nid=119

2007-11-05T12:58:00.000-08:00

Greatest Game

by Adnan Gill

It is unfortunate that violence in Pakistan seems to have made us numb to suicide and bomb blasts. The blasts at the PPP rally will have immense political repercussions. Neither the motives nor the benefits from this tragedy should be hard to speculate. All we have to do is think who will benefit the most from it? Even though most of the casualties are sustained by the PPP workers, ironically the fruits of this tragedy will be reaped by the PPP. The PPP has gotten the trump-card of victimisation. Another ‘outfit’ that has a lot of interest in a destabilised Pakistan is the US. A destabilised and politically weakened Pakistan will conveniently play as puppet whose strings will be in the hands of the US through its proxies of Musharraf and Benazir. Is it a mystery why Osama bin Laden is still at large, even though we have been told for the last six years that he is hiding in a five square miles area on the Pak-Afghan border? To some, it is not a mystery because it serves the powers-to-be. What we are witnessing is only a small part of a ‘game’.

The Post http://thepost.com.pk/Arc_LetNews.aspx?dtlid=124020&catid=4&date=10/20/2007&fcatid=14

2007-11-05T12:42:00.000-08:00

Price of a Jiala

By Adnan Gill

If Benazir Bhutto’s infamous mad dash that covered 15 km in 15 minutes to the sanctuary of ‘Bilawal House’ wasn't demoralizing enough; if the mobbing of the reporters by the fame hungry PPP leaders like Jehangir Badar, Sherry Rehman and others, immediately after the bombings, wasn't embarrassing enough; if the stampeding bigwigs of PPP literally driving over the dead and injured party workers/Jialas in their luxury cars, as their injured Jialas cried for help, wasn't cruel enough; BB had to rub salt on the wounds of her Jialas by giving them Rs.5,000 (US $83 per head) for their pain and suffering. It cost more than Rs.5,000 to even pay one month’s rent for a barely livable dwelling in Karachi.

Benazir Bhutto's stinginess and sadistic disregard for the sacrifices of Jialas wasn't lost on anyone, even international media took a note of it.

One cannot put a figure on the ultimate sacrifice of a person, but BB’s niggard act of putting a price of piddly Rs.5,000 was the ultimate insult to her Jialas who didn't think twice before sacrificing their lives for her. Her stinginess and sadistic disregard for the sacrifices of Jialas wasn't lost on anyone, even international media took a note of it. The New York Times noticed,
“Flanked by security guards carrying automatic weapons, she waved to dozens of supporters as she left Jinnah Hospital after she handed out envelopes containing 5,000 rupees, or about $83, to the wounded.”

Even a 5th grade student can estimate the price BB put on her Jialas’ heads:
145 Martyred Jialas x Rs.5,000 = Rs.725,000 or $12,083
400 Injured Jialas x Rs.5,000 = Rs.2,000,000 or $33,333
Grand Total = Rs.2,725,000 or $45,416 (note: all figures are approximation)

Ms. Bhutto often travels to New York from Dubai in First-Class/Business-Class. A round trip costs roughly $8,500. Price she put on her Jialas’ heads, 5 round trips.

Ms. Bhutto has been widely seen wearing diamond studded designer fashion glasses. They are estimated to have cost around $10,000. Price she put on her Jialas’ heads, 4 1/2 such glasses.

Upon her much publicized trip to Pakistan, Ms. Bhutto rode in her Mercedes S600 luxury-car to the Dubai airport. A Mercedes S600 costs approx. $134,000. Price she put on her Jialas’ heads, 1/3 of a Mercedes S600.

Recently Ms. Bhutto returned to Dubai. Her husband picked her up from the airport in their Bentley luxury-car. A single Bentley costs at least $264,000. Price she put on her Jialas’ heads, 1/6 of a Bentley.

Ms. Bhutto owns a pink family villa fringed by palm trees in an upscale Emirates Hills (Dubai) neighborhood overlooking a lake and with a view to a golf course. Average price for a villa in Emirates Hills is said to be $6,000,000. Price she put on her Jialas’ heads, 1/35 of a luxury villa in Emirates Hills.

As BB recuperates in the luxury of her Dubai Villa, her jialas lay in the hospital beds wondering how they are going to feed their families.

True leaders stand tough in the face of adversity for their followers. An immortal leader fearlessly jumps in the fire to save his/her followers. However, an opportunist puts the price on his/her followers’ heads. Benazir Bhutto, a leader or an opportunist? You decide!

Asian Tribune http://www.asiantribune.com/index.php?q=node/8110
The Frontier Post http://www.thefrontierpost.com/News.aspx?ncat=le&nid=63

2007-10-30T17:56:00.000-07:00

Bomb Attacks on Benazir in a Perspective

by Adnan Gill

Since the October 19 bomb attacks allegedly on Benazir Bhutto’s (BB) life, almost everyone is asking the same question; WHO was behind the attacks? Instead, if we were to ask who is benefiting the most from these attacks, the answer may explain the original question too. And if we were to look at the broader picture, even the latter question becomes rhetorical, once we try to understand WHY she was attacked? A short answer could be Ms. Bhutto and Pakistan are only small pieces of the New World-Order in which, due to its strategic location, a subservient Pakistan has a linchpin role. Hence, the need for a leadership owing it's allegiance to the architects of this new order. Maybe some of us are wondering what the objectives of this World-Order are, how Pakistan fits into them, and what all of this has to do with the bomb blasts? We will return to these questions in a moment.

Neither the motives, nor the benefits from these bombings should be hard to speculate. Already Ms. Bhutto is demanding major share in the caretaker government. Virtually everybody is too sympathetic or too afraid to raise the most nascent and controversial questions like how she could join hands with the military junta, vis-a-vis the infamous ‘National Reconciliation Ordinance’ (NRO)? Likewise, President Musharraf (who for the last eight years called BB a criminal) conceded that he alone cannot fight the terrorists, thus he invited BB to join hands to fight the extremists.

Interestingly, long before BB sat a foot on the Pakistani soil, a steady parade of American officials, including Ms. Rice’s deputy, John D. Negroponte, have been sent to Pakistan seemingly with the intent to organize a welcome wagon for BB. Most of us already guessed what was behind BB’s vowing of American lawmakers through her editorials and indirect promises that she will oblige to any requests made to her even if it takes handing over Dr. A. Q. Khan, or allowing NATO to conduct military operations within the Pakistani borders. But it was the NRO that took the veil off the deal that took place between President Musharraf and Ms. Bhutto.

The NRO and power-sharing deals were the bombshells that not many Pakistanis were prepared to tolerate. The deals raised such a hue and cry that politicians from PPP and Musharraf's party ducked their heads and openly started to question the wisdom behind them. It would be naive rather irresponsible to think that the architects of such an unnatural (proverbial) marriage did not anticipate such a reaction, and more importantly, that they did not have a remedy to overcome such a handicap.

Even though most of the casualties were sustained by the PPP workers, but in a sick ironic twist, the fruits from the bombings are also reaped mostly by the PPP. Whether by planning or by chance, at minimum, the bombings have given the trump-card of victimization to BB and her party.

As if these were the first ever attacks on the Pakistani political leadership, an outcry from the Western capitals, and unprecedented UN resolution condemning the attempt on their so-called secular Sweetheart have only confirmed the suspicions that the West, especially the United States is once again deeply involved in forcing their choice on the Pakistanis. This time the interference was so unabashedly flagrant that even an ordinary Pakistani is asking, how did we reach this point where the powers-to-be are so shamelessly forcing their Sweetheart upon us?

The interference in the internal affairs of Pakistan could also be judged by Security Council’s appeal to all countries to cooperate in bringing the perpetrators of the alleged suicide attack on Ms. Bhutto to justice. In other words, it's giving a carte blanche to foreign powers to violate the Pakistani sovereignty as deemed necessary. Not to be left behind, the Western media is doing its part by hyping the hysteria of insecure Pakistan. The Newsweek in its hysterical cover story promulgated that Pakistan is a more dangerous nation than Iraq and Afghanistan.

A deliberate hysterical image of Pakistan is being projected just the way ‘mushroom clouds’ were painted prior to the Iraqi invasion. Eerily, the common themes of the hysteria created against Pakistan and hysteria preceding the Iraqi invasion were Islamic-terrorist taking refuge in the country and the Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD). This begs the question, are we witnessing the prelude to an invasion on Pakistan? Most probably not an invasion, as the powers-to-be are spread too thin and they have learned hard lessons from the Afghani and Iraqi occupations. More importantly, there will be no need for an invasion if a proxy-leadership keen at obeying the wishes of their benefactors could be installed in Pakistan to begin with.

Let's return to the question raised earlier, Pakistan's role in the New World-Order. A strategically located Pakistan on the crossroads of Asia is a diamond in rough for many. Soviet Union eyed it to reach the warm-waters of the Arabian Sea. China wants to place its Navy in the Pakistani Naval Ports to protect its interests in the Middle East. Energy hungry India wants to use it to expand its trade with the landlocked Central Asian States (CAS), and to tap into oil and gas resources of CAS. That's not all, to the misfortunes of Pakistanis there are even bigger players with their crosshairs set on Pakistan for their own purposes.

It would hardly be a stretch of imagination to argue Pakistan's geographical situation flanking Iran and its potential of keeping an eye on the traffic coming in and out of Persian-Gulf, makes it ideal in serving the interests of powers-to-be. By every estimate the global appetite for the oil and gas will keep on rising by approx. 2% per year till 2035-2040. Middle East is blessed with over 60% of the proven oil and gas reserves, which naturally makes it the most prized real estate in the world. Energy supplies are the Hydrogen-Bomb of the future. It will be the carrot and stick of the future. Whoever controls its supplies will be able to set its prices, and use it to reward or punish a nation. For the foreseeable future Global Trade will stay sensitive to oil prices and so will be the global stock markets.

It is not mere coincidence, or love for the Jewish community that America has promised Israel $30 billion worth of military aid in the next 10 years. Though concrete numbers are not available on how much the US intends to dole out to its Egyptian and Jordanian proxies, but we can safely assume it will be quite impressive. None of these three nations produce oil, but they play a vital role in flanking and guarding the plush oil fields of the Middle East from the West. Regardless of how volatile Iraq will remains, irrespective of whether it ever exports even a single barrel of oil, it will remain a US outpost guarding the Middle East from the north. Interestingly, the Eastern flank of the Middle East, Iran still remains untamed. Till the time the maverick Iran is tamed, it will keep on presenting itself as a toe-hole for other potential adversaries, like the Russians and Chinese.

This is where the worth of proxy-Pakistan becomes obvious. Subservient Afghanistan and Pakistan are imperative to cover the right flank of the Middle East. It will also ideally serve to politically destabilize Iran by conducting surgical strikes on Iranian interests, toppling its current government, installing a pro-American government; resulting in 70% of planet’s proven and deliverable oil/energy-supplies being in the hands of the US and its close allies. As a fringe benefit, a strategically placed proxy-Pakistan will play an instrumental role in strategically encircling and containing China. Her shortcut to the Arabian Sea and Persian Gulf would be curtailed. Russians will be kept at bay by further isolating their access to the warm waters and the Middle East through a friendly Iran. New pipelines from the landlocked CAS will crisscross the Iranian landscape. There will be no longer a need to pamper Turkey for its role of transit of oil pipelines. Russia will no longer be able to destabilize the oil prices, because it (currently) controls the largest oil pipelines from the CAS.

The puppet Afghani President Karzai, who is too afraid to even step outside his palace, more than suffices as an American proxy. Now all the US has to do is place such loyal and obedient leaders in Pakistan too. And who could be better candidates than General Musharraf who is already more than happy to oblige to the US, and Benazir Bhutto who is promising to anyone and everyone in Washington willing to listen that she would do over and above what General Musharraf had been doing. What could be a better way to entrench its Pakistani puppets in shortest possible time than placing the trump-card of victimization in Ms. Bhutto’s lap? It also conveniently overcomes and/or bypasses time consuming pesky problems haunting BB, like massive corruption charges. As long as BB is running strong, dozens of casualties of the PPP workers is nothing more than a collateral damage for BB’s cause, and for the New World-Order.
And suddenly, the answers to questions about the objectives of New World-Order, how Pakistan fits into them, and what all of this has to do with the bomb blasts becomes crystal-clear.

Asian Tribune
The Statesman
Frontier Post
Attock News

2007-10-30T17:37:00.000-07:00

Anatomy of October 19 Blasts

by Adnan Gill

The way Pakistani government covers up every single bomb attack by declaring that it was an action of the suicide bomber has become a regular theme. Mostly people buy the government’s version with little or no questions asked. Fortunately for us, and unfortunately for the establishment, the October 19 twin-bombing attacks (allegedly) on Pakistan People's Party (PPP) leader Benazir Bhutto were captured by numerous private TV cameras and by the print-media photographers. Most of these videos and still-photographs which are available on the Internet for the public to view potentially suggest a cover-up going up to the highest levels.

If one were to study these videos (widely available on YouTube), and the still-photographs (available among others on AP, AFP, Reuters, and the Daily Dawn's websites) one can argue that the nation has been once again misguided by the establishment, because pictures tell a story totally contradictory to what the latter wants us to believe. The contradictions are so shockingly obvious that it suggests that either the establishment likes to mock our intelligence, or its agents tasked to disseminate its story of suicide-bombers are highly incompetent; because even a 10th grade student with a basic knowledge of laws-of-physics can put together the sequence of events that took place on October 19. The motives behind the establishment’s possible cover up are a subject of another debate, so for now, first we will lay down some facts, circumstantial evidence, and ground rules to evaluate the evidence.

Rule # 1, laws of physics do not bend, twist, or change to anyone's liking or for that matter disliking.
Rule # 2, for the purpose of this column we will assume that the face of Ms. Bhutto’s armored truck was pointing to 12 o'clock, while its tail was pointing at 6 o'clock.
Rule # 3, fashioning an explosive device is more of a science than art.

Circumstantial evidence # 1, per PPP's statement Ms. Bhutto retreated to her heavily-armored cabin just minutes before the bombs exploded.
Circumstantial evidence # 2, every PPP leader standing on the top of the armored truck escaped the blasts virtually unscathed.
Circumstantial evidence # 3, numerous TV cameras and still photographs captured the images of the bombings and their aftermath live.
Circumstantial evidence # 4, government’s experts claimed the second (and the deadlier) bomb used approx. 14-15 kg of RDX explosives and hundreds of nails and ball bearings.

Fact # 1, RDX explosives are one of the most powerful and stable explosive. The velocity of RDX detonation at a density of 1.76 grams/cm³ is 8,750 meters per second.
Fact # 2, the shock-wave from the blast travels like a bubble and in a circular manner.
Fact # 3, the dispersal-pattern/direction of the shrapnel resulting from the blast can be managed and fashioned according to the need.

AAJ-TV was broadcasting live when the two blasts took place. Judging from the video images AAJ-TV cameras caught, one can safely assume that the first blast was of a restively low-intensity, and second blast was of much higher-intensity. It should also be kept in mind that the initial blast did not trigger the (what demolition experts call) sympathetic blast or the second explosion. That is most probably due to the stable nature of RDX explosives.

The other evidence one can safely gather from this video are:
1. Virtually everyone and everything stayed upright and intact on the right and backsides of the armored truck. This suggests the second explosive was a shaped-charge from which the shrapnel spread in an arc-pattern, and away from the truck. In other words, either by sheer luck or deliberately the trajectory of the blast was directed away from the truck in a cone-shape that spread from seven o'clock to one o'clock (relative to the truck).
2. People can be seen jumping off the armored truck and others climbing down the stairs after the blasts. This suggests that none of the people standing on top of the truck were seriously injured, which suggests that the shrapnel and the force/shockwave of the blast stayed closer to the ground. Typically, a well-directed shockwave generated by 14-15 kg of RDX from such a close proximity can turn the internal organs into gel. Another sign, it was probably a shaped-charge.
3. Before the second blast the left door of the truck could be seen in open position. Some unconfirmed reports claimed that just minutes before the blasts the truck was stopped to switch the drivers. Either way, it can be argued that the driver vacated the truck before the second blast. Which could mean, that the standard operating-procedure of immediately escaping the scene was not followed.
4. A vehicle can be observed to the front-left side (9-10 o'clock) of the truck and exactly in the front of a white Suzuki Alto engulfed in flames. Some reports alleged that the Suzuki Alto carried the bomb, but a spare wheel could be seen on the backside of the burning vehicle. Therefore it can be argued, that the burning vehicle was a Jeep rather than a small car. When this vehicle is observed from the other angles in the still pictures it shows its front was ripped open. Could this be the vehicle that carried the bomb? We will return to this question in a moment.

When asked, how the government can be so sure that it was an act of a suicide-bomber wearing a suicide belt, they immediately give a ready-made answer that since no crater/hole was found, it had to be a suicide bomber. It's difficult to tell if they give this ready-made answer out of ignorance or in an effort to cover-up the reality? Because a cleverly designed shaped-charge/explosive can easily leave no crater, which means such a signature could also be left out by other kinds of improvised explosives, like by a car-bomb.

If one would meticulously study the widely available still-pictures of the blasts, one could figure out the origination-point of the blast and the direction the shrapnel and debris traveled, which belies government’s version. Since the shockwave from an ordinary explosion travels in a circle, it knocks down objects around it like petals of a flower. If the blast was caused by a suicide-bomber then how did he/she managed to control the direction of the explosion and that too into the opposite direction of its alleged target? Another lucky coincidence or there is something more than meets the eye?

The pictures also show that the majority of victims lost their lower limbs and the clothing on their legs was either singed or torn apart by the blasts, while their torsos and shirts on them were relatively in better condition. Even the small trees and plants around the center of explosion told a story that the brunt of the shockwave traveled closer to the ground and not in a bubble shape. This is another telltale sign of controlled explosion, which was directed away and closer to the ground. Could it be another fortuitous coincidence for the alleged primary-target?

Some people could be seen as far as (roughly) hundred feet from the center of blast lying in the pool of blood. Strangely, the armored truck which was barely a 10 feet away from the center of explosion only sustained minor damage like flattened tires and few shrapnel penetrations in its windshield. A police van on the front-left side of the armored truck can be seen severely damaged. However, no evidence of even minor damage could be seen above the driver’s cab of the armored truck. This could be another sign that the explosion was caused by the shaped explosive whose trajectory was not pointed upwards where the PPP leadership was standing. Yet another fortunate coincidence?

Based on debris tracks, never mind from where one draws a line, they all triangulate to a point roughly where the vehicle on fire could be seen. From a front angle one can see the face of the mysterious burning vehicle spread open. Based on all of these educated and conservative observations, one could argue that either the government investigators are not qualified to conduct such investigations, or the establishment is hiding something and deliberately fooling the nation into thinking it was another merciless, cruel and deliberate action of suicide bombers. Because the circumstantial evidence suggest, that the origin of the second blast, which was in all likelihood a shaped-charge, took place on the front-left side of the armored truck that Ms. Bhutto was traveling in, and most importantly, it was directed away from her heavily-guarded and heavily-plated truck.

At this point it is hard to speculate about the motives and the forces behind the gruesome tragedy, but one can argue with high level of certainty, that the second blast was caused by a shaped-charge that was directed closer to the ground and away from the armored truck that was used by the high and mighty of PPP. It also cannot be disputed that while virtually all of PPP leadership came out of these deadly attacks literally unharmed, but hundreds of loyal foot soldiers/jialas of the same party miserably failed to escape the cold hands of death. It is said that due to this tragedy hundreds of jialas will remain maimed and handicapped for rest of their lives, hardly a matter of conciliation.

It is hard to believe that nature could be so compassionate and heartless at the same time. On one hand it spares the lives and well-being of every single member of PPP leadership, then simultaneously it blew up hundreds of its workers to smithereens. A one in a billion coincidence? You decide!

Attock News
The Frontier Post
Pakistan Observer
The Statesman

2007-09-11T11:00:00.000-07:00

Indo-Pak Attitudes, 60 Years Later

by Adnan Gill

On August 14 and August 15, in an unprecedented collaborative effort of Pakistan’s GeoTV and India’s NDTV, a political talk show ‘Hamaray Mutabiq’ was broadcasted. The show hosted some of the most respected cultural and political icons from both Indian and Pakistani sides. It presented an excellent opportunity to reflect on what had been changed in the last 60 years: physically, economically, ideologically, and more importantly philosophically. It also provided an interesting sample of attitudes and moods of the citizens of the two countries.

In the decades following the partition both countries went at each other's throats, at least four times. By any standard, these conflicts physically changed the maps, i.e. out of the British India now we have Bangladesh, India, Pakistan, and the disputed Kashmir.

Materially, in last decade or so, India improved quite a bit in technologically and economically whereas Pakistan showed intermittent spurts of improvement, but not enough. Overall, both countries lag far behind the developed nations in the social uplift of their citizens. The majority of Indians and Pakistanis are still barely surviving on less than $2 per day. To put this in perspective, according to UNDP’s 2006 Human Development Index (HDI), out of 177 countries, India was ranked at a shameful 126th place and Pakistan took an even worst 134th place. Even the so-called banana-republics like Honduras and Guatemala were ranked higher than India and Pakistan.

On philosophical and ideological levels, while much has changed on Pakistani side, unfortunately, hardly anything changed on the Indian side of the divide.

Pakistani side has repeatedly gone through political evolutions and devolutions which has over time softened the attitudes of its citizens towards their neighbors in the East. Pakistanis have matured philosophically, and are mentally exhausted from decades of political instability, ultra-conservatism, and the fruitless struggle of fighting for the rights of the Kashmiris. They have realized that decades of political instability and leading Jihads, one after other, for the liberty of others has only left them socially exhausted, diplomatically isolated, and financially drained. With the decent of umpteen political talk-shows of new and independent TV channels, this exhaustion was filled by the heightened social and political awareness, and to some extent, by the religious extremists who played the role of catalyst for even newer mini-Jihads.

As highlighted in the Hamaray Mutabiq show, the attitudes of majority of Pakistanis from all walks of life have transformed from individualist to righteous, into compromising and conciliatory. Yes, even in the case of disputed Kashmir too. Ironically, at the same time, the attitudes on Indian side have become even more self-righteous, arrogant, and condescending as displayed by the Indian Gen. (Retd) Shanker Roy Choudhary.

In last six decades, the attitudes of the general populace on the Indian side have regrettably only hardened. Just like 60 years ago when most of the Hindu extremists were pursuing the creed of Hindutva, today a growing number of even mainstream Indians are pursuing this intolerant theological dream, only with even hardened resolve. Hindutva is an intolerant and fascist ideology that negates the teachings and ideals of Mahatma Gandhi and is closer to the teachings of Bal Thackeray.

Throughout his life, Mahatma Gandhi remained committed to non-violence and truth even in the face of most extreme circumstances. But on January 30, 1948, his messages of nonviolence and truth were deemed unpatriotic and unbecoming of a Hindu, so he was shot and killed in New Delhi by a Hindu extremist. In their mad pursuits, the forces of Hindutva didn't spare even the most cherished and beloved Indian leader. Gandhi’s assassin, Nathuram Godse, was a Hindu radical with links to the Hindu Mahasabha (a Hindu extremist organization). If you think, Gandhi’s assassination gave a backlash to the Hindu extremists, think again! Even a higher percentage of Indians elect and support the Hindu extremist parties now.

Ironically, even though Pakistan is viewed as the country in the clutches of religious extremists, but in reality, to this day, its citizens have never elected any religious party in the center. While in the stark contrast, India has twice sent a Hindu nationalist party to the center, the BJP which twice formed a coalition government with the other Hindu extremist parties. In fact, it was the BJP Chief Minister ‘Narendra Modi’ who sat over the massacre of 2,000 Muslims.

Sadly, today there are more followers of Mahatma Gandhi’s nemeses, Bal Thackeray. Thackeray is an admirer of Adolf Hitler and Nazism. He is a Hindu fundamentalist and a poster boy of the Hindutva believers. He formed the Shiv Sena (widely known to be a Fascist party), an ally of the BJP. He holds the most extreme views against non-Hindus (especially Muslims), and the Pakistanis.

Unfortunately, the Indian news media and entertainment industry are also hammering the ultra-conservative pro-Hindutva beliefs into the impressionable minds of younger Indians, already high on ‘Shining India’ mantra. With increasing frequency, Bollywood is churning out movies in which villains are either Muslims or Pakistanis. Not to be beaten by Bollywood, the Indian news media bolsters its rating by hyping the government’s favorite bogyman, the infamous Pakistani ISI. Every time a violent act takes place in India, immediately, without even any circumstantial evidence, the media joins the government’s favorite chorus of Muslim or Pakistan bashing.

In last 60 years, barring notable exceptions, while Pakistani attitudes have transformed into humbleness and conciliation; regrettably, the same cannot be said about the Indian attitudes which have only hardened in their yearning for the extremist philosophy of Hindutva whose cardinal objective is establish ‘Akhand Bharat’.

PakTribune http://paktribune.com/news/index.shtml?189339
Attock News http://www.attocknews.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=344&Itemid=168
The Statesman http://statesman.com.pk/opinion/op7.htm
The Frontier Post http://www.thefrontierpost.com/News.aspx?ncat=le&nid=554
The Defence Journal (October)

2007-09-10T11:05:00.000-07:00

Shaheed vs. Shaheed

by Adnan Gill

Muslims have a long history of backstabbing and killing each other, but the authority and conviction they kill one another these days is outright astonishing. In the old days when a Muslim was killed while fighting the nonbelievers there was no confusion as to who the ‘Shaheed’/Martyr was. Regrettably, the distinction is not that obvious when one Muslim kills another. Regardless of the circumstances under which one dies, it seems, these days whenever a Muslim loses his life to another Muslim in a fight, fashionably we tend to bestow the honor and title of Shaheed upon the dead. For people, like me, with a very basic knowledge of practices and principles of Islam such a scenario is nothing short of paradoxical. The paradox becomes even more complex when two Muslims effectively kill each other and we hastily title both of them as Shaheeds.

In Islam, ’shahadat’/ martyrdom is one of the most revered ambition and honor that true believer can hold. This is because shahadat entitles the Shaheed with one of the highest rewards possible for such persons in the hereafter. Abdullah-Ibn-Umar quoted the Prophet Muhammad (Peace and Blessings be Upon Him/PBUH) as saying, "Martyrs are forgiven their sins, except debts”. Muslim scholars opine, the phrase “except debts” also relates implicitly to the abuse of people’s rights, unjustified killing, and so on.

It suffices here to quote the ultimate stature Allah has promised for the martyrs. Almighty Allah says: “Think not of those, who are slain in the way of Allah, as dead. Nay, they are living. With their Lord they have provision. Jubilant (are they) because of that which Allah hath bestowed upon them of His bounty, rejoicing for the sake of those who have not joined them but are left behind: that there shall no fear come upon them neither shall they grieve. They rejoice because of favor from Allah and kindness, and that Allah wasteth not the wage of the believers.” (Al-Imran 3: 169-71)

The magnanimity of the rewards for a Shaheed is very obvious, but what is not so obvious is who deserves to be called a Shaheed? Similarly we do not want to disgrace and disrespect a worthy titleholder by ignoring to remember him as a Shaheed.

Deeds are judged according to one's intention. We can only judge them according to what is apparent to us, but only Allah can judge their intentions. It may happen that sometimes we may regard someone a Shaheed while Allah knows that he is otherwise.

Common sense dictates when two Muslims reach a point of conflict where they end up using deadly force against each other one has to be on the right side, and the other on the weaker or wrong side. In this life there is no way for us to know for sure who will be awarded the shahadat, so all we can do is go over the teachings of Quran, and Sunnah to educate ourselves, to the best of our abilities, so we could come up with an educated guess as to who may quantify as a Shaheed.

The Quran and the Sunnah are abundant with provisions that crystallize and emphasize one of the important objectives of Islam of safeguarding people's life, property and honor. In light of this objective Islam prohibits aggression against innocent people. Al-Bukhari reported "A woman (was made to) enter (Hell) Fire because of a cat which she tied, neither giving it food nor setting it free to eat from the vermin of the earth." If we risk entering the hellfire for the cruelty to animals then imagine, what will be the fate of the suicide-bombers who often shed innocent's blood and violate their rights?

When a suicide-bomber kills himself in the process of taking lives of other Muslims, oddly the Muslim group which sent him calls the bomber a Shaheed; despite the fact, majority of times the victims of these bombers happens to be unsuspected Muslim civilians, including women and children. Ordinary Muslims often find themselves at loss as to how a suicide-bomber whose victims are also Muslims could be called a Shaheed?

However, in Islamic jurisprudence self-defense is legal, even if it leads to manslaughter, as it would then be forced, not optional. For example, unlike a suicide-bomber whose intention is to kill as many people as he can, a policeman could shoot to kill a suicide-bomber in an attempt to defend himself and the innocent people he has sworn to protect. Muslim scholars suggest that not everyone who is killed in this disorder of fighting between the two Muslim parties will be destined to the hellfire. Surely, there is a difference between a person who is killed when illegally attacking another, and a person who kills his attacker in self-defense or in the defense of innocent. Jurists are of the opinion that people should defend themselves with the lightest possible means, but if these means fall short of repelling the danger, stronger force can be used, even if it leads to the death of the assailant(s).

Recently, in a standoff between the Pakistani military and Islamic militants holed up in the ‘Lal Masjid’ dozens of lives were wasted on both sides. Lo and behold! Both sides conferred their fallen ones with the ultimate title of Shaheed. Most distinguished examples are of Lt. Col Haroon Islam and Maulana Abdul Aziz Ghazi. To an ordinary Muslim it has to be the most paradoxical riddle that how could a Muslim responsible for the deliberate death of another Muslim could enjoy this ultimate honor? In order to solve this riddle first we need to make a distinction between the offender and the defender.

The Holy Quran says, “O you who believe! Obey Allah and obey the Messenger, and those of you (Muslims) who are in authority. (And) if you differ in anything amongst yourselves, refer it to Allah and His Messenger, if you believe in Allah and in the Last Day. That is better and more suitable for final determination.” (An-Nisa: 59) This verse hardly leaves any doubt that Muslims are instructed to obey the state's authority. Following hadith reinforces this principle: “It is your duty to listen and obey your rulers whether you are in difficulty or at ease, whether willingly or unwillingly and even when you do not receive what is your right.” (Muslim: No. 1836)

Some may argue, what if the rulers have questionable character? If faced with such a scenario prophet Muhammad (PBUH) has advised, “He who sees something despicable in his ruler should bear it, for he who even slightly disassociates himself from the state system and dies in this condition shall die the death of ignorance.” (Bukhari: No. 7054)

Allah and his messenger (PBUH) have ordered us to respect and obey even our questionable Muslim rulers and have strongly advised us not to undermine state's authority. Forcibly interfering in the government's business can break our collectivity apart, and can disrupt the governance, which can result in the break up of a Muslim state. Cognizant to the fact that Islam entrusts the state with the duties of policing, it can very well be argued that those who may lose their lives while assisting the state in dispensing its policing duties holds a special stature, perhaps of a Shaheed.

Allah says: “Allah commands justice, the doing of good, and liberality to kith and kin, and He forbids all shameful deeds, and injustice and rebellion: He instructs you, that ye may receive admonition.” (An-Nahl 16: 90) An eminent Muslim scholar Sheikh Yusuf Al-Qaradawi further elaborated these instructions of Allah: “No doubt, aggression against innocent people is a grave sin and a heinous crime, irrespective of the victim's religion, country, or race. No one is permitted to commit such crime, for Allah, Most High, abhors aggression. Unlike Judaism, Islam does not hold a double-standard policy in safeguarding human rights.”

Unity among Muslims holds a paramount status in Islam. Islamic principles are crystal clear about how the Muslims are obligated to obey the orders of their rulers, because Islam understands and emphasizes in the concept of collectivity which naturally gets undermined and compromised when certain group(s) disrupt this concept by spreading violence through fiery sermons calling to pick up arms against the government. Only exception for taking down a government is provided if the ruler orders Muslims to commit a sin. There are no other exceptions to this rule even if we don't agree with our government’s domestic or foreign policies. Allah’s messenger Muhammad (PBUH) said, “Whether they like it or not, it is obligatory on the faithful to listen and to obey their rulers except when they be ordered to commit a sin. If they are ordered so, they should neither listen nor obey.” (Muslim: No. 1839)

Henceforth, it is difficult to imagine how a Muslim who intended to harm the interests of the state through injustice and/or rebellion could be the viewed as a Shaheed vs. a government official who lost his life in the process of executing his duties of defending the state and its citizens.

When certain elements challenge state’s authority by taking it upon themselves to set the world straight through their own vision they commit a grave sin. In fact, anyone who tries to undermine the principle of collectivity has been ordered to be killed by Allah’s messenger (PBUH), “You are organized under the rule of a person and someone tries to break your collectivity apart or disrupt your government, kill him.” (Muslim: No. 1852)

Only Allah knows the best, but if we are to look at the recent examples of suicide-bombings and attacks on the government forces, in the light of the Quranic verses and ahhadith quoted above, we could dare to come up with an educated conclusion, that people who spread indiscriminate violence and mischief/shur in an Islamic state stand guilty of committing grave sins.

From the Islamic point of view, it is haram (forbidden) to kill civilians and innocent souls or to destroy or burn plants, trees, etc. The Qur’an says, “…Take not life, which Allah hath made sacred, except by way of justice and law: thus does He command you, that ye may learn wisdom.” (Al-Anam: 151)

The mischievous elements who had been dividing Muslims at the barrel of gun also try to undermine the state by assassinating the foreigners who are supposed to be the guests of the Muslim state. Clearly, the intent is not only to harm the government domestically, but also to put it at odds with other nations too. Islamic jurisprudence known as Ahd al-Aman is very clear about providing protection of life and safety to non-Muslim civilians and the foreigners in Muslim countries. Hence any attacks against their life or property are forbidden in Islam.

For those who engineer conflicts to take shortcuts to the heavens through shahadat are advised to read Quran, which says, “Nor take life, which Allah has made sacred, except for just cause. And if anyone is slain wrongfully, We have given his heir authority (to demand Qisas or to forgive): but let him not exceed bounds in the matter of taking life; for he is helped (by the law).” (Al-Isra: 33)

Instead of resorting to violence Muslims are instructed to resolve their differences through peaceful means. Quran is quite clear about how Muslims should resolve their differences. It says, “And if two parties of believers fall to fighting, then make peace between them” (Al-Hujurat 49:9) Then Allah further elaborates in the next verse, “The believers are naught else than brothers. Therefore make peace between your brethren” (Al-Hujurat 49:10).

In light of Allah’s commands, it becomes incumbent upon each and every Muslim to shun the extremists who try to divide Muslims and impose their views through fear and bloodshed, we need to counsel them by showing them how Allah has ordered us to resolve our differences through peaceful means and certainly not through violence.

Finally, for our benefit, Allah commands us not to let the mischievous ones force us to depart from the path of brotherhood, “Do not let your hatred of people who would debar you from the Sacred Mosque lead you into aggression; but rather help one another in furthering righteousness and piety, and do not help one another in furthering evil and aggression. Have fear of God, for God is severe in retribution.” (Al-Maidah 5:2)

Verily, Allah sees and knows all. He will certainly distinguish the true Shaheed from the wannabe.

PakTribune.com
Pakistan Link

Pakistaniat and Commonsense

2007-09-06T18:57:00.000-07:00

Pakistaniat and Commonsense

by Adnan Gill

They say, once a month a metamorphosis takes place which turns a man into a werewolf. In a similar metamorphosis, once a year around 14 August, the blood of Pakistani-Americans turns green and we return to the grounds of University of Southern California to celebrate the birth of Pakistan. It is a unique experience that freshens the memories of the country we grew up in. The people you meet there and their behavior could fool you into thinking that we are back in Pakistan. Just like every year, this year too the experiences of Pakistaniat were not much different either.

As soon as we got closer to the fair venue the traffic turned from bad to ugly. As if ‘Stop’ signs didn't matter and driving on both sides of road became legal, the race to enter the parking lot got so competitive that people started to ignore the traffic rules altogether. Commonsense says, obeying the traffic rules would get everyone in faster and nobody would get a traffic ticket. But then what do we know; maybe in our hearts Pakistanis like to donate money to the city officials through their traffic tickets and strive to get their insurance rates higher. Others decided to save the $10 parking fee by parking on the streets. It didn't matter whether they were parking on the yellow or the red lines. Commonsense says it's cheaper to pay the $10 parking fee than paying $60 in fines. But then what do we know; maybe Pakistanis were trying to increase the city's revenues by paying through the parking tickets.

No sooner had we entered the parking lot a raging mad Pakistani captured our attention through his yelling and cursing at a female parking worker. Apparently, he was unhappy about how much time it took him to reach the parking lot as compared to others. Maybe, all he wanted to do was to inform her that she was racially profiling him against rest of the Pakistanis, but she called the police instead. Almost immediately, Police sirens could be heard. I could swear I have never seen anyone disappearing in the darkness of night as fast as our Pakistani brother did. Commonsense says, when treated unfairly, one should sue the discriminator and become rich. But then what do we know; perhaps all he wanted to do was to educate her in the art of fairness.

We got into the parking lot, but were held up for another 10 minutes; because another Pakistani brother wanted to squeeze in his van in a space big enough for a bicycle. When he failed to get in head first, he decided to back into it. Low and behold, the space refused to widen even though he was desperately trying to reverse into it. Commonsense says, it's faster, safer, and more convenient to park 10 spaces farther than parking in a tight spot that will cause him to put dents in his and other people's cars. But then what do we know; maybe he had a shrinking-ray gun that could have shrunk other peoples cars.

Since there were no signs or anyone pointing towards the main entrance, we decided to try our luck by walking in the same direction as the others were. It turned out people had found a hole in the fence, with a red sign that read ‘do not enter’ next to it, to enter the fair. Commonsense says, the organizers must have put signs to guide the masses towards the official entrance. But then what do we know; the organizers were probably trying to increase our IQ through the process of trial and error.

A dirty little secret is, most of the Pakistani women are lured to the 14 August Fair to check out the latest fashions, and most of the men are lured to it in a pursuit of the wide variety of desi gourmets available. Therefore, like most, our first order of business was also to throng the food stalls. Organizers were kind enough to provide folks with long sheets of paper so that they could sit on the ground and feast on their favorite dishes. After devouring their food most of people simply got up and left the paper sheets in the middle of the grounds. Commonsense says it's considered common courtesy to clean up after oneself. But then what do we know; people probably thought since organizers were naive enough to arrange for the paper sheets, perhaps it was their duty to clean up after them too; or at minimum, sooner or later, the paper sheets would decompose and provide nourishment for the grass.

Everywhere one could see green balloons and Pakistani flags proudly flying in the wind. But not a single American flag was in sight. Commonsense says, it's good etiquettes and appropriate, while celebrating the birth of Pakistan, not to forget the country that is graciously hosting us; as well as the chance that it can give Pakistanis a big backlash for appearing to be unpatriotic Americans. Not long ago the Latino population in Los Angeles learned a hard lesson when they flew and waved only Mexican flags during the protests against the immigration policies of the United States. Their PR blunder only resulted in hardening of the prevailing negative impression (illegal immigrants being a burden on society) the rest of Americans had against them. But what do we know; organizers probably believed Pakistanis didn't have to prove their patriotism to the Americans, because the Pakistani President Musharraf believes he has trusting friends and allies in the White House in the shape of the President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney. Who cares what rest of the Americans think?

To the credit of organizers, for the entertainment purposes, they collected a host of renowned Pakistani singers. To name a few Alamgir, Ali Haider, and Najam Shiraz were there. The rising Pakistani stars were also quite impressive. Between all of them, they managed to keep young Pakistani-Americans on their feet and dancing. There is no doubt that most of the people were having a good time and enjoying the concert with their families. Unfortunately, at least one of the singers (without naming) was clearly drunk and shouldn't have come on the stage. Commonsense says when drunk, don't come on the stage, because drinking liquor is still a sin in Islam, and Muslims certainly don't believe drunks can be good role models for the impressionable children. But then what do we know; he probably believes liquor squeezes better performance out of him and Muslims prefer performance over a sin.

Just like in any other concert, a crowd of people gathered behind the stage, not accessible to the general public. Some of them were the artists; others were staff-members and organizers, while others were special guests wearing red wristbands who probably considered themselves to be superior and above the rest of the mortals. One such middle-aged guest, high and mighty, with a receding hairline, probably imagining himself to be the gift from God to women, decided to descend upon the sidelines to showoff his cigar-lighting skills. If he wasn't rude enough to block the view and to blow the smoke in the faces of handicaps and elders sitting in the wheelchairs and chairs, he invited three other friends to join him by lighting their cigarettes too. Some elderly women politely requested them to move away and to the side, which they did. But as if the cigar-smoker regretted easily succumbing to the request of ordinary elderly women, he stepped back, once again blowing vile smoke and blocked their view. When they asked him again to move, he smirked and stood his ground by widening his stance and asked another friend to join him in putting down the rebellion. To us, his rude behavior suggested he wanted to teach a lesson to ordinary elderly women for daring to interrupt his corralling of younger women. As it so happened, some of the gentlemen who were observing his rude behavior decided enough was enough, and they told them to move away and not in a so polite manner. To that the crowd cheered and applauded the intervention of the gentlemen, and our once high and mighty Don Juan had to move with his pride wounded and trampled upon. Commonsense says don't embarrass yourself needlessly. But then what do we know; he probably believed the cigar-smoke had therapeutic effects on the elderly and ill.

All in all, despite certain aberrations, it was a good experience and a nostalgic reminder of our good old country. Children got the opportunity to experience Pakistani culture firsthand, women folk caught up with the latest fashions, and men doused fires in their bellies with Pakistani cuisines. Most of us will certainly return to the Pakistaniat and same fair grounds in the years to come. May Allah bless Pakistan!

Courtesy: PakTribune.com

Secular or fascist India?

2007-09-04T10:19:00.000-07:00

Secular or Fascist India?

by Adnan Gill

Talk to an Indian, or listen to any Indian official, especially the Indian politicians, they would make you believe India is a secular state. If you were to look at the Indian Constitution, again you would think India is a secular state. However, on a closer scrutiny of Indian politics, the myth of secularism crumbles faster than Bal Thackeray’s tolerance for the Muslims and Pakistanis.

Just like 60 years ago, when most of the Hindu extremists were pursuing the creed of Hindutva, today even more Indians are embracing this intolerant dream.

Today, there is even a larger percentage of Indian populace that are embracing fascist, or at least, pseudo-fascist ideologies, like Hindutva; consequently, there are far more Hindu extremist parties dominating the Indian political landscape than ever before. Thanks to these believers of Hindutva, religious intolerance has become the main theme of the Indian politics. The hunger for ‘Akhand Bharat’ (a united Hindu state that spreads from the borderlands of Persia to Tibet and western China) is stronger than ever before; which also explains, why more and more Indians are crossing their fingers in a hope, that one day Pakistan will become a failed state, and annexed into the ‘Akhand Bharat’. In short, the ideologies of Hindutva and ‘Akhand Bharat’ go hand in hand.

A cursory look at some of the largest Indian political parties will establish, if not already, how India is rapidly turning into a Hindu state.

A Hindu umbrella group, called ‘Sangh Parivar’ (Family of Associations), derived out of ‘Hindu Mahasabha’ group, is an extremist organization that is based on the core ideology of Hindutva, and is built around an extremist Hindu party, Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS). Sangh Parivar’s membership includes, parties known to harbor fascist ideals, like the RSS, Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), Vishwa Hindu Parishad, and Bajrang Dal (also known as Monkey Brigade).

The poster boy of the Hindutva believers, Bal Thackeray, is the founder of an extremist Hindu party ‘Shiv Sena’, and an admirer of Adolf Hitler and Nazism. In an interview with the Indian Express, Thackeray professed his love for Hitler. He proudly proclaimed, “I love [Hitler]”. Only his hate for Muslims surpasses his love for Hitler. He holds the most-extreme views against the non-Hindus (especially Muslims), and the Pakistanis. In 1984, in an interview with the ‘India Today’, Thackeray made his hate for Muslims known with these words, "They [Muslims] were spreading like a cancer and should be operated on like a cancer. The...country should be saved from the Muslims and the police should support them". On numerous occasions, Thackeray has reiterated his fascist desire to establish a Hindu state. As late as 2007, Press Trust of India quoted Thackeray insisting on "Hindustan for Hindus" and an appeal to Hindus to "bring Islam in this country down to its knees".

The Asia Times reported that Thackeray called on Hindus to form suicide squads “to take the Muslims head on. Trouble-making Muslims should be wiped out from the country ... kick out the four crore [40 million] Bangladeshi Muslims and then the country will be secure". At least two organizations founded and managed by the retired Indian Army officers namely Lt Col (retired) Jayant Rao Chitale and Lt Gen. P.N. Hoon (former commander-in-chief of the Western Command), answered Bal Thackeray’s call to set up the Suicide Squads in India. Lt Gen. Hoon claimed, Thackeray instructed him to set up the training camps.

A witness, in his deposition before the Srikrishna Commission said, Thackeray coordinated much of the January 1993 Mumbai carnage. Yuvraj Mohite claimed, “Balasaheb was sitting and he was getting calls from various places. He would ask what was happening at that particular place (from where he got the call) and then he would say, 'Kill them. Send them to Allah'”.

The ‘Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh’ (also known as the Sangh) is another Indian extremist party. It is also active abroad as the Hindu Swayamsevak Sangh (HSS). Due to its fascists activities RSS was thrice banned in India. Because of its involvement in Mahatma Gandhi's assassination, it was banned in 1948. It was again banned during the 1975 Emergency, and then in 1992 for its leading-role in the Babri Masjid demolition. Its numbers have been bolstered by the rise of its associated Sangh Parivar members, especially by the BJP. The RSS has an estimated 4.5 million active members. It attracts new membership through its Hindutva and ‘Akhand Bharat’ slogans.

An offshoot of the RSS, the ‘Vishwa Hindu Parishad’ (VHP) is the most intolerant Hindu extremist party in India that thrives on hatemongering, Hindutva and ‘Akhand Bharat’ slogans. Its stated objective is to protect the ‘Hindu world’ from other religions. It was formed by Swami Chinmayananda and by a former RSS member S.S. Apte. Apte declared, “The world has been divided to Christian, Islam and Communist. All of them view Hindu society as very fine rich food on which to feast and fatten themselves. It is necessary in this age of conflict to think of and organize the Hindu world to save it from the evils of all the three.”

Human Rights Watch reported, the members of the VHP were part of Hindu mobs who demolished the Babri Masjid. VHP demands a legislation authorizing the construction of a temple on the Babri Masjid site. It has many active branches in North America. According to Human Rights Watch, the VHP along with other Hindutva organizations was also deeply involved in the 2002 Gujarat riots. In a prime example of bigotry, its leader Ashok Singhal justified the riots, saying the massacres "had the blessings of lord Rama". The VHP claims, India has been a Hindu nation, in culture, heritage and history, therefore it demands a proclamation of ‘Hindu Rashtra’ (Hindu Nation).

‘Bajrang Dal’ is the youth and armed wing of the VHP. The group claims to have 1,300,000 active members. It runs terrorist training camps called ‘Shakhas’ in many Indian states where thousands of young Hindu men train in using weapons. Its members lead the demolition of Babri Masjid. In another instance of its terrorist activities, in January 1999, its men killed a missionary and his two sons for allegedly converting Hindus to Christians. In 2006, while making a bomb, two Bajrang Dal activists were killed in a premature explosion. Bajrang Dal activists were also involved in the 2003 Parbhani Musjid blasts.

Since the inception of modern India, BJP is the first religiously motivated Hindu political party that came into power in the center and in large number of states. Amongst other Hindu fundamentalist parties, it has the largest following of the mainstream Indians and Indians living abroad. It is the largest member of Sangh Parivar. In their stated vision, BJP reiterates its “Commitment to construction of a magnificent Ram Mandir at Ayodhya.” In another place it mentions the "Hindu Rashtra” (a nationalist ideology that sees the modern state of India as a Hindu polity, and seeks to preserve the Hindu heritage). BJP’s rallying cry and stated philosophies are also enshrined in Hindutva.

Contrary to its public claims, in an anti-Muslim and bigoted statement, BJP’s official Internet site states, “Thus, the seeds of today's Hindu Jagriti (awakening) were created the very instance that an invader threatened the fabric of Hindu society which was religious tolerance. The vibrancy of Hindu society was noticeable at all times in that despite such barbarism from the Islamic hordes of central Asia and Turkey, Hindus never played with the same rules that Muslims did... The destruction of the structure at Ayodhya was the release of the history that Indians had not fully come to terms with. Thousands of years of anger and shame, so diligently bottled up by these same interests, was released when the first piece of the so-called Babri Masjid was torn down... The future of Bharat is set. Hindutva is here to stay... [Hindutva] will mean that the guiding principles of Bharat will come from two of the great teachings of the Vedas, the ancient Hindu and Indian scriptures.” This statement hardly leaves any doubt that BJP is a Hindu fundamentalist party, that despises Islam and hates Muslims, and more importantly, strives to establish a Hindu state or ‘Akhand Bharat’.

One of BJP's coalition partners in National Democratic Alliance (NDA) was Shiv Sena (meaning Army of Shiva). Shiv Sena is widely believed to be a Fascist political party. Its ideology is based on the concepts of 'Bhumiputra' (Maharashtrians deserve more rights than others) and Hindutva. The Shiv Sena is one of the most influential Hindutva parties in the region. Sena’s senior member Manohar Joshi was the Speaker of Lok Sabha (2002-2004). Shiv Sena often orchestrates violence against Muslims. In 1993, Justice B.N. Srikrishna commission accused its leader Bal Thackeray of "commanding his loyal Shiv Sainiks to retaliate by organized attacks against Muslims."

India is increasingly turning into a culture of nationalists and Hindu fundamentalists. This is also true for Indian ex-patriots who use their positions and money to support and lobby for the Hindutva cause. They are extremely passionate for Hindutva and vicious against anyone who they perceive to be a hurdle. Among many, India's one of most renowned and respected columnist, Praful Bidwai had also been one of their targets. In one of his columns, Mr. Bidwai wrote, “Pro-Hindutva non-resident Indians in North America are among those spearheading this campaign of intolerance, especially on email circuits. Driven by their long-distance or 'Green Card' hyper-nationalism, they take extremely illiberal positions. They target individuals and assassinate their character, abuse them, and try to intimidate them. Among their targets are journalists, including myself.”

Indian entertainment industry and news media are not improving the ultra-conservative pro-Hindutva culture either. With increasing frequency, Bollywood is churning out movies in which villains are either Muslims or Pakistanis. Every time a violent act takes place in India, immediately, without presenting even circumstantial evidence, the media joins the government’s chorus of Muslim or Pakistani involvement. For example, within hours of Samjhota Express blast (in which the victims were overwhelmingly Pakistanis and their Muslim relatives) the Indian media joined government’s line that the so-called Muslim fundamentalists were behind the blast. Conspicuously, Indian establishment have yet to find and arrest the bombers.

In the Gujarati riots at least 2000 Muslims were massacred by the Hindu mobs. The violence was instigated, and endorsed by a senior VHP leader, who initiated a rumor, that the Muslims had kidnapped three Hindu girls during the Godhra train incident. British newspaper ‘The Guardian’ reported that besides the massacres, "two hundred and thirty different Islamic monuments... were [also] destroyed or vandalized". Right-wing Hindus justified the demolition by alleging that the Hindu marauders were only "redeeming the past". Witnesses testified before the Nanavati commission that the BJP leader Maya Kodnani, Bajrang Dal leader Babu Bajrangi, and others led the Hindu marauders during the pogrom. According to another Human Rights Watch report, mobs of thousands dressed in RSS uniforms of saffron scarves and khaki shorts and "armed with swords, sophisticated explosives, and gas cylinders" were guided by voter lists and printouts provided by the local municipal administration of addresses of Muslim-owned properties.

According to a New York Times report, the police "watched the events taking place and took no action against the attacks on Muslims and their property". Gujarati government’s complicity in the pogrom was also reported by the US Department of State. It reported, “The Gujarat state government and the police were criticized for failing to stop the violence, and in some cases participating in or encouraging it. NGOs report that police were implicated directly in nearly all the attacks against Muslims in Gujarat, and in some cases, NGOs contend, police officials encouraged the mob.” The central government of BJP was equally involved in the pogrom. The Telegraph reported, the Indian “Intelligence officials admitted, however, that there had been a deliberate delay by federal and state governments in deploying the army to give Hindu militants a free hand [to kill Muslims].” Instead of showing any remorse or regret, the Gujarati Chief Minister Narendra Modi (BJP), in a cynical justification, shamelessly said, “Every action has an equal and opposite reaction.”

In an indirect admission of Modi’s direct roll in the massacres, in 2005, the United States denied to grant him diplomatic and tourist visas, citing, “a comprehensive failure on the part of the State Government of Gujarat to control persistent violations of [human] rights”.

In any respectable secular state the architect and overseer of a well-orchestrated massacre would have been prosecuted and hung, but to put salt on wounds, Narendra Modi was reelected as the chief Minister in the very next elections; which is yet another clear indication that the Hindu extremism is on the rise among the Indian populace.

Sadly, none of the Hindu fascist leaders, including Bal Thackeray and Narendra Modi, who planned and led the massacres were arrested or convicted for the crimes of ethnic-cleansing. Even more sadly, neither the United Nations, nor Western nations have even dared to call these Hindu fascist parties (BJP, VHP, RSS, HSS, Bajrang Dal, and Shiv Sena) for what they are, terrorist parties. They grow on hate and thrive on the blood of non-Hindus, especially the Muslims.

No matter how one looks at it, no longer, India can be viewed as a secular state. In last 60 years, the Hindu fascist parties have succeeded in convincing its general populace that non-Hindus are the enemy who should be purged in order to establish a Hindu theocratic state. Its borders will span from Persia to Tibet and western China. It will be a home for the Hindus where the Hindu culture and the Hindu values will dictate its history and charter its future.

http://www.pakistanthinktank.org/default.php/p/articles/pk/449
http://statesman.com.pk/opinion/op7.htm
The Frontier Post

Pakistani Air Launched Cruise Missile (ALCM) named Hatf-8 (Ra’ad)).

2007-08-25T13:23:00.000-07:00

Pakistan successfully test fired a new Air Launched Cruise Missile (ALCM) named Hatf-8 (Ra’ad)).

Altaf Hussein Vs. a Telephone!

2007-08-05T16:55:00.000-07:00

Does anyone else find it interesting that a telephone is replacing Altaf Hussain’s face? It's amazing how thousands of people, so obediently, sit with their heads bowed listening to a telephone surrounded by dozens of microphones is pictured more often than Altaf Hussein himself. If a person who didn't know who these people are and who they are listening to on the phone, to that person, it would appear that these people are followers of a telephone.

Justice, Taliban style

2007-07-17T16:52:00.000-07:00

A fair and balanced PBS documentary on the resurgence of Taliban.

Part 1

Part 2

Retrospective view of genesis of Lal Masjid crisis

2007-07-16T18:01:00.000-07:00

An interesting retrospective view of genesis of Lal Masjid crisis on Meray Mutabiq show of Dr. Shahid Masood. Even as far back as April the students and Ghazi were full of inflexibility, ‘my way or highway’, and only ‘I know the best’ attitudes.

Part 1

Part 2

Part 3
Part 4

Talibanization

2007-07-14T13:16:00.000-07:00

Take a very good look at Talibanization.

The Lal Masjid I knew

2007-07-09T16:28:00.000-07:00

by Adnan Gill

Many moons ago, I remember looking at the Lal Masjid through the holes in the wall of my junior school, right across the Masjid. Sometimes I would stair at the Masjid for minutes at a time while hanging upside down on the monkey-bars. Sometimes, during the dog days of summer, I used to take refuge in the Masjid from the scorching heat, which was always delightfully cool as the sun would shine through its greenly tinted windows. For some reason, I always found it to be a very peaceful place. I can't remember if it was always painted red, but when I close my eyes, I see it white. In good old-days we used to call it ‘Jamma Masjid’.

In those days, during the regular prayers, barely a row or two used to fill with the devoted worshipers. Even the regular shoppers from -- then known ‘Jumma Bazaar’ -- ‘Itwar Bazaar’ used to barely make a dent in the attendance. However, Jumma prayers always attracted large crowds. So did the Eid prayers. In those golden days, I never remember the Imam issuing calls for Jihad or physical violence. The sermons always focused on the peaceful teachings of the Koran and life of Mohammed (PBUH). When and who transformed the Masjid into a symbol of extremism is not known to me. Luckily, I left Islamabad before the Masjid took a turn for the extremism. At least, I can still revert back to the nostalgic days of Jamma Masjid when the worshipers were more concerned about each other's well-being than the length of their beards.

Fast forward to late 80s. I remember meeting a young and joyful man in the Northern-Areas, which some say depicts the heavens. I still remember exchanging pleasantries with that young man on the lush green lawns of an Army mess as the ‘Megrib’ time fell upon us and as the flying-squirrels started their air-ballet gliding from a tree to tree. I will never forget the time I spent with that young and brave man under the clear blue skies of the Northern-Areas. That young man's name was Captain Haroon Islam. Yes, I am eulogizing Shaheed Colonel Haroon Islam who gave the ultimate sacrifice while breaching the walls of Lal Masjid in an effort to secure the innocent lives of our children stuck inside the Masjid whose Imam time and again refused to order his impressionable students to leave the Masjid; unless, the government agreed to issue him and his mother a full-amnesty. In other words, he was willing to exchange blood of innocent children with a free get-out-of-jail card.

Who is to be blamed for radicalizing, the once, peaceful Masjid to the point where so many innocent lives have been lost is a matter for another debate, but we need to make it loud and clear; that no more we will allow another Imam to brainwash our impressionable children so they can consolidate their power through an army of children. No more we will allow Mosques that are supposed to be places for warship and sources to cleanse one’s souls to become the hubs of extremism. No more we will allow the extremists to hijack our religion whose meaning, and message is peace and welfare for whole creation of Allah.

Let's not forget what the Qur'an has clearly declared: Whoever killed even a single soul - except being a punishment of murder or that of spreading unrest in the land - is as if he killed the whole of mankind. (Al-Maaidah 5: 32) Therefore, it is incumbent upon us to resist these radicals (who are spreading unrest in the land) with every fiber of our being so they can no longer corrupt and poison the pristine minds of our children.

Till we take such a strong stand against the extremists, these thieves of peaceful souls will continue hijacking the impressionable minds of our blossoming children, and more and more brave fathers will have to save these children with the gifts of their lives.

I hope, the next time I see the Lal Masjid I will not have to close my eyes to see the peaceful Masjid, I once knew. I also hope, the Masjid to be renamed to ‘Masjid-ul-Islam’ in the memory of the Shaheed Haroon Islam, so we will always remember the price we had to pay to rescue our beloved children. Finally, I hope, the government will no longer get in the business of granting general-amnesties to the murderers of our children.

Rest well, rest well my friend Haroon Islam. May Allah bless you with every reward he has promised to a Shaheed.

Courtesy: http://www.paktribune.com/news/index.shtml?183604

Hamid Mir sets the record straight on General Pervez Musharraf's mantra

2007-07-02T12:36:00.000-07:00

Geo-News’ Hamid Mir sets the record straight over General Pervez Musharraf’s biased media mantra.