Secret Strategic Games in Afghanistan

CIA, RAW and Mossad have been destabilising Pakistan to 'denuclearise' the latter. On the other side, Indian and Afghan rulers want to entrap the US permanently in Afghanistan in order to achieve their secret designs by damaging American global and regional interests. So in Afghanistan, multiple secret strategic games are being played.
__________________________________________________________

Since the US-led NATO forces occupied Afghanistan, stiff resistance of the Taliban militants which created unending lawlessness in the country has made it a most conducive place for the foreign countries and the Karzai-led regime to play secret strategic games to obtain their clandestine aims.First strategic game is collective, which includes the US, India, Israel and country’s President Hamid Karzai who are in collusion to fulfill their covert strategic designs against Pakistan, Iran and China.Under the cover of the US-led blame game against Islamabad regarding cross-border terrorism, Talibanisation of Afghanistan and Pakistan, secret agencies like American CIA, Indian RAW and Israeli Mossad have well-established their networks in Afghanistan. Particularly, India has been running secret operations against Pakistan from its consulates in Mazar-i-Sharif, Jalalabad, Kandhar and other sensitive parts of the Pak-Afghan border. New Delhi has not only increased its military troops in the country, but has also decided to set up cantonments. In this respect, US and regime of Hamid Karzai encouraged India in using the Border Roads Organisation in constructing the ring roads by employing Indo-Tibeten police force for security. On october 5 this year, India and Afghanistan signed a strategic partnership agreement, deepening their security and economic ties. In this regard, India will help Kabul in diversified projects. The deal will guarantee Afghanistan’s security as foreign troops begin withdrawing from the country, which will be completed in 2014. However, apparently, it is open strategic agreement, but secretly India wants to further strengthen its grip in Afghanistan not only to get strategic depth against Islamabad, but also to use the war-torn country in destabilising Pakistan. For this purpose, with the tactical support of CIA and Mossad, and assistance of Afghan Khad, RAW, based in Afghanistan has been sending well-trained agents and militants in Pakistan, who have joined the ranks and files of the Taliban. Posing themselves as the Pakistan Taliban, they not only attack the check posts of Pakistan’s security forces, but also target schools and mosques. They are continuously conducting suicide attacks and targeted killings, fuelling sectarian violence in our country. Now, Indian support to insurgency in the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and Baloch separatism has become a routine matter.Drug and kidnappings are some other source of Indian income. According to an estimate, world’s 90% heroin is cultivated in Afghanistan. So money earned through drug-smuggling and hostage-takings is utilised in buying weapons, being sent to the foreign agents and the insurgents in Pakistan.Nevertheless, besides backing subversive acts in Pakistan, India and US are also supporting the Balochistan Liberation Army (BLA) and other Balochi separatist leaders who have taken shelter in Afghanistan. For example, Brahmdagh Bugti has been operating against Pakistan from Kabul. On July 23, 2008, in an interview with the BBC, Brahmdagh Bugti had stated that they “have the right to accept foreign arms and ammunition from anywhere including India.”Another CIA and Indian-supported separatist group, Jundollah (God’s soldiers) is also working against the cordial relationship of Pakistan with China and Iran. In the past few years, Jundollah kidnapped and murdered a number of Chinese and Iranian nationals in Pakistan. This insurgent group has not only been committing acts of sabotage in Pakistan, but also in Iran. In this respect, on October 18, 2009, a suicide attack had killed several officers in the Iranian Sistan-Balochistan. On December 15, 2010, two suicide bombers blew themselves up near a mosque in Iran, killing 39 people. Jundullah claimed responsibility for these incidents. Regarding all these attacks, Tehran had directly accused CIA for funding of that type of terrorist attacks, while diverting the attention of Iran towards Islamabad through secret propaganda.In this context, Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei revealed, “The bloody actions being committed in Iraq, Pakistan and Iran are aimed at creating a division between the Shias and Sunnis…those who carry out these terrorist actions are directly or indirectly foreign agents.”It is noteworthy that in the recent years, several persons died in the terror-incidents and ethnic riots occurred in various regions of China’s Xinjiang — the largely populated Muslim province. For all the incidents, India blamed Pakistani militants for supporting the insurgency in order to deteriorate Sino-Pak ties. In fact, New Delhi which had given shelter to the Tibetan spiritual leader, Dalai Lama and his militants have been playing a key role in assisting upsurge in the Tibetan and Muslim areas of China. Recently, US President Obama also met Dalai Lama so as to indirectly encourage insurgency in China.It is of particular attention that Balochistan’s ideal geo-strategic location with Gwadar seaport, connecting rest of the world with Central Asia irritates America and India. So, it is due to multiple strategic benefits that the US which signed a nuclear deal with India in 2008, intends to control Balochistan in containing China and subduing Iran. Second secret strategic game is being played by India and Afghan President Karzai against the US-led forces in Afghanistan. In this regard, if the US-led NATO forces withdraw from Afghanistan, Karzai regime will fall like a house of cards. Even New Delhi will not be in a position to maintain its network in wake of the successful guerilla warfare of the Taliban. Therefore, India and Karzai have been doing their utmost to convince Washington to have a long stay in Afghanistan. Before his trip to Washington in 2009, during his interview to the Washington Post and Newsweek, Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh had said that he would encourage the American leadership to stay in Afghanistan. Otherwise, Afghanistan could fall into a civil war if the US exited. But Singh and Karzai were frustrated when US and NATO countries repeatedly remarked to withdraw their forces from Afghanistan. Failed in their objective, Indian and Afghan rulers, with the help of RAW and Khad, started acting upon dirty tricks to get the foreign forces——especially those of America entangled in Afghanistan permanently. In this context, with help of some so-called Muslims, RAW and Khad have increased attacks inside Afghanistan, particularly targeting American soldiers with the sole aim to revive old blame game of the US against Islamabad and ISI in relation to cross-border-terrorism. In these terms, New Delhi and Kabul succeeded in their connivance against the US when the latter disclosed that it will maintain reasonable contingency in Afghanistan after the withdrawal of forces. Recently, tension increased in Pak-US relations when American retiring top military officer Mike Mullen accused that Pakistan is waging a ‘proxy war’ in Afghanistan with the help of country’s Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), alleging for a recent assault on the US embassy in Kabul. Mullen’s irresponsible statement was also repeated by the other US high officials who issued stern warning about Islamabad’s failure to crack down on the Haqqani network, raising the possibility of US unilateral action in North Waziristan. On September 27, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, while endorsing US Admiral Mike Mullen’s allegations regarding ISI and Haqqani network, said, “There is now growing awareness of the groups which indulge in these nefarious activities.” Kazai and his top officials also shared Mullen’s allegations. Besides, on October 5, President Karzai accused Pakistan of supporting militant networks in his country and of having links to the recent assassination of peace envoy and former president Burhanuddin Rabbani. Nonetheless, in wake of escalating tension between Islamabad and Washington, Pakistan’s civil and military leadership has rejected allegations of the foreign conspirators. While, in the recent past, the US-led intermittent attacks by the armed militants who crossed inside Pakistan from Afghanistan, have continued.In this connection, on October 6, Pakistan’s Chief of Army Staff, General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani issued a warning to Afghanistan to stop cross-border incursions in Pakistan. While Prime Minister Syed Yousuf Raza Gilani has disclosed, “Certain forces are at work to destabilise Afghanistan and Karzai should not play in their hands.”Notably, regarding Indian activities in Afghanistan the then NATO commander, Gen. McChrystal had pointed out: “Indian political and economic influence is increasing in Afghanistan…is likely to exacerbate regional tensions.”In fact, under the pretext of Haqqani group, CIA, RAW and Mossad have been destabilising Pakistan to ‘denuclearise’ the latter. On the other side, Indian and Afghan rulers want to entrap the US permanently in Afghanistan in order to achieve their secret designs by damaging American global and regional interests. So in Afghanistan, multiple secret strategic games are being played.
_____________________________________________________

By Sajjad Shaukat (sajjad_logic@yahoo.com)

India promises to prop up Karzai

 Delhi would do well to remember as well that all its support to the regime of Mohammad Najibullah-political, military, security and economic- still did not prevent the regime from collapsing in 1992 when the mujahideen came knocking on the doors of Kabul.
__________________________________________________________

President Hamid Karzai’s two-day visit to India presages a major realignment of regional powers over the Afghan problem. India has taken a carefully thought-out decision to pitch for a key role in the so-called “endgame” in Afghanistan, commensurate with its aspirations as a regional power and in defence of what it considers to be its vital interests against the backdrop of a developing situation about which it is genuinely concerned.

India, however, will not get away unchallenged in its newfound "pro-activism" and how the ensuing regional rivalries will play out in the coming period remains far from clear. The cloudy horizons may have got just a bit darker as Karzai's presidential jet takes off from the Indian capital on Wednesday.

Karzai, too, had a mission on his mind as he headed for Delhi. Late on Monday evening, on the eve of his departure for India, he spoke candidly about his political predicament. His much-touted reconciliation policy toward the Taliban is at a dead-end and for crafting a way forward he needs to get a fresh mandate from a loya jirga (tribal assembly) that will be convened for the purpose.

He blamed Pakistan for being uncooperative in the peace process and yet he acknowledged that he needed to talk to Islamabad, being mindful that it also is what the United States and the international community want him to do - despite the wave of "anti-Pakistan" sentiments sweeping large sections of Afghan society and notwithstanding the deep and entrenched aversion to any truck with Pakistan over the Taliban that many figures within his own coalition harbor.

The leadership in Kabul has traditionally reached out to India as a counterweight to Pakistan. Karzai's visit to Delhi (his second visit in seven months) falls within that classic mould, but what gives added dimension to his mission is that his principal political allies at home - groups belonging to the erstwhile Northern Alliance (NA) - also happen to be forces closely associated with India for the past several years.

His two vice presidents, Mohammed Fahim and Karim Khalili, were leading figures in the anti-Taliban resistance, which India promoted, and Fahim, in particular, is the inheritor of the war machine of the late Ahmad Shah Massoud who was substantially supported by the Indian security establishment during the anti-Taliban resistance of the late 1990s.

If Delhi has decided to take the plunge and stand overtly behind the Karzai-Fahim-Khalili axis of power that is taking shape in Kabul, it is because the Indian political leadership is acceding to certain compelling reasons given by the country's security establishment.

First and foremost, there is deep disillusionment over United States policies and a resultant feeling that India must pursue an independent course in Afghanistan to safeguard its security interests. The US's pattern of intermittently quarreling and depending on Pakistan to advance its regional strategy in Afghanistan exasperates the Indian establishment.

Just as Indian pundits concluded that the recent rift in US-Pakistan ties was far too advanced to lend itself to repair, Washington has once again kissed and made up with Islamabad. New details have begun emerging that the US Central Intelligence Agency might have taken the help of Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence in contacting the Haqqani network and that the US would have offered the Haqqanis a place in the Afghan government.

The fact that the US and Pakistan may be working together to finesse the Haqqani network (which India holds responsible for the two murderous attacks on its embassy in Kabul) and bring it into the peace process horrifies Delhi and it runs contrary to repeated American assurances to Indian officials.

Besides, Delhi is convinced that Pakistan masterminded the assassination of the head of the Afghan High Peace Council, Burhanuddin Rabbani, who was close to India, as part of a calculated plan to systematically remove from the political chessboard all figures who may challenge Taliban supremacy in the coming period, especially as the drawdown of US troops accelerates.

Three-pronged strategy

Within the framework of the dialogue with Pakistan, the Indian leadership had somewhat exercised self-restraint in robustly advancing its interests in Afghanistan in the recent period, but the Indian security establishment seems to have concluded that Islamabad is pushing the envelope nonetheless, aimed at exterminating all Indian influence in Kabul in a future set-up dominated by its Taliban proxies.

Equally, Delhi is not convinced about the efficacy of the troop drawdown plan of President Barack Obama. Ironically, India shares the skepticism recently voiced by Pakistani army chief Pervez Kiani as to whether the 2014 timeline to hand over responsibility to the Afghan security forces is realistic under the prevailing circumstances.

Thus, India is taking matters in its own hands, so to speak, to do what it can to ensure that the present power structure in Kabul (which is very well-disposed toward India) gains resilience in the near future.

The concrete outcome of Karzai's visit to India is three-fold and it reveals the range of Indian thinking. First, India is poised to step in for the first time in the post-Taliban era to fulfill a role that it used to perform before the mujahideen takeover in 1992 when Afghanistan was under the communist regime - namely, a commitment to be a mentor of the Afghan security forces.

Second, Delhi is making a strong pitch for a major role in the exploitation of the multi-trillion dollar mineral resources in Afghanistan. Third, India and Afghanistan have decided to work on their respective bilateral cooperation grids with Iran with a view to developing a trade and transit route through Iranian territory, bypassing Pakistan.

Clearly, India visualizes the non-Pashtun groups in central and northern Afghanistan as a bulwark against a Taliban takeover in the country. Yet, India will insistently maintain that its dealings with these groups will be strictly within the framework of a state-to-state relationship, given the alchemy of the political structure in Kabul supporting Karzai.

The point is, Tajik officer corps practically dominate Afghan forces and Delhi can be confident that they can be trusted to resist a return to power of forces such as the Haqqanis supported by Pakistan. In short, Delhi is virtually falling back on the raison d'etre of its policy to support the NA in the late 1990s.

Delhi doesn't rule out the possibility of another outbreak of civil war in Afghanistan. It is reviving its interest in "operationalizing" an airstrip it built in Tajikistan out of its own funds and has sought permission from Dushanbe to reopen a military hospital it built in the late 1990s at Farkhor on the Afghan border to provide medical treatment to the NA warriors fighting the Taliban.

Pakistan is sure to perceive the forthcoming Indian role as mentor of the Afghan forces and Delhi's decision to resuscitate its infrastructure in Tajikistan that used to provide underpinnings for the erstwhile NA's militia as moves directed against its "legitimate interests" in Afghanistan. The stage is getting set for a rather vicious eruption of Pakistan-India animosities. Pakistan's "asymmetrical" response in the past typically took the form of terrorist strikes at targeted Indian interests.

Indian restraint was commendable in the past when faced with the challenge of terrorism, but there is a school of thinking in the Indian strategic community that it is about time that India calls the Pakistani bluff. At any rate, India seems to anticipate troubled times ahead and has just begun a massive two-month military exercise on its desert border with Pakistan in Rajasthan sector, involving some 20,000 troops belonging to its strike corps and its air force, with an ambitious agenda to test its offensive plans to capture and hold enemy territory deep inside.

Second, Delhi is encouraging Indian business to invest in Afghanistan's mineral resources by way of emerging as a "stakeholder" in that country. Delhi is currently pushing a policy of acquiring strategic "assets" abroad and Afghanistan's vast mineral resources offer big scope for Indian investment.

Indian corporate giants are getting interested in the proposition, too. An Indian consortium is preparing to participate in the tender for the Hajigak iron ores in Afghanistan, which is estimated to hold reserves of 1.8 billion tonnes. The two memoranda of understanding signed during Karzai's visit to Delhi - relating to the field of mineral exploitation and the development of hydrocarbon - signal the shared interest of the two countries in facilitating large-scale Indian investments in Afghanistan.

To be sure, India's moves in this regard will be keenly watched by other countries, especially China and the US, which are already neck-deep in the scramble for resources in Central Asia. For the first time in the post-Soviet era, India is spreading its wings in the region and is scouting for "assets". While it lags far behind China, it seems to estimate that the game is far from over.

Third, India's main challenge with regard to a trade and transit route to Afghanistan needs to be addressed in priority terms and Karzai's visit provided a timely opportunity to have consultations. Delhi has vaguely spoken for over a decade regarding the importance of a Silk Route via Iran, but a new criticality has arisen. The point is, India cannot hope to have an effective Central Asia policy in the absence of a viable and dependable access route to the region.

Delhi views Iran as the obvious choice as a partner in this regard. Despite the improved climate in India-Pakistan relations and notwithstanding the stirrings of a more relaxed trade regime between the two countries, no one in his senses in Delhi quite expects that Islamabad would facilitate an access route for India's trade and investment ties with Afghanistan where the two countries are locked in rivalry.

Pakistan is dragging its feet with regard to the implementation of the trade and transit treaty it signed with Afghanistan under sustained American prodding. India does not see any prospect of Pakistan agreeing to include it in this treaty, as propagated by US officials.

Equally, India is far from optimistic about the US's grandiose Silk Road project connecting the Central Asian and South Asian regions, which is likely to be presented as a major regional initiative at a forthcoming conference in Istanbul on November 2.

Iran gets two suitors

Thus, finally, after some five years of neglect, Delhi has begun dusting up the framework of India-Iran strategic cooperation. This is no easy task, as Tehran harbors a deep sense of hurt that Delhi succumbed to US (and Israeli) pressures to atrophy India's ties with Tehran. But a beginning has been made in a dramatic manner recently with Delhi seeking a bilateral meeting with Tehran at the highest level of leadership and the latter promptly agreeing.

The fact that last month's meeting between Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and Iranian President Mahmud Ahmadinejad took place in New York - on American soil - was in itself invested with great political symbolism. Clearly, Delhi was preparing the ground for Karzai's forthcoming visit.

At any rate, Manmohan seems to have taken a personal interest in breathing life into the India-Iran strategic partnership, which many hold him as responsible for stifling in recent years in deference to American wishes.

India's rapprochement with Iran coincides with an upswing in the latter's ties with Pakistan. Iran is going to be assiduously courted by the two South Asian rivals. Pakistan's efforts will be to forge a matrix of commonality of interests with Iran over the Afghan situation and India's attempt will also be orientated in the same direction. How Iran balances its multiple choices will form an absorbing template of regional politics.

Pakistan will strive its utmost to avoid a replay of the 1990s when Iran shared common interests with India to resist the Taliban regime. This can only be done by Islamabad accommodating Iran's interests in Afghanistan, while, on the other hand, Delhi will strive to reinforce its shared concerns with Tehran over the prospect of the ascendancy of forces who enjoyed established links with al-Qaeda in the past.

Pakistan will factor in that the key to keeping India out of Afghanistan and the Central Asian chessboard will depend on its ability to "neutralize" Iran. On the contrary, India will view Iran's cooperation as integral to its strategy toward Afghanistan and Central Asia.

This curious turn to regional politics gives Iran much strategic space to maneuver vis-a-vis the US. Washington's "containment" strategy toward Iran will be virtually rendered ineffectual if India and Pakistan ignore it and forge strategic links with Tehran.

The US will inevitably come to view Indian "proactivism" in Afghanistan with a sense of disquiet, just as it hopes to work with Pakistan to reconcile the Taliban and to bring on board the intransigent Haqqanis. Again, India is identifying itself as, arguably, the strongest supporter of Karzai in the region at a time when the US is patently disillusioned with the Afghan leader and is counting on the remaining part of his second term in office to somehow get over so that by 2014 a new leadership can take over in Kabul.

The US and its Western allies and the Afghan opposition have openly welcomed Karzai's hints that he may not seek a third term (which the Afghan constitution also forbids) but they would know that the doughty Afghan leader possesses acute political instincts and they may not have heard the last word on the matter. India's seamless support for Karzai could become a headache for the US and its allies to dethrone him.

Delhi, on the other hand, will assess that its interests are best served in an alliance between Karzai and his erstwhile NA allies perpetuating their hold on power. The bottom line is that Karzai's coalition comprising powerful NA satraps serves Indian interests. The strong expression of support to Karzai by Manmohan leaves no one in doubt as to the thinking in the security establishment in Delhi that India should go the whole hog to prop up anti-Taliban forces in Afghanistan.

At a press conference with Karzai on Tuesday, Manmohan said meaningfully, "India will stand by the people of Afghanistan as they prepare to assume the responsibility for their governance and security after the withdrawal of international forces in 2014."

Karzai echoed his trust in the Indian commitment by pointing out that the strategic agreement with India that was signed during his visit was the first such agreement Afghanistan had ever concluded. He seems to have implied that he was prepared to accord India the pride of place as one of his most valuable partners. (The US-Afghan strategic agreement is due to be signed by the time of the Bonn conference in December.)

Again, the US will have misgivings about the decision by Afghanistan and India to rev up a trade and transit route via Iran. The very purpose of the US's Silk Road project with Afghanistan as a regional hub, which it is pushing with its European allies, aims at sidelining Iran (and Russia) in the "new great game". Whereas, Delhi now is showing preference to Iran for providing it with an access route that connects it with Central Asia (and Russia).

In overall terms, Washington is not going to be enthused by these Indian moves in Afghanistan, even if it doesn't pour cold water on Delhi's high enthusiasm for the Karzai regime. The US special representative on Afghanistan, Marc Grossman, is scheduled to visit India this week and will patiently search for rational explanations by his Indian interlocutors, while keeping his counsel to himself.

The big question, therefore, remains to be answered: Will it prove to be within Delhi's capacity to advance on its own such an ambitious agenda of all-round strategic partnership with Afghanistan? High hopes have been raised during Karzai's visit, but the pitfalls of Indian policies cannot escape notice, either.

India's record of fulfilling its commitments to its "allies" (not only Afghan) has been patchy. India repeatedly failed at critical points to bolster the NA despite its pleas when the Taliban juggernaut began rolling into the Amu Darya region. Meanwhile, Karzai would also know Pakistan's centrality in any Afghan peace process and India can never be a substitute for Pakistan.

The situation around Iran is central to the US's Middle East policies and the present government in Delhi may lack the grit to indulge in an act of strategic defiance of Washington. The Indian elites are not inclined to allow any serious contradiction to arise in the US-India strategic partnership in relation to the region - although they view with extreme distaste Washington's overtures to Beijing to step in as a provider of security for Afghanistan and as a "stakeholder" in the regional stability of South Asia.

All that can be said for certain for the present is that the Indian military and security establishment may have scored a huge propaganda point over its rivals in Rawalpindi and Islamabad by succeeding after six years of persistent effort to gain the status of a mentor of the Afghan armed forces. There is a heady feeling among the strategic community that India has at long last become a player in the "great game".

Will Indian military advisors be stationed in Afghanistan? If that happens, the Indian political leadership cannot overlook the grim prospect of the nascent dialogue process with Pakistan disintegrating in no time. It is highly unlikely that Islamabad (or Washington) would countenance an Indian military presence in the Hindu Kush.

At the end of it all, Delhi would do well to remember as well that all its support to the regime of Mohammad Najibullah - political, military, security and economic - still did not prevent the regime from collapsing in 1992 when the mujahideen came knocking on the doors of Kabul.

______________________________________________________

By M K Bhadrakumar (The Statesman)

India, Afghanistan and the End-Game

There are no permanent friends or foes in international politics, but the interests are. It has been amply displayed by India and Afghanistan while dashing another move on the strategic chessboard of South Asian Region. It is same Hamid Karzai, whose election to the presidential slot of Afghanistan for the second time had been silently opposed by India in opposition to Abdullah Abdullah, the Tajik titan, while Pakistan was reported to be in side with the former. During one of his visits to Pakistan, Karzai had passionately stated that “Pakistan and Afghanistan are conjoined brothers.” Today, he is again in India seen signing a strategic partnership pact. At the agreement signing ceremony, Dr. Manmohan Singh, the Indian premier, said that terrorism was being used “as an instrument of policy against our citizens,” again maligning Pakistan without naming it. “The deal,” he said, “creates an institutional framework for our future cooperation.” He also notified that agreements on energy and mining add a new dimension to our economic relations and that, “India will stand by the people of Afghanistan as they prepare to assume the responsibility for their governance and security after the withdrawal of international forces in 2014.”

The agreement should not be viewed and analysed on face value. There are yawning motivations for it. On the one hand, American people are too wary of the “3-trillion dollar” war, which brings home nothing but coffins of the American youth with not even a meagre yield of the gory toil in sight, let alone a politico-military victory. Americans want to go home in a state of stalemate before that it turns into a recorded rout or semblance of defeat. America’s drawdown diagram has upset both India and Karzai. India looks at the US presence in Afghanistan as a licence to its presence therein. For Karzai, the presidential palace is assured haven till such time that the Americans are operating at full strength in Afghanistan. If they go home, Karzai may have to take the last flight of US Army to run his restaurant in New York again. New Delhi too is not a bad option. This is how the interests of India and Karzai are seeking convergence in regional politics. Thus, the End-Game in Afghanistan is heralding a new Start-Game.

India is seeking an enhanced role in Afghanistan. It has already made noteworthy inroads into Afghan polity and society spending nearly US$2 billion out of the coffers that could have been spent on well-being of the socially deprived, economically underprivileged and homeless Indians who sleep in their millions on the footpaths of major metropolitans like Bombay, Kolkata and New Delhi. Geo-politics has prevailed over human security, courtesy to the expansionist Indian mindset. Anyway, Indian polity is leaving clear signatures that it is not going to leave space for anyone else on the podium of regional strategic speech-board. Certainly, it is trying to heap up political capital against none else but Pakistan. Principally, Pakistan cannot object to Afghan alignment with anyone including India. Yet, it has to keep note of any such move or arrangement that could breed a snake in its backyard. India understands that Karzai, though a Pashtun, does not represent popular Pashtun sentiment in Afghanistan. But a “strategic partnership” would keep the glow of India’s case alive under the ashes of history that could be set ablaze any time the sun of India’s goodwill shone in the heart of an Afghan polity in the days to come. This would let India keep a strong foot in Afghanistan. It has already deployed an Indian Air Force squadron on Ayni Air Base of Tajikistan. Deployment of one more on Bagram Air Base after American retreat would sound even more viable! India-Karzai agreement has also shown that they would continue to project “terrorism” as “instrument of Pakistan.” Actually, this is what all India wants Karzai to do; continue crying wolf and we would do the remaining part of the job.

What Pakistan needs to do under the present circumstances is not far from one’s reflection. It needs to create stronger-than-ever nexus with Afghan populace irrespective of their caste or creed. Meagre Kabul-Jalalabad Highway would not do enough to reach out to the spectacles of Afghan mind. They need more. Our politico-bureaucratic institutions need to think beyond political and military lines. There is abundant room along societal welfare line. It is indeed irony of the fate that while millions are Afghans are still living in Pakistan as refugees and their president, who too reportedly owns property in Quetta and Peshawar, goes and signs an agreement with India, which bears anti-Pakistan smell. We must remember that clock never clicks the same hour again in the gallops of history.

The writer holds master’s degree in Strategic Security Studies from the College of International Security.
 ____________________________________________________

 By Ehsan Mehmood Khan

Affairs, Washington D.C. and is pursuing M.Phil in International Relations from Faculty of Contemporary Studies, Islamabad.

ehsanmkhan@yahoo.com

(Statesman)

The real target of America

American invasion of Afghanistan in 2001 was termed by some serious thinkers and intellectuals as the first step of the big game planned to reach the atomic assets of Pakistan at the end. Such cautions from people having the ideological belief, had very little response particularly from the ruling secular elite of that time headed by Musharraf, who lacked the courage to demonstrate resilience to the American illicit pressure. The final goal of the Crusaders in Washington was the dismantling of Pakistan’s nuclear arsenals for which Afghanistan was to be turned into a launching pad. The series of events and recent developments give a clear indication towards that direction. America’s top leadership, both civil and military, have been seriously engaged during the past few weeks to demonize Pakistan’s armed forces, specifically the ISI to be responsible for the attacks at the heart of Kabul on the important American centres, including its embassy. They have accused the ISI to be backing the Haqqani network which has been incriminated to be responsible for these deadly attacks from North Waziristan Agency of Pakistan.If we go back into the retrospect, we find that Taliban were all prepared for dialogue on the Osama issue after the 9/11 episode. America could have achieved its purpose of Osama’s extradition through diplomatic channels and by using the good offices of Pakistan. America turned down every peaceful offer Taliban were making for the settlement of the Osama issue and launched her attack against Afghanistan. Pakistani leadership took a U-turn and offered its full support to America by providing all facilities of ground, air and sea to the aggressor to haunt the empty handed Taliban in the name of ‘war on terrorism’. Musharraf did all this for the sake of prolonging his illegitimate rule with the American support. Some political parties (calling themselves as leftists), a group of journalists and intellectuals completely endorsed the American policies of aggression in the region in the same way they had done when the USSR had attacked Afghanistan in the early eighties. This group of journalists and political intellectuals ran their media campaign so vigorously that Pakistani rulers did not heed the least to review their newly-adopted track under the American threat of, “With us or with the enemy”. Dislodging the Taliban and haunting the so-called Afghan insurgents, America grounded herself deeply in Afghanistan with all her might aided by the NATO and other allied forces in addition to the Northern alliance and Karzai’s puppet administration in Kabul. America gave ample room to the Indian interference, both covert and overt, and the Indian RAW took a glaring and active anti-Pakistan adventurism on the Afghan soil in full connivance of American CIA. The sabotaging activities in the country, particularly in the KPK, the naked aggression against Pakistan on the vulnerable points through the border line and the insurgency in Balochistan are good indicators to that situation. She has been promoting the idea of terrifying the West and all the anti-Islamic forces of the atomic weapons likely to fall into the hands of terrorists. To travel through all her journey, America has discovered very rightly that there are three very important hurdles in her way to reach her final goal, the atomic assets of Pakistan. At the top there is a very trained and disciplined army filled with the strength of deep conviction (Eiman) which is a source of Unity, Discipline and Jehad, the slogan of our armed forces. Second to the armed forces we have a world top ranking intelligence agency the ISI. America and all the inimical forces of this ideological country have joined hands in propagating a very negative picture of these inevitable organs of the security of the country. Through the media war, the Western media in general and that of America in particular are busy in disseminating all types of disinformation in order to undermine the credibility and prestige of our armed forces and the ISI both. To make this notorious campaign more effective and ambitious there are certain people within the country who are aiding the efforts of these forces in exchange of dollars. These include the so-called commentators and analysts who are trying to attribute every evil and activities of terrorism to be the planning of the security forces and the ISI. If one listens to the two programmes of the VOA, the Pushto channel of the Dewa Radio and the Urdu programme ‘In the News’ (Aap Ki Duniya) one can easily conclude how the state-run programmes are misleading the world about Pakistan. The Pushto programme particularly promotes the hatred against the armed forces and also accelerates the negative thinking already existing in the form of provincialism and nationalism. These programmes are always attributing all negative developments to the armed forces and those political parties and groups which believe in the ideological structure of the country. The third main hurdle in the way of the enemies of Pakistan is the Tribal citizens of Pakistan, whom the Quaid-e-Azam had named as the hands-and-arms of Pakistan. History is witness to the fact that the present Azad Kashmir on the Pakistan side is a gift of these tribal ‘mujahids’ who had reclaimed it from the Hindus after partition. We also know that during these six decades we did not need deployment of any security forces on our western border since our tribal brethren were manning these frontiers without any remuneration. They had proved their worth as the unpaid, informal and traditional force with all their capabilities of thwarting any untoward aggression from the west. During the rein of the Islamic Emirate of the Taliban of Afghanistan our west was safe to an exemplary standard. To create cracks in the solidarity between our armed forces and the tribal Pakhtuns, America worked on the multi-dimensional conspiracies and created a gulf between the two organs, responsible for the security and solidarity of the country. Through manipulation of the situation in these areas by importing terrorism in the shape of Mullahs, saboteurs, suicidal bombers, target killers, invisible Raymond Davis etc the most patriotic armed forces were forced for confrontation against the ill-informed but undoubtedly equally patriotic tribal Pakistanis. America has been struggling through all this decade-long terrorist activities to widen the gulf between the two important elements of strength and solidarity for Pakistan. She seems to be successful to a great extent in her nefarious designs as is evident from her threats of unilateral action on this soil if we do not take up our sleeves against the Haqqani network, a nightmare for the American generals and the civil administration in the White House.We Pakistanis do remember that conspiracies against Mr. Z.A. Bhutto were hatched by the Americans and he was murdered since he boldly denied bowing before America on the issue of initiating the project for the nuclear arsenals. How can the same America see the atomic assets in the hands of Pakistan, considered by Israel and India as their arch enemy? The troika consisting of America, Israel and India has perfected all its offensive regarding reaching our nuclear installations. The network of terrorists established by these forces have been carrying out all their destructive activities in the mosques, funeral prayers, public places and every where it finds a chance. It makes no difference if all such terrorist acts are being carried out through the fugitives from Pakistan drained out as a result of Army action or the ones purchased from the Northern Alliance or more sophisticatedly trained the like of Raymond Davis. We had been very categorically cautioned by the Iranian President, Ahmadinejad in June this year that America has completely drawn out its notorious plan of attacking our nuclear assets. He had claimed to have this information through very authentic sources. Anyhow, the Pakistani rulers did not take this note seriously. Attacks of Abbottabad and on the PNS Mehran in Karachi were a test case and probably a rehearsal for the purpose under reference. We should see writing on the wall and seriously ponder over the situation since Obama has already approved American attack on our nuclear assets. In a complicated situation like this, the All Parties Conference convened on Sept. 29th seems to be an important event showing solidarity of the nation behind their armed forces for the defence of the country. However, the message conveyed across the spectrum was very weak and it did not mention even the name of America, who has created this dubious situation for us. It seems like an FIR, in which the name of the accused and the crime committed is missing. Under these uncertain circumstances, we need to review our past policies viz-a-viz our partnership with the US in the so-called war on terror. Some of the suggestions are as follow.We should bring all the mutually agreed items of action in a written memorandum prepared on the basis of equality as is done between the two sovereign states. We should redefine clearly and unambiguously all the elements of our engagement with US with clear conditions specifying the limits to which we can go.The limits to which both the parties can go should clearly be mentioned and the red lines indicated very neatly and conspicuously which should not be transgressed by any of the parties in all circumstances. The logistic facilities we have given to the US and NATO must be recompensed specifically mentioning every segment that is under use for the purpose.We should have a clear commitment and guarantee of the US that India must remain within the limits as far as her interference in the Afghan affairs are conflicting to our interest.America should fully guarantee that there will be no future armed incursion in our country as repeated many a time during the past few months on the borders of Dir, Chitral and Bajaur Agency. We should have a clear guarantee of the US Administration that there will be no secret agents on our soil. We should also emphasize on the Americans to take note of the activities of the Indian consulates working on the soil occupied by the American occupation forces. Any problem/issue arising between the two should be addressed through dialogue and finding mutual solution rather than to resort to threats and pressure.

 By Muhammad Faheem (Frontier Post)

America’s lost decade!

Insurgency in Afghanistan is gaining momentum, making things worse for the Afgan Government and US-led alliance. From 2001 to 2010 the US-led Alliance has suffered 2.169 casualties. In the last two years more than 7,400 attacks had taken place in Afganistan resulting in more than 2,400 civilian casualities. Public support of the US war in Afganistan is also waning the US, Afganistan and regional countries. According to a recent CNN poll, only 37% percent of Americans favor the war in Afganistan, and more than half of Americans belive the war has turned into a Vietnam- like quagmire.
____________________________________________________________

Air Commodore ® Khalid Iqbal

While Pakistan does not seek an all out confrontation with the United States, it is also not starved of the options to continue enduring a transactional relationship. Beside commonly stated reasons for American frustration, one major cause is Pakistan’s recent effort to look for alternative alignments within Asia. Recent diatribe by the American leadership was indeed a close call, hopefully the worst is behind us; however next American relapse, with spiralling effect, may not be far away. Incriminations hurled on Pakistan are rather serious. Waging of a proxy war is too sombre a blame to die down. America has indeed mouse trapped itself; these accusations would keep coming back to haunt it with snowballing effect. America will neither be able to swallow nor spit it. Descent on escalatory ladder would be much tougher than the climb. Process of strategic divergence that started with the Raymond Davis episode has reached its peak. Public hostility towards the United States has reached new heights, exposing inherent strategic incompatibility of Pak-US relations. A decade after 9/11, Pakistan is being asked the same question: “Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists”. Going by this fixation, America has indeed lost a decade in fruitless pursuits.This time around American calculus is grossly out. Much has changed since 9/11. Thanks to American Machiavellian approach towards Pakistan, gap between the public perception about America and leadership’s policy evaluation about America is at its minimum. Expectations of buckling like a decade ago are misplaced. Given the spike of public antagonism, no political leader could afford to digress from collective national sentiment, at least publicly. Statements by the political leaders indicated that a national level consensus had evolved much before the convening of APC. Amid the prevailing confusion of jumping the fray by other countries like China, Saudi Arabia, Iran and, India, visit by the Centcom chief was a mysterious one. In all probability he came with an ultimatum which triggered an extraordinary meeting of corps commanders which voted down any military operation in North Waziristan; thus limiting the turf for the APC. APC has formalised the national consensus; and sent across a strong message. Now, at national level, there is a need for the political leadership to fully assume the charge of Pakistan’s America policy and demonstrate that it could walk the APC talk. First ‘to do’ is to lower the tempers at political level and convert this crisis into opportunity.Pakistan needs to evaluate its options, which are numerous; and review the courses of action available to America, that are numbered. Nevertheless, none of the sides can afford a direct confrontation without enormous risks. There are compatible capabilities on both sides, Americans are aware that in any military confrontation, Pakistan has no option but to retaliate irrespective of the losses. Americans are well aware of the limitations of employment of raw military power and crude economic sanctions. America may not conduct conventional operations on Pakistani soil. It may encourage the cross border incursions by Afghanistan based militants to overstretch Pakistani forces. It is likely to conduct periodic special operations akin to Abbottabad attack to embarrass Pakistan’s military leadership, create an aura of insecurity amongst the general public and induce a feeling of helplessness amongst the political leadership.In addition, the US would focus on non-operational military punishment, by severing military aid and supplies. However, this will go back in circles to haunt America as it will curtail the combat prowess of Pakistani military to carry out operations in tribal areas. That is why Admiral Mullen told the US lawmakers that a “flawed and strained engagement with Pakistan is better than disengagement”. America understands that the relationship with Pakistan cannot be broken because of the constraints entrapping the US. A damage control effort has already been initiated by relevant American functionaries. It will be interesting to see, how America balances its compulsions and limitations. Pakistan cannot afford escalation, likewise the US also cannot up the ante unrestricted without the risk of reaching a point of diminishing returns. By scuttling the semblance of a strategic partnership, the US has already lost most of the leverage it had over Pakistan. Though Pakistan will not opt for escalation, it is prone to respond, in kind, to the US actions. The US could stop bilateral aid to Pakistan. But that is unlikely to hurt Pakistan too much. US aid does not help the government’s precarious fiscal situation in any meaningful way as only 12-15 per cent of the total amount is channelled for budgetary support. If $3 billion (per annum) in economic and military aid is disbursed fully, this accounts for less than seven per cent of the total foreign exchange earnings of the country. The increase in export revenues and remittances in the current year was almost twice that amount. As regards significance of the aid, World Bank data shows that during the previous five years, net Official Development Assistance (ODA) from all sources to Pakistan has averaged less than 1.5 per cent of its Gross National Income. Per capita aid from all sources in 2009 was $14 only! Severing of civilian aid would have only a 0.14 per cent impact on Pakistan’s GDP growth. These facts do not point towards any meltdown if the American aid is withheld.But the real concern for Pakistan’s solvency would be loss of support from international lenders like the World Bank and International Monetary Fund (IMF); both look towards the US before deciding, they may deny the requests until a nod by the White House.A candid estimate puts losses to Pakistan’s economy due to its participation in war on terror around US$ 70 billion. The US has provided $20.7 billion to Pakistan since 2002, which makes about 0.1 per cent of the American treasure spent on war on terror over the same period. The biggest head, consuming $8.9 billion, is “Coalition Support Fund”. However a sizeable portion of it remains un-remitted. The US is getting obnoxiously stingy on reimbursements of this fund, rejecting 44 per cent claims in 2009, as compared to 1.6 per cent in 2005.Beyond that lie export quotas, both bilateral and others: if the US declares Pakistan a state sponsoring ‘terrorism’ that would unleash a sanctions regime which will severely impact Pakistan. However, in view of the strong support by China, America will not be able to accomplish this. In case of an eventuality, Pakistan could respond by imposing corresponding transit charges of logistics flowing through land routes and slam a ban on transit of its military aircraft through Pakistani air space. This would literally choke the foreign troops operating in Afghanistan.Pakistan understands that it is not in its interest to allow terrorists safe havens or allow such elements to launch attacks on other countries from inside Pakistan. A number of meaningful administrative and military related suggestions have been made by Pakistan to control the trans-border movements; to which Americans have shown a cold shoulder. Pakistan needs to project itself as an agent of peace in Afghanistan. It is uniquely placed to facilitate a process of cohabitation amongst various factions of Afghan resistance. America needs to understand that it cannot continue to slaughter the resistance forces while paying lip service to the need for reconciliation. It is now amply clear that America wants to run away from Afghanistan at a faster pace than its advent. It does not serve long-term American interests to leave behind a stable Afghanistan, so it is doing all gimmicks to spoil the pudding. Pakistan needs to take appropriate measures to minimise the impact.

khalid3408@gmail.com

US in Afghanistan: 10 years of massacre

 The US-led alliance has failed and in the last 10 years they could not achieve any considerable success in casualties have soared in the recent past, and there has been a rise in attacks on US led alliance that has deteriorated security situation in Afghanistan. Now the question arises whether the US-led alliance can achieve what they claim in next four years? Can America and its NATO allies clear10 years of mess in next four years, such claims are beyond reality.
___________________________________________________________

10 years ago, the then US President George W. Bush announced a war operation against Taliban in Afghanistan.

The reason for the operation was Taliban’s refusal to extradite Osama bin Laden, the leader of the international terrorist network “Al Qaeda” and the main organizer of the 9/11 attack – probably the most large-scale terror act in history.

At first, the US role in Afghanistan was limited to supporting the so-called “Northern Alliance”, the main Afghan force which stood against Taliban, with airpower and missile shots. However, when the main part of Afghanistan was freed from Talibs, international forces were introduced there. At present, Taliban doesn’t rule Afghanistan any more, but the remaining terrorists are still leading a guerilla war against their both local and Western opponents.

The killing of Osama bin Laden, which took place on May 2 this year, can be called a serious success of anti-Taliban forces. However, recently, General John Allen, who commands international forces in Afghanistan, said that these forces would stay in the country even after 2014, though, earlier, President Obama has said that they would be withdrawn before 2013.

The Afghan war has already cost the US many human lives – and a lot of money. At a recent meeting in Brussels, US Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta said that the US cannot support NATO’s budget any more, because EU countries are cutting their expenditures on defense, and the US itself has cut its defense expenditures by $ 450 bln in the last 10 years.

By October 1, 2011, the international coalition has lost 2,747 servicemen in the war against Taliban.

According to the UK newspaper “Independent”, 14 to 34 thousand Afghan civilians were killed in this war.

The exact number of the killed Taliban militants is unknown. Western sources speak of “tens of thousands”.

In an interview to the “Rossiya 24” TV channel, the head of the Russian anti-drug service Victor Ivanov said that the volume of heroine production in Afghanistan has considerably grown since 2001.

“This war has three results, all very sad,” Mr. Ivanov said. “First, the production of drugs in Afghanistan grew by as many as 40 times. That’s an unprecedented figure. Second, the region is now stuffed with military bases and foreign troops – over 150 thousand servicemen, which makes the situation highly explosive. Third, Afghanistan is still very politically unstable, and the number of militants is constantly multiplying there.”

(Voice of Russia)

Indo-Afghan agreement

Pakistan should take this agreement as one more sign of the change that has taken place, and should point out to the USA that if it continued to patronize India, it would be backing a power that posed an existential threat to Pakistan, as India wished to undo the partition. Pakistan must use this agreement as one more reason to end its own unequal alliance with the USA, which is not just backing, India, but permiting Afghanistan to pursue policies unfriendly to Pakistan.
________________________________________________________________

The strategic partnership agreement signed up by Afghanistan and India was not all that unexpected. It was for long in coming. All the portents were there ever since the US led the invasion of Afghanistan, ousted the Taliban and installed its proxies in office. The CIA, which president George Bush had tasked to conduct the invasion campaign and thereafter administer the occupied state, had established a close rapport with Taliban’s adversary Northern Alliance when the two were pitted in a civil strife. The Indians also had actively sided with the alliance in its fight against the Taliban, providing the technicians and air force personnel to maintain its planes, and even establishing a base hospital for its injured in Farkhor in Tajikistan, where commander Ahmed Shah Massoud too was reportedly rushed after the fatal suicide attack on him. Once the Taliban were driven out of power, the CIA brought up its Northern Alliance allies to cobble up a deep state of Afghanistan, throwing the inevitably necessary element of inclusiveness out of the window to induct exclusiveness in the power system decisively. Irrationally, it packed up the deep state with Afghan minorities, principally the Tajiks, and kept shunted out the Pakhtuns, alienating irreversibly this majority community traditionally occupying the pedestal of kings and kingmakers. And the Northern Alliance, on its part, set out to pay back the gratitude to the Indians by putting the deep state of Afghanistan at its service. It provided all the space to the Indians to embed and entrench in the post-Taliban Afghanistan. The deep state enabled India to build infrastructure of New Delhi’s special strategic interest, including an expressway linking Afghanistan with the Iranian seaport of Chabahar to render redundant Kabul’s dependence on Pakistan as a transit route for trade and commerce with the outside world. With its powerful position in the post-Taliban Afghanistan, the alliance inducted a number of Indians in key posts in the state’s bureaucratic leviathan, including the president’s own office where sat one Indian advisor even to advise on cabinet affairs. For reasons so obvious, the alliance was out to hurt Pakistan’s interest in Afghanistan in every manner. It ganged up with the Indians to subvert and destabilise the Pakistani polity and the Pakistani state. In a joint venture with India’s spy agency RAW, believably at the behest of its godfather CIA, the Tajik-dominated Afghan intelligence service, National Directorate of Security, a CIA subsidiary in reality, infested Pakistan’s bordering sensitive tribal areas. This has been admitted in so many words by none else but the sacked Afghan spymaster Amrullah Saleh in public outburst recently. And while leaving the Indian consulates to fan subversion and insurgency in its Balochistan province, it berthed undercover RAW agents in the offices of Afghan governors in bordering provinces of Afghanistan for subversive activities in the Pakistani territory.The deep state of Afghanistan seemingly received a bit of shock when the Americans’ forays for peace negotiations with the Taliban surfaced to the public limelight. The Northern Alliance was visibly miffed, and so were the Indians. The alliance cried foul and betrayal. It left no doubt about it that neither was it happy over the planned pullout of the American and NATO forces, which it wanted to stay on for years longer; nor was pleased at efforts for peace with the Taliban that potentially threatened its existing position of primacy in the post-occupied Afghanistan. The Indians too were opposed to peace with the Taliban; and only belatedly expressed a half-hearted support conditioned on many stipulations, none of which could be acceptable to the Taliban, palpably now in surge. With the frustration of failed peace attempts of the Americans and President Hamid Karzai, who the Taliban in any case view as mere puppet and no authority competent enough to talk peace with, their interests now seem to converge with the alliance. They all the three now appear on the same wavelength. It is unclear if the strategic partnership deals of India and Afghanistan carries the support of the United States, which itself is hankering for a strategic deal with Afghanistan, though as yet failingly. But it should not be forgotten that the outgoing US top military commander Mike Mullen had once famously stated in a Kabul press meet that India “has a military role in Afghanistan”. And lately US Congressmen, belonging to India caucus, have been calling for India’s prominent role in Afghanistan.Indeed, sometimes ago when the Americans were debating hotly the question of troops surge in Afghanistan, the Indian media was afloat with reports that the Indian military establishment was pressing the government to deploy two divisions of the Indian army, as a force independent of  the coalition armies. But some independent defence experts and farsighted political observers warned the Indian government that with this deployment it would surely get entangled in the internal strife of Afghanistan and its troops may return home with greater humiliation than had its expeditionary force met in Sri Lanka in fighting the Tamil Tiger insurgents. The sane counsel apparently prevailed. Yet India has deployed in strength its Indian-Tibetan border paramilitary specialising in espionage and subversion. This strategic agreement is thus sure to ratchet up the security concerns in Pakistan, and not unreasonably but quite legitimately.

Defence of Pakistan Day

 September 6, the Defence Day, falls at a time in the history of Pakistan this year when the country is facing extremely grave challenges, both internal and external. These challenges are in a sence unprecedented. Undoubtedly, the bifurcation of Pakistan in 1971was the greatest shock and the sddest event that has ever occurred. But we must keep in mind that in the late 60s it was a neighbouring country like India that was arraigned against Pakistan to slice its eastern wing off, today it is the combined forces of the sole superpower US and India, which are out to destablise it.
________________________________________________________

By Mohammad Jamil:

The Defence of Pakistan Day has significance in many ways, but national unity and trust between the people and the army is the spirit of 6th September. It is also manifestation of what Sallust (86-34 BC) a well-known historian, friend of Julius Caesar, politician and one of great Latin literary stylists had said: “By union (harmony) smallest states thrive, by discord the greatest are destroyed”. He was witness to the waning Roman Empire. On the other hand, Enver Hoxha an Albanian leader, head of communist party, former prime minister and head of state, a country with 3 million population only had written in his book: “No matter how small a country was it could not be subdued even by the great powers, if the people remained united”. As ardent a nationalist he was as he was a Communist, Hoxha excoriated any communist state that threatened the sovereignty of Albania. During 1965 war between Pakistan and India, entire Pakistani nation was cast into the mould of a cohesive unit that frustrated sinister designs of India to decimate the citadel of Islam.Every year, on sixth September the nation pays homage to the martyrs who laid down their lives while defending their country during 1965-war between Pakistan and India – six-time bigger in population and size. This is one of the most important events in the annals of Pakistan’s history when our military officers and soldiers heroically foiled India’s attempt to destroy Pakistan. During 1965 war, people of Pakistan were united and as a result Pakistan was not only able to repel the attack but also made advances in Kashmir sector. Political parties and people of Pakistan stood by the armed forces. Though efforts are being made to denigrate military by some pseudo-intellectuals, political analysts and some politicians, yet the people of Pakistan hold the military in very high esteem because they had given supreme sacrifice in the defence of the motherland, and always helped them whenever natural calamity hit the nation. It was in this backdrop that dring 1965 war, people irrespective of sect, language, region or province had demonstrated what Quaid-i-Azam had exhorted —- Unity, Faith and Discipline. It is relevant to recount the achievements so that the present generation is also aware of the past events. From Khyber to Coxes bazaar in former East Pakistan, people paid tributes and lauded the jawans and officers of Pakistan army, navy and air force for having displayed the valour when India attacked our motherland. The coordinated action of the army, navy and air force from Lahore, Karachi, Runn of Kacch to Chamb Jorian, had made all sectors the graveyard of ruined dreams of Indian leadership and army commanders who had dreamt of celebrating victory in Lahore. Pakistan with a relatively small army and limited resources had, indeed, given adequate response to the enemy on two thousand miles long border. India’s invincibility as a regional power was shredded into bits when Pakistan army in various sectors including Chwinda frustrated India’s pernicious designs. Pakistan navy had played its part by launching a successful attack on Dawarka, when fear from submarine Ghazi kept the enemy at bay and away from Pakistani coasts. Pak Navy’s complete control over the waters was indeed a miracle. Pakistan Air Force had proved its mettle by continuous air attacks from Pathankot to Agra; and Pakistan Army’s resistance for every inch of land would go down in the annals of history as a remarkable and memorable performance. But successive governments became complacent and did not focus on enhancing defence capabilities. They also failed to maintain the national unity achieved during 1965 war. On the other hand, India started preparing for the second round and was looking for Pakistan’s soft belly and an opportunity to attack Pakistan. In Pakistan, internecine conflicts between political parties and contradictions between the Centre and the provinces had provided India an opportunity to incite nationalists in former East Pakistan. During the last few years of united Pakistan, opulent Hindu minority worked on those misguided elements who had not weaned off the poison of sham nationalism. India had also trained Mukti Bahini to create chaos and unrest in former East Pakistan. It was a tremendous shock for Pakistan when Pakistan’s allies did not ask India to refrain from interfering in internal affairs of Pakistan. They rather stopped military as well as economic aid, with the result that Pakistan could neither get spare parts for the planes and other military hardware nor could it replenish the outdated fighter planes and other equipment. Since then, Pakistan army, navy and air force have been striving to enhance combat capability, and have also succeeded in developing tanks, missiles and other military hardware. By the grace of God, Pakistan today is an atomic power and has also developed surface-to-surface; surface to air, and air-to-air missiles. Pakistan possesses Medium Range and Short Range Ballistic Missiles; the 500-km-range Ground Launched Cruise Missile Hatf VII is capable of carrying conventional and nuclear payloads and hit the enemy with a pinpoint accuracy. But above all, we have Jawans and officers of the armed forces who are committed to defend the country. They always helped the civil government to rescue the people whenever a catastrophe hit the country like 2005 tragic earthquake or flash floods of 2008. During the last few years, our armed forces have fought terrorists, enemy agents and misguided elements in Swat, Malakand Division and South Waziristan. And they have successfully demolished terrorists’ infrastructure. However, there are some remnants of the militants, and the military is resolved to destroy them hook, line and sinker.Historical evidence suggests that even the strongest army cannot succeed unless it has the backing of the people. In 1965, armed forces had the support of people of Pakistan and could frustrate the vicious designs of the hostile neighbour. In 1971, however, the nation stood divided because of the ineptness of the rulers, who could not resolve the contradictions between the provinces and as a result Pakistan was disintegrated. Of course, there was international conspiracy with India on the frontline, which had trained Mukti Bahini, and Indian army physically supported the rebels by crossing international borders. The hearts of die-hard Pakistanis sink to find that due to odious notions of some elements in the garb of religion and nationalism, even today the nation finds itself divided on various planes and into various segments destroying the roots of cohesion and solidarity among its components. Our politicians and people of all strata of society should reinvent the spirit of September 1965, display unity in their ranks to frustrate the designs of the hostile enemy and so-called friends of Pakistan.

mjamil1938@hotmail.com
Frontier Post

Mirza goes dabang!

The timing of KPC Press Conference too was particularly significant. The very next day Chief Justice was scheduled to open the hearing of suo motu case vis-à-vis Karachi carnage and to expose those who are behind these killers, kidnappers, extortionists and land grabbers. It may further be recalled that, while in Islamabad, CJ had termed the government as ineffective. It is hypothesized that PPP was afraid of some severe ruling. Hence KPC Press Conference is perceived by many as an attempt to divert the focus only on MQM
_______________________________________________________

 
 By Tallat Azim

There we were, chugging along at our usual pace and concentrating on nothing more than seeing the holy month through. The only thought on our collective brains was how to cope with the onslaught of Eid expenses. We had very little time to think or worry about ‘Irene’, the hurricane that was creating havoc in another, far removed, corner of the world at that particular time. Little did we guess or know that there was a ferocious hurricane called ‘Mirzene’, which was hurtling towards us at breakneck speed and which would give us no preparation time!
Dr Zulfiqar Mirza has been in the public limelight ever since this government came to power. The primary reason of his importance stemmed from the fact that he was a childhood buddy of the all-powerful President and considered his right-hand man in the province of Sindh. That he was outspoken and dabang, ala Salman Khan, was no secret but he had, hithertofore, remained more or less within party discipline.
On August 28, only three days before Eid and within the last 10 days of Ramazan, Mirza went public on several issues that have been major stumbling blocks in the way of good governance. As a dumbfounded country listened on Dr Mirza, who disclosed important national secrets, named names and called the Federal Interior Minister the biggest liar on earth and went on to explain why he did so, he did not stumble or falter anywhere in his lengthy press conference, had files and documents to support his claims and, the icing on the cake, he did it all with one hand either on the Holy Quran or while holding the Quran with both hands over his head.
The brunt of his frontal attack was the person of Altaf Hussain and his party the MQM, as well as Interior Minister Rehman Malik. Like a ball of wool, he unravelled their alleged modus operandi and made some direct accusations, including the most serious one on MQM of being hand in glove to undo the federation of Pakistan. All these accusations have been made previously too, but only in the privacy of closed doors and that also in roundabout phrases. Primarily, because people are scared of the MQM and its silencing abilities. Thus, Mirza’s diatribe had a freeing feel for everyone. There were no saving graces. We have reached a point in our political life where all parties will have to clean their acts to survive, if we are to survive that is.
Many political analysts have described this as a master stroke by the President and they do not believe that Mirza has acted without his permission. That train of thought does not appeal to me. I, somehow, think that this is a real life example of a verse from the Holy Book that says: “On the Day of Judgment your mouths will be sealed and your hands and feet will bear witness against your deeds.” Best friends can be compared to one’s hands and feet, would you not agree?
More than what Mirza said, and the way he said it was also a real presentation of the values that we, rightly or wrongly, hold dear. We tend not to doubt anyone swearing on the Holy Quran in the manner that he did and that too in Ramazan. We think it is a sign of being well bred, if you are called a yaaron ka yaar and Mirza repeated umpteenth times how he holds the President in the highest esteem, as his childhood friend. He also disclosed his lineage and his family tree as well as his sectarian leanings, all of which could have been left unsaid. But by stating them he reveals a mindset and the importance we store by such facts.
The Eid holidays have been spent in absorbing and assimilating all that we heard. The Supreme Court has its tasks all laid out before it, as it resumes its hearings on the breakdown of the law and order situation in Karachi. The holidays have in all probability given time to the political parties too, affected or otherwise, to meditate, take deep breaths and plan their strategies in the light of the reveal - all, particularly if proof can be found to substantiate Dr Mirza’s serious allegations. These are interesting times indeed!
Postscript: After the thumping success of Shoaib Mansoor’s Bol more Pakistani films have been released on Eid. The industry seems to be struggling to survive and we must encourage its efforts. Reema has given us Luv main gum and Faisal Bukhari has given us Bhai log. We cannot continue to bask in the glory of a bygone cinema era, which is all that we have as reference. If we could do well previously, I am sure we can do well again. This is a country that likes its good times and remains resilient, despite best efforts to bring it down. As was visible in the holidays, the nation, particularly the cities, displayed an almost unbelievable zeal towards finding moments of joy and relaxation. The throngs of people and maddening traffic jams leading to parks, food streets and so on was a telling display of what people really want. They only want a very small part of the pie and a chance to be happy too.

The writer is a public relations and event management professional based in Islamabad.
Email: tallatazim@yahoo.com

The Nation