by Omar Ali
…. Why is Sheikh Rashid getting attacked? My guess (its only a guess) is because he was a senior facilitator of jihadi terrorists and now they are unhappy at the new policy. Pakistan will continue to bleed due to the leftovers of jihadi terrorism, India will continue to have its own indigenous terrorist movements, but Pak army “moral and diplomatic support” days are over….
Courtesy: CRDP, Feb 8, 2010
By Zahid Hussain
During an address to the foreign media, General Ashfaq Kayani said that peace and stability in Afghanistan were crucial to Pakistan’s long-term interests.
Courtesy: Dawn
RAWALPINDI: Chief of the Army Staff General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani said on Monday the success of military operations in the tribal regions have caused substantial decline in cross-border attacks on Nato forces in Afghanistan and warned that it was essential to address Pakistan’s long-term strategic concerns for stability in the region.
In a rare press briefing, General Kayani said it would be a cause of worry for Pakistan if Afghanistan’s projected army developed the potential to take on Pakistan.
“We want a strategic depth in Afghanistan but do not want to control it,” the general said while talking to a group of journalists at the Army General Headquarters.
“A peaceful and friendly Afghanistan can provide Pakistan a strategic depth.” He asked the US and Nato to come out with a clear strategy on Afghanistan.
Continue reading Kayani spells out terms for regional stability
Islamabad: Pakistan’s top military leadership on Thursday reviewed internal and external challenges confronting the country and the situation along the border with India and discussed their “contemplated response” to these issues. A meeting of the joint Chiefs of Staff Committe held in Rawalpindi discussed the “situation along the eastern borders, developments in the Indian Ocean? Region and the tenuous spectere of regional strategic balance”, said a statement issued by the military.
The meeting, chaired by Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee Chairman Gen Tariq Majid, also reviewed the “reshaping regional dynamics, implications of the revised US strategy for Afghanistan and impact of increased instability in Afghanistan”. The military leadership reviewed the national security scene and took “stock of evolving internal and external challenges and the contemplated respons”, the statement said. The leaders also discussed measures for dealing with assessed security challenges confronting Pakistan, including the “complex internal security situation”.
Continue reading Pakistan : Top military leadrship meets review defence strategy
by Omar Ali
My take on the Pak army’s current position oscillates between Taqi’s opinion and the opinion of Dr. Manzur Ejaz. I was fully behind Dr. Manzur Ejaz this morning. But its getting late at night and I just saw Kamran Khan and so maybe its time to put on a more pessimistic hat…
Rationally, Dr. Saheb is one hundred percent right. The army has a huge stake in Pakistan’s economy. Pakistan’s economy has no future if we are in a state of near-war and proxy war with India, Pakistan’s economy has even less of a future if NATO regards Pakistan as an enemy instead of an ally. India’s economy is growing rapidly. Peace will allow Pakistan to attach on India’s growth. Given its lower population density, reasonable infrastructure in Punjab and Karachi, relatively homogeneous heartland,and favorable location (Iran-India pipeline, central Asian transit trade, easier to ship things from Karachi to East Punjab than it is to go via Gujarat, etc.) Pakistan can actually start making serious money relatively quickly and that means the army will make money. China is also focused on economic growth and trade between India and China is exploding. Pakistan can get a share in all that. The peace dividend, in other words, is real and almost immediate.
Meanwhile, the jihadis are certifiably insane and are already a huge threat to the Pakistani state. America, NATO, Japan, Korea, all will pay good money to go after them and the job will take so many years, the army has no reason to worry that its “war on terror” gravy train will dry up anytime soon. Socially, Pakistan is not really ready for Jihadists rule. The jihadis have absolutely no workable program for a modern state….the case for ditching the jihadis and making peace with India seems open and shut. (Of course, INDIA may not cooperate either, but we are focusing right now on what the Pak army is thinking).
So are there some reasons to doubt this rational analysis?
1. The army may calculate (miscalculate in my opinion, but who said they cannot miscalculate?) that peace with India will deprive them of their ability to keep everyone else in Pakistan under their thumb. Or (even more stupidly) that it will deprive Pakistan of its reason for existence.
2. Some geniuses in NDU spend their life looking at rivers on the map and writing position papers about how Pakistan will shrivel and die if we don’t “have Kashmir”. Outsiders tend to think this his just the usual institute of strategic studies bullshit, but I have yet to meet an army officer who did not wholly or partly believe this.All sorts of other gory details about evil devious Hindu Brahmans and their determination to eat every last Muslim baby are added as needed. Again, outsiders tend to think this is “just propaganda” and expect that the army can distinguish between genuine maniacs like Babu Bajrangi and mainstream Indian politicians, but maybe the outsiders are giving the army too much credit? As you may know, even senior army officers seem to believe this propaganda by the time they have had a few drinks. This is an old hazard in the world of propaganda: the propagandists tend to fall for their own propaganda, especially when they live in some echo chamber where alternative views don’t get in anyway.
3. Some in the army and its “think tanks” (Shireen Mazari?) may think that it is more rational to destroy India before it becomes a serious power, and they may imagine that their BFFs in China actually want the same. It does’nt matter if Wen Jia bao doesnt actually think in these terms. What matters is that Shireen Mazari and General Tinpot bahadur imagine that the Chinese want this to happen. Dr. Manzur Ejaz is a sane person, but far too many Pakistani army officers are listening to Zaid Hamid and Ahmed Qureshi, not Dr Manzur Ejaz. What if they take those nutcases seriously?
4. The problem of true believers. Again, outsiders tend to think that Islam and the whole neo-wahabi paradigm are basically means to an end. Tools used by the Pak army to get its goodies, just like Republican candidates use evangelical Christianity. But what if a lot of people in high places actually believe that Allah is waiting for them to unite the Ummah and lead it in its eternal struggle against the infidels?
5. There is the issue of some events that don’t make a lot of sense if the jihadi option is actually being shut down: the determined refusal to launch frontal propaganda against the jihadis; the fact that ISI mouthpieces are constantly working to stir up anti-American and anti-Indian feelings and spreading confusion about the jihadi menace; The attack on Mumbai and the determined effort to present it as some kind of Indian plot;The mysterious survival of all senior jihadi leaders; Masood Azhar; Daood Ibrahim; Ahmed Saeed Shiekh; Haqqani network; Fazlullah, etc. And the line taken by army spokesmen like Kamran Khan; Shireen Mazari….too many loose ends…
5. Finally, there is the issue of nutcases. Every nation has some maniacs who need to be kept in asylums or employed in low level police jobs or as prison guards in Texas. If this kind of person makes it to some place where they can plan another attack on Mumbai, then all bets are off.
Dr. T has mentioned the Nazis. The sophisticated, highly civilized German nation ruined Germany and all of Europe in 12 short years of Nazi rule. At some level, Hitler’s initial actions seemed rational. Rationalists fully expected that he would also know where to draw the line. They were proven terribly wrong. What if the true believers are not thinking of means but ends?
I look forward to being proved wrong.
Courtesy: CRDP, Fri Jan 1, 2010
– Restive generals represent the backers of the Taliban and al-Qaeda – bad news for the war next door.
by: Tarek Fatah
Courtesy: Globe and Mail
A military coup is unfolding in Pakistan, but, this time, there is no rumbling of tanks on the streets of Islamabad. Instead, it seems the military is using a new strategy for regime change in Pakistan, one that will have adverse consequences for Western troops deployed in Afghanistan.
By: Khalid Hashmani
Mr. Azhar Ali Shah has extracted some interesting information about 14 Army chiefs of Pakistan (of course none of them was Sindhi) from Wikipedia. He has asked the knowledgeable persons to comment on the authenticity of the information since any one can add information to Wikipedia. He interestingly notes that except for one Army Chief, all other 13 chiefs superseded their seniors, denied the orders of head of state, seized the power though coup ….
Courtesy: Sindhi e-lists/ e-groups, 26 May 2009
‘The day is not far when Islamabad will be in the hands of the mujahideen,’ Pakistani Taliban commander Mullah Nazeer Ahmed said.
MINGORA: Pakistani Taliban are moving into a new area in northern Pakistan, clashing with villagers and police in a mountain valley, police and district officials said on Wednesday.
Separately, a Pakistani Taliban commander said the Pakistani military and the United States were colluding in US drone aircraft attacks and the militants would take their war to the capital, Islamabad, in response.
Surging militant violence across Pakistan is reviving western concerns about the stability of its nuclear-armed ally.
Pakistan is crucial to US efforts to stabilise Afghanistan.
US envoy to Afghanistan and Pakistan Richard Holbrooke, and Admiral Mike Mullen, chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, were in Pakistan for talks on security strategy this week.
In a development that will deepen the west’s concerns, scores of Taliban have moved into Buner district, 100 km northwest of Islamabad, from the Swat valley where authorities struck a peace pact in February aimed at ending violence.
‘About 20 vehicles carrying Taliban entered Buner on Monday and started moving around the bazaar and streets,’ said senior police officer Israr Bacha.
Villagers formed a militia, known as a lashkar, to confront the Taliban and eight of the insurgents were killed in a clash on Tuesday, police said.
Two villagers and three policemen were also killed.
‘People don’t like the Taliban,’ Ghulam Mustafa, deputy chief of Buner, told Reuters by telephone.
Muslim Khan, a Taliban spokesman in Swat, was defiant. ‘What law stops us going there?’ Khan said. ‘Our people will go there and stay there as long as they want.’
Authorities agreed in February to impose Islamic law in Swat to end more than a year of fighting.
Critics said appeasement would only embolden the militants to take over other areas.
Pakistan’s western allies fear such pacts create safe havens for Taliban and al Qaeda fighters.
Pakistani Taliban commander Mullah Nazeer Ahmed said in an interview with al Qaeda’s media arm, Al-Sahab, that Pakistan was behind US drone attacks on militants.
Authorities were misleading the public by saying it was the United States carrying out the strikes, he said, and it was the Pakistani army that sent spies to facilitate them.
‘All these attacks that have happened and are still happening are the work of Pakistan,’ Ahmed said, according to a transcript of the interview posted on Al-Sahab’s website.
Alarmed by deteriorating security in Afghanistan, the United States has since last year stepped up drone strikes in Pakistan.
Pakistan objects to the strikes, calling them a violation of its sovereignty that complicates its effort to fight militancy.
Other Taliban commanders said recent violence in Pakistan has been in retaliation for the drone attacks and threatened more.
Ahmed said Pakistani Taliban factions had united and would take their war to the capital: ‘The day is not far when Islamabad will be in the hands of the mujahideen.’
Ahmed also blamed the Pakistani military’s Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) agency for sowing divisions between factions, saying the ISI was the Taliban’s main enemy.
Some US officials have said recently the ISI maintained contacts with militants and there were indications ISI elements even provided support to the Taliban or al Qaeda militants.
Such accusations have angered Pakistan, although a military spokesman denied reports that ISI chief Lieutenant-General Ahmed Shujaa Pasha had snubbed Holbrooke and Mullen by refusing to meet them on Tuesday.
Courtesy: DAWN
(Editor’s Note: Bashir Qureshi is a Sindhi nationalist leader, he heads his own faction of Jeay Sindh Quami Mahaz (Long Live Sindh National Front) based on ideology of late G.M. Syed who called for independence of Sindh from Pakistan in 1970s. G.M. Syed was founder of movement for independent Sindh into a separate country he called “Sindhudesh”, that means land of Sindh. Qureshi lives in Karachi, originally hails from a small city of Larkano district called Rato Dero. He became prominent when he was student leader in early 1980s at Tando Jam University, where he was studying. It is not confirmed that he completed his graduation from there or not because he was frequently arrested and remained in jail for several years.)
On January 5th, 2009 Syed’s birth day was observed in his ancestral native village called Sann.
Few passages of speech made by Bashir Khan Qureshi, Chairman JSQM are taken from Sindhi newspaper “Awami Awaz” (means voice of people) are given below;
“G.M. Syed is an ideological leader not only of Sindh but of globe, Syed considered Pakistan’s creation precarious not only for people of this country but for world at large”. This reality is now established universally that Pakistan’s existence is precarious not only to region but world at large.
We consider meaning of Pakistan as Punjabistan. Madeleine Albright, the former U.S. Foreign Secretary of State/Minister, said openly that “Pakistan is a Migraine for the world”. International Community committed error by not accepting G.M. Syed’s advice, and now this same mistake should not be repeated again, to get rid of religious extremism, international community should support Sindhis, Bashir Qureshi said.
“We Sindhis, though are stronger than Balochistan in terms of ideology but in fighting and resistance Balochs are far ahead than us. We demand end to operation in Balochistan and fully support independence of Balochistan, and further demand freedom and independence of all nations who have separate existence, he (Bashir Qureshi) said“
The Birth Anniversary of G.M. Syed was attended by some five thousands men & women on January 5, coverage of the event widely reported on January 6th 2009.
Background: At present there are four major groups/parties following into the political footsteps of late Jeay Sindh group led by Bashir Qureshi called JSQM is considered to be successor of G.M. Syed’s movement and most popular among its Jeay Sindh’s workers.
Other groups are JSQM-Areesar Group and Jeay Sindh Mahaz-Junejo Group, the fourth group is led by Syed’s own family called Sindh United Party (SUP), it is led by G.M. Syed’s grandson Syed Jalal Shah, who is a former member of Sindh Assembly and Deputy Speaker & acting speaker of Sindh provincial assembly. SUP has moved from demanding separation of Sindh to provincial autonomy of Sindh while remaining into Pakistan’s framework. Where as other three groups still demand independence of Sindh.
New intelligence report says Pakistan is ‘on the edge’
By Jonathan S. Landay and John Walcott | McClatchy Newspapers
Courtesy and Thanks: McClatchy
MORE FROM MCCLATCHY
Severe economic crisis threatens Pakistan’s stability
Wave of violence worsens Pakistan’s security, economic crisis
WASHINGTON – A growing al Qaida-backed insurgency, combined with the Pakistani army’s reluctance to launch an all-out crackdown, political infighting and energy and food shortages are plunging America’s key ally in the war on terror deeper into turmoil and violence, says a soon-to-be completed U.S. intelligence assessment.
A U.S. official who participated in drafting the top secret National Intelligence Estimate said it portrays the situation in Pakistan as “very bad.” Another official called the draft “very bleak,” and said it describes Pakistan as being “on the edge.”
The first official summarized the estimate’s conclusions about the state of Pakistan as: “no money, no energy, no government.”
Six U.S. officials who helped draft or are aware of the document’s findings confirmed them to McClatchy on the condition of anonymity because NIEs are top secret and are restricted to the president, senior officials and members of Congress. An NIE’s conclusions reflect the consensus of all 16 U.S. intelligence agencies.
Continue reading Pakistan: No money, No energy, No government!
Within a matter of days, events on the Afghan border seem to be creating a perfect storm of mistrust and conflict between the United States and Pakistan: The recent US heliborne attack with troops inside Pakistan’s tribal area; the report that President George W. Bush had signed off on such attacks in July, allowing US forces to conduct these raids without clearance from Pakistan; the short-term shutting down of the US supply route to Afghanistan by Pakistan, ostensibly for “security reasons”; and finally an unequivocal riposte from Pakistan’s army chief General Ashfaq Pervez Kayani that “There is no question of any agreement or understanding with the coalition forces whereby they are allowed to conduct operations on our side of the border.”
Unless good sense prevails, the US-Pakistan alliance may be heading for the rocks in a storm that could rent the tenuous alliance between these two “allies”.
There may be good grounds for the US to feel that it has been let down by Pakistan in the past. Pakistan’s ambivalent approach to the Afghan Taliban and continuing hidden links to former Afghan Mujahideen commanders, such as Jalaluddin Haqqani and his son Siraj, came to be at odds with its partnership with the US against militants in the border region. Coming clean on that score may not have satisfied the US. Hence the Bush signature on unilateral attacks even perhaps as he entertained the new Pakistani prime minister in Washington this July.
Suddenly the old policy of “a wink and a nod” that worked for President Pervez Musharraf and that appeared to be continuing under the new democratically elected Peoples’ Party government seems to have been set aside. Kayani’s tough statement appears to have widespread public support in Pakistan. The Prime Minister echoed his words. But President Asif Ali Zardari uncharacteristically has been silent. If this portends fissures in the ruling hierarchy then the signs are not good for the balance of power inside Pakistan.
Other dangerous possibilities appear likely in the US-Pakistan relationship. The next time the US physically invades Pakistani territory to take out suspected militants, it may meet the Pakistan army head on. Or it may face a complete a cut-off of war supplies and fuel in Afghanistan via Pakistan. With only two weeks supply of fuel available to its forces inside Afghanistan and no alternative route currently available, the war in Afghanistan may come to a screeching halt. The Bush approach may prove to be yet another example of short-term thinking that damages the longer term objective. The Taliban meanwhile will be applauding from the sidelines.
A major consequence of the US invasion of Pakistan’s territory will be the further alienation of the Pakistani public and a serious internal problem for the fledgling civil government that took over from Musharraf’s autocracy. The US may think it has considerable leverage over the Pakistani government because of the latter’s economic ills and financial straits and its overwhelming reliance on US aid. But it is failing to measure the power of the Pakistani street. Already, a vast majority of people in Pakistan, including inside the army, see the United States with hostile eyes. Anyone in Pakistan seen as aligning with the Americans would lose public favor. And the nationalists and religious extremists will then get a chance to say “we told you so!” and gain the upper hand.
All this is happening as the lame duck Bush presidency is getting ready to pack its bags. But the campaign to succeed Bush is heating up. Cross border US attacks inside Pakistan will distract from the war on terror in the region. They will also divert the campaigns of Senators John McCain and Barack Obama from finding solutions to hurling new rhetorical bombs at each other to prove that each is tougher in the use of military force than the other.
Both Pakistan and the United States need to rethink their actions. Pakistan must prove with actions not just words that it is willing to shed its ties to all militants. The United States must ratchet down the rhetoric and the use of force, especially against an “ally” in this war on terror, a war that will last well into the next president’s term and may be beyond. And it must fully equip the Pakistan army to fight a mobile counter insurgency in its borderlands. Otherwise, the US will not only lose an ally in Pakistan but ignite a conflagration inside that huge and nuclear-armed country that will make the war in Afghanistan seem like a Sunday hike in the Hindu Kush.
Author’s Note: This article has also appeared on The Huffington Post
Indus Asia Online Journal (Click here to go to home page)