no easy days for pakistan ahead

8/7/2019 No Easy Days for Pakistan Ahead

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/no-easy-days-for-pakistan-ahead 1/20

No Easy Days for Pakistan Ahead

July 25th, 2010

Pakistan is still Mistrusted by its Allies:For easing their troops out of Afghanistan, the US apparently needs a shoulder to relyon. And in the current scenario the Pakistan Army, headed by Gen Kayani, offers that

shoulder. Hence, the overwhelming US desire to ensure continuity in command on theeastern side of the Durand Line.

But beyond Gen Kayani’s extension, Clinton and Admiral Mullen’s latest visits (July19 and July 24, 2010) need to be examined in the backdrop of the ever growing Indo-Afghan-American axis. Within six days, top leaders of these countries – IndianForeign Affairs Minister S M Krishna, Hillary Clinton, President Hamid Karzai, andAfghan Commerce Minister Anwarul Haq – exchanged notes with Pakistani ministersand officials in Islamabad and Kabul. And on July 20, what stood out was the usualmistrust of Pakistan being the harbourer and promoter of terrorist forces.

S M Krishna and Clinton left no doubt that mistrust remains the biggest thorn in theIndo-Afghan-American-Pakistan relationship. By practically insisting on the presenceof Osama Bin Laden and Mulla Omar in Pakistan and asking for access to them, MsClinton practically indicted Pakistan for “harbouring terrorists wanted by the UnitedStates.”

Clinton’s claims also belied the niceties she showered around in Islamabad, belittlingthe claims of the desire “for a long-term strategic partnership.”

Regional Power – India – Still Skeptical of Pakistan’s Intentions:And this mistrust emanates not only from Washington but also sits deep in India,illustrated by the Deccan Herald on July 22: “Clinton is right in the substance of her allegations, she is downplaying the magnitude of the problem. Knowledge of Bin

http://crss.pk/beta/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/manmohan-obama.jpg



Laden’s whereabouts might be restricted to elements in the Pakistan government butthe support he and others of his ilk are getting is far more widespread from within thePakistani establishment. In fact, Pakistan has made no shift away from its long-standing use of terrorism to further its foreign policy goals.”

The paper went on to claim that “Recent evidence too has revealed that US aid is being diverted to fund terrorism. So why is Washington then still treating Islamabadwith kids gloves?”

As far the Indian external affairs minister S M Krishna is concerned, he may havevoiced his displeasure with the home secretary G K Pillai, who in an interview

published a day before talks in Islamabad spoke about the alleged role of the ISI in the2008 Mumbai attacks. Yet he diplomatically qualified his criticism of Pillai.Factually, Mr. Pillai was “very much in order” in speaking about the disclosures made

by Headley to the FBI and Indian interrogators, but “the timing was something whichwas very unfortunate,” said Mr. Krishna.

Krishna’s criticism of Pillai apart, the latter clearly represented the hard-line approachwithin the Indian government over engagement with Pakistan. At a seminar in NewDelhi, India’s national security adviser Shivshankar Menon openly endorsed Pillai’sstand.

Where would This Mistrust Take Pakistan?Firstly, the Indo-Afghan-American axis is unsparing and convinced of the “links

between the militants and the establishment” and they are thus closing ranks to politically, if not physically, encircle Pakistan. India’s fixation on the accusedLashkar-e-Taiba members and USA’s insistence on the Pakistani links with theHaqqani network, Laden and Mullah Omar amply underscore that point.

Secondly, until the US and the Indian’s harp on these links, Pakistan will remainstigmatized as a terror-sponsor.

Thirdly, Pakistan’s alleged links with terrorists will always serve as spoiler on issuesmentioned above. This will increase suspicion of USA and India in Pakistan, kickingup controversies and stoking the old ones.

Case in point is the emerging Indo-US consensus on the LeT as a threat to global

stability (in the words of Admiral Mullen in New Delhi on July 24).

How Could Pakistan Tackle This Situation?Pakistan, so it seems, has been on the defensive so far. While explaining its positionon people such as Haqqani, Hekmetyar and Mulla Omar, it apparently has notadequately spelt out the socio-political domestic compulsions that are obstructing anall-out war against the people mentioned above.

It also has allowed the debate on its “role” in the Afghan reconciliation process;allegations and insinuations out of Washington and New Delhi say that Pakistanwants a central role in this process.



Strangely, not a single word on these allegations has surfaced in Islamabad or Rawalpindi. Why can it not publicly state its concerns “next door”? If the US, over 13,000 kilometres away, and India, which doesn’t share a border with Afghanistan,are out to safeguard and secure their interest in that volatile country, why shouldn’tthe Pakistani government be concerned about it?

Another extremely important issue is US opposition to the Iran-Pakistan gas pipeline(because of Washington’s conflict with Tehran). Rather than celebrating a couple of hundred million dollars for energy projects, why cant Pakistan press for the removalof the American opposition to this project that it so desperately needs. Thegovernment must make it clear that if Americans want to extract maximumcooperation from it, they must also respect Pakistan’s long-term energy interests.

Where Does Kayani’s Extension Fit-in?Some call it a coincidence, others a coordinated effort, that within 72hours of Secretary of State Hilary Clinton’s meeting with General Ashfaq Kayani on July 19,the Prime Minister hastened on to state-run television and made an unprecedentedannouncement. In view of “his excellent services” Gilani “gave” Kayani the threeyear extension. Never before has a prime minister appeared on national TV to makesuch an announcement. Nor does the three-year tenure have a precedent. This meantall elements of the jigsaw puzzle are in place, pretty much in line with the road-mapcharted out by David Petraeus and Admiral Mullen, both of whom openly displayedtheir fondness of Kayani on several occasions.

Does this mean the Obama administration succeeded in managing all the key playersin Pakistan’s ruling matrix? Are Asif Zardari, Premier Gilani, General Kayani allhappy because they all can coexist until 2013 under international guarantees?

Viewed against Obama’s plans from July 2011 onwards, the US weight behindKayani makes sense. For the first time, both Obama and the Pentagon (represented byPetraeus and Mullen) seem to be in sync as far as the Afghan strategy is concerned.Both civilian and military leadership probably realize, unlike advice by many withinthe establishment, that the military surge did not use violence, so why speak of eliminating it through another surge?

If the US is keen on the Afghan Transit trade to flow between India and Afghanistanvia Pakistan, the quid pro quo would be to persuade India to move beyond its stated

position on the Mumbai attack culprits and engage in substantive talks. Pakistan needsto ask and strive for long term benefits, rather than bargaining for temporal and shortterm gains.



Different Pakistans for the Rich and Poor

August 29th, 2010

Pakistan’s Ruling Elite:

Garhi Khuda Bux (Sindh) – Once again, the tide of goodwill in the aftermath of thesuper-flood favors Pakistan. By himself flying over the affected areas and later givinga graphic description of the devastation, the UN Secretary General Ban KiMoon persuaded members of his organization to step forward and help Pakistan copewith the consequences of what he described as the “slow-motion tsunami.”

And rightly so.

It is indeed a “slow-motion Tsunami” because it will now amplify the consequences

of a system that rests on a morally bankrupt, intellectually poor, politically self-serving, culturally bigoted and financially corrupt ruling elite comprising politicians, bureaucracy, feudal lords, generals and their apologists in all spheres of life.

Towering Grand Tomb and Low Lives at Garhi Khuda Bux:

And the Garhi Khuda Bux – the ancestral town the Bhuttos – exemplifies thedisconnect between this ruling elite and the hapless masses on the one hand, and themisplaced priorities on the other; a huge domed complex now stands over the oldgraveyard where all the Bhuttos are resting. The three-domed marble complex is nowcalled the Mazar- the mausoleum, built with public money – drawn from the

provincial and the federal kitties. A huge boundary wall, running into hundreds of meters, is being built as the foreyard of the mausoleum, all with expensive holed-

blocs, imported from Karachi. That too, of course, with the public money.

Both and inside the mausoleum, dozens of half-naked children and elderly locals areidling around. Some barefoot, some without shirts, you can count the rib-cage of theseemaciated figures. Their faces betray the story of poverty and the miserable life theylive under the shadow of this towering complex. Looking at the physical expense andthe financial expense incurred on it, it appears as if poverty, education and healthfacilities for the thousands living by the mausoleum have been taken care of.

Politics – Even After Death:

The lay-out of the graves inside offers even more disconcerting and reflects how thequest for personal and undivided glory precedes human relations; beside the grave of Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto is the resting place of the daughter i.e. Benazir Bhutto. Behindthese two lay the graves of grandparents but where are the two brothers – Murtaza andShahnawaz – we ask one of the frail care-takers. He points to two graves behind us – several meters away from the two PM graves behind a huge column. Rather than

being beside their father, the two brothers were buried at the foot-side of senior Bhutto.

We try to ask for the reason and none of the “wretched of Garhi Khuda Bux” darestell us the truth; they say the mazar committee in charge must have decided where the



brothers would be buried. We don’t expect any better explanation from these down-trodden faithful followers of the senior Bhutto. We can only infer that the sister wasso overwhelmed with power and authority that she decided to put the brothers awayfrom their father, practically in isolation of others.

Misery All Around the Towns of the Prime Ministers:

Once outside the Mausoleum, we witness more scenes of grueling poverty in thevillage, with men and women toiling in the sweltering humid heat. This place of

phenomenal contrasts only a few kilometers away from Rato Panjdero, Rato Dero andLarkana, the town which the Bhuttos used a launching pad for their political careers.

While driving past these poverty-stricken villages, one wonders how these poor farmers and daily wage workers feel when their representatives zoom past them intheir land-cruisers or flying over their heads in helicopters. The dividend of empowerment flows to the elected ones and those empowering them remain stuck in

perennial poverty.

Larkana itself represents another distressing story of neglect and extremely poor governance. Dusty, broken and tattered roads, choked sewage lines boiling on to theroads, parts of the town littered with garbage. This is the scene today of the town thatgave Pakistan two prime ministers.

Almost a 100,000 displaced from Garhi Khairo and Shahdadkot in particular havetaken refuge in Larkana, which is protected by two protective dykes – Nusrat LoopBand and Aqil Aghani Band -. Dozens of heavy machines – tractors, excavators – have been working round the clock to reinforce these dykes to protect Larkana fromthe wild overflow of the Indus.

One wonders whether other towns currently submerged in water – Kubo Saeed Khan,Shahdadkot, Thattha, Nasirabad, Rojhan Jamali and scores of others also received thesame unusual vigilance. Probably not.

Mother Nature played havoc in October 2005. It is wreaking havoc again in August2010. It has dispossessed the majority of those living along or near the Indus River

basin, while those empowered by the majority are once again stuck in their point-scoring, selfish squabbles, eyeing dividends that will flow from the aid for those

affected. One PPP worker who had enough of guts could only say: “God save us. Weare hapless, poor, powerless people only meant to vote for those who fly past us.”

Democracy, if it has to stay, has to evolve into a system that is just, accountable and provides ample opportunities to the ones who vote the ruling elite to power.



Is there a Hope for Pakistan?

October 24th, 2010

A Reality Check on Pakistan’s Future:

Pakistan has a population of around 180 million which has trebled over the past 50years and is slated to grow by another 85 million in the next 20 years, making itroughly 265 million – equivalent to adding five more Karachis! In another twentyyears the population will be 335 million! With more than half of the population livingin towns and cities imagine the lethal tensions over land, water, power, housing, jobsand services. Imagine the scale of investment and materials that will be required ininfrastructure and services. The economy will need to grow at a minimum of six per cent per year over the next ten years to generate 36 million new productive jobs tomeet the needs of the growing population.

Currently, the growth rate is not even keeping pace with the population expansionrate. Moreover, with only 50 per cent of children going to primary school, 25 per centto secondary school, and only 5 per cent receiving higher education the qualificationsrequired for productive employment and self-employment are just not going to bethere. In fact, taking into account the deplorable quality of education available to theoverwhelming majority of our children the situation is in fact much worse than whatthe deplorable figures suggest.

Plethora or Problems:

The situation in other basic services sectors, indeed in social and gender protectionsystems and human resource development as a whole, is arguably even more dismal.Roughly 40 per cent of all households have no electricity and 80 per cent of allhousehold energy use comes from firewood, dung and crop residue. Industrial andtransport growth without assured energy supplies at affordable prices will be a pipe-dream. Pakistan is already one of the most water-stressed countries in the world as aresult of its population growth. Rising consumption expectations in a globallyconnected world will exacerbate current frustrations. Climate change will further exacerbate water and food shortages which, if not addressed on a national andregional scale, will massively undermine the country’s growth and productiveemployment prospects. It will threaten the peace within Pakistan and with neighbors.

Already Poor; Floods Made People Poorer:

Around 110 million of Pakistan’s population lives on $2 a day which may betechnically above poverty line but apart from a bare, miserable and uncertain survivalit allows for little. Even before the recent floods it was estimated that due to inflationin general and food inflation in particular roughly seven per cent of the population(over 12 million) who had barely risen above the poverty line during the previousdecade sank below it again.

In the aftermath of the floods millions more will sink into this pitiless pit where norights or hope can exist. Transparency International’s report that Pakistan is todaymore corrupt than ever explains why there is a growing disillusionment with



democracy among the youth. The horror stories one hears about brazenly deliberatecorruption at an unimaginably massive scale are soul-destroying.

The youth, accordingly, look for a strong but just hand, even an Islamicfundamentalist hand, to help them out of the pit they find themselves dug in. They do

not want to be dependent. They are willing to work their butts off. They need to beenabled and given a reasonably level playing field. That is a fundamental right that isdenied them because they are not a priority. And then we wonder: Why do they havesuch violent thoughts? Who is brainwashing them? Are they vulnerable to recruitment

by bad guys? Well, ask them who the bad guys are. And the bitter irony is that these betrayed young people adore their country.

Youth of Pakistan: A Hope?

A riveting study of Pakistan’s “next generation” (18 to 29 year-olds) compiled by awhole range of Pakistani scholars, experts, activists etc, with the help of contributionsfrom over a thousand young Pakistanis from all over Pakistan and a range of

backgrounds, funded by the British Council, depicts a grim but not hopeless picture of Pakistan’s future. Provided the right priorities and policy measures are urgently put in

place. According to the study, the “next generation” sees injustice as the prime reasonfor violence and terror in Pakistan.

But according to the leaders of the west their security is threatened by terrorism theroot causes of which are not even open to discussion. To suggest that injustice mighthave something to do with terrorism is seen as an attempt to condone it. Their acolytes among the political and power elite in Pakistan have a similar distaste for anydiscussion on injustice or other root causes of violence and terror. These include,according to the next generation, poor economic conditions and lack of education andawareness.

The next generation study talks about a window of opportunity of a “demographicdividend” for Pakistan between the 1990s and 2045. During this period the potentially

productively employed youth as a proportion of the whole population will be at amaximum. Hence if all the enabling policies are put in place the country can receive amassive “one-time boost” over several decades. This could be a real socio-economicgame-changer in terms of increased economic growth, savings, investment in childrenand social transformation. The East Asian Miracle was largely a result of exploiting

this dividend. Conversely, a failure to avail of these opportunities could lead to a“demographic disaster” involving spiraling poverty, increased crime and conflict, anda “crippled next generation”. The stakes are extraordinarily high.

A Demographic Waste:

We have already wasted two decades of the demographic window of opportunity because, among many reasons, little progress has been made towards achievingMillennium Development Goals. The population has not been stabilized becausewomen have yet to enter the work force in significant numbers. Health and educationremain woefully under-resourced. As a result, we are not even poised to begin moving

towards a demographic dividend. On the contrary, we are headed towards a



demographic disaster. Failure to take appropriate action will set us back for decades tocome. This is euphemism for ‘State Failure’.

So whatever our current security or other pre-occupations may be, they pale bycomparison to the demographic threat we face, and time is running out to save our

country from an impending absolute disaster. Will the present government surprise usand do what is essential starting NOW? It does not look likely. The government andcivil society, of course, could have a deeply satisfying experience empowering thenext generation and rendering the kind of transforming, indeed life-saving, service noone has yet provided the country.

The Pakistani State Must Act Swiftly:

The necessary measures are by and large known and their urgency is obvious in lightof the dire implications of not taking them immediately. But this urgency has not yettranslated into priority which is the measure of our tragedy. Indeed, much of the elite,including their next generation, have their exit options ready. The facts are

pronouncing a death sentence upon us as a society and as a nation. Denial is betrayal.It is already very late. But, maybe, not too late. Blame-game time is over. All of usmust now be in the same game.



Global Dimension of Current Turmoil: Al Qaeda andTransitional Islamist Networks

November 14th, 2010

Current Scenario

Under the Executive Order 13224 the United States on Sept 1 s, 2010 formally designatedthe Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan as a foreign terrorist. Daniel Benjamin, theAmbassador-at-Large for Counterterrorism formally announced it at a press briefing,thereby making the TTP the latest addition to a list of 47 such banned organizations.[1]

Benajamin said that by implication both Hakimullah Mehsud and Wali Ur Rehmanalso stand designated as terrorists. “The TTP and Al-Qaida have a symbioticrelationship. TTP draws ideological guidance from Al-Qaida while Al-Qaida relies onthe TTP for safe haven in the Pashtun areas along the Afghan-Pakistani border.” Thismutual cooperation gives TTP access to both Al-Qaida’s global terrorist network andthe operational experience of its members. Given the proximity of the two groups andthe nature of their relationship, TTP is a force multiplier for Al-Qaida,” Benajaminexplained.

This move reinforced two things: First, several Islamist militant organizations,inspired by al Qaeda, have emerged not only in Pakistan and Afghanistan but alsoenjoy close nexus with like-minded outfits elsewhere.

The other dimension, which is equally worrying, is the shifting of the battle betweenAl Qaeda and the US-led western world. This battle of ideologies and cultures isrooted in the Afghan war against the Soviet Union. This war of course turned out to

be a watershed and provided a new platform to militant Islamist groups from all over the Muslim world.

American / Pakistani Role

It is quite an irony that the American CIA which played a major role in bringing theMuslim fighters from across the world to get them trained by the Pakistani Inter

Services Intelligence (ISI) agency against the Soviet Union, is currently pitchedagainst the first and second generation of Jihadis which the Pakistani and Americansecurity establishments themselves had fostered.

It’s primarily America versus Al Qaeda. It is also the Pakistan army versus Afghanand Pakistani Al Qaeda auxiliaries battling it out in the plains and mountains of bothcountries.

Saudi Arabian Role in Development of Transnational Networks

The royal Kingdom of Saudi Arabia contributed to the spawning of Wahabite-Salafi

groups in Afghanistan and Pakistan in its own way; it not only matched America’sdollar for a dollar during the jihad against the Soviet Russians but also funded

http://c/Users/Taqweem/Desktop/0%20CRSS/16-11-2010/Global%20Dimension%20of%20Current%20Turmoil%20-%20Al%20Qaeda%20and%20Translational%20Islamist%20Networks.doc#_ftn1




creation of new mosques and seminaries. The Saudis also created their own proxies – Sipaha Sahaba Pakistan, Lashkare Jhangvi and several others – to counter what they

perceived as the Shia advances in Sunni regions. [2]

The Pakistani ISI had its own axe to grind – craving for the so-called strategic depth

in Afghanistan. It saw in Taliban a force-multiplier for itself, a force it thought should be able to counter Russian, Indian and Iranian influence. This way various militantgroups emerged, guided and influenced by Saudi Arabia and Pakistan, both nurturingtheir favorite outfits. Most of these organizations derived impressions from Al-Qaida,and Osama Bin Laden was revered as the hero of the Muslims across the world,somebody who had dared the sole super power i.e. the United States and its protégéIsrael.

What has been the consequence: the consequence of this anti-Moscow jihad is thecreation of al Qaeda, and the graduation of many Afghan and Pakistani organizationsinto trans-nationalist movements – that stretch from Asia to Africa, from Asia toEurope and across the Atlantic Ocean, in the Americas.

The US-led anti-terror war in Afghanistan (Oct 2001) and the invasion of Iraq provided yet ever greater impetus to trans-nationalist movements such as al Qaeda toraise cadre for an organized resistance to the “US-led western imperialism.”

As a consequence, a synergy or fusion of interests and similarity of causes hasemerged between the traditionalist clergy and the radical reformists – largely led andinfluenced by al Qaeda and supported by the Muslim Brotherhood’s Dr. Ayman alZawahiri – in South and Southwest Asia, a sort of synthesis between Islamistmilitants and traditional mullas, who earlier prospered under the American largess,and now serve as direct supporters or apologists – indirect supporters – for the pan-Islamist missionaries.

This mission, basically the al Qaeda ideology, also resonated in a video statement bythe Egyptian Dr. Ayman al-Zawahiri which he issued in the context of the Hezbollah-Israeli conflict in summer 2006, Aneela Salman wrote:

‘The whole world is an open field for us. As they attack us everywhere, we will attack them everywhere. As their armies got together to wage war on us, our nation will gettogether to fight them….The shells and missiles that tear apart the bodies of Muslims

in Gaza and Lebanon are not purely Israeli. Rather; they come and are financed by allcountries of the Crusader alliance. Thus, all those who took part in the crime should pay the price. We cannot just stand idly by in humiliation while we see all these shellsfall on our brothers in Gaza and Lebanon’ .[3]

It is this messaging that seems to have galavanise various Pakistani and Afghanoutfits, those who believe in, and work for, a militant brand of Pan-Islamism

a) Al-Qaeda

b) Muslim Brotherhood

c) Hezbul Tehrir








d) IMU

e) Tableeghi Jamaat

f) Lashkare Taiba

g) Jamaate Islami

h) TTP

Conclusion [4] :

Viewed against this backdrop, it is quite clear that Pakistan has a long struggle athand. The omnipresence of apologists for transnationalist organizations inspired by AlQaeda, as well as ambivalence within some state institutions about some of the groupsoperating in the border regions represents a formidable challenge. The real challenge,in addition to disruption of their activities, lies in penetrating the command structuresof terror networks to figure out their links with sponsors and financiers. Where theguidance and money coming from is, is the main question simply because whatPakistan is witnessing today cannot be explained away just as “acts of terror byreligiously motivated groups.” It is a war of attrition through groups which aredelivering cuts into the body of the country with the clear objective of creatinginstability and denting its economy.

Pakistan is currently pitched against a multitude of domestic and external vestedinterest, a combination of religious zeal, political ideology, and external drivers who

may be using local militant groups or their splinters to keep Pakistan destabilized. It isfor the mighty intelligence establishment to figure out. If it cannot, the collusion of ideologically driven outfits, criminal gangs and external forces – the al Qaeda forcemultipliers – will keep bleeding this country. It is primarily an intelligence challenge,coupled with the daunting task of improving governance and delivering quick andinexpensive justice to the common man. [5]

This clearly means Pakistan has to deal not only with al Qaeda, its foreign extensionthe Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan but also with the increasingly lethal LeJ-TTPcombination, with most of them housed in the Paktia-Khowst region as well as themountains of Waziristan, Kurram and Khyber.

Among them are people from all over Chechnya, Germany, Somalia, the UnitedStates, Europe, Chinese Uighurs, Uzbeks. Not only do they share the al Qaedaideology but also supplement each other wherever needed. The deadly attacks on theParade Lane Mosque (Dec 4, 2009), the siege of the GHQ (Oct 10), the raid on theMananwan Police Academy (October 2009), the strike on the Ahmedi Mosque inLahore (May 28 th, 2010 ), are all but a few examples of how the transnationalistorganizations, influenced by Al Qaeda, are increasingly networked in their attack onthe interests of the United States as well as on all those aligned with the US and

NATO.

Chickens have come home to roost. OBL, Zawahiri, Haqqanis,Hekmetyar, MullaOmar, Ilyas Kashmiri – they all have spread their tentacles like small godzillas,








terrorizing and eliminating all those who believe in democracy and liberal Islam. Allthose affected by this clash of ideas and beliefs must join hands to eradicate andneutralize the godzillas that are killing innocent men and women. Taking on thistransnationalist complex is an uphill task and requires a very calculated, concerted butdetermined collaboration among all the nations.

(Read at The Regional Conference on AfPak (Nov 12-13, Islamabad ) by Instituteof Strategic Studies and Konrad Adenauer Stiftung, Germany.)

[1] (US government official website, September 2010)

[2] (Imtiaz Gul, The Most Dangerous Place; Pakistan’s Lawless Frontier, Penguin,June 2010)

[3] BBC 2006: quoted by Snow and Byrd 2007: p 8).

[4] Several articles by the author in the Foreign Policy Magazine and its AfPak Channel also served as the primary source.

[5] (Gul, Imtiaz in Foreign Policy Magazine, June 10, 2010)

http://c/Users/Taqweem/Desktop/0%20CRSS/16-11-2010/Global%20Dimension%20of%20Current%20Turmoil%20-%20Al%20Qaeda%20and%20Translational%20Islamist%20Networks.doc#_ftnref1












Terrorism Dictates Indo-Pak Peace and Relations

September 19th, 2010

Kashmir, Kashmir and Kashmir:

Kashmir is in the news again. With over 100 deaths, the valley of Srinanagar has beenin grip of protests, police violence and public unrest since May. This also seems tohave prompted India to express interest for resuming dialogue with Pakistan on thesidelines of the UN General Assembly some time next month. But will this change thesubstance of the bilateral relationship?

Even a cursory look leads to the conclusion that terrorism sits deep at the heart of theIndo-Pak relations. India remains convinced, and therefore focused, on LashkareTaiba, which it believes is the prime source of terrorism on the Indian soil including

Kashmir. In fact, India gradually revised its characterization of the violence inKashmir in early 1994, from militancy to Terrorism, after “the guest organization”LeT unleashed their militant campaign in Kashmir, along-with other guestorganizations such as Harkatul Mujahideen.Terror Attacks always Derail the Indo-Pak Peace Process:The attack on the Indian parliament (13th December 2001) and the Mumbai carnage(Nov 26th, 2008) not only reinforced that characterization but also stands out today asthe stumbling bloc in the way of resumption of formal talks between the twocountries.

A multitude of factors in fact bedevils the bilateral relationship, and thus obstructing

almost every move to peace and joint counter-terrorism strategies, terrorism being thecentrepiece of the Indian argument.

The deadlock on the dialogue stems not only from the Indian conviction thatPakistan’s security establishment supports the LeT and Jaishe Mohammad; it alsodraws strength from New Delhi’s belief that the Pakistani establishment continues to

back non-state actors against the Indian state, and thus remains a rogue army, a sourceof violence and instability in Kashmir and rest of India. And the US establishment in

particular also views the Pakistani security apparatus through the Indian prism, a factexplained through the fact that almost every visitor from Washington or elsewhereinvariably asks about the fate and the status of Lashkare Taiba (Jamaatud Dawa).

During a lecture on the US-Pakistan-China relations at Islamabad on Sept 21s,renowned American scholar Stephen Cohen also underscored the need for thePakistani authorities to “delegitimise and disarm” that are operating across the 750-km Line of Control (that divides Kashmir between India and Pakistan) and the 2560km Durand Line (the Pak-Afghan border).View from Pakistan:This view on the Pakistani establishment practically scuttled the 2004 proposals on a

joint anti-terror mechanism. Cooperation in countering terror networks prerequisites bilateral trust. Another must is an irritant-free, if not dispute-free environment, whichit is not. This strained bilateral relationship has trilateral dimension, with Afghanistanserving as the third component that fuels the Indo-Pak tensions and concerns. TheAfghans apply more or less the same yardstick to measure Pakistani policies as the



Indians do; the nexus between the establishment and some Taliban factions, theHaqqani Network, Mulla Omar and Hikmetyar in particular, they claim, are still under the Pakistani protection.

All three i.e the Indians, the American and the Afghans lump the LeT with the TTP,

Lashkare Jhangvi and Al Qaeda when making a case that Pakistan abets terror outfits.For instance, almost every body from outside keep asking as to why is thegovernment not moving against the Punjabi Taliban. Little do the outsiders try tounderstand that the government (the army) moved against all those groups whichchallenged the writ of the state (Swat, South Waziristan, Bajaur, Mohmand andKhyber are cases in point).Kashmir is a Must:Continued unrest in Kashmir also comes in the way of peace and counter-terror cooperation. While most in Pakistan view this with concern and many also feelvindicated that “the Kashmiris are unhappy with New Delhi,” India blames it onseparatist militants which it says are backed by the Pakistani security apparatus.

The latest unrest in Kashmir has triggered alarm as well as critcial analysis in theUnited States as well. In his latest review article Steve Coll has also underscored theneed for a pro-active American role in nudging India and Pakistan towards a peacefulresolution, for accountability of the Pakistani security establishment as well as theneed to adress the Pakistani concerns both sides of its borders. Coll also recals Barack Obama’s July 2008 interview with Joe Klein of Time magazine, in which Obamaacknowledged that Kashmir’s disputed territory was “obviously a potential tar pitdiplomatically. ”

Coll quotes from Howard Schaffer’s book “The Limits of Influence, America’s Rolein Kashmir” saying that in 1956, President Eisenhower wrote identical letters to theleaders of India and Pakistan, urging them forward. In the absence of a Kashmir settlement and the removal of other obstacles to normalized Indo-Pakistani relations,Eisenhower wrote, “the peaceful, progressive economic development which eachnation desires…cannot succeed.” That has not changed, says Coll.

But now, India Needs to Do More:The conclusion drawn in the August 30th edition of the TIME magazine is quiteinstructive. While summarizing the volatile conditions in Kashmir, it says “A repeal(of Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA), a law that gives security forces broad

leeway to operate in Kashmir without fear of oversight or prosecution) will requirethe kind of political courage that New Delhi has yet to show in the region. If itcontinues with the same old strategies — blaming Pakistan for stirring trouble,imposing curfews and superseding talks with bloody crackdowns, it will engender thesame cycles of violence.

In other words, the only effective response to this new generation of Kashmiri stone pelters may well be a new generation of Indian statesmen, argues the TIME specialreport.

And in fact the last line contains the catch for any progress forward as far as Indo-

Pakistan peace is concerned; a new generation of Indian statesmen.



Both sides certainly need thinkers, if not a new generation to embark on the way tocooperation. While Pakistan reels under the dire effects of the counter-insurgency – afledgling economy, an instable political government, and an army establishment thatis exhausted and stretched to the hilt ( war on terror as well as the unusual

preoccupation with the post-flood relief and recovery operations), the Indian

establishment refuses to review its analysis of the Pakistani establishment.Indians Lost a Historic Opportunity to Move Forward:When an all-powerful General Musharraf laid open all his cards and invited NewDelhi to think out-of-box on Kashmir, the Indians got cold feet, saying they wouldrather deal with a civilian government. When the civilians (returned to power inFebruary 2008) found the going tough because of the establishment’s reservations ontheir India-policy, the Indians once again retreated into a wait-and-see mode, sayingthe government is too weak to deal with.

It is a dilemma on both sides that seems to have stymied forward movement. In thewords of noted American scholar Micahel Krepon, “The Army is taking on onegroup, the Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan that has blown up mosques, markets andmilitary installations, at significant cost. Other outfits, such as the Lashkar-e-Taibaand its parent organization, are inconvenienced only after major explosions in India.They are poison to Pakistan’s political and economic development, posing a threat tothe state but they are also likely to become the Pakistan Army’s allies in the event of an Indian attack triggered by their actions. The longer this dilemma continues, theharder it becomes for the Pakistan Army to address.

India, on the other hand, faces the dilemma of indecision as to who should they talk to. It shall have to concede that the Indo-Afghan influence in Kabul and their allegedrole in Balochistan does constitute a legitimate concern for the Pakistaniestablishment, as much as the alleged Pakistani involvement with groups operatingacross the Line of Control (Kashmir) and the Durand Line (Afghanistan) serves as themajor source of concern for New Delhi and Kabul. Unless both sides recalibrate their

positions on issues of concern to each other, this relationship will remain dogged and beset with suspicion and acrimony.



The New Regional Power Play in Afghanistan

February 7th, 2010 The “Please spare Afghanistan” appeal: During the Pak-Afghan-Iran foreignministerial conference in Islamabad middle of January, the Afghan foreign minister Rangeen Dafdar Spanta issued a passionate appeal when he said his request to all theneighbors would be to “please keep Afghanistan out of your bilateral problems. Wehave already suffered a lot and do not add to those sufferings by fighting your proxywars on the Afghan soil.” Spanta’s reference obviously centered on the Indo-Pak andUS-Iran rivalries that keep casting ominous shadows on the stabilization efforts inAfghanistan. A top British government functionary also conceded that point recentlyand urged caution as Pakistan may embark on the path of talks. Balancing Pakistan’sown national security interests with the need to play an active role in reconciliationwith the Taliban, without being seen as imposing its own agenda on the country,amounts to a daunting challenge. The London Conference on January 28 has turned

more heat on the diplomacy of Af-Pak. The vow to pursue talks with the “goodTaliban” by driving a division within the Mullah Omar-led insurgency through amulti-million-dollar trust has prompted several questions because the “reintegrationtrust” as well as the pursuit of dialogue is likely to further expose the region tomultiple selfish competing interests and intrigues of neighboring countries – Iran,Pakistan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, Tajikistan, China – regional powers like Turkey,India and Russia, plus international players such as the United States and other lead

NATO members. Al Qaeda, the stateless entity riding a vague pan-Islamist and anti-American ideology is, of course, the other actor in this area, pitched against most of the regional and international powers – the common enemy, so to say, operating outof the Af-Pak region. This essentially means Afghanistan will remain hostage to the

whims and wishes of all these actors – every one of them proposing its own solutions.

Messages from the London Conference: The first message revolved around therealization that the over-bearing reliance on the military component in the past yearshas only further fuelled the insurgency. The second flowed from the first message i.e.it was time to deescalate the military campaign in favour of talks. The third messagewas embedded in the creation of the reintegration fund, aimed at wooing the “goodTaliban” away from the battlefield. Here, once again, the western mind went wrong: itis up against a fighter who is acting and reacting out of commitment and not for money. And if the past is any indicator, all those who walked out of the Taliban ranksas “good Taliban” lost their relevance altogether. So, the approach of buying off the“good Taliban” is as good as nothing. This, nevertheless, should not demean theintention of creating some space for negotiations.Pakistan has the key to a stable Afghanistan: The world has seemingly understoodit now and diplomats from lead European nations, including those from Great Britain,Germany and the Netherlands, also acknowledge that given Pakistan’s:

• a) Geographical advantage, i.e. a common 2,560 km border with Afghanistan;• b) Leverage with various factions of the Taliban, and Mullah Omer in

particular;• c) Lead position within the 57-member Organization of Islamic Conference

(OIC);• d) Good working relations with China and the United States; and



• e) Exceptionally good political rapport with Saudi Arabia (which has beenhosting Afghan mujahideen, the Taliban and other leaders, including its proxyProfessor Abdul Rab Rasool Sayyaf, an ethnic Pashtun and the torch-bearer of the Saudi Salafi school of thought in Afghanistan).

Islamabad could at least try – if tasked by the international community – to reach outto the core of the Taliban i.e. to the mobile shura led by Mullah Omar. GulbuddinHekmetyar, Jalaluddin and Sirajuddin Haqqani are of course important, but thosefamiliar with Afghan power dynamics know that Mullah Omar holds the real key tode-escalating the insurgency. Suspicions, however, will accompany any role thatPakistan plays on the way to deescalating the conflict through opening of space for talks. While Pakistan needs to build upon the goodwill the London Conferencegenerated for it indirectly, well-meaning members of the international communityalso need to ensure that the dynamics created by the London conference are notscuttled by one country or another; Afghanistan’s medium to long term interests mustnot fall victim to bilateral or multi-lateral state rivalries. In this context, resumption of the Indo-Pakistan dialogue will also be very important because this may help theintelligence establishments of both countries to address allegations of interferencethrough proxies (Balochistan and Kashmir are cases in point).

Pakistan gained maximum from the London Conference: International playersalso expect of Pakistan to “demonstrate its intent of helping in stabilizingAfghanistan.” In this regard, Pakistan’s military establishment probably did preciselythat by first moving against militants in Swat and then South Waziristan in October last year. This context, and some forceful arguments by the army chief GeneralAshfaq Kayani as well as Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi probably alsohelped Pakistan regain a lot of political space it had lost under General PervezMusharraf. During his recent Brussels visit, and also before that, General Kayani kepttelling his visitors including those from the United States, as well as members of thePakistani intelligentsia, that the army would continue cooperating with US-ISAFtroops but only in a calculated and measured way. The scale and timing of anymilitary campaign in North Waziristan would be of our choice and not of outsiders,sounds the message from the military high command. The army also keeps cautioningthat that “any military adventure into the tribal areas requires extreme caution andconsideration for the future.” The bulk of foreign troops will most probably be gonein a few years, leaving Pakistan to fend for itself and also to co-exist with the verytribes that will be hurt when the army moves against the militants nestled among

them.

Emergence of future Pak-Russian cooperation: Interestingly, the post-Londonvibes that one gets from Moscow through diplomatic channels is one of welcomingPakistan’s potential role in creating the space for dialogue with the Afghan Taliban.Russian diplomats, on the other hand, also sound encouraging. Why should Pakistannot use its influence and act as ground-leveler, if not broker, if the internationalcommunity so desires, said one senior official in Islamabad. Both Islamabad andMoscow agree on preserving Afghanistan’s sovereignty. They also support theregional approach (six plus two). Abdul Basit, the spokesman for the Pakistaniministry of foreign affairs, insists the contacts with Moscow regarding Afghanistan

have been unusually good and forward-moving in the past couple of years. He speaksof much better coordination and warmth in relations with Russia. This synergy of



approaches augurs well for all the regional players but only if they can divorce their bilateral or multi-lateral misgivings rooted in the past. This applies to both – Russo-Pak relations as well as the complicated Indo-Pak relationship.

How the power players see it: On January 31, Indian Foreign Minister SM Krishna

indicated his country was willing to back efforts to seek peace with Taliban tostabilize Afghanistan. “If the Taliban meets the three conditions put forward – acceptance of the Afghan constitution, severing connections with al-Qaeda and other terrorist groups and renunciation of violence, and are accepted in the mainstream of Afghan politics and society, we could do business,” Krishna told The Times of India.German Chancellor Angela Merkel took the lead immediately after the Londonconference in underscoring Pakistan’s importance by saying it should be more closelyinvolved in solving the Afghan conflict. “There will be no peace in this region unlessPakistan carries its share of responsibility.” For a comprehensive solution, “we need amuch greater involvement of Afghan authorities and the inclusion of neighboringcountries, in particular Pakistan,” Merkel told German weekly Welt am Sonntag (January 31).In the post-London scenario, caution becomes even more necessary; if theinternational community wants to try the dialogue option, it shall have to lower thetemperature by scaling down combat operations. Only then would the potential peace-

broker be in a position to encourage the Afghan Taliban into talks.



Understanding a few of Chinese interests in Pakistan

October 25th, 2009

China’s great “trade-route” game:

China is currently quietly pursuing a new role for itself in the Indian Ocean bygradually expanding its maritime capacity. The primary purpose is to secure traderoutes. And thus the desire to expand and consolidate ties with Pakistan, India andother regional countries saddling the Indian Ocean rim. In this context, Pakistanremains the key link in China’s Indian Ocean political matrix because the Chineseleadership continues to consider a strategically located stable Pakistan as a key to itsinterests in the region. For the Chinese leaders, Pakistan also serves as a reference for its contacts with the Muslim world.

At the same time, the Chinese don’t want to be too candid about their tilt towardsPakistan. On more than one occasions, the Chinese very tactfully accommodatedPakistani leadership i.e. Prime minister Gilani, for instance, arrived here on a veryshort notice ahead of the Beijing Olympics last year, but still was placed in the frontrow in the inauguration ceremony, and seated at the head table for the dinner with theChinese president. Diplomats based in Beijing interpreted this as a demonstration of the symbolism of friendship and the reverence with which Chinese treat Pakistan andits leaders. Simple statistics also favors this interpretation; China has approved the500 million dollar Karakorum Highway expansion project. It is the only country thatlaunched a Pakistan-specific five year Plan for Pakistan in 2006, under which it hasalready launched 27 projects, while close to 30 are still in the pipeline. It agreed to set

up the Joint Investment Company in 2008 with a paid up capital of 200 milliondollars. Within last six months Beijing also quietly extended balance of paymentsupport worth about a billion dollar.

Chinese cure for Pakistani security ailments:

During Interior Minister Rehman Malik’s mid June visit, Beijing not only pledged$10 million immediate grant for Islamabad Police and Frontier Police but also

promised to provide security gadgets worth $280 million. These security gadgetsinclude vehicle scanners, mobile scanners and some other equipment. The mobile andfixed scanners will be used to identify any explosives, drugs or any armed person in avehicle. This equipment can be used in big cities to interdict arms and ammunition.The mobile scanners would sniff explosives or identify their locations from as far as500 yards. In addition to this modern equipment, the security forces will also need

bullet proof jackets, night vision devices and aerial support to deal with militants. Andabove all, the security personnel would also be given special training to tackle thisunusual situation.…(and) for economic ailments also:

Currently about 120 Chinese enterprises involving about 10,000 Chinese, are active inPakistan, led by companies such as China Construction, China Mobile and Huhwai.While the Chinese care for Pakistan, they feel the Pak-China economic cooperationmust now be treated as the “strategic objective” to top off the strategic defense



cooperation that has gone on unhindered so far. Discussions often turn to the Gwadar port, built on Pakistan request as a “business-strategic” asset.

Some Chinese academics insist Pakistanis hood-winked China into investment inGwadar, the 2nd largest Chinese investment in recent decades after the Tanzania-

Zimbabwe railway line in the 1960. “Gwadar is an example of Chinese desire to helpPakistan but now it is up to Pakistanis to do their bit – linking Gwadar to the Northvia a feasible road or rail link. The challenge right now is how to enter into the phase2 of the Gwadar project. Some intellectuals like Prof. Daojing contest the widely heldtheory on the US policy of “contain China” and call it hedging, Prof Zha. Yet, senior government and party officials appear quite clear on the issue; they still mistrust bothIndia and the U.S and view them as potential “strategic competition.” But, typically,whenever drawn into this subject, they invariably speak of the need and desire for

peaceful coexistence, political stability, economic development and non-interferencein others’ matters, rather than venting their discomfort.

Recalibration required?

Many in Beijing and Shanghai would desire a recalibration of Pak-China relationshipin view of the changing global political matrix. They cite the change of Chineseambassador to Pyongyong after North Korean missile test in April, 2009, explainingthat China has been urging North Korea to shun belligerence. North Korea’s May 25nuclear and missile tests brought about even more pressure on China, which considersitself as “the awkward middleman” trying to balance its relations with the NorthKoreans and the rest of the world. Same might happen to Pakistan if frustration withlack of credible information mounts, suggest some and indicate that the review of

policy on Pakistan appears certain as little has moved in Islamabad, where the civiliangovernment is seen as fragile and incompetent.

Geo political quid pro quo:

For Chinese Sinkiang (Xinjiang), the western Muslim Majority province remains aconcern in the context of Islamic extremist movements, which the Chinese fear mightinfect this region as well. Relentless pursuit and defeat of Islamist radicals, therefore,stands out as a “priority of priorities.” We hope and expect of the Pakistani leadershipto take the fight against religious extremists to its logical conclusion. If Pakistandithers and wavers – even by default – it can cost us all very dearly. Failing against

the Taliban and Al-Qaeda therefore is no option. It could have direct impact on our Muslim minority and turn Xinjiang into a soft belly of international terrorism, sayChinese officials. You take care of our concerns, we will stand by you come whatmay, reads the loud and unambiguous message out of Beijing.

no easy days for pakistan ahead

Documents