Friday, April 30, 2010

Why Indian diplomat Madhuri befriended ISI?

Indian diplomat’s arrest
Dawn Editorial, April 30, 2010

A second secretary in the press and information section of the Indian High Commission in Islamabad is detained in Delhi amid allegations of possible espionage on Pakistan’s behalf.
The arrest comes on the eve of the Saarc summit in Bhutan, on the sidelines of which the Pakistani and Indian prime ministers are to meet (the meeting is likely to happen today). Coincidence? Very unlikely. The timing of the Indian government’s announcement sends a clear signal: India is not ready to move towards improving ties with Pakistan any time soon. While the spying case has not completely overshadowed the Bhutan summit, it has competed for headline space and buried any talk of positive developments.

Pak-India relations have been held hostage by Indian intransigence since the Mumbai attacks in November 2008. India wants Pakistan to shut down the Kashmir- and India-centric militant groups before it is willing to talk to Pakistan again. But by reducing Pak-India relations to a single-point agenda, the Indian side is ensuring that South Asia remains one of the world’s danger spots. True, Pakistan has historically more often than not been the spoiler itself. But when it comes to the present, the Pakistani state has taken a reasonable line: Pak-India relations cannot be held hostage to acts of terrorism and there remain some fundamental issues, headlined by Kashmir and water sharing, that need to be resolved. Even on the terrorism issue, not talking serves no real purpose. India tried and failed to isolate Pakistan diplomatically in the wake of the Mumbai attacks, with diminishing returns on that policy setting in very quickly.

The highly publicised arrest of Madhuri Gupta suggests that India is in no mood to change its policy towards Pakistan. In the world of diplomacy, it is unthinkable that a spying case could be revealed by a government if it is interested in improving ties with another country. So going forward, Pakistan should continue to do what it has been doing lately and emphasise that it would like to restart the dialogue with India but without preconditions. It isn’t ideal, but it’s the best that can be done in the circumstances.

Related:
Behind India's Bust of a Pakistan Spy - TIME
Did Madhuri Gupta, diplomat-spy, convert to Islam? - NDTV
Spy Madhuri deeply hated IFS officers - MSN
Madhuri Gupta: exploited for her insecurities? - Economic Times
Alleged spy Madhuri Gupta knew it coming - Mid Day

Wednesday, April 28, 2010

Former MI chief faces investigators today

Former MI chief faces investigators today
By Iftikhar A. Khan and Syed Irfan Raza
Dawn, 28 Apr, 2010

ISLAMABAD: Maj-Gen Nadeem Ijaz, a former director-general of the Military Intelligence (MI), will appear on Wednesday before a three-member fact-finding committee investigating the hosing down of the site of Benazir Bhutto’s assassination.

The commission recorded on Tuesday statements of four police officials allegedly involved in washing the site shortly after the gun and bomb attack that claimed Ms Bhutto’s life near Liaquat Bagh in Rawalpindi on Dec 27, 2007.
Official sources said the committee had sent a notice to the former MI chief. They said Maj-Gen Ijaz had arrived in the city.

The sources said the former MI chief’s statement would be crucial because if it was proved that he was behind the episode, it would bring more people at the helm of affairs at that time into the fray. When asked if former president Gen (retd) Pervez Musharraf would also be implicated, they said it depended entirely on the report of the committee which included a senior representative of the army.

They said the job of the committee was to determine if the then DG of the MI had a role in the hosing down of the site, but its report might lead to initiation of criminal proceedings.

For complete article, click here
Related:
UN commission report blames Pakistan officials for Bhutto assassination - Jurist
Complete UN Report Report on Benazir Bhutto Assassination, clihttp://www.un.org/News/dh/infocus/Pakistan/UN_Bhutto_Report_15April2010.pdfck here

Sunday, April 25, 2010

Tariq Ramadan: Muslims and the West - PBS

Tariq Ramadan: Muslims and the West
PBS, April 15, 2010

In 2004, the Bush administration barred prominent Muslim scholar Tariq Ramadan from entering the United States, accusing him of giving money to a charity that funds terrorists. For the last six years, Ramadan has been fighting the ban, saying the charity was not on any terrorist watch lists at the time and he was unaware of any ties to terrorists. The Obama administration lifted the restrictions against Ramadan in January, and last week he made his first visit to the US since the ban was reversed. Watch excerpts from his April 12 address at Georgetown University and his conversation with journalists, including Religion & Ethics NewsWeekly managing editor Kim Lawton. Ramadan discusses fear of the religious “other” and the need for policies that foster a better understanding of Islam, US relations with the Islamic world in the wake of President Obama’s 2009 speech in Cairo, and the new visibility of Islam in the West and current debates in Europe over whether to ban the burqa, the niqab, and other Islamic garments.

Indo-Pakistan proxy war heats up in Afghanistan

Indo-Pakistan proxy war heats up in Afghanistan
By TIM SULLIVAN; AP, Washington Post, April 25, 2010

KABUL -- Across Afghanistan, behind the obvious battles fought for this country's soul, a shadow war is being quietly waged. It's being fought with spies and proxies, with hundreds of millions of dollars in aid money and ominous diplomatic threats.

The fight pits nuclear-armed rivals India and Pakistan against one another in a battle for influence that will almost certainly gain traction as the clock ticks down toward America's military withdrawal, which President Barack Obama has announced will begin next year.

The clash has already sparked bloody militant attacks, and American officials fear the region could become further destabilized. With Pakistani intelligence maintaining ties to Afghanistan's Taliban militants, India has threatened to draw Iran, Russia and other nations into the competition if an anti-Indian government comes to power in Kabul.

"This is a delicate game going on here," said Daoud Muradian, a senior adviser to the Afghan Foreign Ministry. He spoke wearily about how Afghanistan, a mountainous crossroads linking South Asia, the Middle East and Central Asia, has for centuries often been little more than a stage for other countries' power struggles. "We don't want to be forced to choose between India and Pakistan."

For both India and Pakistan, Afghanistan is an exceedingly valuable prize.

To India, ties with Kabul mean new trade routes, access to Central Asia's vast energy reserves and a way to stave off the rise of Islamic militancy. It means the chance for New Delhi to undermine Islamabad as it nurtures its superpower aspirations by expanding its regional influence.

While Pakistan is also desperate for new energy supplies, its Afghan policy has been largely shaped by the view that Afghanistan is its natural ally. The two countries share a long border, overwhelmingly Muslim populations and deep ethnic links.

For complete article, click here
Related:
"Pakistan and India Should Consider Collaborating This Time" - Daily Star, Dec 2009

Friday, April 23, 2010

Kashmir solution just a signature away?

Kashmir solution just a signature away: Kasuri
Says previous govt had completed 90 pc spadework on dispute; ‘we agreed on a point between complete independence and autonomy’
By Babar Dogar & Ranjan Roy, The News, April 24, 2010

LAHORE: Former foreign minister Khursheed Mehmood Kasuri has said the solution to the Kashmir dispute is just a signature away once India and Pakistan decide to pull the file from the rack.

While addressing the concluding session of the two-day seminar — held as part of the ongoing Aman ki Asha campaign, launched by the Jang Group and Times of India — and later talking to The News and the Times of India here on Friday, the former foreign minister revealed the previous Musharraf government had completed almost 90 per cent of the spadework on the half-a-century old Kashmir dispute by 2007 as the whole exercise just needed the formal signature of all the three parties to the issue - Pakistan, India and representatives of Kashmir.

“All India and Pakistan now need is to defreeze the process. The entire paper-work has been done. The copies of related documents are safe with some friendly countries as well,” said Kasuri.

Kasuri said that negotiators from Islamabad and New Delhi had quietly toiled away for three years, talking to each other and Kashmiri representatives from the Indian side as well as Kashmiris settled overseas to reach what he described as the “only possible solution to the Kashmir issue”.

For complete article, click here

Confessions of a Pakistani spy

Confessions of a Pakistani spy
By Syed Saleem Shahzad, Asia Times, April 24, 2010

ISLAMABAD - Retired squadron leader Khalid Khawaja, a former Inter-Services Intelligence official and a close friend of al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden during the resistance in Afghanistan against the Soviets in the 1980s, has explained in videos sent to Asia Times Online how he was on a mission to broker a deal between militants and the army when he was captured by militants, and how he played a double game by deceiving a radical cleric into being arrested.

Khawaja was dismissed from the air force in the late 1980s and subsequently earned a reputation of having close ties to some militant groups. Khawaja has played an important behind-the-scenes role in both regional and national politics. Before the US attack on Afghanistan in late 2001, he was a part of the back-room diplomacy between the US and the Taliban, which failed miserably.

The revelations appear in five video clips sent to Asia Times Online by an al-Qaeda-linked group of militants from the Pakistani North Waziristan tribal area. The clips appear to have been heavily edited, with some of Khawaja's sentences - he is speaking in Urdu - cut off. At times it appears that a frail Khawaja, in his early 60s, is under duress.

On March 25, Khawaja traveled to North Waziristan to interview commanders Sirajuddin Haqqani and Waliur Rahman Mehsud. He was accompanied by a British citizen, Asad Qureshi, a reporter with Channel 4, and Colonel Ameer Sultan Tarrar, also a former long-time ISI official and once Pakistan's consul-general in Herat in Afghanistan.

Tarrar was nicknamed "Colonel Imam" by the mujahideen as he was instrumental in helping raise the Taliban militia and he trained present Taliban leader Mullah Omar and other top Afghan leaders, including Gulbuddin Hekmatyar and the slain Northern Alliance leader, Ahmad Shah Massoud. "Colonel Imam" is widely referred to as the "Father of the Taliban."

The three men have not been heard from since March 25.

Soon after their disappearance, Punjabi militants calling themselves the "Asian Tigers" sent a video to the media in which they demanded a ransom of US$10 million for the release of Asad Qureshi and the freedom of Taliban leaders Mullah Baradar and Mansoor Dadullah in exchange for Khawaja and Colonel Imam.

The Afghan Taliban have distanced themselves from the kidnappings and their spokesman Zabiullah Muhajahid said they were working for the release of the two.

In the video footage, Khawaja confesses to a scheme to bring down the radical movement that had become centered around Lal Masjid (Red Mosque) in the capital, Islamabad. By mid-2007, the movement had become increasingly aggressive. Students from nearby educational faculties had taken to the streets to persuade video shops not to sell "vulgar" movies. The campaign took a turn for the worse when the students seized a suspected brothel owner in the Aapara area, where both the Taliban-supporting Lal Masjid and the ISI were situated.

Khawaja says he hatched a plan with Maulana Fazlur Rahman, the chief of the Jamiat-e-Ulema-e-Islam (the largest Islamic party in the country), the Gand Mufti of Pakistan, Mufti Rafi Usmani, and other scholars to eliminate the Lal Masjid movement from Islamabad.

Khawaja says he trapped Maulana Abdul Aziz, the prayer leader of the mosque and the brother of Ghazi Abdul Rasheed, with whom Aziz ran Lal Masjid.

Khawaja says he telephoned Aziz and lured him into being arrested. Rasheed was killed in the military raid on the mosque in which scores of militants also died.

"I am known among the media and masses as a thoroughbred gentleman, but in fact I was an ISI and CIA [US Central Intelligence Agency] mole ... I am remembering the burnt bodies of the innocent boys and girls of Lal Masjid ... I called Maulana Abdul Aziz and forced him to come out of the mosque wearing a woman's veil and gown, and that's how I got him arrested," Khawaja says in one of the video clips.

For complete article, click here

Thursday, April 22, 2010

Grading Pakistani Leaders - Gilani gaining popularity, Sharif losing

Grading Our Leaders: Some Surprising Poll Results
Adil Najam, Pakistaniat.com, April 18, 2010

At one level the results of our ATP Poll on Grading Pakistan’s leadership and power centers are not surprising at all. However, when we compare the result of this ATP Poll to related ATP Polls held in June 2009 and September 2009, then there is a rather interesting trend that seems to be apparent in the responses from our readers.

For complete, click here

'Khalid Khawaja and 'Col Imam' kidnapped by Punjabi Taliban': It is not that simple....

Missing ex-ISI officers in Fata
Punjabi Taliban behind kidnapping, says family
The News, April 22, 2010 - By Umar Cheema

ISLAMABAD: The mystery of the abduction in tribal areas of two pro-Taliban ISI veterans has virtually been solved as the wife of a kidnapped officer says the Punjabi Taliban were responsible and they invited them to the tribal areas.
One of the kidnapped ISI veterans, Khalid Khawaja, has previously acted as a conduit for Baitullah Mehsud for an intelligence agency. He once handed to late Baitullah a list of the Punjabi Taliban in the tribal belt who were disliked by the intelligence sleuths.

Khawaja, in a recently televised video sent by the captors, said he went to the tribal belt on the advice of former DG ISI, Lt Gen (retd) Hamid Gul, a serving ISI Col Sajjad, and former Army chief Aslam Beg. Col (retd) Imam in the same video said he undertook the tribal area visit on the advice of Gen (retd) Beg.

Retired PAF Squadron Leader Khalid Khawaja and Col (retd) Sultan Amir alias Col Imam were kidnapped along with a British documentary-maker of Pakistani origin, Asad Qureshi, in the tribal area where they went to film the ‘atrocities’ being committed on the Taliban of the Fata region.

According to an early press release issued by Khawaja’s family, they went there on the “precise invitation of the High Command of Tehrik-e-Taliban of North and South Waziristan as their respected guests for the purpose of making a documentary highlighting the present situation of the area and its impact on the indigenous population.” However, details gathered in background conversations present a totally different picture.

For complete article, click here

‘Natural security’ and water By Kashif Hasnie

‘Natural security’ and water By Kashif Hasnie
Dawn, 13 Apr, 2010
 
IN one of my earlier commentaries for the Middle East Institute in Washington, D.C., titled 'water Security in Pakistan', I was able to get the attention of the water authorities in Pakistan by explaining to them the grim situation the country is facing with regard to this precious resource.

I wrote that “Islamabad, we have a problem!” Today I write to attract their attention by saying, “Islamabad, we need a solution!”
In the recently concluded ‘strategic dialogue’ between Pakistan and the United States, water issues did not get the prominence they deserved. Water became part of the energy dialogue in one of the second-day sessions, giving it less prominence than required.

Given the high population growth rate, growing poverty, religious militancy and natural disasters, it sometimes feels as if matters in Pakistan could not get worse. Pakistan is ranked 125 out of 163 countries in the 2010 Environmental Performance Index (EPI).

The EPI focuses on two overarching environmental objectives: a) reducing environmental stresses to human health; and b) promoting ecosystem vitality and sound natural resource management.

Moreover, since Pakistan is primarily an agrarian country, water becomes the most important of all the natural resources to be secured and managed. Ironically, although the complex Punjab rivers and link canals system could very well be classified as one of the 20th century engineering wonders, today one is left wondering what good the engineering wonder has accomplished in a country where water resource management has failed for all intents and purposes.

To many, water security entails the idea of ‘water wars,’ which is a plausible scenario in the case of the waters shared by Pakistan and India. A good gauge of the trans-boundary significance of water is the dependency ratio, which is a measure of water resources originating outside the country.

Pakistan has a dependency ratio of 77 per cent, which is one of the highest in Asia. Therefore, we all hear about the classic, model treaty between India and Pakistan, called the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT). So much has been said, written and discussed about the treaty that there might as well be another one by the name of Indus Water Treaty 2.

Since enough has been said about the trans-boundary water issue between India and Pakistan, I would briefly add that although the treaty is admired for withstanding wars and conflicts between the two countries, it has not been able to play any role in forestalling war. The mechanics of the treaty has survived so far, but the treaty itself has not been able to be part of a solution to animosities.

This is because the institutions, which deal with water and environment, do not work in tandem with the national security agencies. Quite recently, the water issue created friction between the two countries when after the Mumbai attacks of November 2008, Pakistani political commentators started accusing Indian officials of violating the Indus Waters Treaty, suggesting that water was the root cause of the Kashmir issue. Is this the case?

For complete article, click here

Tuesday, April 20, 2010

Collateral damage in Sra Vella - Mosharraf Zaidi

Collateral damage in Sra Vella
The News, April 20, 2010
Mosharraf Zaidi

While Pakistan should be celebrating the passage of the 18th Amendment (once again, cementing the historical place of the PPP in the story of Pakistani democracy) innocent villagers in Tirah Valley are dealing with another mess of Pakistan's own making. If we didn't know any better it would almost seem like someone was trying to rob this country of a well-deserved celebration of its vibrant and raucous democracy.

It is now clear, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that the Pakistani military authorised and conducted the aerial bombardment of the Sra Vella area in Tirah Valley with Pakistan Air Force planes that led to the death of at least 61 innocent Pakistanis. Civilian casualties in the theatre of war are neither new nor surprising. What is surprising is the strange and dangerous concoction of lies, truths, emotions, and reason that simultaneously swing the narrative in this country in all directions possible.

For complete article, click here

Pakistan: a nation or a collection of ethnicities? —Yasmeen Ali

VIEW: Pakistan: a nation or a collection of ethnicities?

In rural Sindh, the PPP rules the roost. In the predominantly Urdu speaking urban Sindh, it is the MQM that will bag the seats. In Punjab, PML-N emerges supreme. In Balochistan and NWFP, it is an assortment of various ethnicity-based political parties that hold the ground. Where are the nation-state building leaders?

Yasmeen Ali, Daily Times, April 21, 2010

The perception today is that Pakistan is a hasty and ill thought-out throwing together of ethnic groups that now, after over 62 years of living together, are at each others’ throats and spewing hatred. The perception is that we have failed to gel together as a nation-state. Some sceptics paint the picture of a doomsday scenario. This may or may not be the reality. However, sometimes, perceptions are stronger than the reality itself.

Two concepts need defining here: ethnicity and the nation state. Ethnicity may be broadly defined as belonging to a group that shares the same characteristics such as country of origin, language, religion, ancestry and culture. Ethnicity is a matter of biological and historical affiliation and is not changed by the culture in which a person grows up. Ethnic identity is drawn from the realisation that a person’s thoughts, perceptions, feelings and behaviour are consistent with those of other members of the same ethnic group.

Contrary to this is the relatively modern concept of the nation-state. The nation-state is a state that identifies itself as deriving its political legitimacy from serving as a sovereign, territorial unit for a nation. Nation-states use the state as an instrument of national unity in cultural, social and, above all, economic life. Early conceptions of the nation defined it as a group or race of people who shared history, traditions, culture, sometimes religion and usually language.

For complete article, click here

'Asian Tigers' kidnapp Brig. Sultan Amir (Col Imam) and Khalid Khawaja - the two 'legendary' ISI officials ???

Kidnappers release video of former ISI officers Bureau Report
Dawn, 19 Apr, 2010
 
PESHAWAR: A little known militant group acknowledged on Monday that it was holding two former ISI officers, Colonel (retd) Imam (Sultan Amir) and Squadron Leader (retd) Khalid Khwaja and threatened to execute them if its demands were not met within 10 days.
An email sent along with the video footage demanded the release of senior Taliban leader Mullah Baradar, Mullah Mansoor Dadullah and Maulavi Kabir.

The group calling itself Asian Tigers, an unusual name for a militant group in Pakistan, is also reported to have demanded a $10 million ransom for journalist Asad Qureshi who also has been missing along with the two retired ISI officers.

In the video clip, Col (retd) Imam is heard saying that his real name is Sultan Amir (Tarar) and he served in the Pakistan Army for 18 years, 11 of them in the Inter Services Intelligence.

“I had consulted with Gen Aslam Beg (former army chief) about coming here,” Col Imam said.

Squadron Leader (retd) Khalid Khwaja said he had served in Pakistan Air Force for 18 years and in the ISI for two years.

“I came here on the prodding of Gen Hameed Gul, Gen Aslam Beg and ISI’s Col Sajjad,” Khalid Khwaja was heard as saying in the video.

Both held a copy of a Peshawar-based Urdu newspaper while recording their statement before the camera.

In the video, the group called itself “Asian Tigers” and said the hostages would be killed if its demands were not met within 10 days.

The group said (exact words taken from email in English): “Khalid Khwaja and Col Imam in Taliban custody. Both ISI persons are enemy of Islam and Muslims. We demand released all Taliban leaders, Mullah Brother (Baradar), Mullah Mansoor Dadullah and Mullah Kabir. We will send list of other mujahideen within a few days. Ten days time, if government not released mujahideen, then we will kill ISI officers or other decision.”

For complete article, click here

Monday, April 19, 2010

Inside Pakistan's NWFP: The Political Landscape of Insurgency

Counterterrorism Strategy Initiative Policy Paper
Inside Pakistan’s North-West Frontier Province: The Political Landscape of the Insurgency

By Hassan Abbas, Columbia University & Asia Society; April 19, 2010: New America Foundation

Despite comparatively progressive forces taking control of Pakistan’s North-West Frontier Province (NWFP)[1] after success in the February 2008 provincial elections, stability remains elusive and the law and order situation has gradually deteriorated, raising important questions about the correlation between politics in the province and the nature and extent of militancy there. This essay investigates how different political and religious forces have influenced the state of affairs in the province in recent years.

There has been a sharp rise in the number of terrorist attacks in the NWFP. In 2009, there were 49 suicide attacks targeting police, security forces, political figures, markets, and social gatherings.[i] Many of the attacks have targeted Peshawar, the NWFP capital, posing a serious challenge to the province’s coalition government, led by the Awami National Party(ANP) and the Pakistan People’s Party (PPP). Militants crossing into the NWFP from the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) and fighters from South Punjab (where most sectarian and Kashmir-focused groups recruit) moving to the FATA through various NWFP routes have made the province militarily dangerous.

The social and political dynamics in NWFP are also inextricably linked with the security environment in the ever volatile tribal areas. Militancy in the FATA (widely known in Pakistan as illaqa ghair, “foreign area”) has often negatively affected law and order in the adjacent NWFP, especially since the 1980s. Likewise, political developments in the mainstream NWFP (also called “settled areas”) increasingly influence political dynamics in the FATA. Despite stark differences in the administrative and political systems of the two regions, the same political parties operate in both areas.

Pakistani security forces were slow to react to signs that militants were growing more aggressive from 2007 to 2009. Political instability played a major role in the government’s inability to devise an effective counterterrorism policy, and the alliance of progressive political parties elected in February 2008 was overwhelmed by the Swat crisis, in which militants used violence and political manipulation to conquer major swaths of the Swat Valley and adjoining areas. Belated but effective military action in 2009 reasserted government control in the region, but it will be some time before things return to normal in the Malakand division of the NWFP, as the Swat, Malakand, Chitral, and Dir districts are known collectively. The crisis situation in the NWFP did not emerge overnight; the deterioration was a product of years of poor governance, regional tension, and economic distress, in addition to the gradual strengthening of militant forces, especially since the Taliban regime in neighboring Afghanistan fell in 2001. The prolonged presence of foreign troops in Afghanistan and over-dependence on military means to defeat insurgents in the region also negatively affected the residents of NWFP, and predictably so.

For the rest of this policy paper, click here. Abbas presented this paper at the New America Foundation on April 19, 2010. For other papers in the " The Battle for Pakistan" series on politics and militancy in the tribal areas, click here

Saturday, April 17, 2010

What are the Three Positive Signs of Change in Pakistan?

Commentary on "Can Pakistan Get Its Act Together?" 
Reported by Sandhya Kumar, Asia Society, April 14, 2010
For watching the segment 'signs of change in Pakistan', click here

NEW YORK, April 13, 2010 - In a timely discussion examining the hurdles facing Pakistan's domestic and international state of affairs, Bernard Schwartz Fellow Hassan Abbas seemed buoyed by hope in the nation's ability to prevail, but emphasized that "it's a step-by-step process."

Though there are signals of a return to stable governance, the threats are still pervasive. Abbas noted that while significant progress had been made by the government in strategically targeting centers of the Taliban in Northern and Southern Waziristan and improved collaboration with the US, there remain pockets of militant groups concerned with Kashmir in Punjab which are not being tackled. This poses a serious problem for both India and Pakistan, both equally victims to the violence perpetrated by these groups, and requiring that both nations act together to face this threat.

As the discussion progressed, Asia Society Executive Vice President Jamie Metzl probed the evolving role of the military in the present and future governance of Pakistan. Abbas responded that, unfortunately, the army had been the most important political party and there has been ongoing friction between civil and military leadership. However, the present military leadership of General Kayani is more popular both in Pakistan and the US, and Abbas predicted that future army chiefs would likely have less power as democracy progresses.

Equally critical in rebuilding Pakistan, is the issue of identity. At its founding, the insufficient infrastructure allowed hardliners and mullahs to define the state in the name of Islam, obstructing the formation of a positive identity by more liberal leaders. The social and economic structure continues to be weak, thus spurring much of the social unrest the country faces. Abbas reassessed the "strategic depth" former political leaders perceived lay in Afghanistan versus the "civilizational depth" that lies in India and how improving relations with India could be critical in mitigating security concerns as well as fomenting economic activity.



Abbas closed by recounting the dream of Pakistan's founders for a progressive Muslim state. While this state has been witness to many ups and downs, the culmination of civil society and political agency, a history of resilience to religious as well as political extremism, and greater international collaboration all bear positively in Pakistan's efforts to restore peace between and beyond its borders.

This event was the launch of the Asia Society's Bernard Schwartz Fellows Program for 2010, and also the first in the Pakistan 2020: A Vision for a Better Future and a Roadmap for Getting There public program series.

To watch the complete program, click here
Picture credit: George McClintock

Fatima Bhutto - Interview with Rediff News

'I am horrified to see these two nuclear countries entangled in this bizarre love story'
Rediff, April 8, 2010

History sits rather lightly on the slender shoulders of the petite and elegant 27 year old who has journeyed nearly 555 miles from across the border, with a bulky hardback to promote in India's book bazaars.

The title of her book -- Songs of Blood and Sword -- seems incongruous with the delicate, fashionably-dressed author, clad in a black embroidered jacket and slacks, facing you, just prior to the book's launch in Mumbai.

For complete article/interview, click here
Related:
Fatima Bhutto beats Jaswant Singh but Musharraf still leads - Tribune
'Fatima Bhutto: 'We didn't know what would happen tomorrow' - Guardian

Strengths and pitfalls By Asma Jahangir

Strengths and pitfalls By Asma Jahangir
Dawn, 16 Apr, 2010

The much-awaited constitutional reforms may have sailed through the National Assembly and Senate but there are trials ahead. Senator Raza Rabbani deserves praise as do the other members of the committee that worked on the reforms. The proposed amendments are not perfect but they do lay the foundation for a clearer direction in the future.
However, the amendments may face obstructions — not for their weaknesses but for their strengths. They touch upon three basic parameters: the strengthening of democratic institutions, the recognition of provincial rights and the extension of two new fundamental rights — the right to information and primary education.

In places the reforms are illogical and confused about the basic concept of rights. The committee reinserted the word ‘freely’ in guaranteeing freedom of religion to minorities in the Objectives Resolution, but contradicts this spirit of promoting tolerance elsewhere. By reverting to the original 1973 Constitution, the 18th Amendment makes it mandatory for the prime minister to be a Muslim. However, the chief ministers may be non-Muslims.

In reality, Pakistan’s disempowered religious minorities can never even dream of reaching such pinnacles of power, but for the constitution to brazenly discriminate against them is indefensible. Non-Muslims may contest elections to the National Assembly and command a majority of votes, but cannot be elected as prime minister. Consequently, only Muslims will be able to be parliamentary leaders. Our political leadership must make up its mind: either it commits itself to non-discriminatory policies on minorities or confesses to bigotry.
Fata as usual has a generous quota of seats in parliament but reserved seats for women in Fata do not exist. Is one to conclude that women do not live or indeed suffer in Fata? Are they not as vulnerable as women elsewhere to warrant special representation?

For complete article, click here

Friday, April 16, 2010

Sheikh to Terrorists: Go to Hell - By Christian Caryl

Sheikh to Terrorists: Go to Hell
A Pakistani cleric declares jihad on suicide bombers. And the story is just beginning.
BY CHRISTIAN CARYL, Foreign Policy, APRIL 14, 2010

Pakistani newspapers recently picked up an intriguing story from the country's security establishment. Reporters learned that their government had intercepted a secret message circulating within Tehrik-e-Taliban, the most prominent of several militant groups trying to overthrow the government in Islamabad. The jihadists, it seemed, had just added a new target to one of their death lists. His name is Tahir ul-Qadri, and he's no government official. He's one of Pakistan's leading Islamic scholars, an authority on the Quran and Islamic religious law.

It's no wonder the terrorists want to see Qadri dead. Last month he promulgated a 600-page legal ruling, a fatwa, that condemns terrorism as un-Islamic. A few Western media outlets gave the news a nod, but the coverage quickly petered out. And that's a pity, because the story of this fatwa is just beginning to get interesting. "I have declared a jihad against terrorism," says the 59-year-old Qadri in an interview. "I am trying to bring [the terrorists] back towards humanism. This is a jihad against brutality, to bring them back towards normality. This is an intellectual jihad." This isn't empty rhetoric. Last year militants killed one of Qadri's colleagues, a scholar named Sarfraz Ahmed Naeem, for expressing similar positions.

This isn't the first time that a Muslim jurisprudent has denounced suicide bombings as contrary to the spirit of Islam. But Qadri's ruling represents an important precedent nonetheless -- one that could well contribute to the struggle between the suicide bombers (and those who support them) and a more moderate brand of Islamic politics. Many Muslim scholars before Qadri, of course, have denounced terrorism. What makes him significant is the uncompromising rigor of his vision, which deploys a vast array of classical Islamic sources to support the case that those who commit terrorist acts are absolutely beyond the pale. He's especially keen on targeting the coming generation, younger members of the global ummah (the community of believers) who -- he contends -- have lost their bearings in the roiled post-9/11 world.

Qadri's fatwa aims to establish a bit of healthy clarity. His finding, which builds its argument around a meticulous reading of the Quran and the hadith (collections of oral statements attributed to the Prophet Mohammed), makes the case that terrorist acts run completely counter to Islamic teaching. While quite a few scholars before have condemned terrorism as haram (forbidden), the new fatwa categorically declares it to be no less than kufr (acts of disbelief). "There was a need," says Qadri, "to address this issue authentically, with full authority, with all relevant Quranic authority -- so that [the terrorists] realize that whatever they've been taught is absolutely wrong and that they're going to hellfire. They're not going to have paradise, and they're not going to have 72 virgins in heaven. They're totally on the wrong side."

For complete article, click here

Thursday, April 15, 2010

Who Killed Benazir Bhutto? - UN Report Released

U.N. Report Finds Faults in Pakistani Bhutto Inquiry
By Sabrina Tavernise, New York Times, April 15, 2010

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan — A United Nations investigation into the assassination of the former opposition leader Benazir Bhutto has concluded that the failure of Pakistani authorities to effectively investigate the killing was “deliberate,” saying that the country’s powerful intelligence agency “severely hampered” local authorities.

The 65-page report, issued in New York on Thursday, did not answer the question of who killed Ms. Bhutto, or even give the precise cause of death. It was concerned instead with looking into the facts and circumstances surrounding her death in a suicide bombing and gun attack at a political rally in December 2007.

“The commission believes that the failures of the police and other officials to react effectively to Ms. Bhutto’s assassination were, in most cases, deliberate,” the long awaited report said. “In other cases, the failures were driven by uncertainty in the minds of many officials as to the extent of the involvement of intelligence agencies.”

The report catalogued a litany of failings on the part of the authorities before and after the attack that killed Ms. Bhutto, leaving an impression of purposeful obstruction and raising questions that the authorities had something to hide.

These included a decision by Saud Aziz, the police chief in Rawalpindi, the city where the assassination took place, to hose down the crime scene less than two hours after the attack. That forced investigators to spend seven hours following the water current and wading through a drainage sewer to collect valuable evidence, including a bullet casing.

The decision was taken after he received a call from army headquarters, possibly including Maj. Gen. Nadeem Ijaz Ahmad, then director general of military intelligence, the report said, citing anonymous sources. It called a later Pakistani inquiry into the decision “a whitewash.”

“Hosing down the crime scene so soon after the blast goes beyond mere incompetence,” the report said. “It is up to the relevant authorities to determine whether this amounts to criminal responsibility.”

The report also criticized Mr. Aziz for deliberately preventing an autopsy, eliminating a central piece of evidence.

The report, in large part, dismisses allegations that Ms. Bhutto’s husband, Asif Ali Zardari, who is now president, had some hand in her killing. It said that it was “patently unrealistic” for the police to have expected Mr. Zardari, who was presented with his wife’s body a full seven hours after her death in a coffin on an air base outside Rawalpindi, to have allowed an autopsy at that time.

Conspiracy theories involving Mr. Zardari “simply had no basis, no evidence to be treated as credible hypotheses,” said Heraldo MuƱoz Valenzuela, a Chilean diplomat who was part of the three-member team that conducted the investigation. He spoke at a news conference at the United Nations that was broadcast live on the Internet.

For complete report, click here
Related:
To read complete "Report of the United Nations Commission of Inquiry" - click here or here
U.N. blames Bhutto's murder on lax security and alleges 'whitewash' - USA Today
Pakistan Security Failures Contributed to Bhutto Death, UN Says - Bussiness Week
U.N. report: Benazir Bhutto's assassination was preventable - CNN

Wednesday, April 14, 2010

Nuclear Security Summit and South Asia

All on board over N-fuel offer: official By Anwar Iqbal
Dawn, 15 Apr, 2010

WASHINGTON: The decision to offer nuclear fuel services to the world was made at a recent meeting of the National Command Authority, said a senior aide who was assisting Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani at a news conference on Tuesday evening.

The aide, who was responding to a question put to the prime minister, said the country’s highest decision-making body on strategic issues had made a consensus decision to create a fuel bank.

The offer, made in a national document presented at the two-day nuclear summit in Washington, reflected the decision made by the National Command Authority, the aide said.

“As a country with advanced fuel cycle capability, Pakistan is in a position to provide nuclear fuel cycle services under IAEA safeguards, and to participate in any non-discriminatory nuclear fuel cycle assurance mechanism,” said the document presented at the summit, which ended in Washington on Tuesday.

Before leaving Washington, the prime minister told a news conference that Pakistan’s participation in the summit had boosted international confidence in its capability to protect its nuclear arsenals and brought (a higher degree of) ‘legitimacy to our nuclear programme’.

Mr Gilani noted that a person no less than US President Barack Obama personally quashed all doubts about Pakistan’s nuclear programme, publicly voicing his administration’s firm confidence in the country’s safety mechanism.

“Our nuclear programme is in safe hands and President Obama is totally convinced that our command and control system is undoubtedly effective,” said the prime minister.

For complete article, click here
Related:
After the Summit - NYT Editorial
Statement by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh at Nuclear Security Summit, Washington DC - The Hindu
Factbox: National commitments promised at nuclear summit - The Vancouver Sun
Obama's Speech at the Nuclear Security Summit, April 2010 - CFR
 
Background:
Nuclear Posture Review - Department of Defense, USA
Nuclear Threat Initiative - website
Nuclear Security - Mohamed ElBaradei, Graham Allison, Ernesto Zedill

Sunday, April 11, 2010

How to End the War in Afghanistan: David Miliband in New York Review of Books

How to End the War in Afghanistan
By David Miliband, New York Review of Books, April 1, 2010

Neither the UK nor the US started the war in Afghanistan. In the 1990s that country’s Taliban government provided a safe haven and support for al-Qaeda. In return Osama bin Laden provided the Taliban with money and fighters. Afghanistan became the incubator for the September 11 attacks. The international intervention in response to those attacks had widespread support around the world. But we never meant for our militaries to be there forever. Eight years later, with al-Qaeda pushed into Pakistan, it is not enough to explain to people why the war started. We need to set out how it will be ended—how to preserve what has been achieved and protect South Asia from a contagion that would affect us all.

The route to progress depends on recognizing the centrality of politics to issues of war and peace. Violence of the most murderous, indiscriminate, and terrible kind started this Afghan war; politics will bring it to an end. A political settlement for Afghanistan must have two dimensions. First, a new and more inclusive internal political arrangement in which enough Afghan citizens have a stake, and the central government has enough power and legitimacy to protect the country from threats within and without. And second, on which the first depends, a new external settlement that commits Afghanistan’s neighbors to respect its sovereign integrity and that carries enough force and support to ensure that they abide by that commitment.

Britain fought three wars in Afghanistan between 1839 and 1919. Each time it was defending its power base—and economic stake—in British India. And each time it suffered military reverses as it sought to establish order. Yet on every occasion, once that lesson had been learned the hard and bloody way, Britain’s imperial strategists sought—and secured—a saner and more sustainable objective: a self-governing, self-policing, but heavily subsidized Afghanistan, whose tribes balanced each other and that posed no threat to the safety of British India.

For complete article, click here

Saturday, April 10, 2010

Can Pakistan Get Its Act Together? - Asia Society, New York - April 13 from 12:00-2:00 PM

Can Pakistan Get Its Act Together? - Asia Society, New York, April 13 12:00-2:00 PM
Featuring

Professor Hassan Abbas
Asia Society Bernard Schwartz Fellow
Quaid-i-Azam Chair Professor at Columbia University

In conversation with
Jamie Metzl
Vice President, Asia Society

Stability in Pakistan is vital to both Central and South Asia’s regional security and prosperity. It is also vital to achieving real success on the ground in Afghanistan and in the Overseas Contingency Operation—two of Washington's core aims in the region. Yet stability in Pakistan remains incredibly elusive, dogged by regional rivalries, political instability, military dominance in the policy making arena, and rising religious extremist trends. Please join us for this event, the first in the Pakistan 2020: A Vision for a Better Future and a Roadmap for Getting There public program series, as Professor Hassan Abbas examines Pakistan’s capacity to address the serious political, social, and economic challenges undermining Pakistan’s stability today.

HISTORIC - Constitutional Reform in Pakistan

Historic
Dawn Editorial, April 9, 2010

They’ve done it. Proving all the naysayers wrong, dismissing all the conspiracy theorists, rejecting all those who would be spoilers, the National Assembly of Pakistan has approved a constitution that for the first time in decades will have the broad support of the people’s elected representatives.
Such was the bonhomie in the house yesterday that regular watchers of parliament may have rubbed their eyes in disbelief: was that really Chaudhry Nisar, leader of the opposition, the PML-N attacker-in-chief, a seemingly perennially angry man, praising the PPP co-chairman, President Asif Ali Zardari? Yes, it was. It was that kind of a day. A historic day in Pakistan’s parliamentary history, one that the MNAs deserve a heartfelt thanks for.

And yet the 18th Amendment is neither the panacea that its proponents suggest it is, nor will it transform Pakistan’s polity unless implemented with sincerity and purpose. There are four broad areas that this constitutional amendment package addresses: the repeal of the 17th Amendment; enhancement of provincial autonomy; the appointment process for the superior judiciary; and ‘other’ issues. That is a sizeable agenda and necessitated nearly 100 clauses of the 280-article constitution to be amended. But many big issues were never put on the table. For example, the Islamic clauses gratuitously inserted by Gen Zia in the constitution were not touched and the colonial-era status of Fata was not looked at. Perhaps the Parliamentary Committee on Constitutional Reforms headed by Raza Rabbani should not be disbanded and should instead be allowed to work on the next raft of changes that are needed. Consider that the security threat that has radiated from Fata is unprecedented in the country’s history and yet the committee did not see fit to amend its constitutional status at this stage. In fact, even the relatively minor changes (allowing political parties to participate in elections, for example) promised by the president have not yet been signed into law by the NWFP governor. The security challenge in Fata has to be dealt with by more than just guns and money — the ‘wild west’ political status of the place is part of the reason that the area has become the greatest threat to internal security.

Democracies must necessarily be forward-looking. To suggest that more needs to be done at this stage is not to detract from the historic achievement of the present parliament. Mr Rabbani and his committee have done a phenomenal job — which is all the more reason to keep them together and set them to work on the next set of constitutional reforms. ‘Do more’ in this context is not a quibble; it is the essence of democracy

Related:
An Unlikely Catalyst For Change - Raza Rumi, Tehleqa
Editorial: The ‘impossible’ comes to pass - DT Editorial
Pakistan Weighs Changes to Revise Constitution - NYT
Historic Indeed by Babar Sattar - The News
Sanitising the Constitution by Sania Nishtar - The News

For Background:
Full text of 18th Amendment Bill - Associated Press of Pakistan
Full text of Pakistan's 1973 Constitution (with amendements) - Pakistani.org
Abiding Shame by Amina Jilani - The Nation

Friday, April 09, 2010

Afghanistan: From Ramping Up to the Exit Ramp



Afghanistan: From Ramping Up to the Exit Ramp
The Century Foundation & The UNA-USA Southern New York State Division
2/19/2010 United Nations Headquarters, New York

Hassan Abbas, Bernard Schwartz Fellow, Asia Society
Valentin Gatzinski, Director (NY), UN Assistance Mission in Afghanistan
Jeffrey Laurenti, The Century Foundation
Linda Fasulo (Moderator), UN Correspondent for NBC News

The panel examines prospects of the international efforts to assist Afghans in building a secure and peaceful society after nearly thirty years of civil war and political conflict. Hassan Abbas discusses the complicated regional context, including how the India-Pakistan rivalry continues to play out in Afghanistan and the prospects and methods for reconciliation with the Taliban. Century Foundation Fellow Jeffrey Laurenti adds perspective on the scope of the external and especially U.S. commitment to Afghanistan’s security, including the political dynamic of sustaining support for military deployments in the country. Valentin Gatzinksi stresses the importance of the international community’s long-term commitment to Afghanistan.
Afghanistan: From Ramping Up to the Exit Ramp highlights from Century Foundation on Vimeo.

For complete event, click here

War or peace on the Indus? - A very insightful article

War or peace on the Indus?
The News, April 03, 2010
John Briscoe

Anyone foolish enough to write on war or peace in the Indus needs to first banish a set of immediate suspicions. I am neither Indian nor Pakistani. I am a South African who has worked on water issues in the subcontinent for 35 years and who has lived in Bangladesh (in the 1970s) and Delhi (in the 2000s). In 2006 I published, with fine Indian colleagues, an Oxford University Press book titled India's Water Economy: Facing a Turbulent Future and, with fine Pakistani colleagues, one titled Pakistan's Water Economy: Running Dry.

I was the Senior Water Advisor for the World Bank who dealt with the appointment of the Neutral Expert on the Baglihar case. My last assignment at the World Bank (relevant, as described later) was as Country Director for Brazil. I am now a mere university professor, and speak in the name of no one but myself.

I have deep affection for the people of both India and Pakistan, and am dismayed by what I see as a looming train wreck on the Indus, with disastrous consequences for both countries. I will outline why there is no objective conflict of interests between the countries over the waters of the Indus Basin, make some observations of the need for a change in public discourse, and suggest how the drivers of the train can put on the brakes before it is too late.

Is there an inherent conflict between India and Pakistan?

The simple answer is no. The Indus Waters Treaty allocates the water of the three western rivers to Pakistan, but allows India to tap the considerable hydropower potential of the Chenab and Jhelum before the rivers enter Pakistan.

The qualification is that this use of hydropower is not to affect either the quantity of water reaching Pakistan or to interfere with the natural timing of those flows. Since hydropower does not consume water, the only issue is timing. And timing is a very big issue, because agriculture in the Pakistani plains depends not only on how much water comes, but that it comes in critical periods during the planting season. The reality is that India could tap virtually all of the available power without negatively affecting the timing of flows to which Pakistan is entitled.

Is the Indus Treaty a stable basis for cooperation?

If Pakistan and India had normal, trustful relations, there would be a mutually-verified monitoring process which would assure that there is no change in the flows going into Pakistan. (In an even more ideal world, India could increase low-flows during the critical planting season, with significant benefit to Pakistani farmers and with very small impacts on power generation in India.) Because the relationship was not normal when the treaty was negotiated, Pakistan would agree only if limitations on India's capacity to manipulate the timing of flows was hardwired into the treaty. This was done by limiting the amount of "live storage" (the storage that matters for changing the timing of flows) in each and every hydropower dam that India would construct on the two rivers.

While this made sense given knowledge in 1960, over time it became clear that this restriction gave rise to a major problem. The physical restrictions meant that gates for flushing silt out of the dams could not be built, thus ensuring that any dam in India would rapidly fill with the silt pouring off the young Himalayas.

This was a critical issue at stake in the Baglihar case. Pakistan (reasonably) said that the gates being installed were in violation of the specifications of the treaty. India (equally reasonably) argued that it would be wrong to build a dam knowing it would soon fill with silt. The finding of the Neutral Expert was essentially a reinterpretation of the Treaty, saying that the physical limitations no longer made sense. While the finding was reasonable in the case of Baglihar, it left Pakistan without the mechanism – limited live storage – which was its only (albeit weak) protection against upstream manipulation of flows in India. This vulnerability was driven home when India chose to fill Baglihar exactly at the time when it would impose maximum harm on farmers in downstream Pakistan.

If Baglihar was the only dam being built by India on the Chenab and Jhelum, this would be a limited problem. But following Baglihar is a veritable caravan of Indian projects – Kishanganga, Sawalkot, Pakuldul, Bursar, Dal Huste, Gyspa… The cumulative live storage will be large, giving India an unquestioned capacity to have major impact on the timing of flows into Pakistan. (Using Baglihar as a reference, simple back-of-the-envelope calculations, suggest that once it has constructed all of the planned hydropower plants on the Chenab, India will have an ability to effect major damage on Pakistan. First, there is the one-time effect of filling the new dams. If done during the wet season this would have little effect on Pakistan. But if done during the critical low-flow period, there would be a large one-time effect (as was the case when India filled Baglihar). Second, there is the permanent threat which would be a consequence of substantial cumulative live storage which could store about one month's worth of low-season flow on the Chenab. If, God forbid, India so chose, it could use this cumulative live storage to impose major reductions on water availability in Pakistan during the critical planting season.

Views on "the water problem" from both sides of the border and the role of the press

Living in Delhi and working in both India and Pakistan, I was struck by a paradox. One country was a vigorous democracy, the other a military regime. But whereas an important part of the Pakistani press regularly reported India's views on the water issue in an objective way, the Indian press never did the same. I never saw a report which gave Indian readers a factual description of the enormous vulnerability of Pakistan, of the way in which India had socked it to Pakistan when filling Baglihar. How could this be, I asked? Because, a journalist colleague in Delhi told me, "when it comes to Kashmir – and the Indus Treaty is considered an integral part of Kashmir -- the ministry of external affairs instructs newspapers on what they can and cannot say, and often tells them explicitly what it is they are to say."

This apparently remains the case. In the context of the recent talks between India and Pakistan I read, in Boston, the electronic reports on the disagreement about "the water issue" in The Times of India, The Hindustan Times, The Hindu, The Indian Express and The Economic Times. (Respectively, http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Water-Pakistans-diversionary-tactic-/articleshow/5609099.cms , http://beta.thehindu.com/news/national/ article112388.ece , http://www.hindustantimes.com/News-Feed/india/River-waters-The-next-testing-ground/Article1-512190.aspx , http://www.indianexpress.com/news/Pak-heats-up-water-sharing/583733 , http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics/nation/Pak-takes-water-route-to-attack-India/articleshow/5665516.cms )

Taken together, these reports make astounding reading. Not only was the message the same in each case ("no real issue, just Pakistani shenanigans"), but the arguments were the same, the numbers were the same and the phrases were the same. And in all cases the source was "analysts" and "experts" -- in not one case was the reader informed that this was reporting an official position of the Government of India.
Equally depressing is my repeated experience – most recently at a major international meeting of strategic security institutions in Delhi – that even the most liberal and enlightened of Indian analysts (many of whom are friends who I greatly respect) seem constitutionally incapable of seeing the great vulnerability and legitimate concern of Pakistan (which is obvious and objective to an outsider).

A way forward

This is a very uneven playing field. The regional hegemon is the upper riparian and has all the cards in its hands. This asymmetry means that it is India that is driving the train, and that change must start in India. In my view, four things need to be done.

First, there must be some courageous and open-minded Indians – in government or out – who will stand up and explain to the public why this is not just an issue for Pakistan, but why it is an existential issue for Pakistan.

Second, there must be leadership from the Government of India. Here I am struck by the stark difference between the behaviour of India and that of its fellow BRIC – Brazil, the regional hegemon in Latin America.

Brazil and Paraguay have a binding agreement on their rights and responsibilities on the massive Itaipu Binacional Hydropower Project. The proceeds, which are of enormous importance to small Paraguay, played a politicised, polemical anti-Brazilian part in the recent presidential election in Paraguay. Similarly, Brazil's and Bolivia's binding agreement on gas also became part of an anti-Brazil presidential campaign theme.

The public and press in Brazil bayed for blood and insisted that Bolivia and Paraguay be made to pay. So what did President Luis Inacio Lula da Silva do? "Look," he said to his irate countrymen, "these are poor countries, and these are huge issues for them. They are our brothers. Yes, we are in our legal rights to be harsh with them, but we are going to show understanding and generosity, and so I am unilaterally doubling (in the case of Paraguay) and tripling (in the case of Bolivia) the payments we make to them. Brazil is a big country and a relatively rich one, so this will do a lot for them and won't harm us much." India could, and should, in my view, similarly make the effort to see it from its neighbour's point of view, and should show the generosity of spirit which is an integral part of being a truly great power and good neighbour.
Third, this should translate into an invitation to Pakistan to explore ways in which the principles of the Indus Waters Treaty could be respected, while providing a win for Pakistan (assurance on their flows) and a win for India (reducing the chronic legal uncertainty which vexes every Indian project on the Chenab or Jhelum). With good will there are multiple ways in which the treaty could be maintained but reinterpreted so that both countries could win.
Fourth, discussions on the Indus waters should be de-linked from both historic grievances and from the other Kashmir-related issues. Again, it is a sign of statesmanship, not weakness, to acknowledge the past and then move beyond it. This is personal for me, as someone of Irish origin. Conor Cruise O'Brien once remarked, "Santayana said that those who did not learn their history would be condemned to repeat it; in the case of Ireland we have learned our history so well that we are condemned to repeat it, again and again."

And finally, as a South African I am acutely aware that Nelson Mandela, after 27 years in prison, chose not to settle scores but to look forward and construct a better future, for all the people of his country and mine. Who will be the Indian Mandela who will do this – for the benefit of Pakistanis and Indians – on the Indus?

The writer is the Gordon McKay Professor of Environmental Engineering, Harvard University. Email: jbriscoe@seas. harvard.edu

Thursday, April 08, 2010

Banned Muslim scholar Tariq Ramadan Visiting Chicago and New York

Chicago welcomes once-banned Muslim scholar
Chicago Tribune, April 5, 2010
 
Six years after the U.S. government barred Tariq Ramadan from entering the U.S., the controversial Muslim scholar will speak in Chicago on Saturday—one of his first American appearances since U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton promised he would no longer be denied a visa for having alleged ties to terrorism. His opponents warn of danger ahead.

Ramadan, now a professor at Oxford University in England, will address an audience at the Council of American Islamic Relations in Chicago. His visa was revoked in 2004 right before he would have moved to Indiana to take a tenured teaching job at the Joan B. Kroc Institute for International Peace Studies at the University of Notre Dame.

A champion of integrating Islam in the Western world, Ramadan criticized the Bush administration's policies in the Middle East. He also has rejected Muslim terrorism as "anti-Islam."

“Anyone who has read any of my 20 books, 700 articles or listened to any of my 170 audio-taped lectures will discern a consistent message,” Ramadan wrote in the Chicago Tribune in 2004. “The very moment Muslims and their fellow citizens realize that being a Muslim and being American or European are not mutually exclusive, they will enrich their societies. Since Sept. 11, I have lectured at countless American universities and civic organizations. The French consul of Chicago invited me in 2002 for a lecture trip in the United States, and I spoke at the Chicago Council on Foreign Relations.”
Ahmed Rehab, executive director of the Chicago chapter of the Council of American-Islamic Relations, said he wasted no time inviting Ramadan to speak when the scholar’s rights to enter the U.S. were restored in January. He had last spoken with Ramadan in December when both of them spoke at the Parliament for the World’s Religions in Melbourne, Australia. Ramadan now has a 10-year visa.

For complete article, click here
Related:
At Last Allowed, Muslim Scholar Visits - NYT
Tariq Ramadan To Speak in New York - Slate
Why I Was Banned in the U.S.A. by Tariq Ramadan - Newsweek
Tariq Ramadan Has an Identity Issue by Ian Buruma, NYT - 2007
To visit Tariq Ramadan's official website, click here

TTP Strikes Again

TTP Strikes Again
Dawn Editorial, April 8, 2010

Last week Qari Hussain, Ustad-i-Fidayeen, warned that the “memory of Khost”, a reference to the bombing of the CIA forward base last December, would soon be refreshed. Intelligence warnings had been provided to the Americans that strikes against them were possible.

In Miranshah, North Waziristan Agency, the Taliban had warned that Afghanistan and Pakistan were “one” in terms of a war theatre. And then the TTP struck on Monday, launching a sophisticated attack on the US consulate in Peshawar and a devastating car bombing of an ANP rally in Timergara, Lower Dir. The threat that the TTP continues to pose is very real and very serious.

So yet again, some questions have to be asked. First, where are the Qari Hussains and Hakeemullah Mehsuds (he has risen from the ‘dead’) hiding? The intelligence and security agencies have made some decent progress in the war against militancy but they have still, by and large, failed to capture or kill most of the top militant commanders. For example in Swat, of the 50 most-wanted militants about 80 per cent have been accounted for by the security forces, but the ones who are missing are part of the top leadership. In other militancy-hit areas, too, a similar pattern has been established. Where is Tariq Afridi? Where is Faqir Mohammed? The reason it is important to get these top leaders is becoming increasingly apparent. Sophisticated and devastating attacks like those launched on Monday would be infinitely more difficult for middle-ranking or lower-tier militants to pull off on their own. Moreover, the top commanders have repeatedly pledged to keep on attacking targets, indicating that they have no intention of melting away and giving up the fight.

Second, what exactly is going on in North Waziristan Agency? Many, if not most, of the recent militancy trails appear to end in the agency. The state is trying to put pressure on Hafiz Gul Bahadur via the tribal structure to either stop the violence emanating from NWA or to dismantle the safe havens that have been established there. But it is not clear yet who is in fact in control of NWA. Is it Hafiz Gul Bahadur or is it Hakeemullah Mehsud? And while the army maintains it has a fair amount of resources in the area (which it does), the state has perhaps the least direct influence. Sooner rather than later, the army needs to establish its control over the area. The Taliban may be on the run but they have proved they still have the capacity to launch strikes almost anywhere in the country. They must be denied whatever space they have found in North Waziristan.

Tuesday, April 06, 2010

U.S. Aims to Ease India-Pakistan Tension - WSJ

U.S. Aims to Ease India-Pakistan Tension
Progress in Afghanistan Hinges on Improved Relations Between New Delhi and Islamabad, Obama Administration Directive Says.By PETER SPIEGEL in Washington and MATTHEW ROSENBERG in Kabul, WSJ, April 5, 2010

President Barack Obama issued a secret directive in December to intensify American diplomacy aimed at easing tensions between India and Pakistan, asserting that without dƩtente between the two rivals, the administration's efforts to win Pakistani cooperation in Afghanistan would suffer.

The directive concluded that India must make resolving its tensions with Pakistan a priority for progress to be made on U.S. goals in the region, according to people familiar with its contents.

The U.S. has invested heavily in its own relations with Pakistan in recent months, agreeing to a $7.5 billion aid package and sending top military and diplomatic officials to Islamabad on repeated visits. The public embrace, which reached a high point last month in high-profile talks in Washington, reflects the Obama administration's belief that Pakistan must be convinced to change its strategic calculus and take a more assertive stance against militants based in its western tribal regions over the course of the next year in order to turn the tide in Afghanistan.

A debate continues within the administration over how hard to push India, which has long resisted outside intervention in the conflict with its neighbor. The Pentagon, in particular, has sought more pressure on New Delhi, according to U.S. and Indian officials. Current and former U.S. officials said the discussion in Washington over how to approach India has intensified as Pakistan ratchets up requests that the U.S. intercede in a series of continuing disputes.

Pakistan has long regarded Afghanistan as providing "strategic depth"—essentially, a buffer zone—in a potential conflict with India. Some U.S. officials believe Islamabad will remain reluctant to wholeheartedly fight the Islamic militants based on its Afghan border unless the sense of threat from India is reduced.

For complete article, click here
Related:
Strong Ties With India Goal of Trip by Geithner - NYT

Sunday, April 04, 2010

Z A Bhutto's 31st death anniversary


Biography with a twist By Anjum Niaz

Dawn, 04 Apr, 2010

Today, 31-years ago, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto was hanged. It reminds me of an email I received on another Sunday morning. It was from ‘Benazir’s brother.’ He had just finished reading my column on Benazir Bhutto’s second death anniversary. “ZAB was my best friend. I was to write his biography,” wrote the e-mailer. “His beloved daughter Benazir gave her life for the restoration of democracy. I was supposed to be killed with her when she arrived in Karachi. In our last meeting in New York we had agreed to adopt each other as sister and brother. But that is another story… I know who killed her.”

The next day we met at an Indian restaurant (in the US). It was an uncanny coincidence that he happened to be in the area I was in. Seated around were American diners blithely unaware of a land called Pakistan and the mysteries it holds. I found it even more surreal to hear the Bhutto ghost being resurrected by this stranger who dropped out of the blue as I sat thousands of miles away from Pakistan.

Dr Thomas B Manton was the mystery man. He was Zulfikar Ali Bhutto’s “best American friend.” In the fall of 1966 a dear friend of his in New York, the Dawn Correspondent at the United Nations, set up a meeting with Bhutto. The four-hour meeting was a “wonderful tour de force of what really happened during the 1965 war between India and Pakistan.” In the 95-page transcript of his interview which the US government wanted to see, “but I never gave it to them,” ZAB revealed that the war would not have ended if UN Secretary-General U Thant (whose biographer Tom was) had not intervened. “Bhutto was not the reckless young foreign minister often portrayed by the press. He was very realistic and visionary as to what the available options for Pakistan were.”

For complete article, click here
Related:
Ghosts and memories of Bhuttos - Ghazi Salahuddin
Zulfikar Ali Bhutto rejected Kissinger’s warning over nukes’ - Daily Times
Death Anniversary: Gen. Zia-ul-Haq Explains Why Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto Had to Die - Adil Najam, All Things Pakistan

Friday, April 02, 2010

Interview: Delaying release of Bhutto report might help Pakistani constitution reform: Xinhua News

Interview: Delaying release of Bhutto report might help Pakistani constitution reform: expert

UNITED NATIONS, Apr. 1, 2010 (Xinhua News Agency) -- The delay in releasing a UN report on the assassination of former Pakistani Primer Benazir Bhutto might help advance Pakistan's constitution reform, an expert said.

"The Pakistani government might be trying to time the report's release according to its own political goals," Hassan Abbas, a senior advisor at Harvard Kennedy School's Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs and a fellow at the Asia Society, told Xinhua in an interview.

It appears the delay has already helped, said Abbas, a former member of of Pakistan's police service.

On Wednesday, after 10 months of heated debate and one day after President Asif Ali Zardari, Bhutto's husband, requested the UN to delay releasing the report, all major political parties in Pakistan reached consensus on a constitutional amendment bill.

The bill is expected to be presented next week for a vote in the lower and upper houses of parliament.

Abbas said that with such a hotly debated piece of legislation moving its way through Pakistan's government, it's possible that Zardari and his ruling Pakistan People's Party did not "want to jeopardize its victory lap with any negative fallout from the UN report."

The United Nations had planned to release a report on Tuesday from a probe into the December 2007 assassination of Bhutto, but just hours before a press conference at UN headquarters, it was announced that Zardari urgently requested a delay until mid-April.

The Pakistani president said before the report is released, he wants the UN to quiz four international personalities who had prior information on threats to Bhutto's life.

The four people are Afghan leader Hamid Karzai, former U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, Saudi Arabian intelligence chief Prince Muqrin bin Abdul Aziz and the United Arab Emirates intelligence chief.

In response to the request, the United Nations said it will not reopen the probe into Bhutto's assassination, and that the report will be released on April 15.

How Pakistan's government learned that the report did not contain information from those four personalities remains to be seen. The United Nations denies showing the report to the government, insisting that even the secretary-general himself did not know the contents of the report.

Abbas, who still maintains contact with members of Pakistan's security sector, said that he thought the UN team failed to interview a number of "very important people," such as the law enforcement officials who were responsible for cleaning up the crime scene and a couple of people Bhutto was in contact with in the last hours of her life about security concerns.

"The UN never reached out to those people," he said, adding that the fault might lie with the mandate given, not the methodology.

A UN fact-finding team was asked to investigate the facts and circumstances surrounding the assassination with the understanding that the assessment of criminal liability would remain in the hands of Pakistani authorities.

The UN commission has been granted a technical extension until the release of the report but it is unclear whether the team will use the next two weeks to question any more officials.

Thursday, April 01, 2010

Cost of the Kashmir Conflict ? - Two 'Not to be Missed Events' at Asia Society

Discuss: Cost of Kashmir Conflict
Asia Society, New York

The India-Pakistan conflict over Kashmir has lingered for six decades. Even though sides have made several efforts to resolve the issue through talks, international mediation, and by fighting three wars, there has not been any significant progress toward peace.

The cost of the Kashmir conflict is always cited in terms of lives lost, and the cost of maintaining large-standing armies to ensure victory in a full-scale war. But children living at the heart of the conflict suffer the most from the effects of decades of turmoil and violence.

TWO BOOK EVENTS:

In the Valley of Mist – Kashmir’s Descent into Violence
By Justine Hardy, April 5, 2010, Asia Society New York:  6:30pm to 8:30pm

In the book, Justine Hardy recounts the ongoing Kashmir insurgency through the eyes of the Dar family, with whom Hardy has stayed for many years, while reporting on this conflict. In The Valley of Mist is an extraordinary story of family survival, at the heart of a conflict within and beyond the Muslim world.


Curfewed Night: Basharat Peer (author) in conversation with Pankaj Mishra
Asia Society New York, April 12, 2010: 6:30pm to 8:30pm

Born and raised in the war-torn region, Basharat Peer brings this little-known part of the world to life in haunting, vivid detail. It is a tale of a man's love for his land, the pain of leaving home, and the joy of return—as well as a fierce and moving piece of reportage from an intrepid young journalist.


Join the discussion below: What happens to culture in times of violence, particularly over many years? For children, what does it mean to grow up in a culture of violence? And what do you think are the prospects for solving the Kashmir conflict? Is a resolution possible?

Click here to comment

Who's Afraid of a One-State Solution?

Who's Afraid of a One-State Solution?
As Israeli-Palestian peace talks remain at an impasse, a radical solution gains steam.

BY DMITRY REIDER, Foreign Policy, March 31, 2010

In light of the ongoing deadlock in Israeli-Palestinian peace talks, leaders such as U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Israeli opposition leader Tzipi Livni have raised the specter of a one-state solution. Their intention, of course, is to scare some sense into Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his intransigent coalition partners. But, as this once-taboo idea becomes a legitimate part of political discussion in the region, some Israeli intellectuals are making the case that this is not something to fear, but a path toward a viable resolution to the region's long-running crisis.


The two-state solution has presented no shortage of obstacles: Negotiations are mired in talks about talks; the settlement policy is splintering what little territory was envisaged for the Palestinian state; and Israelis are becoming increasingly aware that the conflict doesn't stop at the Green Line, but emerges in varying shapes, including unprecedented racism and sectarian rioting within Israel proper. It's little wonder, then, that an increasing number of Israeli voices are beginning to inquire whether the one-state idea is more than just a bogeyman.

For complete article, click here

Consensus on Constitutional Reforms: A very positive indicator

Parties strike accord on 18th Amendment By Ahmad Hassan
Dawn, 01 Apr, 2010

ISLAMABAD: The Parliamentary Committee on Constitutional Reforms achieved on Wednesday a historic consensus on the draft 18th Amendment by overcoming all contentious issues ranging from the renaming of NWFP to the appointment of superior courts judges.

Members of the committee, headed by Senator Raza Rabbani, signed the draft document at a ceremony held at committee room No 2 of the Parliament House.

Sources said that after the ceremony the committee met again to decide a date for presentation of the bill in the National Assembly and Senate. S.M. Zafar, a PML-Q member of the committee, told reporters that the body would meet again on Thursday to fine-tune the document before taking it to parliament.

After hectic meetings between leaders of the PML-N and ANP and members of the committee throughout the day, the two parties agreed to a new name for the NWFP — ‘Khyber Pakhtunkhwa’ — choosing a middle path to end the controversy.

The PML-Q, the third stakeholder in the renaming issue, however, rejected the new name and submitted a dissenting note. It made two suggestions: ‘Sooba-i-Sarhad’ as the new name for the province or holding of a referendum.

After getting a fresh advice from the party leadership, PML-N members of the body agreed to the constitution of a seven-member judicial committee, to be headed by the Chief Justice of Pakistan, and to the nomination of a retired Supreme Court judge as its seventh member. He will be appointed by the CJ.

The all-party parliamentary committee has revisited all 278 articles of the Constitution and proposed amendments to about 100 of them.

For the first time in the country’s judicial history a consensus has emerged on reshaping the precincts of provincial autonomy by abolishing all items from the Concurrent List and handing them over to the provinces.

Efforts of the Pakistan People’s Party to finalise a constitutional reforms package suffered a major setback on March 25 after it failed to reach an understanding with the Pakistan Muslim League-N on the procedure for appointing judges and on renaming the NWFP before a joint session of the two houses.

The 27-member parliamentary committee was constituted on June 23 last year to revisit the 1973 Constitution in order to repeal the 17th Amendment and strike a balance of powers between the president and the prime minister, including removal from the Constitution of the controversial clause 58(2)b.

For complete article, click here
Related:
Constitutional reforms under way in Pakistan - Gulf News
Pakhtoons get identity after 63 years: Wali - The News
Pakistan president Asif Zardari gives up constitutional powers  - Telegraph