Wednesday, May 30, 2012

India and Afghanistan in the Post 2014 Scenario

India fears for Afghanistan after NATO pullout
By Shaun Tandon (AFP), May 31, 2012

WASHINGTON — India called for greater coordination with the United States on Afghanistan, voicing fear that Islamic radicals would gain strength once Western forces pull out.

NATO leaders in a May 21 summit in Chicago committed to pulling combat troops out of Afghanistan by the end of 2014 as Western nations grow tired of more than a decade of war and pessimistic on the chances of further progress.

India is one of the most vocal supporters of continued engagement and has given Afghanistan more than $2 billion since the US-led invasion in 2001 overthrew the Taliban regime, which sheltered virulently anti-Indian militants.

Ahead of high-level annual talks between India and the United States on June 13, Nirupama Rao, New Delhi's ambassador to Washington, said the two nations have been holding talks on building "a stable, democratic and prosperous Afghanistan."

"These consultations must be strengthened," Rao said at the Atlantic Council, a think tank.

"We understand that after 10 long years of war there is a manifest and genuine desire to seek an end to conflict. But equally, we must ensure that the enormous sacrifices and efforts of the past decade have not been in vain," she said.

"Given the history of the last few decades in Afghanistan and the tide of extremism and radicalism that has swept across that country to the great detriment of its men, women and children, one cannot but help be concerned about what the future holds for that country" after the NATO pullout, she said.

India's involvement in Afghanistan has enraged neighboring Pakistan, which helped create the Taliban regime and accuses its historic rival of seeking to encircle it.

For complete article, click here

Related:
Afghanistan: the Great Game, BBC Two, review - Telegraph
For Pakistani truckers, NATO route row is all about the money - Reuters

NATO Summit and the Deteriorating US-Pakistan Relations

US, Pakistan Row Over Border Crossing Reveals 'Outstanding Problems'
Alex Ortolani, Asia Society, May 23rd, 2012
For Video, click here

While activists clashed with Chicago police to protest the NATO summit in Chicago this week, the U.S. and Pakistan were having their own stand-off inside the meeting.

According to reports from the conference, U.S. President Barack Obama and Pakistan President Asif Ali Zardari barely spoke despite an ongoing dispute concerning Pakistan’s decision to block a supply route for NATO troops into Afghanistan. The country has blocked the passage to protest NATO killing 24 Pakistani soldiers in November.

While U.S. officials may be hopeful that Pakistan will open the border to NATO the situation may not be cleared up so easily, Asia Society Senior Advisor Hassan Abbas said on an Al Jazeera program.
“I’m not very hopeful that something will happen very soon because Pakistani military and civilian leadership are not on the same page, and I think that is an issue,” said Abbas, a former Pakistani government official who is directing an Asia Society project on police reform in Pakistan with a report to be launched in June 2012. "When it comes to Afghan Taliban and the Haqqani group, the most important group, there is a disconnect — the civilian side, the civilian law enforcement, the political leadership, even if they want to do something about it they cannot."

Two problems have been making the Pakistan-U.S. relationship difficult, added Ahmed Rashid, author most recently of Pakistan on the Brink: The Future of America, Pakistan, and Afghanistan.

The issue from the U.S.-side is that Pakistan has been harboring high-level Afghan Taliban leaders who may return to the country once combat troops withdraw. Meanwhile, Pakistan officials feel they have been left out of the decision-making process when it comes to the wind-down of NATO and U.S. military operations in Pakistan.

“Essentially these are the two outstanding problems that have been getting worse and worse,” Rashid said.

Also See: US-Pakistan relations: At a standstill - Aljazeera

Sunday, May 20, 2012

Reviewing Pakistani History

History 101: Writing a new Pakistani history
By Aroosa Shaukat, Express Tribune,  May 17, 2012
LAHORE: Pakistanis must delve into their history with open minds, historian Dr Ayesha Jalal said during a talk on Wednesday.

Speaking to over 200 students at the Forman Christian College in a lecture titled Writing Pakistani History: Problems and Challenges, Dr Jalal said that open minds allow historians to hear and sift through contesting narratives on a subject in history.

‘Voice everyone’

“The task of a historian is to voice everyone,” she said.
A historian cannot be uncomfortable with change, she said.
“Pakistan presents a particularly complex subject matter,” she said.

“When we read historical narratives from outside Punjab, they criticise the Punjabi elements in the establishment and the military,” Dr Jalal said.

Baloch and Sindhis tell their own tale of how the Pakistani state has maltreated them, she said.
Traditional Pakistani history excludes the narrative of marginalised segments in our society, she said.
Historians must broaden the sources they use, Dr Jalal said.

Official archives must be complemented by unofficial records and oral histories, she said.
The tradition of oral history has always played an important part in the recording of history the subcontinent, she said.

“Historians are now using far more creative and imaginative sources than they were just a few years ago,” she said.

‘You can’t bypass history’

Answering a student who asked why people had not gone beyond debates on Pakistan’s history, Dr Jalal said, “You can’t bypass history. The only way to come to terms with one’s history is to understand it.”

For complete history, click here

Related:
Book launch: Pakistan finally finds a ‘companion’ for history - Express Tribune
The threat of Pakistan's revisionist text - Guardian

Tuesday, May 15, 2012

New Hope for India-Pakistan Relations? - Asia Society

New Hope for India-Pakistan Relations?

Nadia Rasul, Asia Society, May 11, 2012

In recent months Pakistan and India have made unprecedented strides in improving bilateral trade relations. Last year Pakistan decided to grant India "most favored nation" status, and recent reports show that Pakistan will soon be importing petrol and energy from India, while India will allow foreign direct investment from Pakistan.
The two countries plan to collaborate on higher education programs, as well, and a new integrated check post for commercial traffic and trade has opened at the Attari-Wagah border crossing. India and Pakistan are also expected to discuss reforms in their visa regime at the upcoming Home Secretary level talks in Islamabad on May 24 and 25.
We asked Asia Society experts on the region to comment on what sets apart Pakistan and India's recent efforts to improve bilateral relations from previous attempts, and whether the current discussions are more likely to produce positive results.
Moreover, as former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif recently commented that Pakistan should unilaterally abolish its visa regime with India, we asked our experts why Sharif didn't take this step when he was in office (twice) — and what's changed in the past 14 or so years.

Vishakha Desai (President, Asia Society)

The current discussions and efforts about improving the bilateral relationship between India and Pakistan seem more promising because the discussion is around the economic and civil society efforts rather than political trust or lack thereof. It seems more grounded in reality and not just in political rhetoric. Also, it feels more multi-pronged. So I feel that there may be a better chance for a real improvement in the bilateral relationship. Political efforts have failed in the past, so why not give these new efforts a chance?
It is remarkable that Nawaz Sharif has called for the abolishing of the visa regime with India. Clearly, this is partly related to the new economic realities and efforts. If India and Pakistan can sort out the visa restrictions and trade barriers, it can be hugely beneficial to both sides. The problem will be with the Indian side because of worries about the potential of export of terrorist actors and activities.
The more Indians and Pakistanis meet each other, work together and do business together, the more we will build trust, and it will have a greater chance for a lasting goodwill than anything governments can mandate.

Hassan Abbas (Senior Advisor, Asia Society)
Professor of International Security Studies, National Defense University

There is an increasing realization in both power corridors that without peace between the two states their people will suffer more and geopolitical tensions will only increase. I think both countries have learned the hard way that "conditions for dialogue" (read: "Kashmir on top of the agenda" or "dealing first with cross-border terrorism") are not going to help resolve the lingering issues.
It appears that after a long hiatus democratically elected governments on both sides are now engaged in both open and Track II-level discussions. The business communities on both sides are pushing for more openings in bilateral trade relations. Civil society activists also are more assertive than before, as is evident from the Aman ki Asha initiative from the Times of India and Jang Group in Pakistan — so all of this augurs well for positive results this time around.
Nawaz Sharif's statement is indeed significant but this is not the first time any mainstream political leader from Pakistan said such a thing. The late Benazir Bhutto made similarly courageous suggestions. I think Nawaz Sharif tried to take important initiatives in this direction during his 1997-99 government but Pervez Musharraf's Kargil adventure got in the way. Also, political realities have changed over a period of time — but, most importantly, "it is better late than never."
For complete article, click here

Monday, May 07, 2012

Baluchistan: In the Shadow of the Gun

Newsline Editor’s Note: March 2012
By Rehana Hakim

It took a US Congressional hearing and resolution on Balochistan last month to shame those in the portals of power to sit up and take notice of the grave situation prevailing in the province.

The media had been crying hoarse on the enforced disappearances and target killings in the region, but to no avail.

Now, suddenly, President Gilani convenes an All Parties Conference on Balochistan and the incorrigible interior minister, Rehman Malik, offers amnesty to all Baloch leaders in exile if they return to Pakistan. But the young nationalist leaders, who are now calling the shots, are not impressed.

Promises made in the past, in the full glare of publicity, have not been honoured. Assorted government-appointed committees have made several fact-finding missions to Balochistan, but their reports and recommendations are probably gathering dust in some remote corner.

The present government’s Aaghaz-e-Haqooq-e-Balochistan Package, too, has done little to rectify the situation that is deteriorating day by day. According to an Amnesty International Report, Balochistan is one of the most militarised regions of Pakistan, with the military, the paramilitary Frontier Corps, the Levies and the police stationed across the province.

There are reports of Baloch nationalists being kidnapped and of their tortured, bullet-riddled bodies being dumped in public places by law enforcement agencies. The nationalists, in turn, are retaliating by blowing up gas pipelines and security installations, and targeting FC personnel and, in certain instances, other ethnic groups (mostly Punjabis) in the province.

A war-like situation exists in the province and Raisani’s government seems totally helpless – in fact, most legislators cannot even visit their own constituencies.

The mantle of leadership has now passed on to the young Baloch sardars, who are unwilling to settle for anything less than independence.

So, is the country destined to see yet another partition?

Yes, if the power-brokers continue to play too clever by half. Yes, if the state does not stop the use of violence as a tool of oppression. Yes, if the army is not reined in and the killings don’t stop.
Yes, if the rulers do not concede the right of the people of the province to its resources and recognise their democratic aspirations.

The government has to move fast to bridge the trust deficit, create an atmosphere of reconciliation, bring all stakeholders, including the leaders in exile to the table, draw up a watertight agenda that addresses the legitimate grievances of the people and sets a timeframe for the implementation of the agenda. They do not have the luxury of time on their side to implement it at will or play politics to serve their own vested interests.

If we want Balochistan to stay with us, we will have to stay the course and deliver – the time for playing games is over.

Also See:
Of Empire and Army: A Historical Understanding of Balochistan - Newsline
Institutions’ failure has turned Balochistan into war zone: CJ - The News
Gods of wanton destruction — Mir Mohammad Ali Talpur - Daily Times

Friday, May 04, 2012

How to Prevent Afghanistan from Becoming a Narco-State - Vartan Gregorian

How to Prevent Afghanistan from Becoming a Narco-State
Transforming Afghanistan's opium farming from heroin to morphine production would thwart the Taliban and stabilize the economy
By Vartan Gregorian, US News, May 2, 2012

Vartan Gregorian, president of Carnegie Corporation of New York and former president and professor emeritus of history at Brown University, is the author of The Emergence of Modern Afghanistan: Politics of Reform and Modernization 1880-1946, which will be reissued by Stanford University Press in November.

The year 2014 is fast approaching and with it, the end of the allied forces mission in Afghanistan. At the close of that year, as the president confirmed in his speech from Bagram Air Force Base, the United States and NATO will hand over responsibility for the security of Afghanistan to its own forces. But in the meantime, events on the ground are conspiring against some of the long-term policy goals that the allied nations who committed troops to Afghanistan had hoped would bring peace and stability to that country. The recent burning of Korans as well as the massacre of civilians, not to mention U.S. troops urinating on enemy corpses, posing for photos with the remains of Taliban insurgents, and similar inflammatory actions have contributed to anti-American and anti-NATO sentiments in Afghanistan as well as in neighboring countries, especially Pakistan. Given these developments, President Karzai, in an effort to prove to his nation that above all he is an Afghan nationalist and guardian of Afghan sovereignty, has often been forced to publicly distance himself from America, making demands such as that U.S. forces be confined to their bases and withdraw completely from Afghanistan by the end of 2013. In addition, the Afghan government has insisted that NATO forces stop "night raids" on suspected insurgents' hideouts, which recently resulted in an agreement that should give Afghan authorities veto over controversial special operations raids. For its part, the Pakistani parliament has demanded a halt to all U.S. drone flights over border areas that provide safe haven and supply routes for the Taliban. Further, the Pakistani government has blockaded the flow of U.S. materiel supplying American troops in Afghanistan.

For complete article, click here

Wednesday, May 02, 2012

Pakistan Needs Police Reforms - NOW



What Post-Osama Pakistan Really Needs: Police Reform
by Hassan Abbas, Asia Society, May 2, 2012

A year has passed since the May 2, 2011 operation that killed Osama bin Laden in Pakistan, and we still do not understand why the raid was needed in the first place — or why it took 10 years to put together. What is clear is that it was the United States that had to go after Bin Laden, given the critical inadequacies of law enforcement and related intelligence in Pakistan.

Pakistan is going through a tough political transition, and critical issues such as effective tax collection, expansion of energy generation, and — perhaps most importantly — law enforcement reform continue to hang in the balance.

The Bin Laden episode embarrassed Pakistan deeply, and the debate that followed centered largely on whether Bin Laden’s presence in the country was a result of incompetence or connivance on the part of Pakistan’s security and intelligence services. The U.S. has acknowledged that it has no evidence showing that top Pakistani military leadership helped hide Bin Laden. And Pakistan is happy to share an extensive list of its security officials who bravely sacrificed their lives in various counterterrorism operations.

Both of these points are noteworthy — but none of it explains how Bin Laden and his large family survived for more than five years in a town surrounded by tourist resorts and in close proximity to the country’s premier military academy. Disclosures from Bin Laden’s younger wife about how she freely traveled across the country only raise eyebrows further. As of yet, no senior Pakistani security or intelligence officials have lost jobs for any dereliction of duty.

What we are missing is that counterterrorism, in essence, is a law enforcement issue. An efficient criminal justice system is a more important tool for defeating extremism and violence than any fighter aircraft or nuclear submarine. An agile and resourceful law enforcement structure in Pakistan could have made Bin Laden’s life very difficult. This, however, was not the case.

Today, the nexus between organized crime and terror outfits is what plagues South Asia in general and Pakistan in particular. But tomorrow, more terrorists will probably choose to hide behind their laptops — computer viruses will become the new car bombs. The common sense response to these new challenges lies in better police work, supported by systematic investigation, intelligence sharing and forensic tools. Approaches that were useful, and in some ways defensible, in the immediate aftermath of the 9/11 attacks are no longer relevant.

Ironically, Bin Laden and many of his counterparts throughout the world faced little discomfort in pursuing their nefarious agendas. This is because the nature of the terrorism challenge has evolved in the last decade, and governments are failing to adapt.

Developing countries, especially those particularly affected by terrorism, need to invest in the improvement of their criminal justice systems and focus on enhancing the capacity of police organizations. Having served on Pakistan’s police force and having lived in Abbottabad, I can confidently argue that a more resourceful and skilled police force there could have nabbed Bin Laden much earlier. But, there is no point arguing that now. Eventually, Bin Laden met his fate.

The question now is how to ensure that such a criminal lapse doesn’t happen again. Police reform is the answer.

Asia Society Senior Advisor Hassan Abbas is directing a project on police reform in Pakistan, with a report to be launched in June 2012. The report, a product of collaboration with experts from both Pakistan and the United States, seeks to provide a framework for police and law enforcement reform throughout the country. More details can be found here.