Warning: Undefined array key "rbname" in /data/rantburg.com/www/rantburg/pgrecentorg.php on line 14
Hello !

India-Pakistan

Sufi Mohammed and Missus arrested

2009-06-20

[ADN Kronos] The militant cleric Sufi Mohammed has been arrested and transferred to a secret 'safehouse' in Peshawar, together with his wife, an unnamed official told Adnkronos International. Tomorrow we'll likely have a story saying he wasn't arrested, never happened, nope... Mohammed brokered a controversial peace deal earlier this year between the government and militants in the troubled northwest Swat valley. He took the interesting position that it was his job to negotiate the agreement, but that somebody else was responsible for enforcing it. He didn't say who. The arrests were made recently and the government was aiming to keep them secret until it decides on role for Mohammed, according to the source, who is close to developments in surrounding North West Frontier Province. "This could be the beginning of a new round of a dialogue as the military operation so far failed to get the government any place," the source told AKI, speaking on condition of anonymity. Toldja they'd surrender as soon as they'd beaten the Talibs in the field. The government in April launched a military offensive against militants in the Swat valley and surrounding areas, who are fighting to impose hardline Islamic or Sharia law there under the peace accord they signed in February. That was after they broke the agreement that Sufi wasn't responsible for enforcing... Mohammed is the head of militant group Tehreek-e-Nafaz-e-Shariat-e-Mohammadi and is the father-in-law of the Taliban leader in Swat, Maulana Fazlullah. Mohammed has been calling for an end to the military operation and has threatened to abandon the Swat peace deal. It looks like the Swat peace deal has pretty thoroughly flown that coop... Over 3.5 million people have been taken refuge in camps since the operation started in Swat and the government is poised to open up a new front in South Waziristan bordering Afghanistan, which is likely to bring a new wave of refugees. All thanks to Sufi Mohammad... South Waziristan is the stronghold of Pakistani Taliban leader Baitullah Mehsud and the military operation there is seen as a potential turning point in the fight against militancy in Pakistan. A rival of Mehsud, Qari Turkestan Bhitaini, has confirmed CIA and Pakistani government reports he was behind the assassination in December, 2007, of former prime minister, Benazir Bhutto. The Mighty Pak Army doesn't appear to be out to kill Qari, and the government doesn't appear to be too concerned about him imposing his writ on the locals... Bhitaini said he can supply the addresses of the suicide bombers who were sent by Baitullah to kill Bhutto. " Baitullah Mehsud is an American, Indian and Jewish Agent. That makes sense. Not a lot of sense, but sense. Kind of. In an Islamic sort of way... He receives dollars from the Indian embassy in Afghanistan to attack the Indian security forces They pay him to attack them... In Pakistain that passes for subtlety... and has continued to defy the directives of the commander of faithful Mullah Mohammad Omar (Afghan Taliban leader) to go to Afghanistan along with his fighters and fight against the infidel NATO forces," Bhitaini said in an interview with Pakistan's Express TV Channel. We actually had that report yesterday. Must-see viewing. Although Bhitni and fellow warlord and Mehsud rival Qari Zain Mehsud are seen as key to government strategy in South Waziristan, their combined force does not exceed 3,000 fighters. Two prominent Mehsud rivals, Hafiz Gul Bahadur, Taliban chief in the neighbouring North Waziristan tribal area, and Mullah Nazir, local Taliban chief in South Waziristan's main town of Wana have decided to remain neutral in the conflict. Such actions make sense only if the government of Pakistain regards them as resources... A top Taliban commander in the region and Pashtun warlord, Sirajuddin Haqqani, is also likely remain neutral. Haqqani, who leads Taliban militants in the Afghan provinces of Paktika and Khost, is considered to be very close to Pakistani security forces. But make sure you don't use Afghanistan as a base for attacks on Pakistain.

Link

India-Pakistan

Pakistan: Minister rejects reports of Sufi Mohammad's arrest

2009-06-06

[ADN Kronos] The Pakistani government has rejected reports that the militant leader Maulana Sufi Mohammad has been arrested by security officials. Translation: Somebody picked him up. When his protectors herd about it they apologized and let him go. Interior minister Rehman Malik said on Friday that Sufi Mohammad, the chief of the hardline Tehrik-i-Nifaz-i-Shariat-i-Muhammadi, had not been detained in a raid in North West Frontier Province. In case you haven't been paying attention, Sufi sez it's his job to reach agreements with the government, not to keep them. Media reports quoting sources on Thursday said Sufi Mohammad, and three other TNSM officials, had been arrested from the Amandara region of Lower Dir. On Friday, the Pakistani army said it had arrested several senior associates of the Islamist cleric, Sufi Mohammed. Military spokesman Major General Athar Abbas said six men, including Sufi Mohammad's deputy Maulana Mohammed Alim, had been detained. The arrests took place during a raid on a religious seminary. Where else? Come to think of it, what kind of seminary is there beside a religious seminary? Maulana Alam and Amir Izzat were "accidentally" banged today in an ambush. Sufi Mohammed is the father-in-law of the Taliban leader in the troubled northwest Swat region, Maulana Fazlullah. He's periodically been reported dead, but nobody's produced a corpse. The Inter-Services Public Relations (ISPR) Thursday confirmed that TNSM's central council member Maulana Wahab, spokesman Ameer Izzat Khan and deputy Maulana Alam, had been arrested during the raid, DawnNews reported. Sufi Mohammed negotiated the peace deal imposing Islamic law in Swat, which fell apart when Taliban fighters moved into neighbouring districts.

Link

India-Pakistan

Taliban seek return to peace deal in Pakistan

2009-05-26

C'mon, boys. What happened to that "last drop of blood" shit? What would Mo say? Mo say, "we're getting our asses handed to us? Time for a hudna!" ISLAMABAD, Pakistan (CNN) -- The Pakistani Taliban -- under pressure in fighting with the military -- said Tuesday it wants to return to a peace deal that recently collapsed. That collapse sparked the ongoing massive military operation, a Taliban spokesman said Tuesday. Taliban militants in Swat Valley have announced that they are willing to disarm if the Pakistani government allows sharia, or Islamic law, to be implemented in the region, a spokesman for Taliban mediator Sufi Mohammed said. ...and if ya can't trust Sufi, who can you trust? The government rejected the offer, saying the Taliban must pull out of Swat or face arrest, state information minister Syed Sumsam Ali Shah Bukhari said Tuesday. According to Bukhari, the offer shows that the Taliban's morale is down and they are retreating. The lastest round of fighting has killed an estimated 1,100 Taliban militants and 75 Pakistani security personnel, Pakistan's military said Tuesday. Another 226 Pakistani security personnel have been wounded, the military said. Mohammed negotiated the previous deal between the Taliban and the government, which called for the same arrangement. So whaddya say, guys? Let's let bygones be bygones, hokay? That deal fell apart because the Taliban refused to disarm and moved into the Buner district, located outside of the region that the government allowed them to control. The government has said it will only allow sharia if it does not contradict Pakistan's constitution. There are many interpretations of Islamic law, but the Taliban's version has curbed human rights, forcing women indoors, men to grow beards, and shops to stop selling movies and music. The military operation against the Taliban in northwest Pakistan has resulted in the exodus of more than 2.4 million civilians since May 2.

Link

India-Pakistan

70 militants killed in Pak operation

2009-04-29

[Bangla Daily Star] At least 70 militants were killed by the security forces while nearly 450 terrorists were holed up in Buner area, Pakistan's interior ministry chief Rehman Malik said yesterday, adding "we will not tolerate them anymore." Pakistan deployed troops and bombed Taliban positions in a district near the capital Tuesday, the military said, in an expansion of an offensive against militants seemingly emboldened by a much-criticised peace deal. The operation in Buner follows urgent calls from the United States for Islamabad to step up its fight against he militants, who moved into the region this month from the nearby Swat Valley. They set up checkpoints, patrolled streets and warned locals to abide by strict interpretations of Islam. It will cause major strains on an already shaky peace deal in the Malakand region, to which Buner belongs. The truce has been widely viewed in the West as a surrender to militants slowly expanding their grip over the nuclear-armed nation. Malik told reporters at least 70 militants had been killed in the Dir operation so far, while 450 others were still present in Buner, Geo TV reported. On the possibility of nuclear weapons falling in Taliban hands, Malik said Pakistan's nuclear assets were safe. He said that Lower Dir was under the complete control of security forces. However, the extremists were still active in Buner district, Dawn reported. Addressing a seminar, Malik categorised the Taliban elements, who were active in Buner and Lower Dir as extremists. He said, "We will not tolerate them anymore." He said there has been an attack on the Frontier Constabulary in the past 24 hours and there have been reports of shops being looted. "Some of the Taliban were forcing the villagers to join them," he was quoted as saying. He added that all efforts are being made to contain the activities of these extremists who are threatening the villagers about imposing their system by force. He warned, "No one will be allowed to challenge the writ of the government." He reiterated that if peace was not restored in the region, the Swat peace agreement would be scrapped. The fresh offensive by the security forces has come as Western governments, including that of the US, raised serious concerns about the peace pact in the north-western Swat region and accused the nuclear-armed country of abdicating to the Taliban. Sufi Mohammed's Tehrik-e-Nifaz-e-Shariat Muhammadi and the NWFP government Feb 16 inked a controversial peace deal under which Sharia laws would be imposed in the Malakand division in return for the Taliban laying down their arms. Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari had approved the imposition of Islamic sharia law in the Malakand division and Swat April 13, nearly two months after hardline cleric Sufi Mohammad brokered a peace deal between the regional government and the rebel. Although the government began setting up Sharia courts, the emboldened militants refused to disarm and instead expanded their control over Swat's neighbouring districts of Buner and Shangla.

Link

India-Pakistan

Sleepwalking to disaster

2009-04-19

By Irfan Husain WHEN faced with a frightening civil war and reeling from repeated blows from a ruthless and determined foe, how does our government react? It puts the countrys clocks forward by an hour. I suppose this is one of the few things it can do to show it exists at all. The rest of us can be excused for doubting the presence of an administration, given the slide and drift we have been seeing over the last year. As the Taliban have made rapid inroads, and now strut about with greater impunity — to say nothing of immunity — than ever before, it has been painful to watch how ineffective the PPP-led coalition has been. When her widower, Asif Zardari, signed that infamous instrument of surrender known as the Nizam-i-Adl, Benazir Bhutto must have turned in her grave. Whatever else she might have been accused of in her lifetime, even her worst enemies concede she was a courageous fighter. And although the original demand for Sharialaw in Malakand surfaced during her tenure in 1994, I doubt very much that she would have surrendered the states writ as easily as this government has done. Another major politician who would have thoroughly disapproved of the turn of events in Swat and elsewhere is Khan Abdul Wali Khan. The late father of ANP chief Asfandyar Wali Khan, a member of the ruling coalition, was an avowed secularist. His National Awami Party was committed to Bacha Khans democratic ideals and struggled to keep religion separate from politics. The sight of his son cravenly handing over Swat (with the NWFP to follow) to the Taliban would have broken the tough old Pashtun leaders heart. To their credit, a handful of politicians did not roll over as the Nizam-i-Adl was propelled smoothly through the National Assembly. My old friend Ayaz Amir made sure this law did not pass without some serious doubts being expressed. And the MQM lived up to its secular credentials, although I would have been happier if they had resisted rather than boycotted the proceedings. By contrast, the PPP succumbed and feebly maintained the party line of surrender. But the deed is done, and we are left to face the consequences of the governments gutless display. However, we must also accept the fact that we are where we are because the army refused to fight the Taliban in Swat. It can be argued that due to this lack of military resolve, the provincial and federal governments had few options. But surely, given political will, the administration had enough resources at its disposal to confront around 5,000 militants. This resounding defeat is the cumulative result of years of pandering to extremists. Partly, this happened because the army thought it expedient to use them to further its agenda in Afghanistan and Kashmir. But mainly, it is due to the massive confusion about the true nature of the threat. This resounding defeat is the cumulative result of years of pandering to extremists. Partly, this happened because the army thought it expedient to use them to further its agenda in Afghanistan and Kashmir. But mainly, it is due to the massive confusion about the true nature of the threat. A After my column (‘The high cost of defeat) appeared in this space last week, I must have received at least a score of emails accusing me of, among other things, not wanting a dialogue with the Taliban. Several readers asked why I did not wish to treat the militants as errant brothers, and reason with them. I wrote back saying that if any brother of mine went around blowing people up, and chopping off the heads of innocent people, I would want him locked up and tried for murder. No society anywhere advocates negotiations with known killers, whatever their stated motives. This exchange goes to the heart of the muddled thinking that has thus far characterised our response to the Taliban threat. TV channels are full of so-called religious scholars and conservative pundits who have tried to justify the deal, assuring us that it would bring peace to Swat. While the gullible might buy this line, I paid more attention to a recent statement by Muslim Khan, the Swat Taliban spokesman. He is quoted as saying that “Muslims should take up arms instead of laying them down”. Thus, he has already broken a key provision of the deal that called for the militants to disarm. Asif Zardari has declared that the deal brings Islamic justice, and not the Sharia, to Swat. Tell that to the women who can no longer leave their homes without their husbands permission and to the thousands of young girls deprived of an education. And just to remind the government whos in charge, Maulana Sufi Mohammed has declared that under the deal, those militants who terrorised Swat during their year-long campaign, cannot be tried for the murders and other atrocities they committed. So much for swift justice. Over the last year, as the Taliban have edged closer to seizing control of the state, the countrys rulers have been indulging in irrelevant power plays. First it was about the reinstatement of the chief justice; then it was the Punjab government being sacked; and now the government and the opposition are squabbling over the implementation of the Charter of Democracy. Meanwhile, Gen Kayani is travelling the globe instead of seeing to the countrys defence. And as the economy falters and stalls, the rest of the world is being asked to rescue us yet again. We are telling the Americans that we will not accept any strings to their assistance, while the Friends of Pakistan are being told that the country will collapse without a bailout. In some ways, we are holding a begging bowl in one hand, and a raised middle finger in the other. If we had a third hand, it would be holding a gun to our head. In fact, this is now our preferred negotiation mode. In some ways, we are holding a begging bowl in one hand, and a raised middle finger in the other. If we had a third hand, it would be holding a gun to our head. In fact, this is now our preferred negotiation mode. It would help a lot if the government had a coherent plan to combat the militant menace. In fact, Pakistanis as well as the international community would welcome some sign that somebody in the government is doing some serious thinking. So far, we have been fed with clichés and idiotic waffle. Perhaps this absence of any sensible policy is even scarier than the continuing inaction. It seems the government is sleepwalking its way to disaster, with our leaders more interested in scoring political points than doing their duty, and fighting the Taliban threat. We have been told that somehow, the government will separate the ‘moderate Taliban from the really bad guys and talk to the former, while using force against the latter. I wonder if the abandoned and terrorised people of Swat can tell the difference.

Link

India-Pakistan

Standard: Denial in Pakistan

2009-04-17

Ambassador Haqqani is obscuring the real nature of the TNSM. The group provided the ideological inspiration for the Afghan Taliban and is allied with Mullah Omar. The TNSM sent more than 10,000 fighters into Afghanistan to battle U.S. and Northern Alliance forces during 2001 and 2002. The forces were led by Sufi Mohammed, the leader of the TNSM. The Pakistani government banned the group, labeling it a terrorist organization, and Sufi was thrown in jail and stayed there until his release in 2007. The TNSM is still listed as a banned group. Yet the Pakistani government negotiates with this terror organization. Here's the dirty secret the Pakistanis don't want you to know: they are using the TNSM and Sufi Mohammed as a front to negotiate with the Taliban. The government can't openly admit that it is caving to the Taliban, so it props up Sufi as a local, respected leader who claims to have eschewed violence, as a face-saving gesture. And Sufi and the Taliban are fine with that, they get what they want: control of an Islamic emirate. lots of background at link

Link

India-Pakistan

"Chief Justice of Pakistan minus Swat"

2009-03-24

When Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhary walks into his office at the Supreme Court on Tuesday after a gap of 16 months, he has to contend with the troubling reality that his court has no writ in seven whole districts of the North West Frontier Province, including Swat. Last week, Sufi Mohammed, a hardline Islamist cleric and chief of the Tehreek-i-Nifas-i-Sharia Mohammadi, with whom the provincial government entered into an agreement in February to set up Sharia courts in the Malakand division of the NWFP in return for peace in Swat, ordered the regular courts in the region to stop functioning. Denouncing the courts as anti-Shari and anti-Islamic, the TNSM head asked judges and lawyers to stop going to work. In Swat district, Sufi Mohammed qazis have started holding court. "The qazi courts are taking up cases. The regular judiciary is paralysed, and the lawyers are all sitting home with nothing to do," a lawyer from Swat told The Hindu. He did not want to be named. More than 300 lawyers are registered with the Swat Bar Association, and lawyers' associations in other parts of the country have expressed concerns about the welfare of their colleagues in the troubled NWFP district. The irony is that Sufi Mohammed's order came on the same day that the government announced Mr. Chaudhary's restoration following a "long march" led by the former Prime Minister, Nawaz Sharif, and lawyers demanding his restoration as basic to the "rule of law" in the country. It led to the comment by columnist Ejaz Haider in the Daily Times that unless the Swat situation was fixed, "the title Chief Justice of Pakistan would need a suffix in parenthesis -- sans Swat -- because the system Justice Chaudhary heads is not acceptable to Sufi Mohammed running his satrapy." Dawn newspaper reported that at least one "qazi court" has already pronounced a judgment in a civil case, directing the respondent to pay Rs.17,000 to the applicant, and a further Rs.20,000 in four instalments. Sufi Mohammed's son Rizwanullah Khan told journalists that the regular judges had taken a "wise decision" not to attend courts. "In Sharia, there is no room for courts functioning under English law," he said. Some lawyers had tried to persuade Sufi Mohammed to allow them to practice; but he rejected the appeal, telling them their profession was against Islam.

Link

India-Pakistan

Pakistan Generals promoted religious fanaticism

2009-03-06

The former Law Minister of Pakistan, Syed Iqbal Haider, on Thursday ridiculed the emerging theory of "good Taliban" and "bad Taliban." He said there was only one Taliban that believed in terrorism to impose its brand of radical Islam on people. Mr. Haider, who is touring India with the Pakistan peace delegation, said at a press conference here that the people of Pakistan have not approved the peace bought by Islamabad with the Taliban in the Swat valley. "The theory that Pakistans Taliban head Sufi Mohammed is moderate is ridiculous. He is pretending to be peaceful but wants to take over Pakistan." Remember, the only issue in the Land of the Pure is who gets to wear the bejeweled turban. The former Attorney General blamed military rule in Pakistan as the root cause of tensions between both the countries. The Generals who ruled the country promoted religious fanaticism for their own benefit. Pervez Musharraf was more deceptive and destructive than the earlier Generals. He nurtured, financed and patronised terrorist organisations and allowed them to operate freely in the country. He put the unarmed civil rights activists in jail while releasing the fanatics and terrorists, who now were threatening the very existence of Pakistan, Mr. Haider said. Arguing that majority of Pakistanis did not support terrorism, he said the terrorists who attacked Mumbai last year were enemies of both Pakistan and India. Such forces could be defeated with the collective effort of governments and the civil society. Similarly, the attack on the Sri Lankan cricketers in Lahore on Tuesday also reflected their evil designs. He agreed that the incident caused more damage to Pakistan as a nation and also fuelled the existing tensions between India and Pakistan. Mr. Haider wanted both India and Pakistan to follow the SAARC declaration on terrorism in letter and spirit. Senior trade union leader of Pakistan B.M. Kutty, who is part of the delegation, said Pakistanis voted for secular parties in the last elections, which indicated whom they wanted in power. The delegation, which is in India as part of a Joint Signature Campaign by civil society organisations, will visit various cities to promote peace. A similar delegation from India will visit Pakistan soon.

Link

India-Pakistan

Another Tryst With Destiny

2009-02-24

Will Swat restructure the sub-continent? Will it have a domino effect on the entire region to create a South Asian Union modelled on the European Union? By Rajinder Puri "There is virtual civil war in Afghanistan. There are three million Pashto speaking Afghan refugees in Pakistan. If the Afghan crisis is prolonged, both Afghan and NWFP Pashto speaking tribes might be expected to make common cause and revive the call for a Pashtunistan comprising areas of present day Afghanistan and Pakistan. "If that happens, Sind and Baluchistan will not lag behind. Already there are incipient freedom struggles in both states. "A war between Pakistan and Afghanistan, or even civil war within Pakistan, were it to come, would not remain confined to Afghan and Pakistani territories. Inevitably, it will spill over and involve India. In that unfortunate event, the painful process of war will confront the leaders of South Asia with the same challenge that they stubbornly refuse to face during peace: how to restructure the subcontinent and undo the legacy of a most unnatural Partition, and to establish in its place a new arrangement more natural to the character and genius of Hindustan. "Let us understand that the day of reckoning is not far. If not by the wisdom of our leaders, then despite their follies, if not by peaceful negotiation, then by painful war, the artificially contrived and grotesquely maintained fragmentation of the subcontinent must end. Nature has already begun to re-assert itself. "The people of India, most particularly the people of the Punjab, must prepare for the change. The best among them must work for it. Revolutionaries can create history only if they first learn to anticipate it." This passage was published twenty years ago in a book authored by this scribe. The intervening period condemned him to isolation, criticism and ridicule. Now, at long last, may one dare hope that the restructuring of the subcontinent has begun? Consider recent events in Pakistan. The Pakistan government has allowed the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) to be governed by Islamic law. In other words, the Pashto speaking areas now controlled by gun-toting Taliban will be administered by laws different from those prevailing in the rest of Pakistan. There is worldwide dismay and alarm over this development. Pakistan's Dawn columnist Murtaza Razvi has asked in his column: "How could you have two parallel justice systems running in the same country?" Good question. It needs to be followed by its logical corollary: Is Pakistan one nation? Nationhood is tested if people stay united voluntarily. That is possible only in democracy. Pakistan has yet to pass that test. The adverse reaction to developments in Pakistan could of course be hasty. The agreement was brokered by the NWFP provincial government. It was approved by President Zardari. It was announced immediately following President Obama's envoy Richard Holbrooke's departure from Pakistan after his talks with Zardari. The Pakistan government said that introducing Islamic law in the territory was not a concession to Taliban. The measure would be implemented only after peace prevailed in the region. Sufi Mohammed, the mentor of the Pakistani Taliban, has expressed confidence about persuading the Taliban to abjure violence. For the world, the most urgent objective is to separate local Pashtuns from Al Qaeda's Arabs and other foreign mercenary terrorists. Bereft of ground support Al Qaeda would become vulnerable. The present agreement is about a ten-day cease-fire in the first instance. It is being hoped that it becomes perpetual. The agreement was brokered by the National Awami Party (NAP) which governs the NWFP province. Asfandiyar Wali Khan, Abdul Ghaffar Khan's grandson, presides over NAP. In 2002 he recalled two basic lessons his grandfather taught him about the superiority of nonviolence. Asfandiyar stated: "My grandfather said that violence needs less courage than nonviolence. Second, violence will always breed hatred. Nonviolence breeds love." In 2007 Asfandiyar said: "The Taliban is not the creation of Pashtun society, but the creation of the Pakistan army." On assuming power in NWFP the first change Asfandiyar introduced was to pass a resolution in the NWFP assembly to rename the province as 'Pakhtunwa'. Only the national assembly can approve the name. Later, NWFP coalition partners and the opposition proposed the name 'Afghana' for the province. According to the 100 year unimplemented Durand Line Treaty, which lapsed in 1993, the FATA territory was to be ceded to Afghanistan. The conflict over the proposed new name for the province suggests that the Pashtuns are torn between Pakistan, Afghanistan and independence. Unless peace is restored US action against Al Qaeda and the Taliban will mount. President Obama has just sanctioned 17000 additional troops for Afghanistan. The people of the region desperately want peace. Peace is the first priority. Liberation from a medieval lifestyle can wait. There is no quick-fix formula to modernize medieval societies. Once peace prevails, this can be accomplished gradually and democratically. The Pashtuns for the first time in over a century have been offered the prospect of legitimized self-rule based on tribal identity. They will get this if they dissociate from terrorism and Al Qaeda. That is how the carrot and stick might work. Will they respond positively? It is unlikely that the Pashtuns will easily surrender the prospect of their newfound tribal unity cutting across the borders of Pakistan and Afghanistan. If terrorism ends, several things could happen. The FATA area could be incorporated into a larger Afghanistan as outlined in the Durand Line Treaty. That could destroy Pakistan as we know it. Or, the Pashtun areas of Afghanistan could merge into Pakistan, leaving the Uzbeks and Tajiks in the north to merge with Uzbekistan and Tajikistan. Afghanistan, as we know it, could then disappear. Or, there could be a sovereign, independent Pashtunistan. That would cripple both Pakistan and Afghanistan. Or, the present international borders of Pakistan and Afghanistan could remain intact as both nations arrive at a confederal arrangement that allows Pashtuns of both countries to intermingle freely and live as one people. Obviously the last would be the best arrangement. If it does emerge it could have a domino effect on the entire region to create a South Asian Union modelled on the European Union. Like the Pashtuns, the Kashmiris are divided between India and Pakistan, the Punjabis are divided between India and Pakistan, the Bengalis are divided between India and Bangladesh, and the Tamils are divided between India and Sri Lanka. At midnight on August 15, 1947 Pandit Nehru spoke in Parliament: "Long years ago we made a tryst with destiny, and now the time comes when we shall redeem our pledge, not wholly or in full measure, but very substantially ." After the leaders of the Congress Party betrayed their own commitments, their own followers and Khan Abdul Ghaffar Khan, by accepting the Partition, the Frontier Gandhi, who sought merger with India but was spurned, gave the call for an independent Pashtunistan. Today, his grandson wrestles with the crisis in NWFP. Apart from Nehru, others too in India and Pakistan made their own trysts with destiny. Has the time come for them to redeem their pledge, not wholly or in full measure, but substantially ? Critics may dismiss such expectations as nonsense.They could be right. But one makes a humble submission. Wait for this year to end before passing final judgment.

Link

India-Pakistan

No hand in Musa Khan's killing, says Taliban leader

2009-02-23

Pakistan radical cleric Maulana Sufi Mohammed, the head of the banned group the Tehreek-e-Nifas-Sharia Mohammadi, has denied any hand in the murder of GEO TV reporter Musa Khan. Khan was killed in the Swat Valley last week; he was shot several times. The Pakistani government did a controversial deal with Sufi Mohammad last week agreeing to impose strict Islamic law and in return hoping that he would persuade his son-in-law, Maulana Fazlullah, the leader of the Taliban in Swat Valley, to give up arms. Taliban leader Sufi Mohammed is a local hero in Swat. He was once known as the most dangerous Taliban leader in the area -- the man who put together an army of 10,000 men to fight US forces in Afghanistan after 9/11. Pakistan government had said termed the murder of the reporter was an attack on freedom of press and promised a full investigation. Earlier, NATO, Britain, India and other countries had expressed concerns over Pakistan government's pact with Taliban in Swat Valley, saying it could embolden militants and provide them safe haven. They have also said that similar pacts in the past have not been successful. Pakistan President Asif Ali Zardari also acknowledged that Taliban, with whom his government reached a truce deal in the restive Swat Valley said that Taliban are "murderous thugs and militants" who "pose a danger to Pakistan, the US and India".

Link

India-Pakistan

Swat a ruse to regain Kabul

2009-02-20

By Ashok Malik This month, Pakistan has sent two asymmetrical signals in terms of the war against terror. One, Islamabad finally admitted the November 26 attack on Mumbai was masterminded within Pakistani territory. It seemed to make efforts to arrest or otherwise control Lashkar-e-Tayyeba operatives waging jihad against India. Two, somewhat contradictorily, the Pakistani Government approved an agreement between the administration of the North-West Frontier Province and the Tehreek-e-Nifaz-e-Shariat-e-Muhammadi, one of the many front organisations of what is called the Pakistani Taliban, to introduce shari’ah and religious courts in Malakand division and its seven districts. One of the seven districts is Swat, which has fallen to Taliban militias in recent weeks. The Pakistani Government has claimed that Maulana Sufi Mohammed, the leader of the TNSM, has promised to ask Pakistani Taliban forces to give up warfare. However, analysts in Islamabad have pointed out that Sufi Mohammed was influential in the 1990s but is a spent force now. His leverage with his estranged son-in-law — Maulana Fazlullah, who led the Taliban forces in the ‘conquest’ of Swat — is limited. Neither can he speak for Maulana Fazlullah’s comrade Baitullah Mahsud, commander of the Tehreek-e-Taliban, the collective of Pakistani Taliban private armies. As such, the ‘peace pact’ in the NWFP is as likely to fail as the agreement between Gen Pervez Musharraf and assorted tribal elders in North Waziristan in September 2006. It led to the scaling back of the military offensive against the Taliban in exchange for vague promises of the cessation of jihadi activity. North Waziristan is a component of the Federally Administered Tribal Areas, which is immediately to the west of the NWFP. Both regions border Afghanistan and have become sanctuaries for Taliban and Al-Qaeda affiliates fighting American forces. In 2006, Gen Musharraf had sold the ‘Waziristan Accord’ as an attempt to use local tribal traditions to isolate religious extremists. It was presented as a tactical retreat but a strategic advance. It turned out to be a hoax. The chess moves — admitting to guilt in the 26/11 attack and introducing shari’ah in the NWFP — would appear to cancel out each other. Is there a method to Islamabad’s schizophrenia? Superficially, the Pakistani establishment was sending a straightforward message to Mr Richard Holbrooke, the United States special representative whose visit coincided with the actions. It was that Islamabad was a willing ally and trying to help with Mumbai. On the other hand, it faced a compelling military threat in Swat and elsewhere. There is, however, a more cynical view. Anticipating Mr Holbrooke’s tough message, the Pakistani military-strategic core was also creating a number of diversionary ‘crises’ and smoke-screens so that expectations on it to deliver would be minimal. Having annexed Swat Valley, the Taliban may be only a short distance from Islamabad, but would it be prudent to see a takeover of the Pakistani capital as logical? It is worth noting that there are no essential differences between the strategic goals of the Tehreek-e-Taliban and the Pakistani Army/ISI. There may be varied opinions on whether, for instance, America is partially useful or implacably hostile — or on the degree of Islamisation the predominantly-Punjabi Pakistani elite must be subject to. These are concerns for the long term. Right now the Pakistani Army is playing a short-term game, with an immediate and, it feels, realisable prize. The priority for the Generals in Rawalpindi as well as the intersecting Taliban militias on either side of the Durand Line is to regain control of Kabul. This is the greater jihad. For the moment, Kashmir is the lesser jihad; it can be revved up later. That is why Islamabad is pragmatic enough to be willing to sacrifice low-level LeT assets. The Swat agreement is going to be held up as a template deal with the so-called ‘moderate Taliban’ and with elements within the Islamist collective that are apparently amenable to a political solution. There are three reasons why the Pakistanis hope they will be heard. First, while US President Barack Obama is committed to intensifying operations in Afghanistan — and the Taliban is already apprehending a ‘Spring Surge’ — it is questionable whether America has the stomach for a potentially 20-year military commitment to the region. Already there is talk in Washington, DC, of less ambitious goals for Afghanistan. The objective of nation-building is gradually giving way to that of containment. Admittedly this is not the only assessment in the US capital but it is one that has more takers than at any time since 9/11. Second, America’s oldest ally, Britain, is clearly tired. It has experienced military reverses in Afghanistan’s Helmand province. That aside, it fears a renewed war — as Mr Obama has promised — will lead to retaliatory strikes by Al Qaeda sleeper cells among British Pakistani communities. America, with its relatively robust integration model, will be sequestered; Britain worries it will bear the brunt. An idea of British anxiety was provided, albeit crudely, by Foreign Secretary David Miliband when he visited India and said the global conflict against Islamist terror was more or less a myth. More recently, Britain has appointed Sir Sherard Cowper-Coles as its special envoy to Afghanistan and Pakistan — he is Mr Holbrooke’s equivalent. In his earlier job as Ambassador in Kabul, Sir Sherard was famously sceptical of winning the war. He is expected to spend the coming months seeking the ‘moderate Taliban’. No doubt Islamabad will help him by exhibiting suitable candidates of its own. Third, Afghanistan is due to hold its presidential election in August. The US is certain to dump President Hamid Karzai, convinced he has failed. His family’s alleged links with the opium trade are also being used against him. Mr Holbrooke, for one, has “long held the view that Karzai is inept”, according to a Washington-based source. The Pakistanis want to see Mr Karzai go, as they consider him too India-friendly. The search is on for a new Afghan President. Islamabad is determined that it must have its man, and must regain the grip on Kabul that it lost after the Taliban forces were routed in November 2001. All its exertions — whether small concessions to India or alarmism about Swat — are aimed at enhancing bargaining ability and ensuring the West gives it a greater say in who runs Kabul. After all, as the Pakistanis believe, some day the Americans will leave.

Link

India-Pakistan

Pakistan's 'Gandhi' party takes on Taliban, Al Qaeda

2008-05-04

New DELHI - In following the will of its people by attempting to find a negotiated solution to mounting extremism, the new Pakistani government is wading against American skepticism, the lessons of the recent past, and – some suggest – its own military establishment. Early indications, however, point to the enormousness of the task facing Pakistan's new ruling coalition. The US is likely to increase pressure after a major State Department report last week concluded that Al Qaeda has rebuilt some of its pre-9/11 capabilities from havens in Pakistan's contested border region with Afghanistan. Al Qaeda and Taliban militants have the upper hand in these Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA), where the region's colonial-era rules limit the new government's authority. The job of overcoming these obstacles has largely fallen to the overlooked member of Pakistan's new ruling coalition, the Awami National Party (ANP). As Pashtuns, the ANP can talk to the Taliban as ethnic brothers. Yet as disciples of the nonviolence espoused by its late founder, Abdul Ghaffar Khan – the so-called "Frontier Gandhi" and follower of the Mahatma – the ANP is uniquely qualified to attempt peacemaking. Whether it succeeds could determine whether Pakistan finds the peaceful resolution that a majority of its people so desire or descends back into war. "The responsibility for a deal lies with the ANP because of the ANP being Pashtun and because they have been very critical of the way the war on terror has been conducted," says Rasul Baksh Rais, a political scientist at the Lahore University of Management Sciences. Facing opposition to cease-fires The ANP is a minor partner in the national parliament, but it leads the ruling coalition in the strategically vital North West Frontier Province. Adjacent to the central battleground of FATA, the province is the front line against the Talibanization of Pakistan. Rising militancy in FATA has spilled into it with bombings against barbers who trim beards and owners of DVD shops – both Taliban taboos. Already, the ANP-led government in the North West Frontier Province has had to withstand global criticism for its new, conciliatory tack – such as last week's release of Sufi Mohammed, a pro-Taliban hard-liner, from jail. The US has warned against negotiations, saying they lead only to toothless cease-fires that have allowed militants time and space to tighten their grip on territory. Indeed, the State Department's annual terrorism report released last week suggested that suicide attacks in Pakistan more than doubled to 887 last year because terrorists were able to regroup during a 2006 cease-fire. For this reason, a new potential cease-fire with militants in FATA, reported last week but apparently abandoned, raised deep concern in Washington. "It's important that any agreement be effectively enforced and that it not interrupt any operations where we are going after terrorists in that area," said White House press secretary Dana Perino. The White House was right to be worried, some experts agree. "The government is negotiating from a position of weakness," says Seth Jones, an analyst at RAND Corp., a security consultancy in Arlington, Va. "There should be no illusions – these [militant] groups are trying to strengthen their position." Army 'capitulated' to militants But others see another dynamic at work in the scrapped cease-fire, too. "The military is out to save itself," says Ahmed Rashid, author of "Taliban," a book considered one of the most insightful looks into the group. He suggests that the failed deal was not the fault of the new government, but of the Army, which wields great influence in FATA, because it is controlled federally. The deal was essentially a capitulation to militants, Mr. Rashid adds, because the Army wants to get out of an unpopular campaign. The military denies this, saying it is not in any direct negotiations with the Taliban. "The government officials are negotiating with them through interlocutors," says Maj. Gen. Atthar Abbas, an Army spokesman. Yet due to the peculiar rules governing FATA, the Army does have more of a voice there. In the North West Frontier Province, the only government negotiators are new lawmakers. In FATA, however, talks are being supervised by a governor appointed by President Musharraf, and the regional Army corps commander, in addition to federal lawmakers, says Rahim Dad Khan, a member of the Pakistan People's Party (PPP), an ANP ally. ANP pushes for more accountability The ANP, for its part, wants to bring more accountability to negotiations by putting all the facts before the people. Past negotiations under the military-led government were never made public, says Sen. Zahid Khan of the ANP. So when agreements inevitably fell apart amid accusations and counteraccusations, no one knew who was right. "We'll make all the developments in the talks public so as the masses can judge who is backing out of his words," he says. "The party going against the agreement would have to take the ire of the masses." In this way, negotiations can serve a strategic purpose. Defense analyst Ikram Sehgal says there are many natural points of disagreement between Pashtun tribals and foreign terrorists, such as the tactic of suicide bombing. "Terrorist ideology is completely anathema to tribal ideology," he says. "The whole idea is to drive a wedge between the tribals and the terrorists." Yet Rashid and others say that to ultimately succeed, the government must have a policy beyond just talks – or bullets, for that matter. The government of North West Frontier Province has drawn a $4 billion development plan designed to spread the authority of the government through new counsels and government positions. But it must address the root causes of the tribal belt's problems – the economic backwardness and political isolation that have made the area a haven for militants, analysts add. "They have to offer some strategic vision," says Rashid. "[The terrorists] want sharia. What are you offering?"

Link

Warning: Undefined property: stdClass::$T in /data/rantburg.com/www/rantburg/pgrecentorg.php on line 132
-12 More