<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/" xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/" version="2.0"><channel>
                        <title>The Express Tribune</title>
                        <atom:link href="https://tribune.com.pk/feed/nwaziristan" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
                        <link>https://tribune.com.pk/feed/nwaziristan</link>
                        <description>The Express Tribune keeps you up to date with all the latest happenings from Pakistan and across the world!</description>
                        <lastBuildDate>Sun, 31 May 26 08:27:27 +0500</lastBuildDate>
                        <language>en-US</language>
                        <sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
                        <sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
                        <generator>https://laravel.com/</generator><item>
			<title>S Waziristan residents’ sit-in enters second day</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2294228/s-waziristan-residents-sit-in-enters-second-day</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/2294228/s-waziristan-residents-sit-in-enters-second-day#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Sun, 11 Apr 21 05:45:30 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[Our Correspondent]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Khyber Pakhtunkhwa]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=2294228</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Protesters threatened if their demands were not accepted then they will stage the next sit in outside CM House]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[The sit in of South Waziristan residents continued for second day in Peshawar who are demanding compensation for home that were destroyed during the military operations. The sit-in continued outside Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa (K-P) Assembly and the protesters threatened if their demands were not accepted then they will stage the next sit in outside Chief Minister House.

Addressing the participants the leaders of the protests said that in 2009 an operation was launched in the South Waziristan which forced them out of their homes and they accepted it for the safety of the country. &ldquo;We spent the past 12 years in camps in very difficult situation. But when after more than a decade our people returned they found their houses and lands in ruins and government even launched a survey in 2016 in this regard but despite the passage of four years the survey is still underway and incomplete,&rdquo; they said.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Doctor kidnapped from North Waziristan</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/676487/doctor-kidnapped-from-north-waziristan</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/676487/doctor-kidnapped-from-north-waziristan#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Wed, 26 Feb 14 17:08:05 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[our.correspondent]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[K-P]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=676487</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[The Tehsil Headquarters Hospital Mirali staffer was heading home from work when the incident occured]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[The former administrator of Tehsil Headquarters Hospital Mirali was kidnapped from North Waziristan Agency while he was heading home from work on Wednesday evening.

According to an official of the political administration, the incident occurred around 6:30pm when unidentified persons intercepted Dr Younas Khan on his way home to Hisokhel and shifted him to an unknown location.

Political administration officials launched a search operation in the area for the missing doctor and his kidnappers, however, they had not been traced till this report was filed.

Locals have planned to hold a protest on Thursday in Mirali Bazaar against the abduction.

&nbsp;]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>No timeframe: Kayani hints at blitz in North Waziristan</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/423703/no-timeframe-kayani-hints-at-blitz-in-north-waziristan</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/423703/no-timeframe-kayani-hints-at-blitz-in-north-waziristan#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Fri, 17 Aug 12 21:45:51 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[kamran.yousaf]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Pakistan]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=423703</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Stresses operation will not be ‘joint’ or a result of outside pressure.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[Army chief General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani indicated on Friday that Pakistan might launch a fresh military offensive in the restive North Waziristan Agency (NWA), but stressed that it would not be initiated at the behest of any outside power.


“We might, if necessary, undertake operations in NWA, in the timeframe of our choosing and determined only by our political and military requirements. It will never be a result of any outside pressure,” the army chief was quoted as saying by the Inter-Services Public Relations (ISPR), following talks with the head of US Central Command (Centcom) General James Mattis.

Gen Mattis arrived in Islamabad late Thursday evening, where senior officials said he would meet the army chief to discuss how to eliminate their “common enemy” – Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) chief Hakimullah Mehsud.

Sources said the military was planning for a push against the TTP in North Waziristan but did not want to be seen as aligned with the US because of the likely public backlash.

According to the ISPR statement, the army chief said Pakistan’s national interest continues to be the prime consideration for any decision regarding the military offensive in North Waziristan.

Gen Kayani, during a meeting with Gen Mattis, also denied reports that he had given any ‘understanding’ to General John Allen, the head of the Nato/Isaf mission in Afghanistan, about Pakistan’s willingness to launch joint operations in the restive tribal areas.

He clarified Pakistan’s position by referring to US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s statement on July 3, 2012, in which she talked of “coordinated action against terrorists who threaten Pakistan and the region.”

The statement went to great lengths to stress that it was “important” to distinguish between ‘coordinated action’ and a ‘joint operation’: “Coordinated action implies that the Pakistan Army and Isaf conduct an operation on their respective sides of the Pak-Afghan Border, for which intelligence sharing is the mainstay of mutual cooperation. Contrarily, a ‘joint operation’ implies that the two forces are physically employed jointly on either side of the border.

“A joint operation in this sense is unacceptable to the people and Armed Forces of Pakistan, hence, has always been our clearly stated red line,” the statement read.

It further said the two generals expressed satisfaction over the level of cooperation between their militaries and resolved to continue to further improve relations between the two countries. The US Embassy also released a statement on Friday, terming Mattis’ talks with senior Pakistani leaders successful.

According to the statement, General Mattis held meetings with Gen Kayani, Secretary of Defense Lt Gen (retd) Asif Yasin Malik and other senior military officials on a “wide range of common security issues, (including) militant network activities and measures to improve cross-border cooperation.

“They agreed to continue to meet periodically to further common objectives on cross-border cooperation and regional security,” the statement added. An American diplomat said that Gen Mattis highlighted the importance of Pakistan going after the ‘deadliest’ Afghan insurgents, the Haqqani network, to ensure peace and stability in Afghanistan.

He also acknowledged the sacrifices made by the Pakistan military in their fight against militants, and offered his condolences for the nearly 5,000 Pakistani military personnel who have fallen in support of that cause.

(Read: General Kayani in Kakul)

Published in The Express Tribune, August 18th, 2012.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Kayani denies joint military operation in N Waziristan</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/423347/kayani-denies-joint-military-operation-in-n-waziristan</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/423347/kayani-denies-joint-military-operation-in-n-waziristan#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Fri, 17 Aug 12 10:30:31 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[web.desk]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Pakistan]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=423347</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Army chief meets US Centcom Commander, says Pakistan will not launch operation as a result of 'outside pressure'.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[Chief on Army Staff (COAS) General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani has categorically denied US media reports which stated that Pakistan was launching joint operations in the North Waziristan Agency.

In a statement released by Inter-Services Public Relations (ISPR) on Friday, Kayani clarified Pakistan’s position in response to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s statement of July 3, 2012 in which she said talked of “coordinated actions against terrorists who threaten Pakistan and the region”.

The ISPR statement said, “It is important to distinguish between ‘coordinated action’ and ‘joint operation’.

“‘Coordinated action’ implies that the Pakistan Army and Isaf conduct operation on respective sides of the Pak-Afghan Border. For such actions, intelligence sharing is the mainstay of mutual cooperation. Contrarily, a ‘joint operation’ implies that the two forces are physically employed jointly on either side of the border. A ‘joint operation’ in this sense is unacceptable to the people and the armed forces of Pakistan, hence, has always been our clearly stated red line.”

Kayani reiterated that Pakistan might undertake operations in North Waziristan determined by the political and military requirements but it will never be a result of any “outside pressure”.

“Pakistan’s national interest continues to be the prime consideration for any decision in this regard,” the ISPR statement said.

According to the statement, Kayani dispelled the US reports during a meeting with Commander US Centcom General James N Mattis in Islamabad, in which both sides discussed matters of mutual interest and expressed satisfaction over the level of cooperation between the two militaries.

On Monday, US Defence Secretary Leon Panetta had told AP news agency that Pakistan had decided to launch a military operation against the Pakistani Taliban in North Waziristan but the campaign was not against the Haqqani network.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>North Waziristan: ‘US may attack, but they’ll think 10 times’</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/277120/north-waziristan-%e2%80%98us-may-attack-but-they%e2%80%99ll-think-10-times%e2%80%99</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/277120/north-waziristan-%e2%80%98us-may-attack-but-they%e2%80%99ll-think-10-times%e2%80%99#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Wed, 19 Oct 11 01:15:14 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[irfan.ghauri]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Pakistan]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=277120</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Kayani says troop build-up along border to heighten pressure.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[The army chief did not rule out the possibility of a US ground offensive in North Waziristan, but told parliamentarians at a briefing on Tuesday that Washington will think ‘many times’ before launching such an attack.


“They [the US] might do it but they will have to think ten times because Pakistan is not Iraq or Afghanistan,” Chief of Army Staff General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani was quoted as telling members of parliament’s defence committees at a briefing at the General Headquarters that went on for over three hours.

Acknowledging that the US is pressing Pakistan to launch a military operation in North Waziristan, Kayani said that the ongoing build-up of Afghan and International Security Assistance Force (Isaf) troops along the Pak-Afghan border is a tactic to intensify that pressure.

“We have made it clear to the US that we will decide the timing of any such action according to our situation and capabilities. We have also told them that the problem lies within Afghanistan. If anyone convinces me that everything will be sorted out if we act in North Waziristan, I will take immediate action,” a parliamentarian, requesting anonymity, quoted Kayani as saying.

General Kayani’s statement came hours after senior Afghan defence officials said the country’s security forces and their Nato allies have launched a new push against the Haqqani network.

(Read: Afghanistan, NATO launch 'new push against Haqqanis')

Leaving no ambiguity over reasons for the operation, an Afghan defence ministry official told AFP on condition of anonymity that the action was tied to recent spats between Washington and Islamabad. While he declined to specify the operation’s scope, another senior official from the ministry said it was “largely against the Haqqani network”.

According to Afghan Defence Minister Abdul Rahim Wardak, the operation has been codenamed “Knife Edge” and was launched two days ago. “This operation is launched along the border because the enemy lately operates along the border on both sides. Sometimes on this side and sometimes on the other side,” Afghan Chief of Army Staff Sher Mohammad Karimi said.

General Kayani said that Pakistan had handed over its position on Afghanistan to the Obama administration in writing in 2010 and had asked the Americans to elaborate on their position but they had not done so. “We have long-term interests in Afghanistan, others might have short … For short-term gains, we cannot lose [sight of] our long-term interests,” the army chief said.

But responding to a question on Pakistan’s interests in Afghanistan, Kayani sought to dispel the perception that Pakistan was seeking so-called strategic depth in Afghanistan.

(Read: Pakistan needs strategic depth)

“We cannot leave both our eastern and western borders insecure,” Kayani asserted. “It is wishful thinking to achieve strategic depth in Afghanistan. The Russians tried, the Brits tried, the Americans are trying. We don’t have a magic wand,” a participant quoted Kayani’s response.

However, Kayani did not deny that Pakistani secret agencies maintained contacts with ‘certain elements’ within the hierarchy of Afghan insurgent groups. “That is where we get our information, the intelligence, from,” he yielded. “The important thing is how we use the information gathered from these elements. You can do it positively and negatively.”

‘No need for US aid’

In a press release issued by the military after a recent corps commanders’ meeting, Kayani is said to have stressed that the Pakistan Army does not need US aid and that he had told American officials that he means what he said.

“We got only 25% of the aid from the Kerry-Lugar Act. Pakistan Army has no objection if the US converts its military aid into civilian assistance,” he said.

(Read: From chorus to crescendo - ‘Ties with Haqqanis’ threaten civilian aid)

Stressing on civilian responsibility for peace, he said that the military can only secure areas where it conducts operations, but civilians need to take control and maintain law and order.

Published in The Express Tribune, October 19th, 2011.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Haqqani network: Pakistan’s military ready to address US concerns</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/269468/haqqani-network-pakistan%e2%80%99s-military-ready-to-address-us-concerns</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/269468/haqqani-network-pakistan%e2%80%99s-military-ready-to-address-us-concerns#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Sat, 08 Oct 11 05:03:57 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[kamran.yousaf]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Pakistan]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=269468</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Corps commanders show willingness to lower tensions with Washington.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[The Pakistan Army is ready to address the US concerns vis-à-vis the Haqqani network but shows no signs of going after them in the North Waziristan tribal region where, Washington believes, the insurgent group is headquartered. 


At a meeting in Rawalpindi on Friday, the top military commanders expressed their willingness to lower tensions with the United States by narrowing down differences on the Haqqani network.

“Pakistan wants a constructive engagement with the US to deal with the Haqqani issue,” an official familiar with the development told The Express Tribune.

The official, who wished not to be named, ruled out the possibility of a military operation in North Waziristan – a region dubbed by the US as the most dangerous place on earth.

“Use of force is not the answer to every problem,” he said repeating the recent statement by Army chief General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani.

Addressing the Pak-Saudi joint military exercises in Mangla on Thursday, Gen Kayani reportedly said that military operations were not the ideal way of dealing with every issue.

His remarks are being seen as Pakistan’s hardening stance on the North Waziristan operation despite the mounting US pressure.

However, it is unclear what exactly Pakistan is offering to the US as an alternative to a military operation in order to deal with the Haqqanis.

A senior military official, when approached, referred to the foreign ministry’s last news briefing in which it said that Pakistan’s policy was guided by its national interests.

“We have our own national interests … we have certain redlines and we are very clear that we won’t compromise on them,” said the official who spoke after being assured that his name would not be revealed.

The corps commanders also discussed possible implications of the recent strategic partnership deal that Afghanistan signed with India.The commanders voiced concerns on allegations by senior Afghan officials that the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) was involved in the assassination of former Afghan president Bhurhanuddin Rabbani.

A brief statement issued by the Inter-Services Public Relations (ISPR) did not mention any of these issues. “The conference was a part of regular monthly meetings. The forum took a comprehensive overview of the routine professional matters aimed at enhancing proficiency of the army,” the statement said.

Meanwhile, US Ambassador to Pakistan Cameron Munter met with Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar to discuss the ongoing tensions between their countries.

“Bilateral relations and the regional situation were discussed. Both agreed to work together for strengthening bilateral cooperation and for coordination on regional issues,” said a brief statement issued by the Foreign Office.

An American diplomat commenting on the meeting said that the two countries were making efforts to sort out their differences.

Published in The Express Tribune, October 8th, 2011.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Making the right decision</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/262463/making-the-right-decision</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/262463/making-the-right-decision#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Wed, 28 Sep 11 17:30:52 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[nadir.hassan]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Pakistan]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=262463</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[In a war where no one has made the right choice, this could be the worst decision yet.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[Like the boy who cried wolf, Pakistan has concocted so many conspiracy theories to deflect blame from itself and onto the US that we will not get a fair hearing when, in fact, US policy leads to an unresolvable mess. Mired in an unwinnable war in Afghanistan, the Americans are lashing out against the Haqqani network and its alleged patrons in the ISI, partly to find a scapegoat for their defeat and partly because of the devastating attacks against US interests.

Here’s where the US is to blame: President Barack Obama made a huge mistake when he announced that Washington would begin its drawdown in Afghanistan in 2012, the same year, not coincidentally, the year of his own re-election. By the time Obama came into power, the Americans were already tired of the never-ending Afghan war, but by setting a specific date for the start of the withdrawal, Obama empowered the Taliban and their allies — like the Haqqani network — in that they no longer needed to win the war and would simply have to wait out the departure of the Americans. Obama also ensured that Pakistan would be forced to take a wait-and-see approach, especially once it became clear that Nato would negotiate with the Taliban to facilitate the withdrawal.

In leaving the Afghan theatre of war, where it has gone from lead actor to just another member of a sprawling cast, the US has, naturally, thought only of itself. It is willing to negotiate with anyone, including those denounced as terrorists, but it is still pressurising Pakistan to target al Qaeda and the Afghan Taliban so that their departure feels more like a victory.

Pakistan, however, has national interests of its own and that means prioritising military action against the Tehreek-i-Taliban Pakistan over the Afghan Taliban. Even with significant successes in Swat, we still have battles that need to be won in Dir, Bajaur and other areas in South Waziristan. Maulana Fazlullah is regrouping in Nuristan, Afghanistan, and launching regular attacks on Pakistani territory. And in that, we are not getting any help from Isaf forces in Afghanistan because they do not see this as a threat to US interests, yet we are continually told that we must fight the Haqqani network, who pose no danger to our own interests.

Thus, it should be obvious to all that launching a military operation in North Waziristan, even if the army was capable of undertaking such a difficult invasion, would not figure very high on our list of priorities. This, however, does not mean that we should actively be funding and training the Haqqani network, as the US has alleged in its ratcheting war of words against Pakistan. There is a difference between inaction — caused by military limitations and a lack of national interest — and actively supporting a terrorist group. This is where Pakistan, if the allegations are true, is yet again committing a mistake of historical proportions.

We may justifiably find it a burden to take on the Afghan Taliban and the Haqqani network at a time when we face a threat from militant’s intent on attacking Pakistan itself, but taking US aid and then using that very aid to help an outfit that is attacking the US, is asking for trouble. Instead of detaching ourselves from the war and maintaining our leverage in Afghanistan by leaving the Taliban alone, we may have bet on the wrong side. In a war where no one has made the right choice, this could be the worst decision yet.

Published in The Express Tribune, September 29th, 2011. ]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>US-Pakistan crisis: the either/or tribe</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/261707/us-pakistan-crisis-the-eitheror-tribe</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/261707/us-pakistan-crisis-the-eitheror-tribe#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Tue, 27 Sep 11 17:31:39 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[Ejaz Haider]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Pakistan]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=261707</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Killing the fiction of strategic partnership with Pakistan and upping the ante, US has also lost leverage it had.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[Somehow, in trying to respond to the United States, we are missing the essential point in the present crisis that has the potential to spiral. So far, we have indignantly challenged the veracity of Admiral Mike Mullen’s accusations and rejected them. That was important but has been done. We now need to go beyond that and to beyond belong some hard facts and choices.

Fact 1: The US is accusing Pakistan of waging a proxy war on it and is putting on a full court press to get the latter to fall in line. This is different from merely alleging that the Network is killing GIs or that its activities are preventing the US from stabilising Afghanistan. Those are the effects; the cause is Pakistan’s support to the Network and, by extrapolation, Islamabad’s active effort to defeat Washington’s interests in Afghanistan. The ally is in fact, according to this narrative, working against the US and is the enemy.

Fact 2: Having done so, Washington has locked itself in a commitment trap — i.e., it cannot simply sit back and let the crisis deescalate unless Pakistan is visibly seen to be doing something to address the US concerns.

Fact 3: By accusing Pakistan of directly supporting the Haqqani Network, the contention over an operation in North Waziristan acquires a different meaning; it is not just about physically occupying that area — though in terms of visibility that is now more urgent than ever — but withdrawing the alleged support to the Haqqanis and accepting Washington’s demands in line with the latter’s interests in Afghanistan and the region.

This narrative can be challenged at many levels and rejected, as has been done, and is being done. But it should be clear that it is not enough to say that this is bollocks. That doesn’t make policy, especially if we are convinced, as it appears from our narrative, that the US is wounded and needs to scapegoat someone. That would in fact mean the dice is loaded against Pakistan anyway.

So, is it a simple choice between escalating and capitulating? No. Those who are suggesting this either/or approach should get out of this business and start doing something more useful.

Pakistan needs to coolly appreciate the options available to the US and to herself. The situation is far more complex for both sides to embark on a direct confrontation without calculating the risks. Quite often, intransigence on issue X is deception because an actor is actually playing for gains on issue Y.

Even allowing for asymmetry, going up on the escalatory ladder by the stronger side is not a neat job. The further up the ladder any side would go, the less likely the chances of success because of what Herman Kahn called a “‘spasm war’ in which both sides would lose all” even as “sufficient asymmetry of capabilities at lower levels would ensure that an intolerable burden would be put on the side forced to raise the stakes”.

This is what Kahn described as escalation dominance: “[The]... capacity, other things being equal, to enable the side possessing it to enjoy marked advantages in given regions of the escalation ladder.” But once escalation begins, there is likely to be “the jet effect of the competing capabilities on the rung being occupied, the estimate by each side of what would happen if the confrontation moved to these other rungs, and the means each side has to shift the confrontation to these other rungs”.

Straightforward? No. “The major difficulty with this approach in operational terms was [and remains] that the escalation ladder was [is] unable to appear as clearly in practice as in theory.”

There are competing capabilities on both sides and both know that. The US also knows that in any confrontation involving military options, Pakistan has options to respond. The calculation for the US would not be how much punishment it can mete out to Pakistan, which can be enormous, but how much of it she can take. That can be a sobering thought.

Given this, it would rely more on non-military punishment, at least in the days to come — combining it with military actions that may not test Pakistan’s red lines overtly — to compel Pakistan to at least do some, if not all, of its bidding. It is important to note that despite the accusations, Mullen told the US lawmakers that a “flawed and strained engagement with Pakistan is better than disengagement”. The relationship cannot be broken because of US constraints. So, how does the US balance its strategy of compellence with its limitations?

The answer should determine Pakistan’s responses. The space relates to the knowledge that Pakistan cannot afford escalation but equally that the US cannot go up the ladder without the risk of jet effect.

This is where non-military means come in. The US could stop bilateral aid to Pakistan. But it also knows that that is unlikely to hurt Pakistan too much. In fact, some economists have argued that such an act may well be to the advantage of Pakistan. However, that is not the only lever. The US can influence other financial support — the IMF, World Bank, other IFIs, state donors that run various projects, etc. There are also other programmes in the development, health and education sectors.

Beyond that lie export quotas, both bilateral and others: if the US declares Pakistan a state sponsoring ‘terrorism’, that would unleash a sanctions regime which will severely impact Pakistan’s access to capital. They have done this with many states, including Iran and Sudan (both are better placed because of oil to take the brunt).

If money flows are terribly hit, Pakistan’s economy, already tottering, could begin to unravel. This coupled with selective military actions that seek to avoid direct confrontation with Pakistani troops could be a plausible scenario.

But what is important to note is the paradox: by killing the fiction of a strategic partnership with Pakistan and upping the ante, the US has also lost the leverage it had when, for instance, it mounted the Abbottabad raid. And if Pakistan begins to unravel, that could pose its own dangers to US interests. So, we now have a Pakistan that doesn’t want escalation but is more prone to reacting to US actions. That means a lesser ability by the US to compel Pakistan to change its behaviour through overt actions that could beget a response.

Other actors like India, China, Saudi Arabia and Iran thrown into the equation make the calculus even more complex. Both sides are therefore faced with the tremendous challenge of managing risks associated with any spiralling effect at a time when they are getting locked into commitment traps.

Corollary: Let’s get rid of either/or analyses and begin to formulate a strategy informed by the terrible complexity of the situation.

Published in The Express Tribune, September 28th, 2011. ]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Imran 'Rhetoric' Khan lashes out at Zardari, US...again</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/260060/rhetoric-khan-lashes-out-at-zardari-us-again</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/260060/rhetoric-khan-lashes-out-at-zardari-us-again#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Sun, 25 Sep 11 14:47:05 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[express]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Pakistan]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=260060</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Khan said the US was blaming Pakistan for its failure in Afghanistan. Govt should reject all US aid.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[PTI chairman Imran Khan reiterated on Sunday that the country needed a brave leader, and the War on Terror was benefiting the government instead of the people.

Addressing a rally in Gujranwala, Khan said that the War on Terror had cost Pakistan $70 billion and resulted in the loss of over 35,000 lives. He said the US was blaming Pakistan for their own failure in Afghanistan.

Referring to President Asif Ali Zardari, Khan said that the nation needed strong leadership unlike the present one that is not standing up to the US, despite all their allegations in recent times.

Khan said the government should reject US aid.

He said that if his party came into power, they would first reject US aid and fight this war on their terms. He added that it was this aid that was giving the miiltants the perception that we were fighting the US War on Terror and hence attacked us.

Speaking on the floods, he said that the president went to flood hit areas for a ‘photo opportunity’ and then disappeared.

Khan said that while the president was busy travelling the world and "amassing wealth", it was the army that was fighting the insurgency in the tribal areas, controlling the situation in Balochistan, and the rangers who were conducting operations in Karachi.

On Waziristan, he urged the nation to unite against any possible US operation in the area. The US has been pressuring Pakistan to conduct an operation in North Waziristan to clear it of militant hideouts.

Khan said that come election year the people should not vote for a "coward leader", as Pakistan was a dignified nation.

Khan said he would make an important announcement in the coming days and give the nation good news soon.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Hitting back: Kayani scoffs, Khar cautions, Gilani muses</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/259312/hitting-back-kayani-scoffs-khar-cautions-gilani-muses</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/259312/hitting-back-kayani-scoffs-khar-cautions-gilani-muses#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Sat, 24 Sep 11 01:40:56 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[kamran.yousaf]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Pakistan]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=259312</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Army chief says Mullen is well aware of ‘which countries had ties with the Haqqani network’.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[The crescendo of discontent emanating from Washington has not been taken lightly by Pakistan.

The country’s top civil and military leadership spoke in unison on Friday, urging the United States to stop publicly accusing Islamabad of playing a double game in the war against militancy – and even going as far as warning Washington that it could suffer consequences if it continued to do so.

“You will lose an ally,” Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar told a news channel in New York in remarks broadcast on Friday – a day that also saw the White House calling for Pakistan to cut ties with the Haqqani network.

“You cannot afford to alienate Pakistan, you cannot afford to alienate the Pakistani people. If you are choosing to do so, and if they are choosing to do so, it will be at their own cost,” Khar added. Pressed to break his silence on Friday, Army chief General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani also dismissed allegations that the ISI had helped Afghan militants attack the US embassy in Kabul, insisting that the charges were baseless and part of a “public blame game” – which was detrimental to peace in Afghanistan.

Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani also joined the chorus on Friday, saying “The message for America is: ‘They can’t live with us… they can’t live without us’.”

In a hard-hitting statement before a Senate panel on Thursday, US Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Mike Mullen openly accused Inter-Services Intelligence agency of supporting Haqqani insurgents in planning and executing a 22-hour assault on the US Embassy in Afghanistan last week and a truck bomb that wounded 77 American soldiers days earlier.

(Read: Volley heats up - ISI targeted in bitter Mullen tirade)

In a statement issued by the Inter Services Public Relations (ISPR), Kayani termed US Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Mike Mullen’s claims ‘very unfortunate and not based on facts.’

Responding to scathing criticism by the US military’s top officer, Kayani denied allegations that his country is “exporting” terror to neighbouring Afghanistan.

“While taking note of the recent statements made by Admiral Mullen... Chief of Army Staff General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani termed these as very unfortunate and not based on facts,” read an Inter Services Public Relations (ISPR).

“This is especially disturbing in view of a rather constructive meeting with Admiral Mullen,” it added referring to a recent meeting between the pair in Spain.

Interestingly, General Kayani’s terse statement suggested Islamabad had no immediate intention of acting on renewed American demands that it attack the Haqqani militant faction in North Waziristan. Nor did the Army go as far as to deny it maintains contact with the feared Afghan insurgent group. However the Army chief felt ‘singling out’ Pakistan for contact with the group wasn’t ‘fair or productive’.

“On the specific question of contacts with Haqqanis, the (chief of army staff) said that Admiral Mullen knows fully well which all countries are in contact with the Haqqanis. Singling out Pakistan is neither fair nor productive.”

The statement left the media buzzing about the name of the country the army chief was hinting at, but there was no confirmation. However, a military official said the army chief was referring to US attempts to reach out to the Haqqanis for reconciliation in Afghanistan.

Categorically denying the accusations of waging a proxy war and ISI support to Haqqanis, the army chief said: “the blame game in public statements should give way to a constructive and meaningful engagement for a stable and peaceful Afghanistan, an objective to which Pakistan is fully committed.”

Renewed demands

Meanwhile, White House spokesman Jay Carney on Friday called on Pakistan to “break any link they have” with the Haqqani terror network.

“It is critical that the government of Pakistan break any links they have and take strong and immediate action against this network so that they are no longer a threat to the United States or to the people of Pakistan, because this network is a threat to both,” Carney said.

In fresh attacks made by Captain John Kirby, spokesperson of Admiral Mike Mullen, the US official claimed the ISI not only supported but also encouraged terrorist outfits, particularly the Haqqani militant network.

“All I can tell you that we are confident that the ISI continues to support and even encourage the Haqqanis to launch these attacks. I am not going into specifics of the intelligence that we have about the support,” Kirby told Pentagon reporters during an off-camera interaction.

When asked about the denial being issued by the Pakistani leadership on the allegations, Kirby said that he and the Chairman stand by those comments.

“The chairman stands by what he testified before the US Senate,” he said.

Military sources say despite US pressure, there is no possibility of an imminent operation in North Waziristan Agency.

“Pakistan must avoid opening another front merely on the behest of the US,” said Defense Analyst Lt General Abdul Qayum. “Any operation in North Waziristan will have huge implications for Pakistan,” he argued.

However, the issue of the Haqqani network has seemingly become the main stumbling block to normalise ties between the two countries. Earlier this week, the US Senate Committee linked all US economic and security assistance to Pakistan with its progress towards fighting militant groups, including the Haqqani network.

Communication lines open

However, despite the heightened acrimony, the Pentagon said on Friday that communication lines with Pakistan’s military remain open. Despite serious disagreement, the US military had no intention of cutting off dialogue with Pakistan, press secretary George Little told reporters.

“The lines of communication with our Pakistani counterparts remain open,” Little said. “This is a relationship that’s complicated but essential.”

Published in The Express Tribune, September 24th,  2011.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>‘Strategic assets’: ISI must disengage from proxies: Mullen</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/256790/us-tells-pakistan-to-disengage-from-proxies</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/256790/us-tells-pakistan-to-disengage-from-proxies#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Wed, 21 Sep 11 04:42:23 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[huma.imtiaz]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Pakistan]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=256790</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Panetta urges Pakistan to exert more border control against Haqqani network.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[Days before he retires as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Admiral Mike Mullen has said that Pakistan’s premier intelligence agency has been supporting ‘proxies’ as a strategy.


Addressing the audience at the think-tank Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, Mullen adopted a critical tone and focused on the Inter-Services Intelligence agency’s (ISI) links with proxies in the regions, which he said was part of their strategy. “The ISI has to make this decision to strategically disengage. They have been supporting proxies for an extended period of time,” he said. “The Haqqani piece of this has got to be reversed.”

He said that he had met General Kayani for four hours in Seville, Spain, on September 16 on the sidelines of the Nato conference, where they discussed the Haqqani network.

When asked if General Kayani had given him a commitment on action against the Haqqani network, Mullen evaded a reply by saying that he had managed to protect his relationship with Kayani by not talking in detail about what was discussed in their meetings. “We have a very close relationship … the strength of the connection is what is important so that we can get through hard times.”

In response to a question about US assistance with helicopters for Pakistan, Mullen said that while the US had provided a large amount of military equipment to Pakistan and had focused on helicopters, he did not believe there was a direct link between improving Pakistan’s helicopter fleet and an operation in North Waziristan.

Speaking about India and Pakistan, Mullen said there was a need to understand what Pakistan’s interests were. He added that Pakistan believes India is an existentialist threat to it, but “solving Kashmir unlocks the whole place,” and was the path for long-term solutions.

Meanwhile, addressing a press conference at the Pentagon, US Defence Secretary Leon Panetta said that Pakistani officials must exercise control over their country’s border to tackle the Haqqani network. “The network cannot be allowed to cross the border, attack troops in Afghanistan and then cross back into Pakistan through the border.”

Referring to Mullen’s recent meeting with Kayani, Panetta said that “we think they (Pakistan) have heard the message.”

Published in The Express Tribune, September 21st, 2011.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>North Waziristan: Gul Bahadur’s aide killed in clash with rivals</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/236757/north-waziristan-gul-bahadur%e2%80%99s-aide-killed-in-clash-with-rivals</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/236757/north-waziristan-gul-bahadur%e2%80%99s-aide-killed-in-clash-with-rivals#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Mon, 22 Aug 11 04:44:20 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[tahir.khan]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Pakistan]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=236757</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Security forces’ convoy targeted, attackers flee but intercepted by opponents.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[A prominent militant commander of a Taliban group led by Hafiz Gul Bahadur, an associate of the Haqqani network, was killed in North Waziristan Agency on Sunday during a clash with a rival group.

A tribal leader told The Express Tribune by phone that three militants attacked a convoy of security forces by blowing up an improvised explosive device in the Qutab Khel area, some four kilometres from Miramshah, the headquarters of North Waziristan Agency.

Five officials were injured but the attackers were able to flee the scene and were later intercepted by the Taliban.

Exchange of harsh words led to an armed clash and resultantly Taliban commander Muhammad Hanif and one of the attackers were killed. The two other attackers managed to escape.

The slain commander belonged to Bura Khel Wazir tribe and was very active in the area. Tribesmen said that Hanif was well-known to the locals and was quite famous at a time when Taliban leaders avoid public appearances due to frequent US drone strikes.

Hafiz Gul Bahadur group of the Taliban is not part of the banned Tehreek-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP). There have been several attacks on the security forces in recent weeks despite a peace deal signed between the security forces and Hafiz Gul Bahadur in 2007.

Locals said that the Taliban commander’s murder caused tension in the area and there could be an angry reaction from the Hafiz Gul Bahadur group. The group has not yet issued a statement on the incident.

Every Sunday, curfew is declared in North Waziristan for the safe movement of the convoys of security forces but militants are still able to launch attacks.

On August 14, rockets were fired on the fort of security forces in Razmak town of North Waziristan. No one was hurt in the attack. Hafiz Gul Bahadur was made deputy of Baitullah Mehsud when the TTP was formed in 2007. But soon after, Gul Bahadur’s group had distanced itself from the TTP fearing a harsh backlash from the government. Gul Bahadur is a descendant of the Faqir of Ipi, a legendary fighter known for his innovative insurrection against British occupation in the 1930s and 1940.  He rose to prominence in 2004 following military operations in North Waziristan and coordinates closely with the Haqqani network. Pakistan has been increasingly under pressure from the United States to go launch a military operation in North Waziristan against the Haqqanis who they blame for stoking the Taliban insurgency in neighbouring Afghanistan.

Published in The Express Tribune, August 22nd,  2011.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Reconciliation talks: US duped by fake interlocutor in talks, says Taliban</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/236229/reconciliation-talks-us-duped-by-fake-interlocutor-in-talks-says-taliban</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/236229/reconciliation-talks-us-duped-by-fake-interlocutor-in-talks-says-taliban#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Sun, 21 Aug 11 00:37:48 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[Naveed Hussain]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Pakistan]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=236229</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Spokesman for the group Zabiullah Mujahid says Tayyab Agha has not carried out any negotiations with the Americans.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[The Taliban have raised doubts about the identity of a key interlocutor that US government officials say they have engaged with in countries as far afield as Qatar and Germany earlier this year.


A spokesman for the Taliban Zabiullah Mujahid said that the Americans may have been duped by an impostor – just as its Nato allies were earlier taken in by a fake Taliban leader. Mujahid said he was convinced that a man posing as Tayyab Agha, a confidante of reclusive Taliban leader Mullah Mohammad Omar, had duped the Americans and had possibly swindled them.

“Tayyab Agha is as close to us as ever. But he has never met with US officials,” Mujahid told The Express Tribune in a telephone interview from an undisclosed location in Afghanistan. “Somebody might have swindled the US officials by impersonating Tayyab Agha,” he added.

In recent months Washington has disclosed that senior State Department and Central Intelligence Agency officials have had secret ‘exploratory conversations’ with Tayyab Agha in Qatar and Germany. Though the talks broke down following the disclosure of Taliban negotiator’s identity, it wasn’t known whether or not Agha was still as close to the Taliban as before 2001.

(Read: Afghan endgame - Peace Council still looking for Taliban ‘address’)

Mujahid said that last year a shopkeeper from the Pakistani city of Quetta had milked thousands of dollars from Nato and Afghan officials after engaging them in talks as Mullah Akhtar Muhammad Mansur, the second-in-command in the Quetta Shura of Taliban and civil aviation minister in the Taliban regime.

He also rubbished a claim by Afghan lawmaker Homa Sultani that she had met Mullah Omar and that he had mandated her to negotiate with US and Afghan officials on their behalf. “We were simply surprised by her claim. I don’t know at whose instigation she made that claim,” Mujahid said.

The Taliban field commander in the northeastern province of Kunar, Maulvi Abdur Rahim also rejected the reports of talks with the Taliban as a “conspiracy to divide their movement”.

Talks on exchange of prisoners

The Taliban spokesperson, however, did admit that his group had been in talks with ‘foreign officials’ for the past 18 months. “But these talks should not be misconstrued as an effort to find a negotiated settlement of the Afghan issue,” Mujahid said. “The agenda of these interactions was mainly the exchange of prisoners,” he added.

Mujahid said that the Taliban would not sit across the table with US or Afghan officials as long as US-led Nato troops were in Afghanistan. “Our jihad against ‘occupation’ forces will continue till foreign forces pull out of our land,” he added.

The United States is seeking, though not officially, at least five ‘permanent’ military bases for counterterrorism operations in Afghanistan. These facilities will be in places, such as Herat, along the Iranian border; Mazar-e-Sharif, along the border with Central Asian States; and Kandahar and Jalalabad, along the border with Pakistan.

‘Taliban are updating their weaponry’

Earlier this month Taliban shot down a CH-47 Chinook helicopter during action in the Afghan province of  Wardak, killing 31 US soldiers – most of them elite Navy SEALs – and seven Afghan troops. Some US analysts believed that the chopper was brought down not with RPG (Rocket-propelled grenade) but with I-RAM (Improvised rocket-assisted mortar), commonly known as ‘flying IEDs’.

The ‘flying IEDs’ were first used by the insurgents against US troops during the Iraq insurgency. And US military officials suspected that they were provided to the insurgents by Iran. The analysts believe that Iran has also provided the ‘flying IEDs’ to the Taliban to use against their arch foe – the United States.

But Zabiullah Mujahid rejected this allegation. “We continue to update our weaponry. We continue to experiment with our arms. The Chinook helicopter was shot down with the help of a modified version of RPG,” he claimed. “Our modified version of RPG can trigger a fire on its target.”

Asked about the contribution of the Haqqani network which the US believes is based in Pakistan’s North Waziristan tribal region, the Taliban spokesperson said, “(Jalaluddin) Haqqani is a mujahid (holy warrior). And his role in the Afghan jihad is second to none.”

US Defence Secretary Leon Panetta, speaking in the US National Defence University alleged earlier this week that Pakistan has links with extremist groups, including the Haqqani network. Ties with the Haqqani network are cited for Pakistan’s reluctance to launch a military operation in North Waziristan Agency.

But the Taliban spokesperson rubbished the claims of outside help for their ‘jihad’. “These are baseless rumours. Ours is a purely indigenous struggle. We are not getting any help from any country,” he claimed.

 

 

 

Published in The Express Tribune, August 21st, 2011.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>How Pakistanis perceive America</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/226158/how-pakistanis-perceive-america</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/226158/how-pakistanis-perceive-america#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Sun, 07 Aug 11 15:09:48 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[daniyal.noorani]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Pakistan]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=226158</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[The fact that Pakistan’s contributions are not highlighted stings Pakistanis greatly.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[Recently, I was roaming around Islamabad when I was approached by a shoe cobbler who pointed out that my sandals were broken. Caught off guard by this stranger identifying my wardrobe malfunction, I found myself giving him my sandals to fix. While he was fixing my sandals, I found out that he was from Bajaur Agency and was forced to leave his home when army operations began there. He told me how before the operation the Taliban had control of his hometown and how they were suppressing the local population. Curious to hear his opinion, I asked him whom he held responsible for his current predicament. Without any hesitation he categorically said, “America”. Confused by his answer I asked him why he didn’t hold the Taliban responsible for provoking the reaction by undermining the writ of the government. His response was that while he understood that the Taliban were in the wrong, “the operation was done because of America”.

This short interaction with the shoe cobbler highlighted to me some of America’s shortcomings in dealing with Pakistan. By having an overbearing approach with Pakistan, America has alienated an entire country and made itself into public enemy number one. According to a Pew Research Centre study, 62 per cent of Pakistanis oppose US-led efforts to fight terrorism and only 37 per cent support the use of the Pakistan Army to fight extremists. If America wants a long-term solution to the instability in the region, it must make efforts to convince Pakistanis that military operations are in their favour, as opposed to strong-arming Pakistan into action.

The recent withdrawal of $800 million of military aid to Pakistan by America highlights the transactional nature of the relationship between the two countries. One had hoped that the Obama administration would move away from this myopic relationship, but that does not appear to be the case. When this latest lovers spat is resolved and Pakistan does a military operation in North Waziristan as the US would like, it will further cement the idea that Pakistan is fighting America’s war.

Time and again the US has not acknowledged Pakistan’s sacrifices. This apparent lack of sympathy by America results in Pakistanis viewing America as arrogant and self-serving. This has led to 73 per cent of Pakistanis viewing the US negatively and 69 per cent of Pakistanis viewing America as more of an enemy than a friend. If the US wants to continue engaging with Pakistan as an ally, it would be pertinent for it to be more sympathetic and appreciative of the efforts taken by Pakistan.

In the US media and government, one would be hard-pressed to find anyone saying anything positive about Pakistan, even though it is the country that has suffered the most with more than 30,000 casualties in the war. The fact that Pakistan’s contributions are not highlighted stings Pakistanis greatly.

It is true that the US has to be cognisant of the difficult nature of dealing with the Pakistani government and its sometimes duplicitous nature. However, this does not mean that it dehumanise the sacrifices of the country. If the US continues to deal with the bubble that is Islamabad, it will continue to further alienate itself in Pakistan and will find itself further destabilising the region.

Published in The Express Tribune, August 8th, 2011.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Musharraf says Benazir violated ‘deal’, maintains innocence over OBL</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/214600/musharraf-says-benazir-violated-%e2%80%98deal%e2%80%99-maintains-innocence-over-obl</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/214600/musharraf-says-benazir-violated-%e2%80%98deal%e2%80%99-maintains-innocence-over-obl#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Thu, 21 Jul 11 18:41:04 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[huma.imtiaz]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Pakistan]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=214600</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Musharraf says he does not need to &quot;reinvent the wheel&quot; once he returns to power in Pakistan.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[Twenty minutes before the event featuring former Pakistani president General (retd) Pervez Musharraf was due to begin, organizers at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars began redirecting people to move to an overflowing room - such was the rush to get a seat.

Fresh from his appearance at the Daily Show with Jon Stewart, General (retd) Musharraf walked in flanked by his aides and a few security officials and was introduced by WWCIS head and former Congresswoman Jane Harman.

Musharraf began his talk with a history lesson, maintaining the military narrative and its focus on India when he relayed the series of events that began from 1947. Musharraf said that militant groups spearheaded the fight against the Soviets in Afghanistan because the elite of Afghanistan had abandoned the country. Musharraf outlined the rise of militant groups in the late 80s and 90s of groups like Lashkare-Taiba and Jaish-e-Mohammad to fight against India in Kashmir.

Musharraf took the opportunity to explain his actions in 2005 "I was trying to wean the Pashtuns away from the Taliban, we were trying to organize local jirgas." Musharraf said that he was accused of playing a double game, whereas he was trying to wean away those who did not want to support the Taliban.

Musharraf said that he regretted missing the fleeting opportunity of achieving an agreement on issues with Kashmir. He said that they were close to an agreement on Sir Creek, Siachen and Kashmir, but that fleeting moment passed.

Musharraf also talked at length of the US-Pak relationship and the trust deficit. He said that it pained him to see the state of affairs. He said that Pakistan has to explain its reasons for not conducting an operation in North Waziristan, whereas the US must be mindful of the sensitivities. Musharraf also mentioned the drone strikes, citing the indiscriminate civilian casualties as a point of concern.

When pressed on the issue of perhaps having done things differently, he said "whatever I did, I need to repeat it" if back in power. The only regret he has, he said, was on cutting a deal with BB and implementing the NRO, "Benazir violated the agreement with me to not return before the elections."

When quizzed about whether he knew about Osama Bin Laden’s presence in Abbotabad since he was also COAS at the time that OBL allegedly moved there, Musharraf said that he was not aware, “whether anyone believes it or not”. He also said that he did not find the high walls of the Abbotabad compound to be unusual, and said that it was negligence, and not incompetence that led to no one knowing about OBL’s presence in the area.

Musharraf also criticized the "leadership vacuum". Both the major political parties, he said, were not delivering. Citing his approval ratings of over 80 percent in early 2007 that suffered due to certain elements, adding that they were the events surrounding the judiciary – “I will not explain why I did what I did” – and the assassination of Benazir Bhutto. He said that he wouldn't have to reinvent the wheel as he knew what worked, referring to his time when he assumed power in Pakistan in 1999 when the country was at the brink of default, but “performed admirably” after he took over.

Speaking to this correspondent after the event, the former President said that he would be returning to Pakistan on 23rd March 2012. Dubbing the case against him in the Benazir Bhutto murder case as politically motivated, Musharraf said he was willing to face it, including more political cases that he expected to come up once he returned. He said that there was a leadership vacuum in Pakistan and that his party would gain momentum once he returned.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Negotiated settlement: US discussed prisoner exchange with Taliban</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/205706/negotiated-settlement-us-discussed-prisoner-exchange-with-taliban</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/205706/negotiated-settlement-us-discussed-prisoner-exchange-with-taliban#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Sat, 09 Jul 11 05:39:55 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[qaiser.butt]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Pakistan]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=205706</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Taliban says militants have demanded release of top commanders.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[Exchange of prisoners of war between the Taliban and the US was on the agenda when representatives from both sides met in Qatar some time ago, a Taliban source told The Express Tribune.


Tayyub Agha, in-charge of Taliban’s foreign affairs, was sent by Mullah Omar for a dialogue on the exchange of prisoners, the source said.

The exact number of US prisoners of war being held by the Taliban could not be ascertained but the source said they are “few” that were captured from different parts of Afghanistan.

In return, the Taliban are demanding release of their top commanders detained by the United States in Afghanistan and Guantanamo Bay.

German mediation

The Taliban source conceded that high officials from the United Kingdom and Germany also participated in their talks with the United States.

“None of the prisoners in Taliban custody are from the UK or Germany,” he said.

Pakistan’s ambassador in Kabul, Mohammad Sadiq had told The Express Tribune last month that the meeting in Qatar was arranged by Germany.

Mullah Zaeef’s role

Taliban sources said that the former Afghan ambassador to Pakistan Mullah Zaeef had also played a role to convince the Taliban leadership for a negotiated settlement of the Afghan imbroglio.

Although the former envoy does not have Mullah Omar’s confidence, a few prominent Taliban leaders do have a soft corner for him. Zaeef was one of the top critics of Pakistan for its support to the United States when Washington led international forces attacked Kabul to oust the Taliban regime.

He was then the Taliban ambassador in Islamabad and was later handed over to the CIA which took him to Guantanamo Bay.

‘Betrayal’

Intelligence sources in Islamabad suspect that the Afghan Taliban and the US are still in touch over negotiations regarding the terms and conditions for the exchange of their prisoners.

Officials in Islamabad also suspect that the Taliban and US discussed other issues as well but the Taliban are trying to conceal facts as they insist their discussions with Washington were restricted to issues pertaining to the prisoners of war.

Islamabad is perturbed over the US-Taliban talks as it considers Washington’s move as betrayal.

“The United States is pressing us for a large scale military operation in North Waziristan on one hand and holding talks with the same Taliban on the other,” an official told The Express Tribune requesting anonymity.

Afghan President Hamid Karzai is reportedly also disturbed over the US-Taliban secret meetings.

Published in The Express Tribune, July 9th, 2011.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Pakistani Taliban try to woo back ex-comrade</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/200398/pakistani-taliban-try-to-woo-back-ex-comrade</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/200398/pakistani-taliban-try-to-woo-back-ex-comrade#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Fri, 01 Jul 11 11:10:31 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[reuters]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Pakistan]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=200398</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Fazal Saeed had defected from the Tehriki-i-Taliban Pakistan and formed a new group called Tehrik-i-Taliban Islami.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[The Pakistani Taliban are trying to lure back a senior militant commander who recently quit the group because he controls strategic routes into Afghanistan and Pakistan and can block off militants' escape paths, his supporters said on Friday.

Analysts say last week's defection of Fazal Saeed, a Taliban leader in the Kurram region, is a serious blow to the Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), blamed for many suicide bombings across the country.

Saeed's faction controls important roads used by both Pakistani and Afghan Taliban militants based in North Waziristan's tribal region for attacks in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Saeed has now formed a new group called the Tehrik-i-Taliban Islami (TTI), comprising some 500 militants and is said to have close ties to Sirajuddin Haqqani, leader of the most brutal faction of the Afghan Taliban.

TTP chief Hakimullah Mehsud has sought help from Haqqani for a truce with Saeed, who quit the group to protest against what he called "brutal" attacks on civilians, militant sources said.

"A six-member delegation of Afghan commanders is meeting commander Saeed at the request of Hakimullah Mehsud to ask him to rejoin the group," a militant source close to Saeed told a group of reporters.

"They have asked him to open roads he has blocked for militant movements, which are import routes linking Pakistani tribal regions to Afghanistan," the militant source said.

Saeed said he intends to continue to attack US troops in Afghanistan.

A Reuters's reporter was part of a group of journalists who were to meet Saeed at his invitation, but the meeting had to be postponed because of the Mehsud delegation's visit.

A spokesman from the TTP was unavailable for comment.

Saeed has been at odds with Mehsud for several months over militant activities in his stronghold of lower Kurram but their ties deteriorated after one of Saeed's commanders was killed about a month and a half ago, his supporters say.

The roads Saeed controls are vitally important for Mehsud's men to reach other tribal regions, and to use as escape routes in case of a military operation in North Waziristan.

Kurram is one of seven tribal agencies, semi-autonomous ethnic Pashtun regions. Its roads are open to the Haqqani network, but not the TTP.

&nbsp;

The United States has long demanded that Pakistan attack the North Waziristan region to eliminate the Haqqani network.

Pakistan has been reluctant to do so but it has come under increased pressure after al Qaeda chief Osama bin Laden was found and killed in Abboattabad by US special forces in May.

Pakistani forces have launched many offensives in the tribal areas against militants, but have failed to weaken their resolve as insurgents continue to attack the army in the northwest.

The Taliban have vowed to avenge Bin Laden's death and have stepped up attacks, including a bombing that killed 80 army recruits, a brazen attack on PNS Mehran naval airbase and an assault on a US consular vehicles in Peshawar.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>No to operation in North Waziristan Agency</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/192710/no-to-operation-in-north-waziristan-agency</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/192710/no-to-operation-in-north-waziristan-agency#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Mon, 20 Jun 11 15:55:39 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[Ejaz Haider]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Pakistan]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=192710</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Operation against Haqqani network will move Afghan Taliban groups against battle-stressed Pakistani security forces.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[Should the Pakistan Army launch an operation in North Waziristan Agency (NWA)? Short answer: No. Is the so-called Haqqani network as deadly for US-Nato-Isaf troops as American official and media blitz suggests? No. Let’s consider these questions in reverse order.

Going by US and western intelligence and military accounts, the network operates in the velayats of Paktia, Paktika, Khost, Logar and Ghazni. Let’s also add Nangarhar to this list. Since 2001 to wit, according to The official US list of fatalities, the number killed in these areas from the combined US-Nato-Isaf troops are Paktia (1), Khost (39), Logar (37), Ghazni (74), Paktika (118) and Nangarhar (43). (NB: These statistics also include fatalities caused by non-hostile factors, including accidents involving road and helicopter crashes, weapons mishandling etc. See casualties.org/OEF/Index.aspx)

The total number of fatalities in these six velayats comes to 312. Compare this with Helmand (730), Kandahar (370), Kunar (153), Kabul (136), Zabul (99), Oruzgan (64), Parwan (54). If one adds up the numbers of fatalities, it should be clear that the fighting has been far more intense in the southern, central and north-eastern areas than where the network has been operating, with the exception of Paktika. Also, the eastern provinces combined have seen fewer fatalities this year than the average for one suicide attack in Pakistan.

Which brings us to the pressing issue of operational priorities: What groups should Pakistan operate against — those that are attacking Pakistani people and security forces or those that operate inside Afghanistan? Given limited resources and the stretch faced by the Pakistan Army, any commander would focus attention on the threat in his own area rather than pick up a fight with those who are not fighting his troops. As for the differential in resources, just one figure would be enough. So far, given US and other fatalities from improvised explosive devices (IEDs), the Joint IED Defeat Organisation (JIEDDO), a Pentagon agency, has spent $20 billion to develop techniques and equipment to counter the IED threat. Does this number sound familiar? Well, it equals the hyped figure of ‘aid’ that is supposed to have come to Pakistan since 2002 for the latter’s entire war effort, as well as under multiple other heads!

Pakistan is already facing a full-blown insurgency and urban terrorism by groups based in Fata and just across in Afghanistan. A recent development relates to well-staged and managed attacks from across the Durand Line on its posts in Lower Dir and Bajaur. The pattern of attacks and numbers employed show the attacking force is free to form up inside Afghanistan, has a secure line of communication to the base, can freely advance to the border, ingress, launch a surprise attack and exfiltrate. Surely, with all the radars, sensor-mounted balloons and unmanned drones, such movement should not go undetected. Apparently it does!

Pakistan’s experience also shows that no one area can be identified as the Centre of Gravity (COG) of this threat. The two US assumptions that NWA is the COG of Afghan insurgency and that once the Haqqani network is taken out, the backbone of the insurgency in Afghanistan will be broken, are wrong and self-serving.

As I wrote in The Friday Times in December 2010, the insurgency does not have a defined COG; there are multiple COGs and command lines are much more diffused than anyone is prepared to accept. There is already dispersal of the leadership and the fighters because of drone attacks. Dispersal and delegation of operations also provide the Taliban the flexibility they require to retain their asymmetric advantage.

The American idea that packing the punch against the Haqqani network — assuming that the network would offer itself as a concentrated target for the convenience of any superior force — would signal to others to come to the negotiating table is unlikely to happen.

In this game, Pakistan will be the loser. NWA does not just house the Haqqani network; it also has Haji Gul Bahadur, elements of the relocated Tehreek-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), multiple Punjabi groups and remnants of al Qaeda. Currently, these groups are geographically confined. If Pakistan goes after them, it will have to face multiple negative consequences, including dislocating more of its population at a time when its build and transfer efforts in other areas have almost stalled and it is already bogged down in Mohmand and Kurram.

The network, currently no threat to Pakistan, would go for a link up with elements hostile to Pakistan and operating only against Pakistani interests. Elements hostile to Pakistan will get reinforced by such a link-up and, while use of force will make the various groups join hands, it will fail to translate into utility of force for the simple reason that the groups would disperse and spread out instead of offering themselves as a concentrated target to a superior force.

That makes eminent operational sense because, rather than losing too many men in pitched battles, the groups will disperse while retaining some fighters to engage advancing columns in combination with the use of area denial weapons like anti-personnel mines, anti-tank mines, ‘victim-operated’ IEDs and booby traps. This means that while they will try to slow down the advance and extract a heavy toll of advancing troops, they would not need to employ the bulk of their forces that are likely to extricate as the operation undergoes.

Pakistan would then be left with two negative fallouts: Future operational linkage between the Afghan Taliban and the TTP and other assorted hostile groups; and dispersal of these groups into other areas. An operation against the Haqqani network will also activate other Afghan Taliban groups against Pakistani security forces which are already battle-stressed, fighting the Pakistani groups affiliated with al Qaeda. That would open another front, currently dormant.

Meanwhile, what about the drones? Why should Pakistan commit ground troops if the drones are as effective as the US says they are and for which reason it is prepared to accept the cost of rising resentment inside Pakistan?

But let’s go higher up the ladder from the operational to the strategic and political. The UN Security Council (UNSC) has delinked the Taliban from its al Qaeda list, sending a signal to the Taliban that they can be talked to if they can prove that they are not linked to al Qaeda. Good move that, one which I have been insisting on before and since US President Barack Obama spoke at West Point. We also have, on the good authority of both Afghan President Hamid Karzai and outgoing US Secretary of Defence Robert Gates, that the US is in talks with the Taliban. This makes sense and shows why the UNSC has done what it has.

And why should Pakistan open up a front against the Afghan Taliban when they are now to be potential partners in peace talks?

Published in The Express Tribune, June 21st, 2011.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>JUI-F calls for initiating talks with militants</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/192008/jui-f-calls-for-initiating-talks-with-militants</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/192008/jui-f-calls-for-initiating-talks-with-militants#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Mon, 20 Jun 11 04:31:51 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[zahid.gishkori]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Pakistan]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=192008</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Military, political and religious leadership should be engaged: Fazl.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[After opposing a military operation in North Waziristan, Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam (JUI-F) has called for forming a commission for holding talks with militants.


The proposal was floated by JUI-F chief Maulana Fazlur Rehman during the party’s Central Executive Committee (CEC) meeting.

The proposal comes in the backdrop of Pakistan and Afghanistan working together for pursuing a peace process and engaging in talks with Taliban ahead of the US troop withdrawal from Afghanistan.

“The military, political and religious leadership should be engaged to form the commission on the pattern of Pakistan-Afghanistan peace commission,” JUI-F chief Fazlur Rehman told The Express Tribune. The commission, Fazl proposed, “may chalk out a strategy to persuade the militants (in this regard) and bring different factions of extremists active in areas bordering Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa and the tribal areas to the negotiating table.”

“It is time to hold talks with militants. Guns won’t solve anything in the war against terrorism,” Fazl said.

The proposal was also intimated by the JUI-F chief during his separate meetings with President Asif Ali Zardari and PML-N Chief Nawaz Sharif on Friday.

Fazl, who is also the chairman of the parliamentary committee on Kashmir, is reported to have informed them about the upcoming All Parties Conference on Kashmir, which is scheduled to be held next month in Islamabad.

Earlier, the CEC meeting focused on militants’ attempts to target the JUI-F chief in Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa and a fresh warning issued by the ministry of interior against holding public meetings due to the same fears.

The policy being pursued for conducting military operations in volatile areas has failed in eliminating terrorism, said Fazl. The government, he said, should engage religious scholars to accelerate efforts for peace, adding that he had already discussed the matter with various scholars.

“We will back the Awami National Party’s (ANP) efforts for peace, its bid to stop insurgency and also to hold talks with disgruntled militants in tribal areas,” he told The Express Tribune.

He said that proposals for a joint commission could be discussed in consultation with members of the Council of Islamic Ideology (CII).

He said that he had recently met the secretary-general of the Wafaqul Madris, Hanif Jalandhri, who was recently nominated as a member of CII and discussed various issues.

Published in The Express Tribune, June 19th, 2011.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Foreigners in North Waziristan</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/191001/foreigners-in-north-waziristan</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/191001/foreigners-in-north-waziristan#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Fri, 17 Jun 11 17:47:59 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[letter.]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Pakistan]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=191001</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Who has allowed these foreigners to have sanctuaries in North Waziristan in the first place?]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[This is with reference to Asad Munir’s article of June 16 titled “Operation in North Waziristan”.

I wonder why the military would ask the people of North Waziristan to evict all the foreigners in their midst? What if the same situation was faced the residents of Lahore? Would they be expected to evict them as well? And, anyway, who has allowed these foreigners to have sanctuaries in North Waziristan in the first place?

Saleem Khan

Published in The Express Tribune, June 18th, 2011.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Operation in North Waziristan</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/189440/operation-in-north-waziristan-3</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/189440/operation-in-north-waziristan-3#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Wed, 15 Jun 11 20:03:52 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[asad.munir]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Pakistan]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=189440</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Haqqani’s network is considered a major hurdle in Obama’s exit strategy. An operation may not fulfill this...]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[The ISPR release on the 139th Corps Commander’s Conference states “The army was following a well-thought-out campaign plan and is under no pressure to carry out operations at a particular time. Future operations, as and when undertaken, will be with political consensus. He [Army Chief], however, called upon the brave people of North Waziristan Agency (NWA) to evict all foreigners from their soil and take charge of their land and destiny once again. He emphasised that it was wrong, in principle, to allow others to use our land for fighting their battles. This must not be allowed. The army in NWA is committed to supporting the people of NWA in this effort”.

&nbsp;

The carefully worded statement has given the outline of the conduct of operation in NWA. The statement highlights a few important points. The army will conduct an operation in NWA as per its own campaign plan and will decide about the timing. The operation will only be launched once the government develops consensus, takes all political parties on board and orders the conduct of the operation. The help of the tribals has been sought for eviction of foreign militants from their area. This implies that it is going to be a targeted operation, against suspected hideouts, and the tribals may have to raise lashkars. The tribals should not allow ‘others’ to use their soil to fight battles having nothing to do with the people of the area.

The operation in the north will be different from those conducted by the army in other terrorist dominated districts and Fata, because, unlike those areas, NWA is not in control of the terrorists. They are not occupying areas like Fazal ullah did in Swat, Baitullah in South Waziristan, Faqir Hussain in Bajaur and Tariq Afridi in Darra. The terrorists are using compounds and hideouts in different parts of the agency. The political administration is reasonably in control of the area. About 30,000 army troops are already present there.

Targeted operations, based on reliable intelligence and with the support of locals, are likely to be conducted. Before the initiation of the operation, Orakzai and Central Kurram have to be secured; otherwise most terrorists are likely to shift to these areas. The priority targets should be elements of Tehreek-i-Taliban Pakistan and other groups who are involved in terrorist activities inside Pakistan.

The Americans are of the view that an operation in North Waziristan would help them win their war in Afghanistan. The Coalition Forces fighting in Afghanistan have created this perception. Armies all over the world traditionally do not accept their failures and look for reasons to cover up their own incompetence, Nato forces are no exception. It is a fact that different terrorists groups are present in the agency and they conduct raids inside Afghanistan. However, the scale of incursion of terrorists from NWA is being exaggerated.

The US focus is on Haqqani, they want his network to be dismantled and evicted from NWA. Haqqani’s activities are being considered as a major hurdle in the implementation of Obama’s exit strategy. However, an operation in the area may not fulfill this objective. Before the operation starts, the Haqqani group may move to Afghanistan. As per US intelligence in Afghanistan, the group has bases in nine provinces of Afghanistan — Khost, Paktiya, Paktika, Nangrahar, Ghazni, Zabul, Kabul, Wardak and Logar. In 2009 and 2010, the Coalition Forces conducted operations against the network in Khost, Paktia, Paktika, and Zabul, but were not able to eliminate its presence in these provinces. In case Coalition Forces eliminate the Haqqani group by securing these areas, they would be justified in blaming Pakistan for harbouring Haqqani. The operation in North Waziristan should be conducted not because the Americans so desire, but to eliminate the sanctuaries of terrorists where young boys are being brainwashed to kill innocent Pakistanis. The terrorists have to be denied space and areas where they are settled and have established training camps, planning centres and logistics areas. They should be on the run so that their capability is diluted.

 

 

Published in The Express Tribune, June 16th, 2011.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Of khaki and mufti</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/188799/of-khaki-and-mufti-2</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/188799/of-khaki-and-mufti-2#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Tue, 14 Jun 11 17:15:02 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[editorial]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Pakistan]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=188799</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[A break with the US might go in favour of al Qaeda’s plans to impose a ‘nuclearised’ theocracy on Pakistan.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[Islamabad has quietly witnessed another extremely important meeting — for the first time at such a level — between the entire top brass of the Pakistan Armed Forces and the prime minister and president, representing the civilian setup of the country. According to reports, the meeting was attended by the military leadership comprising Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee General Khalid Shameem Wynne, Chief of Army Staff General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, Chief of Naval Staff Admiral Noman Bashir, Chief of Air Staff Air Chief Marshal Rao Qamar Suleman and Defence Secretary Lt-Gen (retd) Syed Athar Ali.

Since the one-line official statement about the meeting revealed nothing, the media excusably went on a guessing spree, starting with a civil-military resolve ‘not to make any compromise on national security matters’. This was followed by other obvious topics: Better coordination between civilian and military institutions, the Abbottabad probe commission, investigations regarding the terrorist attack on the Mehran base and the new wave of terrorist attacks. Unofficial sources added more spice by saying: “The civilian and military leadership resolved to launch an operation against the terrorists to stem the new wave of attacks and decided not to accept any external pressure.”

The meeting took place at the Presidency, thus highlighting a dialogue between party and government on the one hand and the Pakistan military high command on the other. The ultimate guess, given the general reading into the recent American visits to Islamabad, was that the military wanted to reaffirm the ‘national consensus’ on not operating against the terrorists in North Waziristan on the bidding of the US. Earlier, a separate statement from the meeting of the corps commanders had already pointed to the said consensus by reiterating the army’s resolve to go into North Waziristan at a time of its own choosing and opposing the operation of US drones in the area. What was the need to go through the same exercise again?

The meeting was attended by chiefs of all the arms of the military, including the naval chief, who has come under particular pressure after the al Qaeda attack on PNS Mehran in Karachi. The meeting also featured the air chief, who had reportedly offered to counter the drones operating in Pakistani territory with an air force response. General Wynne — who has been taking the current US-Pakistan flurry of contradictions in his stride — was there too. President Asif Ali Zardari and Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani have already endorsed the ‘charter’ of ‘reassessing relations with the US’ awarded to the Pakistan Army by a unanimous resolution of a joint session of the parliament. What more could they have told the top brass except that they oppose the US policy in the region and are against the US-proposed operation in North Waziristan?

It is difficult to say what exactly transpired but other possible topics are: A discussion of the anti-army statements issuing from all quarters in the political community and the media. The top brass could have gone through the contents of the recent high-level meetings with the Americans which have not gone well, including the one with CIA Director Leon Panetta where, according to Time Magazine, Mr Panetta accused Pakistan of colluding with pro-Afghan Taliban militants in the tribal areas. The military leadership may have pointed to other ‘irregularities’, such as a recent statement by a Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa minister that Pakistan alone can’t fight the terrorists and that it must act together with the US to defeat them. Next year, the Americans are going to start leaving Afghanistan. Unlike Pakistan, where policy is stuck obsessively on India, Washington is going to change tack and show flexibility, which some have already called defeat; but it may pan out negatively for Pakistan even if Islamabad and Kabul move closer and Pakistan can retain some semblance of leverage or control over the Afghan Taliban under Mullah Omar. It is from the inside that Pakistan is getting defeated through al Qaeda’s terrorism. From Nek Muhammad to Baitullah Mehsud and Ilyas Kashmiri, Pakistan has been able to tackle its tormentors only with America’s help. Hence, a break with the US might go in favour of al Qaeda’s plans to impose a ‘nuclearised’ theocracy on Pakistan.

Published in The Express Tribune, June 15th, 2011.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>In rare meeting, military brass seeks president,  PM’s support</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/188608/in-rare-meeting-military-brass-seeks-president-pm%e2%80%99s-support</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/188608/in-rare-meeting-military-brass-seeks-president-pm%e2%80%99s-support#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Tue, 14 Jun 11 03:09:05 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[irfan.ghauri]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Pakistan]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=188608</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Armed forces’ delegation includes all three service chiefs, CJCSC and defence secretary.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[Amid increasing domestic and international pressure on the armed forces, Pakistan’s top political and entire military leadership huddled in Islamabad on Monday for a rare, and unannounced, gathering – in which the armed forces are said to have sought the government’s support on a number of issues.


The Presidency only issued a terse one-line statement following the meeting, saying that “the security situation was discussed”, while the Inter-Services Public Relations – the media wing of the armed forces – refrained from commenting on the high-profile meeting.

Given its timing and profile, the meeting was far from routine.

Sources claimed that the political and security implications of a possible North Waziristan military operation, which is being demanded by the US, came under discussion.

According to sources, the chiefs of the armed forces have asked the civilian leadership to take up the North Waziristan operation in parliament, similar to the time they launched a military operation in Swat two years back. They  also discussed the political, monetary and security implications of such an operation, they added.

Some security analysts believe that Pakistan might opt to go for a ‘targeted’ operation in North Waziristan instead of an all-out assault, but only after the armed forces reach general consensus and political backing from the civilian leadership.

In the aftermath of the Abbottabad operation, back to back visits by US civilian and military leaders started to build pressure on Pakistan to launch a decisive operation in North Waziristan Agency, believed to be a bastion of militants hurting the international forces in Afghanistan.

CIA Director Leon Panetta’s brief visit to Pakistan over the weekend followed yet another sharp downturn in US and Pakistan relations when he shared ‘evidence of suspected collusion with pro-Afghan Taliban militants in the tribal areas’ with Pakistan’s senior military leaders, according to Time magazine.

Criticism of armed forces

Also discussed were measures to curtail the growing criticism of the armed forces by different quarters internally.

Political forces, most prominently the Pakistan Muslim League-N (PML-N) and its chief Nawaz Sharif, as well as civil society have launched scathing criticism of the security forces inside and outside parliament.

Monday’s meeting came on the heels of an unusually extensive statement issued after a military commanders meeting last week, calling for an end to a ‘slander campaign’ against the country’s armed forces by ‘unidentified elements’.

The security establishment is also concerned about the growing criticism by some political forces, media and civil society to defame the armed forces and wants the civilian government to come forward to defend them against this criticism.

The Osama bin Laden debacle, the attack on PNS Mehran in Karachi and the killing of some innocent civilians at the hands of paramilitary forces served as a catalyst for criticism against the armed forces internally.

Those attending the meeting with President Asif Ali Zardari and Prime Minister Syed Yousaf Raza Gilani included Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee General Khalid Shameem Wynne, Chief of Army Staff General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, Chief of Naval Staff Admiral Noman Bashir, Chief of Air Staff Air Chief Marshal Rao Qamar Suleman and Secretary Defence Lt Gen (retd) Syed Athar Ali.

Published in The Express Tribune, June 14th, 2011.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Intelligence matters</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/188096/intelligence-matters</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/188096/intelligence-matters#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Mon, 13 Jun 11 16:39:02 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[editorial]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Pakistan]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=188096</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[CIA chief, Panetta seems to have realised that the military is the true power in the country.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[CIA Director Leon Panetta’s brief visit to Pakistan follows a sharp downturn in relations between Pakistan and the US since the Raymond Davis saga and the US raid which killed Osama bin Laden. Panetta only met Chief of Army Staff Ashfaq Parvez Kayani and ISI head Ahmed Shuja Pasha during his sudden, unscheduled trip, and it appears he swiftly left after being unable to secure any improvements in the troubled relationship. Panetta, unlike during past visits, did not pay even courtesy calls to the president and prime minister. He seems to have realised and is making it clear to all observers that the military is the true power in the country. And it is the military that is taking an increasingly hard line against the US, demanding the removal of all American military forces and CIA agents. Reports indicate that the military has also refused offers of joint operations by the two countries to kill ‘high-value’ militants.

As troubling as the fracture in the relationship is, what is even more disturbing is further evidence of possible Pakistani duplicity in the war against militancy. A few weeks ago, the CIA provided Pakistan with satellite imagery of two bomb-making facilities in North Waziristan that were supplying weaponry to the Afghan Taliban. When the Pakistan Army invaded the facility, it turned out that all the militants had mysteriously vanished. The CIA believes that the militants were tipped off by elements in the military. Although the proof may be circumstantial, it does deepen the mistrust between the two sides and will lead to greater pressure on Pakistan to launch a massive operation in North Waziristan.

Before relations with the US, who it should not be forgotten provide us the aid that keeps us financially afloat, deteriorate any further, the army has to decide whose side it’s on. It can no longer make distinctions between the Afghan Taliban and the Pakistani Taliban, fighting the latter while ignoring the presence of the former. In protesting our violating sovereignty, we never seem to notice that the Afghan Taliban are also operating with impunity in a foreign country. It is their disregard for our sovereignty that we need to fight.

Published in The Express Tribune, June 14th, 2011.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Abbottabad raid: JUI-F opposes PML-N demand for independent panel</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/187921/abbottabad-raid-jui-f-opposes-pml-n-demand-for-independent-panel</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/187921/abbottabad-raid-jui-f-opposes-pml-n-demand-for-independent-panel#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Mon, 13 Jun 11 03:48:47 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[qamar.zaman]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Pakistan]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=187921</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Maulana Fazlur Rehman says a commission will only complicate things further.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[The chief of his own faction of the Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam (JUI-F) has opposed the demand by the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) for an independent commission to investigate the May 2 killing of al Qaeda godfather Osama bin Laden in a US commando operation in Abbottabad.


“In my opinion, it is not a wise move and will only complicate things further,” Maulana Fazlur Rehman told the media after a meeting of his party’s Central Executive Committee (CEC) here on Sunday. “It’s unlikely the government will set up a commission because accountability  of the army and intelligence agencies will be difficult for it,” he added.

The PML-N had rejected a commission announced by Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani earlier this month, saying that leader of the opposition Chaudhry Nisar Ali Khan was not consulted on the composition of the commission.

On May 13, a joint closed-door session of parliament had adopted a resolution calling upon the government to set up an independent commission to investigate the Abbottabad raid.

Though the military has already quashed speculation about a full-scale operation in North Waziristan, the cleric said, if launched, such an operation would have catastrophic consequences. He also criticised the government’s counter-terror policy, saying that, if not changed, the rulers would be responsible for more bloodshed.

The JUI-F chief also censured the PML-N for its plans to take the issue of new opposition leader in the Senate to the Supreme Court. “Parliamentary matters must be settled in parliament,” he said. “The Supreme Court is not subservient to the PML-N that they approach it for petty issues.”

Senate Chairman Farooq Neak had notified JUI-F’s Maulana Ghafoor Haideri leader of the opposition in the Senate after the resignation of Senator Waseem Sajjad.

He said that the JUI-F had support of majority opposition lawmakers in the upper house of parliament, therefore, its mandate should be acknowledged.

Earlier the CEC of the Maulana’s party sought to revive the now defunct alliance of politico-religious parties, called the Muttahida Majlis-e-Amal (MMA).

“The JUI-F will invite politico-religious leaders and persuade them to make the MMA operational,” JUI-F Secretary General Maulana Ghafoor Haideri told The Express Tribune.

The CEC had discussed a raft of issues, including delay in the constitution of an independent commission to probe the Abbottabad raid, terrorist attack on PNS Mehran in Karachi, controversy over the appointment of opposition leader in the Senate and the newly established Pak-Afghan joint commission.

Asked about the controversy over his nomination as opposition leader in the Senate, Haideri said that the CEC has condemned the PML-N’s approach as “undemocratic, unethical and unconstitutional”.

Chairman Farooq Naek has agreed to review his decision, but Haideri said, “Neither the PML-N can challenge the appointment in the Supreme Court nor can the Senate chairman review his decision.”

Published in The Express Tribune, June 13th, 2011.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Responding to critics: Divert military aid to economy, says Kayani</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/185552/government-utilising-major-share-of-csf-funds-gen-kayani</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/185552/government-utilising-major-share-of-csf-funds-gen-kayani#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Fri, 10 Jun 11 02:23:08 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[express]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Pakistan]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=185552</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Relations with US needs to be reassessed says Kayani while calling for an end to drone strikes and CIA operations.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[In what is being seen as a possible reaction to rising criticism over the army’s role in national affairs, Army Chief General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani said that economic rather than military aid was essential for Pakistan and recommended to the government that US funds meant for military assistance be diverted towards economic aid.


At the same time, military commanders lamented the criticism that was being heaped on them and hinted at putting an end to it.

In an unusually detailed statement issued after a corps commanders’ meeting headed by Kayani here on Thursday, the top brass tried to respond to critics by speaking out on issues including the North Waziristan operation, relations with the US, defence spending and democracy. While the military rarely makes public statements on such matters, increasingly clamorous public criticism following the Abbottabad incident appears to have compelled military commanders to take this route to soothe public anger.

The military commanders also accused unspecified ‘quarters’ of deliberately maligning the country’s armed forces.

The statement issued by the Inter-Services Public Relations (ISPR) said military  commanders were given a comprehensive briefing on internal security, terrorism, role of the media, society and military-level relationship with US.

While reviewing the internal security situation, the participants voiced their concern on the blowback of the Abbottabad incident “which has resulted in the upsurge in terrorism and consequent loss of innocent lives.”

The military acknowledged that law enforcement agencies needed to be more focused and proactive and said the army will extend all possible support.

On criticism

The military, however, expressed its resentment over being subjected to criticism, especially in the public sphere.

The commanders “noted with regret that despite briefing the joint session of parliament and deferring the ultimate findings to the commission appointed by the government, some quarters, because of their perceptual biases, were trying to deliberately run down the armed forces and army in particular.”

“This is an effort to drive a wedge between the army, different organs of the state and more seriously, the people of Pakistan,” the statement added.

Gen Kayani sought public support for the military “to confront present challenges.”

“It is critical to stand united as a nation. Any effort to create divisions between important institutions of the country is not in our national interest,” Kayani added.

In a thinly veiled threat, the participants agreed to put an end to ‘this unfortunate trend.’

Relationship with the US

The military has reassessed its relations with US in view of the joint parliamentary resolution passed last month, the statement said.

“The army has drastically cut down the strength of US troops stationed in Pakistan,” it added. The statement said that the army never accepted any training assistance from US except for training on newly inducted weapons and some training assistance for the Frontier Corps.

“Even that has ceased now,” the statement said.

Gen Kayani also spoke on the US assistance utilised by the army since Islamabad joined hands with Washington to fight terrorism after 9/11.

He said under the Coalition Support Fund, only $8.6 billion, against an expected total sum of $13 billion, has been provided by the US to the government of Pakistan.

The army has received only $1.4 billion of that over the last ten years, he said, adding that the navy and the air force have also received a relatively smaller amount.

The remaining $6 billion, the army chief said, have been utilised by the government for budgetary support.

The meeting was also informed about the extent of intelligence cooperation with US and the participants “decided to share intelligence strictly on the basis of reciprocity and complete transparency.”

“It has been clearly put across to US intelligence officials that no intelligence agency can be allowed to carry out independent operation on our soil,” the statement said.

The military also strongly opposed US drone attacks saying predators strikes were not acceptable under any circumstances.

North Waziristan

Gen Kayani also ruled out the possibility of any move to launch a full-scale military operation in North Waziristan at this stage.

“The army was following a well thought out campaign plan and is under no pressure to carry out operations at a particular time. Future operations, as and when undertaken, will be with political consensus,” he said.

But in order to address America’s concerns, Kayani called on tribesmen of North Waziristan to drive out all foreigners from their soil.

“It was wrong, in principle, to allow others to use our land for fighting their battles. This must not be allowed,” he said.

According to the statement, the army leadership also “reaffirmed its resolve to continue supporting the democratic system without preference to any particular political party.”

Published in The Express Tribune, June 10th, 2011.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Drone strike kills 5 in South Waziristan</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/182073/drone-strike-kills-7-in-south-waziristan</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/182073/drone-strike-kills-7-in-south-waziristan#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Fri, 03 Jun 11 20:28:43 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[afp]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Pakistan]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=182073</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Identities of those killed in the attack were not immediately known,]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[A US drone strike targeting a militant compound killed five rebels in Pakistan's tribal badlands near the Afghan border on Friday, security officials said.

The strike took place in Ghwakhwa area, 10 kilometres west of Wana, the main town of South Waziristan tribal region, where the military launched an operation two years ago.

"A US drone fired three missiles on a militant compound, killing five rebels," a senior security official in the area told AFP.

Another security official confirmed the strike and casualties but said the identities of those killed in the attack were not immediately known.

Friday's attack was the ninth to be reported in Pakistan's tribal areas, close to the Afghan border, since US commandos killed terror mastermind Osama bin Laden in a raid in the Pakistani city of Abbottabad on May 2.

The Pakistani parliament has called for an end to US drone strikes and said there must be no repeat of the operation that killed bin Laden, despite the fact that President Barack Obama has reserved the right to act again.

The drone strikes are hugely unpopular among the general public, who are deeply opposed to the government's alliance with Washington, and inflame anti-US feeling, which has heightened further after the Bin Laden raid.

But US officials insist that the missile strikes have severely weakened Al-Qaeda's leadership and killed high-value targets including the former Pakistani Taliban chief Baitullah Mehsud.

Missile attacks doubled in the area last year, with more than 100 drone strikes killing over 670 people in 2010, compared with 45 strikes that killed 420 in 2009, according to an AFP tally.

Most of the attacks have been concentrated in North Waziristan, the most notorious Afghan Taliban and Al-Qaeda bastion in Pakistan, where the United States wants the Pakistan military to launch a ground offensive as soon as possible.

But Lieutenant General Asif Yasin Malik, the commander supervising all military operations in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province, told reporters on Wednesday "We will undertake operation in North Waziristan when we want to. We will undertake such an operation when it is in our national interest militarily," the general said, describing North Waziristan as calm and peaceful as it was weeks ago.

The strike comes hours after Finance Minister Hafeez Sheikh presented the 2011-12 budget in Parliament amidst harsh criticism from the opposition.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Operation in North Waziristan (II)</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/181678/operation-in-north-waziristan-ii</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/181678/operation-in-north-waziristan-ii#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Fri, 03 Jun 11 18:50:35 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[letter.]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Pakistan]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=181678</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Perhaps another alternative to a military thrust is to start a political process.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[This with reference to Khalid Munir’s article of June 3 titled “Opening another front in FATA”. Perhaps another alternative to a military thrust is to start a political process in Fata with a view to making it a province with its own elected assembly and representatives and so on. Thereafter, military action can be positively reinforced by working in cohesion with local political forces, instead of having to rely on local warlords.

Mazhar Rasool

Published in The Express Tribune, June 4th, 2011.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Operation in North Waziristan</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/181679/operation-in-north-waziristan-2</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/181679/operation-in-north-waziristan-2#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Fri, 03 Jun 11 18:49:38 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[letter.]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Pakistan]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=181679</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[I would like to ask the writer some questions.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[This is with reference to Shaukat Qadir’s article of June 3 titled “No need for operation in NWA”. I would like to ask the writer some questions. 1) Is it all right to allow non-state actors such as the Haqqanis to rule what is part of Pakistan? 2) Does the government of Pakistan have no responsibility towards Pakistani citizens who are living in the area where the Haqqanis hold sway? 3) What is to be done about reports which by all accounts suggest that North Waziristan is being used to launch attacks into Afghanistan, given that Pakistan is not at war with Afghanistan or Isaf? 4) What about training camps set up in North Waziristan, which captured would-be suicide bombers have pointed to? Is it acceptable that they be allowed to continue to operate? 5) Does the writer deny that when a military operation happened in South Waziristan, many Tehreek-i-Taliban Pakistan leaders and fighters fled to North Waziristan and are still there? 6) What about the network of smuggling, kidnapping and other criminal actions which go on in the region? Should they be allowed to continue? 7) If all is well in North Waziristan, why do we have 30,000 troops deployed there? As a nation, have we become so weak that our ‘interests’ lie in protecting militants? 9) Shouldn’t the militants in North Waziristan be seen as criminals to whom we have ceded our sovereignty? 10) Will the writer or anyone in the establishment explain how groups on Pakistani soil are allowed to have their own militias?

Nadir El-Edroos

 

Published in The Express Tribune, June 4th, 2011.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Cost of being a frontline state: $68b</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/181426/cost-of-being-a-frontline-state-68b</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/181426/cost-of-being-a-frontline-state-68b#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Fri, 03 Jun 11 02:37:40 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[express]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Pakistan]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=181426</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[2010-11 losses are the highest since Pakistan became the frontline state in the war against terrorism.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[While pressure to launch an operation in North Waziristan mounts, the latest economic survey reveals that Pakistan has already suffered almost $68 billion (Rs5.1 trillion) in losses – equivalent to almost half of the country’s total debt – on account of being a frontline state in the war on terror.


The damage to the social fabric of society in addition to that, is unquantifiable.

In financial year 2010-11, Pakistan lost $17.83 billion (Rs1.528 trillion), roughly equivalent to this year’s tax target, reveals the Economic Survey of Pakistan.

The 2010-11 losses are the highest in any given year since Pakistan became the frontline state in global war against terrorism.

These losses do not include the damages on account of a recent attack on Pakistan Navy base in Karachi, destroying two surveillances aircraft, the P3C-Orion.

The figures have been compiled by an inter-ministerial committee of the ministries of foreign affairs, finance, interior, commerce and representatives of Balochistan and Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa provinces – the worst-hit federating units.

“Since 2006, the war has spread like a contagion into settled areas of Pakistan that has so far cost the country more than 35,000 citizens, 3,500 security personnel, destruction of infrastructure, internal migration, nose-diving of production and growing unemployment,” notes the survey.

It adds: “the war not only caused serious damage to economy but also to the social fabric of Pakistan.”

Inadequate compensation

In contrast to $67.9 billion in losses both direct and indirect, the United States has so far given $13 billion in aid to Pakistan, of which almost $9 billion are military disbursements and $4 billion in net civilian aid.

The total amount is lesser than what Pakistan suffered in losses in fiscal year 2010-11 alone.

“In the current financial year, the US has disbursed $745 million of Coalition Support Fund (CSF) and the government is expecting another tranche before end of June,” said Secretary Finance Dr Waqar Masood.

The government expects to receive $1.45 billion this year on account of CSF – money that it has already spent while rendering military services and is now seeking reimbursements for.

 

 

 

Published in The Express Tribune, June 3rd, 2011.

The full text of The Economic Survey 2010-2011 can be viewed here.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Opening another front in FATA</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/181055/opening-another-front-in-fata</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/181055/opening-another-front-in-fata#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Thu, 02 Jun 11 21:53:58 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[khalid.munir]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Pakistan]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=181055</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Pakistan has suffered due to activities in N. Waziristan, is it wise to open another front because the US wants it?]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[What happened on May 2 is a classic example of how individuals and nations perceive events differently. Pakistanis thought that as their airspace was violated — an act of war according to international law — the US would at least apologise for what it did. However, the latter has a different perception of the event. For the Americans, their stand regarding the presence of al Qaeda’s leadership in Pakistan was finally vindicated. As a result, they have started pressurising Pakistan with their old demand of carrying out an operation in North Waziristan to flush out foreign militants residing there — to which the military has now responded by saying that it will launch it, if at all, at a time of its own choosing. America attributes the slow progress it has made in Afghanistan, in large part to North Waziristan. This is factually incorrect, given that many of its failures in Afghanistan are of its own making.

Pakistan entered into a secret agreement with the elders of the Utmanzai tribe of North Waziristan in 2008. Since its signing, an uneasy calm prevails in the agency. Violations of the reported clauses have been quite evident, yet Pakistan has been ignoring them. Terrorists caught elsewhere have confessed to receiving training in North Waziristan — though the agreement forbids that. However, Pakistan knew that foreigners were residing there when the agreement was signed. A clause reportedly puts the onus of making them leave the area on the tribes of the agency, but this overestimates their power eject these elements. We have examples in other areas, where villages and entire communities were helpless against a few organised Taliban members. The agreement also stipulates that the tribes will not allow their territory to be used for activities across the border. How this will be done has not been explained and those signing the agreement did not know the ground realities. The collective responsibility system of the tribal area had vanished much before that and eventually Pakistan lost control of the area due to Governor Ali Jan Orakzai’s agreements.

There was an operation but it took place in South Waziristan and forced many Taliban to flee to North Waziristan. Mir Ali and Miranshah are now infested with militants who escaped from other agencies or settled areas when operations were carried out — another violation. Though Pakistan has suffered a lot due to the activities in North Waziristan, is it wise to open another front just because the US wants it? There are two deviating views about this. Carrying out a full-scale operation in North Waziristan will be a hard fought battle, unlike in South Waziristan, because now the Taliban do not have a safe place to go. Presently, South Waziristan is already under army control, Orakzai is not fully under control and Tirah Valley is the hub of activities of the Tehreek-i-Taliban Pakistan. The Taliban will either have to fight in the north or shift to Tirah. Tirah means the outskirts of Peshawar. Thus, the operation in North Waziristan may result in increased militant activities in and around Peshawar. Though these areas have an adequate number of troops, yet, in this type of terrain, troops are never sufficient. So starting an operation means that almost the whole of Fata, from Wana, in the southwest of South Waziristan to Khar in Bajaur, could flare up. The second option is a limited, targeted operation against specific persons, or the Haqqani network. This raises many questions. Are we aware of their hideouts? If we have knowledge of their whereabouts, then what stopped us from taking action against them? Also, there are vast Pashtun-dominated areas in Afghanistan and Nato is still struggling to gain control over them.

Two days ago, the army removed or relocated the checkposts on the Bannu-Mirali road, which has created panic in North Waziristan. People fear that a South Waziristan or Malakand style operation is in the offing. Afraid of staying there but unhappy at the prospect of leaving the area and becoming IDPs has got everyone worried. The IDPs of South Waziristan are still reluctant to go back home. In this summer heat, living in tents in the plains of Bannu and Lakki Marwat will be a terrible experience. This is the human price which must be considered before launching any operation.

Published in The Express Tribune, June 3rd, 2011.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Media and North Waziristan (II)</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/181095/media-and-north-waziristan-ii</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/181095/media-and-north-waziristan-ii#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Thu, 02 Jun 11 17:49:07 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[letter.]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Pakistan]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=181095</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[There is absolutely no reason to go after people who pose no threat to Pakistan.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[The military’s denial of reports that it is launching an operation in North Waziristan should be met with a sigh of relief. There is absolutely no reason to go after people who pose no threat to Pakistan and open yet another front for no reason.

SRH Hashmi

Published in The Express Tribune, June 3rd, 2011.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Exit strategy: Govt is not fond of military action, says Gilani</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/180667/exit-strategy-govt-is-not-fond-of-military-action-says-gilani</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/180667/exit-strategy-govt-is-not-fond-of-military-action-says-gilani#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Thu, 02 Jun 11 03:12:14 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Pakistan]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=180667</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[PM says government will not take dictation from anybody about N Waziristan.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[The government is not fond of military action and wants to have an exit strategy, Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani said on Wednesday.

The government, he said, was not taking dictation from anybody, “but it will take action when its writ is challenged [in North Waziristan]”. “We will decide if there is any need for [an operation in North Waziristan.] We will not meddle unnecessarily,” the premier said.

Speaking in a programme on the state-run Pakistan Television, Prime Minister Gilani said the government is ready to hold dialogue with militants if they disband their outfits and surrender their weapons before political agents in their respective areas

“But if the [militants] challenge the government’s writ, target innocent people and attack cities, public property, installations, police stations and railways, the government will take action against them,” he added.

According to him, the government was following a policy of dialogue, development and deterrence to bring the militants into the national mainstream.

About the level of trust deficit between Pakistan and US after Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s visit to Pakistan, the prime minister said that both the countries have strategic partnership, adding, “there are ups and down in our relations”.

Highlighting the government’s determination to take action against terrorists, he said that the government would not allow anyone to use the country’s soil for acts of terrorism. Action, he said, would be taken against foreigners who “are living uninvited in the country”.

“We will free Pakistan of terrorism,” he said, adding it was not in the national interest to “have sympathy for Osama bin Laden”, who was responsible for the deaths of 36,000 Pakistani citizens, 5,000 soldiers.

Answering a question, the prime minister said that the country’s armed forces, federal and provincial governments, intelligence agencies and police “are collectively responsible for…protecting the life and property of the people”.

The government, he said, was working to chalk out a “comprehensive strategy” to pre-empt acts of terrorism and provide fool-proof security.

The Prime Minister said the Mehran Naval base incident was a matter of concern for everybody. Gilani said that a departmental inquiry into the incident was under way and a joint investigation team had also been constituted.

He said that during the meeting of the defence committee of the cabinet, the naval chief had called for the formation of an independent commission, which could be formed after necessary consultation.

Urging people to avoid targeting any particular institution or country before the completion of the investigation, he said: “We should not jump to the conclusion.”

Published in The Express Tribune, June 2nd, 2011.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Waziristan operation: ‘Media hype’ dismissed</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/180107/no-operation-in-north-waziristan</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/180107/no-operation-in-north-waziristan#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Thu, 02 Jun 11 02:43:38 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[zia.khan]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Pakistan]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=180107</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Pakistan trying to make the US believe that Haqqanis are ‘reconcilable’, called the operation 'far from...]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[Pakistan is still trying to convince the United States that the Haqqani network, the deadliest of all Afghan militant groups which is allegedly based in the North Waziristan tribal region, is ‘reconcilable’ and going after it at this stage will be of no use.


Contrary to media reports and a statement by the top US military commander, Pakistan’s military says it has no immediate plans to launch a full-scale offensive in the region which is considered the premier Taliban and al Qaeda fortress along the Afghan border.

This was confirmed by a top Pakistani military commander and separately by officials from the foreign ministry at a closed-door briefing for the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

In the fallout from Osama bin Laden’s killing in Abbottabad, US officials are said to have increased pressure on Islamabad to mount an offensive in the region – home to an assortment of militant groups including the fearsome Haqqani network. Earlier this week US Joint Chief of Staff Admiral Mike Mullen said that Pakistan’s military had planned an operation in North Waziristan.

But Corps Commander Peshawar Lt-Gen Asif Yasin Malik, who supervises all military operations in Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa and adjacent tribal regions, said: “We will undertake operation in North Waziristan when we want to.”

“There has been a lot of media hype about the operation,” Malik told journalists in the Mohamad Gat area of the Mohmand Agency, where security forces have been fighting homegrown Taliban since January this year. The journalists were flown to the region by the military to show off apparent progress in the operation.

“We will undertake such an operation when it is in our national interest militarily,” he said, describing North Waziristan as “calm and peaceful as it was weeks ago”.

He said the military was focused on maintaining an already ‘stable’ environment to undertake ‘developmental activity’ in North Waziristan, and confirmed reports that the Razmak cadet college in the area had been reopened.

The United States and its Western allies attribute Pakistan’s reluctance to go after the Haqqanis to its desire to use the network to protect its interests in the post-war Afghanistan.

But Gen Malik sought to quash this notion. “For the Army there is no difference between the Haqqanis, Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) or the Afghan Taliban. The Army acts against all those militants who are a threat to Pakistan,” he added.

However, he revealed that the Army had planned a full-scale operation in the Kurram tribal district, which borders North Waziristan and has become increasingly violent amid an influx of Taliban fighters. An operation in Kurram would be significant as it would box-in Afghan Taliban militants in North Waziristan, facilitating any future action there.

Government officials are also seeking to deny media reports about North Waziristan operation. “The government has not made any commitment with the US on Waziristan operation,” a senator who attended Wednesday’s briefing quoted a top diplomatic official as telling the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

The committee’s chairperson Salim Saifullah told reporters that the government representatives informed the panel that Pakistan alone would decide whether or not to launch a military operation in Waziristan. Security officials here, however, do not entirely rule out a ‘targeted operation’ in North Waziristan.  They told The Express Tribune on condition of anonymity that the primary target of an offensive, if any, would be “white al Qaeda and their Arab and local handlers. But the Haqqanis be spared at this stage,” said an official.

“We have been trying to convince the US that the Haqqani network can be brought to the negotiating table,” said another official. During the recent visit of US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Admiral Mullen, Pakistan made its position very clear that it could not afford to open another war front, he added.

Also the country’s military establishment believes that the Haqqanis are not posing a direct threat to Pakistan’s interests, therefore going after them will have repercussions, a military official told The Express Tribune.

There have been reports that around 500 Western militants, almost half of them of German origin, were undergoing training with various groups based in the agency.

The presence of a small group of American militants, led by Abu Ghaddan, has also been reported many times. Ilyas Kashmiri, the chief of al Qaeda’s 313 brigade, is allegedly supervising the training for these jihadis who can hit back in the countries of their origin.

Some Arabs including Abu Akasha al-Iraqi and a Saudi national Abu Yaya are allegedly coordinating between the local groups and al Qaeda’s recruits from the West. 

Published in The Express Tribune, June 2nd, 2011.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Finally, an operation in North Waziristan</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/179530/finally-an-operation-in-north-waziristan</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/179530/finally-an-operation-in-north-waziristan#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Tue, 31 May 11 19:48:50 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[editorial]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Pakistan]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=179530</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[North Waziristan has done more to destroy Pakistan and create the psychology of defeat in its population.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[According to several news reports, the Pakistan Army has finally decided to carry out an operation in North Waziristan to flush out the various terrorist outfits there. It will be perceived by many that the military decided on the operation under pressure from the US, but that may not be strictly true: The position of the GHQ was that while it did not rule out the operation, it would decide its timing in the light of prevailing conditions.

It is not true that public opinion was totally opposed to this operation: A number of hardline, usually anti-US, analysts too had advised it each time the Taliban struck against military targets in Pakistan. It is also true that the US was insistent on this operation because the terrorists used North Waziristan as a sanctuary from where they attacked across the Durand Line to kill Isaf-Nato personnel.

In Pakistan public opinion has been united on the issue of sovereignty. However, this stand has in recent months become untenable when one considers the fact that North Waziristan has been used as a launching pad for terrorism and the state is reluctant to extend its writ there. The international community was right behind the US when it struck North Waziristan with drone attacks, thus weakening Pakistan’s rejection of them. Almost 90 per cent of these attacks have targeted the sanctuary of this tribal agency and according to a military commander of the area, most of those killed have been militants.

Pakistan’s misplaced label of ‘national honour’ was exposed when the world looked at the elements that killed Pakistan’s military personnel and innocent citizens under plans made in North Waziristan. The presence of foreigners has especially weakened Pakistan’s policy of ‘abstention’ and has made it look like a ‘double-gamer’ rather than a ‘game-changer’ in the war against terrorism. It has given rise to a dangerous mass psychology in Pakistan of ‘loving tormentors’ and rejecting friends.

Intelligence reports say as many as 10,000 battle-hardened militants are ensconced in North Waziristan. There are Arabs, Uzbeks, Chechens, Indonesians, Tajiks and some European nationals affiliated with al Qaeda, while some Afghan terrorists such as the Haqqani network have, much of the world thinks, been used to target Indian installations in Afghanistan. Local tribal warlords like Hafiz Gul Bahadur and Maulvi Nazir, involved in dubious peace deals with the military that have been honoured more in the breach, have increasingly moved under the umbrella of al Qaeda.

It is said that Pakistan’s reason for delaying the operation in North Waziristan was logistical, that Pakistani troops were overstretched and that it was not possible to prevent the vast gathering of dangerous terrorists from fanning out into the rest of Pakistan after the operation was launched against them. This has simply increased the immunity of killers who destroy lives in the plains and then take refuge in North Waziristan. Instead of turning the people of Pakistan against the world, the military establishment should have leaned more effectively on international support against the heavy odds in the agency.

Doubts have proliferated. There are reports, also in recent days through WikiLeaks, about the Haqqani family being sheltered from drone attacks by being moved out of the agency to settled districts. The ‘confederation’ of the Taliban and other killers in North Waziristan has threatened to unleash a war against Pakistan if it is attacked, but the truth is that the terrorist headquarters located there has spared no stratagem to destroy Pakistan, including the poisoning of the public’s mind.

North Waziristan has done more to destroy Pakistan and create the psychology of defeat in its population than any other place in the world. The forthcoming operation will need global support and Pakistan can use it to break out of the isolationism unleashed by its unworkable unanimous parliamentary resolutions. Also, going after the terrorists is ultimately going to be in Pakistan’s own interest and it is about time that it stopped differentiating between ‘good’ and ‘bad’ Taliban.

Published in The Express Tribune, June 1st, 2011.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Pakistan to launch operation in North Waziristan: Report</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/178706/pakistan-to-launch-operation-in-north-waziristan-report</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/178706/pakistan-to-launch-operation-in-north-waziristan-report#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Mon, 30 May 11 05:38:20 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[reuters]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Pakistan]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=178706</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[&quot;High placed sources&quot; quoted as saying airforce planes would soften up militant targets before ground operations.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[Pakistan has decided to launch an air and ground military offensive in North Waziristan, the main sanctuary for al Qaeda and Taliban on the border with Afghanistan, a report in The News said on Monday.

The United States has long demanded that Pakistan launch an offensive in the region to hunt down the Haqqani network, one of the deadliest Afghan militant factions fighting American troops in Afghanistan. Pakistan has been reluctant, but has come under intense US pressure to launch an operation there.

The News newspaper quoted unnamed "highly placed sources" as saying Pakistani airforce planes would soften up militant targets under the "targeted military offensive" before ground operations were launched.

The report said an understanding had been reached over the offensive during last week's visit by US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. A US embassy official said he was checking into the report. Pakistani officials were not immediately available for comment.

Pakistan has maintained that its troops were already too stretched fighting Pakistani Taliban insurgents in other parts of the northwest to tackle North Waziristan.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Between a rock and a hard place</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/169820/between-a-rock-and-a-hard-place</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/169820/between-a-rock-and-a-hard-place#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Mon, 16 May 11 18:18:30 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[editorial]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Pakistan]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=169820</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[It is not time for Pakistan to isolate itself in the world and follow ‘strategic defiance’.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[It would be fair to assume that the chairman of the US Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Senator John Kerry, during his visit to Islamabad would have delivered a tough message to Pakistan. On May 15, he said that ties between the US and Pakistan had reached a “critical phase” with mounting calls in America, especially Congress, to cut aid to Pakistan over the perception in the US that it was involved in sheltering Osama bin Laden, or at the very least, that it is not being forthcoming and truthful on the whole affair. In fact, the Massachusetts senator has already publicly said that members of the US Congress want a reduction in aid to Pakistan until it gets “serious” about fighting terrorism.

The senator also met the Pakistan army chief the same day and according to an ISPR press release, the latter “apprised” the former of the “intense feeling of rank and file of Pakistan Army on the Abbottabad incident”. Several US news organisations said, quoting a “Pakistani official” that the senator had “presented” the army chief with a “list of demands”. Although these have not been made public, one can make an educated guess that these would be related to the alleged presence of Mullah Omar in Pakistan and/or the reluctance of the military to, so far, launch an operation in North Waziristan.

The speculation in the media was that there would have been tough talk between them and with the prime minister and the president, whom he met on May 16. And this is being said for two reasons. One, that before leaving for Pakistan, Senator Kerry had told his American audience that he would press the Pakistani leadership to demonstrate “real commitment to fight terrorism”. And two, the military, fortified by a defiant joint resolution of parliament, would signal to the US that it was no longer a pushover. Is the ‘friendly senator’ here to deliver a stern, terminal warning which America delivered to Pakistan in 2001?

The fact is that today, the situation is different. The US has not gone to the UN on the matter of al Qaeda, although it may have the European Union behind it. Operation Geronimo was not in the same category as the Nato-Isaf assault on Afghanistan, and there are questions about the legality of what America has done. On the other hand, is Pakistan in a defiant posture today that it was not when General Musharraf submitted to the American threat in 2001 and the Foreign Office in Islamabad took the UN resolutions seriously? Has parliament given a charter of reckless diplomacy to those who handle our foreign policy?

There are two aspects to the reactions that have taken place on both sides after the Abbottabad operation. In the US, there is understandable outrage in the public which is dangerously undivided on the hard line the media is generally recommending. Yet, in the Obama Administration and among the Democrats in Congress, there is a word of caution on how to handle Pakistan after Osama’s death. This strand of thinking is of the view that care should be taken and Islamabad should not be coerced on this issue. It recommends a two-pillar strategy based on an ‘induced bilateral partnership and a reshaping of Pakistani perceptions of the regional strategic environment’.

Parallel to the dangerously uniform American public mind after Abbottabad, there is a Pakistani public consensus against America. When such uniformity of mind appears in democratic societies it is usually a dangerous sign, opening up possibilities of grand mistakes and blunders. The US faced it before attacking Iraq in 2003 and Pakistan is facing it now after the joint session of parliament emotionally placed the onus of defying America on the military. Yet, what appeared in the Pakistani press was not all in uniformity with public emotion. The questions asked related to the possibility of there being collusion from the Pakistani side in the provision of safe haven to Osama, endorsed by ex-army chief Pervez Musharraf who thought it was possible that some ‘rogue’ elements sheltered Osama without the high command knowing about it.

It is not time for Pakistan to isolate itself in the world and follow ‘strategic defiance’. Islamabad may find itself between a rock and in spite of that it must make the correct choice.

Published in The Express Tribune, May 17th, 2011.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>US should leave Pakistan, Afghanistan: Imran</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/161137/us-should-leave-pakistan-afghanistan-imran</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/161137/us-should-leave-pakistan-afghanistan-imran#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Tue, 03 May 11 21:10:06 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[express]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Pakistan]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=161137</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[PTI chief says 34,000 Pakistanis killed in ‘irrelevant’ war.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaaf (PTI) chief Imran Khan has said that the US should pull out its forces from Afghanistan and Pakistan as they have achieved their target of capturing or killing Osama bin Laden. After Bin Laden’s death, he added, America’s mission in the region is finished.


Khan observed this while addressing a press conference in Sukkur on Tuesday. He said that Pakistan has lost 34,000 of its citizens in this irrelevant war, while according to the government, the country has incurred a loss of Rs68 billion.

Commenting on Bin Laden’s death, Khan said that he had no idea how it was done. “Even our president wasn’t aware of the incident, and was informed about it by the US president,” Khan said.

Elaborating on the post-Bin Laden situation, he said that the Americans will think that Pakistani agencies were sheltering him, and they might pressure Pakistan to start an army operation in North Waziristan. He claimed that the government has lost credibility in the world community and that Pakistanis are not trusted abroad.

The former cricketer also lashed out at the rulers for what he said was lying to the nation on a number of issues, including drone attacks, the release of Raymond Davis, the [alleged] presence of Blackwater/Xe and CIA operators in Pakistan.

Imran Khan said that 45 per cent of the people on the electoral rolls were fake while 35 million young people have yet to be registered. However, he was optimistic that if the electoral rolls were corrected according to the NADRA database, his party would sweep the coming elections.

When asked about the formation of a coalition with any political party for the upcoming elections, he said that his party could join hands with the Sindh National Front, as its leader Mumtaz Ali Bhutto was not corrupt, even though they had a difference of ideologies.

Published in The Express Tribune, May 4th, 2011.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>PML-N lodges protest in NA against drone strikes, loadshedding</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/157871/pml-n-lodges-protest-in-na-against-drone-strikes-loadshedding</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/157871/pml-n-lodges-protest-in-na-against-drone-strikes-loadshedding#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Wed, 27 Apr 11 15:42:49 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[express]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Pakistan]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=157871</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[PML-N leader Khawaja Saad Rafiq demanded the government to take steps to stop drone attacks.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[Pakistan Muslim League -Nawaz (PML-N) lodged protests in the National Assembly on Wednesday against drone attacks, and also chanted slogans against load-shedding.

PML-N leader Khawaja Saad Rafiq demanded the government take steps to stop drone attacks. He also urged the government to provide a time frame to end loadshedding.

He also condemned the torture of journalists in Islamabad and said that strict action should be taken against those involved.

The drones mayhem

Earlier, Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaaf (PTI) Chairman, Imran Khan said that if drone strikes inside Pakistan do not stop within 30 days, protesters will block all NATO supply routes across Pakistan and consequently held a two day protest in Peshawar.

Several political parties have announced their support. Activists from the Jamaat Islami (JI), the Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam (JUI-F), the Pakistan Muslim League Quaid (PML-Q), the Pakistan Peoples Party Sherpao (PPP-S) have announced their support, as well as traders and lawyers groups.

Amidst a continuing diplomatic feud between Pakistan and the United States over a covert drone campaign by America’s top spy agency, fresh strikes by pilotless aircrafts continue to attack tribal areas of Pakistan.

Admiral Mullen is reported to have conveyed it to his counterpart that the drone attacks would be stopped only if the Pakistani military launched a full scale operation in North Waziristan, which is where most of the strikes are taking place.

But Army chief Gen Ashfaq Parvez Kayani says that the operation would be launched only if it is in Pakistan’s national interests.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Amidst strained Pak-US ties, drones strike again</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/154400/drone-strike-kills-25-in-tribal-region</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/154400/drone-strike-kills-25-in-tribal-region#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Sat, 23 Apr 11 01:40:25 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[manzoor.ali]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Pakistan]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=154400</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Pilotless drones kill 25, including women and children; tribal lawmakers’ jirga demands end to drone campaign.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[Amidst a continuing diplomatic feud between Pakistan and the United States over a covert drone campaign by America’s top spy agency, fresh strikes by pilotless aircraft killed at least 25 people, among them women and children, in a tribal region on Friday.


Military and civilian leaders in Pakistan have been asking Washington to call off its controversial drone operation, terming it counter-productive to efforts against militancy.

Friday’s drone strikes took place in the Mirali sub-division of the North Waziristan tribal agency where, the US believes, the Haqqani Network is headquartered.

The network, which is operated by veteran Afghan warlord Jalaluddin Haqqani and his sons, is blamed for offering a rear base to Taliban insurgents in neighbouring Afghanistan.

US pilotless aircraft targeted two compounds – a house and a nearby hujra (guesthouse) – in Hassankhel village in the Spinwam area, sources told The Express Tribune.

“The drones launched two successive attacks. In the first strike, they fired two missiles, and in the second they released three more,” a military official in the area said.

The pre-dawn attacks flattened the two compounds which belonged to a local tribesman, identified as Gul Sharif, who is said to be a supporter of Hafiz Gul Bahadur, the Taliban supreme commander in the North Waziristan Agency.

Hafiz Gul Bahadur is a descendent of Faqir of Ipi, a legendary fighter known for his innovative insurrection against British occupation in the 1930s and 1940s. Bahadur’s group is believed to be closely linked to the Haqqani Network.

Local security and administration officials in Miramshah, the headquarters of the North Waziristan Agency, said that at least 25 people were killed including three women and four children.

Another official said that the rest of the dead were local and foreign insurgents, but there was no report of any high value target and their nationalities were unknown.

Local sources told The Express Tribune that the dead were later buried in the Spinwam and Shawa areas.

The Spinwam area lies around 40 kilometres east of Miramshah –close to Pakistan’s border with Afghanistan.

The latest drone strikes came two days after US Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Mike Mullen openly blamed Pakistan’s premier spy agency, the ISI, of maintaining ties with the Haqqani Network – an allegation denied by Islamabad.

The attacks also come amid growing calls from Pakistani leadership for an end to the drone campaign. Admiral Mullen is reported to have conveyed it to his counterpart that the drone attacks would be stopped only if the Pakistani military launched a full scale operation in North Waziristan, which is where most of the strikes are taking place.

But Army chief Gen Ashfaq Parvez Kayani says that the operation would be launched only if it is in Pakistan’s national interests.

Friday’s drone strike was the second this month. On April 13, a drone strike killed at least six people in the Angoor Adda area of South Waziristan.

That attack coincided with a visit to Washington by ISI chief Lt-Gen Ahmed Shuja Pasha where he, according to the US media, had demanded an end to the drone campaign.

On Friday, a tribal lawmaker from the ruling Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) convened a jirga of lawmakers from tribal agencies to protest the drone attacks. Akhunzada Chitan, who belongs to Bajaur Agency, told the jirga participants at the Peshawar Press Club that the tribal people should unite against the campaign.

He criticised the government for its ‘silence’ on the killing of ‘innocent tribesmen’ by the Americans in the name of counter-terror operations.

“Militancy is sweeping across the country...the government will not tolerate US drone strikes elsewhere in the country,” he said.

Chitan said that he was receiving life threats for raising his voice against drone attacks. But, he added, nothing could stop him from speaking out against the extrajudicial killings by the US. He said another jirga of tribal lawmakers would be convened on May 5 which would devise a comprehensive strategy against the drone strikes.

Friday’s jirga was attended by leaders from all political parties, including the Pakistan Muslim League-Quaid, Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz, Jamiat Ulema-i-Islam (Fazl) and Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf (PTI).

PTI chief Imran Khan plans a two-day sit-in on the Nato supply route in Peshawar on April 23 and 24 to protest the US drone campaign. And Friday’s jirga called upon all tribesmen to join the sit-in irrespective of their political affiliations. The Muttahida Qaumi Movement (MQM) has also joined the political chorus against drone strikes as its chief Altaf Hussain called upon the political and civilian leadership to convene a roundtable conference to devise a strategy.

In a statement issued in Karachi on Friday, Altaf said all political parties, chiefs of armed forces and heads of national security institutions should be invited to such a conference and a decisive line of action should be adopted.

He also called for a referendum on the drone attacks to gauge public opinion on the issue. He was saddened by the Friday’s drone strike in North Waziristan.

Additional reporting by Irfan Aligi in Karachi

 

Published in The Express Tribune, April 23rd, 2011.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>End to US drone hits if military launches North Waziristan operation</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/154339/end-to-us-drone-hits-if-military-launches-north-waziristan-operation</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/154339/end-to-us-drone-hits-if-military-launches-north-waziristan-operation#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Fri, 22 Apr 11 02:47:50 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[express]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Pakistan]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=154339</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Mullen tells Kayani that the CIA-led Predator strikes would continue until Pakistan eliminates Haqqani network.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[The United States has linked the halting of the drone campaign in the tribal belt with the Pakistan military launching a full-scale operation against the influential Afghan insurgent group, the Haqqani network, allegedly based in North Waziristan.


US Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Mike Mullen told Army Chief General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani during marathon talks in Rawalpindi on Wednesday that the CIA-led Predator strikes would continue until Pakistan eliminates Haqqani network from its the tribal region, The Express Tribune has learnt.

However, officials privy to the discussions said General Kayani refused to give any assurance or timeline to the top American military commander on carrying out an all-out assault in North Waziristan.

“Our position is absolutely clear that the operation in North Waziristan will be launched only if it is in the national interest,” said a security official, who requested not to be identified.

The Pakistan’s security establishment has long been accused of having links with the Afghan Taliban particularly the influential Haqqani network.

The American officials say Pakistan’s reluctance to go after the deadliest Afghan militant outfit in its tribal belt is the main reason the Obama administration had to rely on unmanned drones to take out “high value” targets.

But General Kayani strongly dismissed such perceptions, saying the military is committed to defeating extremists.

“The COAS highlighted that Pakistan Army’s ongoing operations are a testimony of our national resolve to defeat terrorism,” said a statement issued by the Inter-Services Public Relations after Kayani’s meeting with Mullen.

“The COAS reinforced the government’s stance on drone strikes and emphasised that they not only undermine our national effort against terrorism, but turn public support against our efforts, which remains the key to success,” the statement added.

It said Kayani strongly rejects the negative propaganda of Pakistan not doing enough and Pakistan Army’s lack of clarity on the way forward.

His remarks came in response to Admiral Mullen’s blunt assessment that the ISI had a “longstanding relationship” with the Haqqani network.

Military sources say the army chief conveyed strong reservations to Mullen on his accusations against the Pakistan’s premier spy agency.

Despite tensions, the ISPR quoted Admiral Mullen as saying that he lauded the sacrifices and efforts of the people of Pakistan and its security forces, and reassured that security ties will not be allowed to unravel between the two armed forces.

The army chief acknowledged that the evolving Pak-US strategic relations are important for mutual long term objectives of comprehensive security in both the countries.

The relations between Washington and Islamabad have been under stress due to a series of incidents including the killing of two Pakistanis by a CIA contractor and drone attacks, one of which killed some 40 tribal elders.

The two countries have since been making serious efforts to defuse the tension. Mullen was the second top American military official who visited Islamabad in less than two weeks following a trip by US Central Command Chief General James Mattis on April 7.

In addition to these visits, the head of the Inter-Services Intelligence chief General Ahmed Shuja Pasha also flew to Washington for discussions with CIA Chief Leon Paneta last week.

Published in The Express Tribune, April 22nd, 2011.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Nurseries of hate</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/146894/nurseries-of-hate</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/146894/nurseries-of-hate#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Sun, 10 Apr 11 17:57:19 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[editorial]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Pakistan]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=146894</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Umar’s interview has put a human face on the destruction extremism has caused in Pakistan.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[The interview run by Express 24/7 with Umar Fidai, the 14-year-old would-be suicide bomber, was revealing for many reasons. It confirmed, for one, that there are a lot of foreigners among the militants. According to Umar, Arabs, Tajiks and Uzbeks are among those receiving training in North Waziristan. Since so many of the international terrorist plots that have been uncovered over the last decade have been found to have originated in Pakistan, which seems to have become a hub and training ground for foreign militants, this was something that was already suspected and has now been proven by someone who was in their midst. Since the government writ barely applies in North Waziristan and other tribal areas, there seems to be very little that can be done to stop their influx. This adds strength to the idea being strongly advocated by the US, that a military operation in North Waziristan is the only way to tackle militancy.

Umar also revealed that there were some Punjabis among the 350 or so men that he saw receiving training. This, too, does not come as a shock to most, but it does belie the words of the provincial government in Punjab, which has sought to downplay the threat of the Punjabi Taliban. In fact, Chief Minister Shahbaz Sharif had denied that such a thing as the Punjabi Taliban even exists, claiming that talk of it was simply a ploy to create differences between the provinces. Umar’s interview should serve to force Sharif to get his head out of the sand and acknowledge the very real threat his province, and the rest of the country, faces.

Above all, Umar’s interview has put a human face on the destruction extremism has caused in Pakistan. It is very hard to blame a teenager who lost his father in a blast and who apologised to the nation for the actions he was about to undertake and for becoming embroiled with terrorist outfits. That he found himself in this position is not his fault. It is the fault of a government that has forsaken the most vulnerable and, above all, the militants who have no regard for human life.

Published in The Express Tribune, April 11th,  2011.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Targeted Killings: JI seeks MQM exclusion from Sindh govt</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/146639/targeted-killings-ji-seeks-mqm-exclusion-from-sindh-govt</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/146639/targeted-killings-ji-seeks-mqm-exclusion-from-sindh-govt#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Sun, 10 Apr 11 06:56:46 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[express]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Pakistan]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=146639</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[JI chief says targeted killings in Karachi will only end if MQM is excluded from the Sindh government.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[Targeted killings in Karachi will only end if the Muttahida Qaumi Movement (MQM) is excluded from the Sindh government, Jamaat Islami (JI) chief Syed Munawaar Hassan said on Saturday.

Addressing at the Peshawar Press Club (PPC), the JI chief said the Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) had a majority in Sindh and should have formed the government without the MQM.

Referring to targeted killings in Karachi, he said that such incidents would continue if the people of Karachi continued voting in favour of “terrorists”.

Hassan also opposed the idea of launching an operation in North Waziristan, and said that if an operation was carried out there, the US will demand another operation in southern Punjab, insisting that militants had relocated there.

 

Published in The Express Tribune, April 10th, 2011.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Bon voyage, Raymond Davis</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/133740/bon-voyage-raymond-davis</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/133740/bon-voyage-raymond-davis#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Thu, 17 Mar 11 02:22:17 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[ayesha.siddiqa]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Pakistan]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=133740</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Who was responsible for the release? What were the concessions made on both sides to facilitate the release?]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[Raymond Davis was released on Wednesday and flown out of the country. A lot of people are asking if justice was done. The release raises two fundamental questions. 

First, who was responsible for the release?

Second, what were the concessions made on both sides of the table to facilitate the release?

The future of Pakistan-US relations and geo-political developments in the region will depend on the nature of the final agreement.


The release was clearly not the work of the federal or provincial governments. Although Najam Sethi tweeted about Shahbaz Sharif playing a critical role, his responsibility may be limited to facilitating the entire release drama. Notwithstanding Punjab Law Rana Sanaullah’s claim that the provincial government was not in the know on the decision, it is hard to rule out PML-N involvement in trying to convince the families of those killed by Raymond Davis to forgive him under provisions of Shariah law.

The Qisas and Diyat law, which was passed in 1997 by the then Nawaz Sharif government, has been used on hundreds of occasions to buy forgiveness for killers. This law privatises a crime like homicide and devolves the responsibility for punishing a killer to the next of kin of the victim. The reason it was not used earlier in the Davis case was possibly because the time was not ripe.

Rana Sanaullah’s lame statement reflects his anticipation of a reaction from hardcore right-wingers inside the PML-N. With cooperation from the right quarters, however, Shahbaz Sharif’s government will be able to deal with any public protest.

In any case, the general perception was that the religious right organisations did not manage to bring people out on the streets on the Davis issue. Therefore, they were keen to link it with the blasphemy laws issue. There may be some street protests and comments from Imran Khan trying to pin it all on the federal government. But the Zardari-Gilani duo could not have managed it as their first effort resulted in friction within the party.

There should be little doubt that the release was possible  due to successful negotiations between the CIA and the ISI. This was all along a spat between the two intelligence agencies which Pakistan’s media did not point out until very late. Another twitterati, Columnist Cyril Almeida, raised the question of a possible link between Gen Pasha’s extension, the Pakistan Army’s agreement to launch a military operation in North Waziristan and Davis’ release, pointing at some secret agreement. Without GHQ’s involvement the judiciary might not have appreciated the significance of the matter for national security and not stopped the Lahore High Court from giving a judgment on the immunity issue immediately.

The million-dollar question now is: what was agreed upon? It seems that the US and Rawalpindi have renegotiated terms of engagement so GHQ will play a greater role in dealing with Washington than the Presidency in Islamabad. General Petraeus’s recent testimony to the US Congress mentions the Pakistan Army’s apprehensions regarding not being taken into confidence on Afghanistan. It is a considered opinion in Washington that Pakistan was not totally on board with the objectives of the war on terror. Did Raymond Davis, a CIA contractor, fall victim to this misunderstanding and has he been released after the problem was sorted out? Another pertinent question pertains to the future of American policy on Pakistan-based militant groups such as Lashkar-e-Taiba, Jaish-e-Mohammad and others. Does a possible agreement involve America backing off from its focus on these organisations, which are considered friendly by the military?

Raymond Davis’ release will for some time increase anxiety amongst the Pakistani people, including the urban-educated-twitterati. GHQ will ensure that this does not really boil over. Or perhaps this will give a lead to an internal move to bring domestic change. What’s certain is that the way the issue has unfolded is fairytale material.

Published in The Express Tribune, March 17th, 2011.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Thank you, Raymond — I</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/123340/thank-you-raymond-%e2%80%94-i</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/123340/thank-you-raymond-%e2%80%94-i#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Thu, 24 Feb 11 18:10:06 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[shahzad chaudhry]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Pakistan]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=123340</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[People have always held an opinion on America but never an outpouring and an outrage.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[Not too far back, I was interviewed by an American journalist on Pakistan’s prevailing security environment and the likely prognosis. On what might nudge Pakistan towards operation in North Waziristan, my response was that it shall have to tie in with benefits to Pakistan’s strategic objectives, along with questions of resource availability and a risk-and-cost analysis. I was asked if more money would do it. I was told that we were alongside discussing individual dispositions at various tiers, and that may have given relevance to the issue of financial incentives. I must admit I was shocked at the audacity of such a suggestion. The journalist has been living in the country since and should have known better. Or, perhaps not. It really depends where someone’s Pakistan begins and ends. My considered response within the realm of politeness was that, while some of us were quite ready to be sold, this nation, as of now, wasn’t.

Three recent events in Pakistan-US relations signify a varying trajectory from the popular perception on the nature of these relations and their unidirectional emphasis. Somewhere in October 2010, after America’s persistent call to ‘do more’, Pakistani interlocutors at the strategic dialogue with Washington presented President Obama with a Pakistani version of what might help both countries reach a consensual end-state in Afghanistan. It also clearly underlined why Pakistanis at large doubt American intent and level of commitment and sensitivity to Pakistani interests. Joe Biden’s last visit to Pakistan was intended to alleviate some of those perceptions from that level. In the intervening period, the incessant calls for Pakistan to act in North Waziristan subsided; they remain on the back burner with an odd statement, supportive of Pakistan’s choice of the timeline. Pakistan countered American pressure on the basis of reason and came out well.

This was followed by an armed incursion by US/Nato forces of Pakistan’s border and deliberate attacks on a Pakistani post. Pakistan retaliated by suspending supplies and closing the more frequently used route to Afghanistan. Infrequent torching of American supplies continues, though not of any state collusion. The US, highly dependent on Pakistan’s logistic facilitation, regretted the incident, promised retribution where neglect was determined, and assured no recurrence. An odd incident has repeated, but never as grave, nor as deliberate. But the red lines of this cooperative relation were reinforced in no uncertain way.

The above two occasions were more state responses than popular sentiment. People have always held an opinion on America, swayed by the sentiment of opportune anti-Americanism, reinforced to a considerable measure by the adverse fallout of the ongoing war against terror and the inequities of this relationship. But never an outpouring and an outrage. Thanks to Raymond Davis, or whatever his real name is, the occasion has brought forth an opportunity for precisely this to happen.

Published in The Express Tribune, February 25th, 2011.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Revelation: Backchannel talks continue with India, says PM</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/108304/revelation-backchannel-talks-continue-with-india-says-pm</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/108304/revelation-backchannel-talks-continue-with-india-says-pm#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Mon, 24 Jan 11 02:27:46 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[abdul.manan]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Pakistan]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=108304</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Gilani says peace process between the two countries may resume anytime.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani has revealed that back-channel talks between Pakistan and India continue despite the fact that a slow-moving peace process between the two countries was suspended following the 2008 terrorist attack in Mumbai.

However, he told foreign journalists during an interaction in Lahore on Saturday that people would be informed if there was any progress in this backdoor diplomacy.

It is the first time that the Pakistani premier acknowledged that the two countries were engaged backchannel talks. He also said that the stalled peace process could also revive anytime in the near future.

The prime minister said that Pakistan wanted to resolve all issues with India but through proper dialogue. He said that  Pakistan is the birthplace of Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, so he does not need any invitation to come.

Gilani said that though Singh was sincere in resolving all issues between the two countries, he was under pressure from his people and parliament.

Asked about the military operation in North Waziristan, the premier said, “We will see how beneficial this is for our country.” He added that the “war on terror” is Pakistan’s war and is in the best interest of the country.

“Pakistan wants to be a part of the solution and not the problem,” he added. He said Pakistan’s forces and people had paid a huge price in the fight against terrorism and extremism so Pakistan’s bad image in the war against terrorism should be dispelled.

On growing US drone attacks, he said the international community should realise that drone attacks are increasing problems because innocent people are being killed along with terrorists. He added that terrorists are using this as a tool to gain sympathy of the locals. He said these attacks are a violation of Pakistan’s sovereignty.

About the ‘rightsizing’ of the federal cabinet, Gilani said, “A decision has been made in principle to minimise the cabinet size in accordance with the provisions of the 18th amendment.” However, he hastened to add that he would take all political parties on board before taking such steps.

Published in The Express Tribune, January 24th,  2011.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Why did Joe Biden rush to visit Pakistan?</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/107159/why-did-joe-biden-rush-to-visit-pakistan</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/107159/why-did-joe-biden-rush-to-visit-pakistan#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Fri, 21 Jan 11 19:27:54 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[shaukat.qadir]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Pakistan]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=107159</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Biden is strongest opponent to prolonged US presence in Afghanistan, continued to oppose the ‘surge’ of US troops.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[Joe Biden, the US Vice President, spent a very busy day in Islamabad on January 12, 2011, on a rather hastily scheduled visit, after his trip to Kabul.

Ostensibly, this unscheduled visit was to reassure Pakistan of America’s long-term commitment to Pakistan, and to express its concern on Salmaan Taseer’s murder and the public reaction of supporting Mumtaz Qadri.

Before looking at recent developments that might have a better explanation for this unscheduled visit, it is important to recall that Biden is the strongest opponent to prolonged US presence in Afghanistan and continued to oppose the ‘surge’ of US troops there, even after it was sanctioned by a reluctant Obama. While Biden and Obama favoured talks with the Taliban, Petraeus — supported by the secretaries of state and defence — opposed talks until a decisive US victory forces them to the negotiating table from a position of weakness. Needless to add, the GHQ opposes Petraeus’ policy and doubts that US forces can ever achieve a ‘decisive victory’ over the Taliban.

Since December 2010, events have speeded up; events that might lead the US to re-think the ‘Petraeus policy’ and offer a more plausible explanation for Biden’s visit. To begin with, Burhanuddin Rabbani, who heads the Afghan High Council for Peace and is the only Tajik veteran of the Afghan-Soviet war era to have kept contacts with some Taliban members, addressed a Pashtun Jirga (council) in Nangarhar (a Taliban infested region) and said words to the effect that ‘this is your country’ and ‘we have all made mistakes that we need to learn from.’ Most significantly, the Jirga concluded that negotiations with the Taliban should begin.

Following this remarkable event, Rabbani was dispatched to Tehran while Afghan President Karzai travelled to Istanbul for the fifth summit, hosted by Turkish President Abdullah Gul for Karzai and Zardari, in another attempt to bring the two closer together. Turkey seems to be succeeding in something that the US has consistently failed at. At the conclusion of the summit, Turkey came up with a surprising offer: It was prepared to ‘open a representative office for the Taliban’— a suggestion which, according to Karzai, came from “dignitaries close to the Taliban”. Many have interpreted Karzai’s comment as a reference to Pakistani officials. The Taliban have not denied that this suggestion might have come from them!

Meanwhile, Rabbani’s visit to Tehran, where Tajiks are more welcomed than Pashtuns, is seen as an attempt to bring Tehran on board — an attempt at reconciliation with the Taliban. Tehran, with predominantly Shia Muslims, has always been concerned about the re-emergence of the diehard Taliban, who are Sunni and mistreat the Shia minority. Rabbani’s visit was not met with total success, but it was soon followed up by a visit from Muhammed Fahim, another Tajik and currently vice president of Afghanistan. Curiously, Fahim’s visit coincided with that of an erstwhile KGB General, Viktor Ivanov, who now heads the Russian anti-narcotic force. It seems that Tehran is prepared to ‘wait and see’.

Early this month, Rabbani led a 25-member delegation to Islamabad where, significantly, he met the COAS in the GHQ; a fact that signals the COAS’ endorsement of the ‘Burhani initiative’, given Burhani’s commitment of excluding the US from negotiations with the Taliban.

While allies in the war against terrorism, the US and Pakistan have significantly diverging interests in the ‘end game’ in Afghanistan, particularly in the pursuit of the ‘Petraeus policy’. For its success, Pakistan has been subjected to the continuous ‘do more’ mantra, with reference to the presence of the Haqqani group in North Waziristan; an act that the GHQ has consistently refused.

In fact, during the meeting that took place last year between Obama and Pakistani COAS Kayani in Washington DC last year, after having heard Obama, Kayani handed over an 11-page document to Obama, containing his analysis of the situation, and where and why the US was in error. Reportedly, Obama was taken aback, but assured Kayani that the document would be “fully and seriously considered”.

In pursuit of divergent interests, the two allies have frequently been playing a double game with each other. While Pakistan’s duplicity has frequently been highlighted in the US media, only a few analysts have pointed out America’s consistent duplicity and the fact that Pakistan, being a geographical neighbour of Afghanistan, has greater justification for guarding its interests in the long-term than the US.

Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar was captured in a CIA/ISI joint operation and the ISI had agreed to hand him over to the CIA. However, during his debriefing after the capture, he revealed that his capture was ‘arranged’, for him to negotiate a deal with the CIA, excluding both Mullah Omar and Pakistan. Baradar obviously concluded that the ISI was ‘in’ on the deal. On learning this, Pakistan reneged and refused to hand Baradar over to the CIA.

I, for one, see absolutely nothing wrong with the duplicity on both sides. Isn’t this an age-old practice? Aren’t the organs of all states supposed to guard the interests of their own states, even at the cost of their allies, if the interests conflict? All I find cynically amusing is the effort by the US to occupy a moral high ground to talk down to its ally!

However, as soon as Biden’s visit to Pakistan was announced, The Washington Post, based on his briefings by senior officials, listed his priorities for the visit which, apart from reassuring Pakistan on a long-term commitment, included three important shifts in the US policy towards Pakistan: a) The US would no longer insist on an operation in North Waziristan; b) Biden would categorically reassure Pakistan that the US would not undertake ground-based, cross-border operations in Pakistan territory and c) US recognises that “Pakistan has an important, if not dominant, role in negotiating with the Taliban”.

If the Post is correct in its assessment, perhaps Kayani deserves to be credited with having forced a major shift in US policy through his written analysis, handed over to Obama, and his endorsement of the ‘Burhani initiative’.

Perhaps, if my assessment is correct, Biden’s visit might actually be the harbinger of peace in this war-torn region!

Published in The Express Tribune, January 22nd, 2011.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>North Waziristan and Afghanistan</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/107140/north-waziristan-and-afghanistan</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/107140/north-waziristan-and-afghanistan#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Fri, 21 Jan 11 19:27:51 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[alam.rind]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Pakistan]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=107140</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Pressure to carry out operation is even greater now, since deemed to have completed its commitments.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[The winter is withering fast and the season to start a military campaign in the tough and rugged mountains of Afghanistan and that of Waziristan is fast approaching. The Americans don’t have much time as they have to signal, at least, partial success to their own people by mid-2011. To deflect the criticism on this issue, the Americans have since long been insisting that Pakistan now go after al Qaeda and Taliban sanctuaries in North Waziristan. The pressure to carry out an operation is even greater now, since the PakistanI military is deemed to have completed its commitments in assisting with the 2010 flood relief effort. Also, recent remarks by the US Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Mike Mullen, who said that Pakistan was the “epicentre” of terrorism, are an indication in this regard.

Pakistan needs to consider the situation carefully with regard to cost and consequences. Launching such an operation in North Waziristan, especially in the absence of indigenous drone support; requires night vision devices and transport and attack helicopters and this will make the whole campaign far more expensive than in Swat and South Waziristan. One will also have to factor the likely possibility that the terrorists may retaliate in terms of attacking Pakistani cities. Furthermore, it would be fair to say that the whole exercise could also strain Pakistan’s already gas- and power-starved economy. And there are apprehensions that conflict in North Waziristan may change into a war between the two neighbours.

As for peace in Afghanistan, that will come about only if all segments of society have proportional representation in the government and in the composition of its security forces. It also has to be acknowledged that the Taliban are part of Afghan society and their ethnic background is mainly Pashtun, who constitute over two-fifths of the Afghan population. This is not to say that all Pashtun are Taliban, but most of them resent the fact that they are grossly under-represented in the country’s leadership ranks.

The best way to move forward is to give a greater role to Pashtun elders and chieftains in the Afghan government — this will act as a confidence-building measure, especially since their seats have reduced from 115 in the 2005 election to around 100 in last year’s poll.

At this point in time, Pakistan’s economic stability is central to its participation in the war against terror. In a recent meeting between President Asif Ali Zardari and President Barack Obama, the need to maintain a moderate democracy in Pakistan was underlined. That objective can’t be achieved without political stability in Afghanistan and economic stability in Pakistan.

Published in The Express Tribune, January 22nd, 2011.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>US sees positive side to delayed N Waziristan operation: NYT</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/105639/us-sees-positive-side-to-delayed-n-waziristan-operation-nyt</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/105639/us-sees-positive-side-to-delayed-n-waziristan-operation-nyt#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Tue, 18 Jan 11 15:14:03 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[express]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Pakistan]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=105639</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[US offici­als believ­e delay will help make drone strike­s effici­ent states report.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[Pakistan's unwillingness to launch an operation in North Waziristan has been taken as a positive by United States intelligence and counterinsurgency officials, states a report published in the New York Times.

According to the report, senior US officials believe that insurgents bunching up in the area will make it easier for US drone strikes to hit them from afar.

Although drone strikes have successfully targeted insurgent commanders and senior leaders, US officials still believe it is important for the Pakistan Army to weed out the militants from the area.

More than a dozen intelligence and military officials interviewed by the New York Times believe that the delay will help US drones will help weaken the militants before the Pakistani army moves in for the operation. As quoted in the New York Times report:
“In some ways, it’s to our benefit to keep them bottled up, mostly in North Waziristan,” said a senior intelligence official, who like others interviewed agreed to speak candidly about the Pakistan strategy if he was not identified. “This is not intentional. That wasn’t the design to bottle them up. That’s just where they are, and they’re there for a reason. They don’t have a lot of options.”
Senior Pakistan Army commanders and politicians have stated that the army will carry out an operation in North Waziristan on their own time. Ambassador of Pakistan to the US, Husain Haqqani has been quoted stating that 'it is only a matter of how, when and in what manner' the operations will be conducted.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item><item>
			<title>Zardari-Obama meeting</title>
			<link>https://tribune.com.pk/story/104330/zardari-obama-meeting</link>
			<comments>https://tribune.com.pk/story/104330/zardari-obama-meeting#comments</comments>
			<pubDate>Sat, 15 Jan 11 18:21:22 +0500</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>
				<![CDATA[editorial]]>
			</dc:creator>
			<category><![CDATA[Pakistan]]></category>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://tribune.com.pk/?p=104330</guid>
			<description>
				<![CDATA[Zardari’s visit for Holbrooke’s memorial less to do with honouring deceased than opportunity to hold impromptu summit.]]>
			</description>
			<content:encoded>
				<![CDATA[It may sound callous to say this, but President Asif Zardari’s visit to Washington for Richard Holbrooke’s memorial service had less to do with honouring the deceased diplomat than an opportunity to hold an impromptu summit with the Americans. On the surface, the Pakistan-US alliance appears to be as strong as ever. US President Barack Obama and Zardari said all the right things. Obama has pledged to continue helping Pakistan develop its economy to the point that it is no longer reliant on international aid. Both leaders also condemned terrorism and mourned the assassination of Salmaan Taseer.

Read between the lines of the diplomatic doublespeak, though, and it is clear that there are several unaddressed issues and points of contention. Pakistan’s ambassador to the US, Husain Haqqani, quoted Obama and US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton as saying that they will find ways to “strengthen Pakistan’s economic reform process.” This appears to be an oblique reference to our inability to pass the reformed general sales tax (RGST) through parliament and our refusal to end electricity subsidies, both of which have been demanded by the US and the IMF. While the US may wish for Pakistan to stand on its own two feet, for as long as we are dependent on it for staying afloat, such demands will be a stark reality of relations between the two countries. Indeed, US Ambassador to Pakistan Cameron Munter admitted as much when he said that American financial assistance will lead to American interference.

Even more than economic issues, the ever-present spectre of terrorism also continues to cast a pall over Pakistan-US ties. For the best part of a decade, US policy has been to throw money at the problem, all the while urging Pakistan to ‘do more’. As the talks in Washington showed, this is likely to continue. The US has already been making noises about a possible military operation in North Waziristan, which Pakistan has been resisting, saying that troops are preoccupied with flood relief. As is likely, in the future more international terrorism plots that originated from the tribal areas will be unearthed. When that happens, the gentle exhortations will turn into full-fledged demands. It is only then that the shaky foundations of this supposedly solid relationship will be revealed.

Published in The Express Tribune, January 16th, 2011.]]>
			</content:encoded>
			
			</item>	</channel>
                </rss>
