ISI director general calls on King Abdullah

[This can't be good.]

ISI director general calls on King Abdullah

KARACHI : Inter Services Intelligence (ISI) Director General Lieutenant General Ahmed Shuja Pasha on Saturday called on Saudi King Abdullah bin Abdul Aziz in Riyadh, a private TV channel reported. Quoting sources, the channel said that ISI DG conveyed the message of President Asif Zardari to the Saudi king. General Pasha also discussed matters of mutual interests with Saudi king, the channel added. The channel further said that Saudi Intelligence Chief Prince Muqrin Bin Abdul Aziz was

Clinton calls Israeli concessions “unprecedented”

PREPOSTEROUS!

Clinton calls Israeli concessions “unprecedented”

Play Video ABC News – Clinton’s Mideast Mission for Peace

AP – U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton ,right, reacts as Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu … By ROBERT BURNS, AP National Security Writer Robert Burns, Ap National Security Writer – 2 hrs 4 mins ago

JERUSALEM – U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said Saturday that Israel is making “unprecedented” concessions on West Bank settlement construction — a position clearly at odds with the prevailing Palestinian view.

Palestinian leaders have said they will not return to peace talks with Israel unless it halts all settlement building on lands they claim for a future state, and they believe Israel has blatantly defied a U.S. demand for a settlement freeze.

Speaking at a joint press conference with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Saturday, Clinton said Israel is putting significant limits on settlement activity.

“What the prime minister has offered in specifics on restraints on a policy of settlements … is unprecedented,” she said.

The issue of settlements has become the biggest sticking point in getting Israelis and Palestinians back to the negotiating table. Clinton made it clear that she wasn’t pleased with Israeli settlement construction but that it was no reason to hold up talks.

“There are always demands made in any negotiation that are not going to be fully realized,” she said.

Clinton also agreed with a statement by Netanyahu that Palestinians had never demanded a settlement freeze in the past as a condition for sitting down with Israel.

Her comments appeared to represent a significant departure in tone from her previous statements demanding a total Israeli settlement freeze without exception. Israel has been resisting that demand for months, and has given no indication it would be willing to call a total freeze.

Clinton’s main aim during her one-day visit to Israel was to resuscitate the Obama administration’s flagging Mideast peace push by persuading the two sides to return to talks.

But Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas is sticking to his refusal to resume negotiations until Israel stops building settlements. Abbas is fighting a perception among his people that he repeatedly caves in to U.S. demands.

Abbas spokesman Nabil Abu Rdeneh, responding to Clinton’s comments, said, “There can be no excuse for the continuation of settlements, which is really the main obstacle in the way of any credible peace process.

“Israel is not interested in stopping its settlement activities and the American administration didn’t succeed in convincing the Israeli government to stop these activities,” he said. “There should be a real change in the Israeli position toward this issue in order for the peace process to be restarted.”

Earlier in the day, a top aide to Abbas, Saeb Erekat, told The Associated Press that Abbas rejected Clinton’s request that he allow Israel’s government to complete building 3,000 units in Jewish settlements in the West Bank, and to allow the government to construct public buildings and continue construction in east Jerusalem — a territory Palestinians hope will be their future capital.

“This is a nonstarter,” Erekat said. “And that’s why it’s unlikely to restart negotiations.”

Before visiting Israel, Clinton met with Abbas in the Gulf emirate of Abu Dhabi. Besides meeting Netanyahu, Clinton also held talks with Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak and Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman.

Palestinians see Jewish settlement building as one of the biggest threats to their ability to form a viable state in the territories of the West Bank, east Jerusalem and the Gaza Strip. Some 500,000 Israelis live in settlements in the West Bank and east Jerusalem. Israel withdrew from Gaza in 2005.

Clinton intends to consult with a range of Arab foreign ministers on the Israel-Palestinian stalemate when she attends an international conference in Morocco on Monday and Tuesday.

At the press conference with Clinton, Netanyahu said Israel is “willing to engage in peace talks immediately without preconditions. Unfortunately the other side is not.”

Hamas’ control over Gaza is another main stumbling block to peace efforts. The group violently seized control of Gaza from Abbas’ forces two years ago, leaving the Palestinians with rival governments. Hamas has long preached that Abbas’ moderation doesn’t pay and that only armed struggle will produce a Palestinian state.

Hamas spokesman Sami Abu Zuhri said the U.S. could not effectively engage in peacemaking while ignoring Hamas, and said Clinton’s visit was “destined to fail.”

_____

Associated Press reporter Mohammed Daraghmeh contributed to this report from Ramallah, West Bank.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091031/ap_on_re_mi_ea/ml_clinton


Balochistan is the ultimate prize

REBRANDING THE LONG WAR, Part 2

Balochistan is the ultimate prize

By Pepe Escobar
PART 1: Obama does his Bush impression

It’s a classic case of calm before the storm. The AfPak chapter of Obama’s brand new OCO (“Overseas Contingency Operations”), formerly GWOT (“global war on terror”) does not imply only a surge in the Pashtun Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA). A surge in Balochistan as well may be virtually inevitable.

Balochistan is totally under the radar of Western corporate media. But not the Pentagon’s. An immense desert comprising almost 48% of Pakistan’s area, rich in uranium and copper, potentially very rich in oil, and producing more than one-third of Pakistan’s natural gas, it accounts for less than 4% of Pakistan’s 173 million citizens. Balochs are the majority, followed by Pashtuns. Quetta, the provincial capital, is considered Taliban Central by the Pentagon, which for all its high-tech wizardry mysteriously has not been able to locate Quetta resident “The Shadow”, historic Taliban emir Mullah Omar himself.

Strategically, Balochistan is mouth-watering: east of Iran, south of Afghanistan, and boasting three Arabian sea ports, including Gwadar, practically at the mouth of the Strait of Hormuz.

Gwadar – a port built by China – is the absolute key. It is the essential node in the crucial, ongoing, and still virtual Pipelineistan war between IPI and TAPI. IPI is the Iran-Pakistan-India pipeline, also known as the “peace pipeline”, which is planned to cross from Iranian to Pakistani Balochistan – an anathema to Washington. TAPI is the perennially troubled, US-backed Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan-India pipeline, which is planned to cross western Afghanistan via Herat and branch out to Kandahar and Gwadar.

Washington’s dream scenario is Gwadar as the new Dubai – while China would need Gwadar as a port and also as a base for pumping gas via a long pipeline to China. One way or another, it will all depend on local grievances being taken very seriously. Islamabad pays a pittance in royalties for the Balochis, and development aid is negligible; Balochistan is treated as a backwater. Gwadar as the new Dubai would not necessarily mean local Balochis benefiting from the boom; in many cases they could even be stripped of their local land.

To top it all, there’s the New Great Game in Eurasia fact that Pakistan is a key pivot to both NATO and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), of which Pakistan is an observer. So whoever “wins” Balochistan incorporates Pakistan as a key transit corridor to either Iranian gas from the monster South Pars field or a great deal of the Caspian wealth of “gas republic” Turkmenistan.

The cavalry to the rescue
Now imagine thousands of mobile US troops – backed by supreme air power and hardcore artillery – pouring into this desert across the immense, 800-kilometer-long, empty southern Afghanistan-Balochistan border. These are Obama’s surge troops who will be in theory destroying opium crops in Helmand province in Afghanistan. They will also try to establish a meaningful presence in the ultra-remote, southwest Afghanistan, Baloch-majority province of Nimruz. It would take nothing for them to hit Pakistani Balochistan in hot pursuit of Taliban bands. And this would certainly be a prelude for a de facto US invasion of Balochistan.

What would the Balochis do? That’s a very complex question.

Balochistan is of course tribal – just as the FATA. Local tribal chiefs can be as backward as Islamabad is neglectful (and they are not exactly paragons of human rights either). A parallel could be made with the Swat valley.

Most Baloch tribes bow to Islamabad’s authority – except, first and foremost, the Bugti. And then there’s the Balochistan Liberation Army (BLA) – which both Washington and London brand as a terrorist group. Its leader is Brahamdagh Bugti, operating out of Kandahar (only two hours away from Quetta). In a recent Pakistani TV interview he could not be more sectarian, stressing the BLA is getting ready to attack non-Balochis. The Balochis are inclined to consider the BLA as a resistance group. But Islamabad denies it, saying their support is not beyond 10% of the provincial population.

It does not help that Islamabad tends to be not only neglectful but heavy-handed; in August 2006, Musharraf’s troops killed ultra-respected local leader Nawab Akbar Bugti, a former provincial governor.

There’s ample controversy on whether the BLA is being hijacked by foreign intelligence agencies – everyone from the CIA and the British MI6 to the Israeli Mossad. In a 2006 visit to Iran, I was prevented from going to Sistan-Balochistan in southeast Iran because, according to Tehran’s version, infiltrated CIA from Pakistani Balochistan were involved in covert, cross-border attacks. And it’s no secret to anyone in the region that since 9/11 the US virtually controls the Baloch air bases in Dalbandin and Panjgur.

In October 2001, while I was waiting for an opening to cross to Kandahar from Quetta, and apart from tracking the whereabouts of President Hamid Karzai and his brother, I spent quite some time with a number of BLA associates and sympathizers. They described themselves as “progressive, nationalist, anti-imperialist” (and that makes them difficult to be co-opted by the US). They were heavily critical of “Punjabi chauvinism”, and always insisted the region’s resources belong to Balochis first; that was the rationale for attacks on gas pipelines.

Stressing an atrocious, provincial literacy rate of only 16% (“It’s government policy to keep Balochistan backward”), they resented the fact that most people still lacked drinking water. They claimed support from at least 70% of the Baloch population (“Whenever the BLA fires a rocket, it’s the talk of the bazaars”). They also claimed to be united, and in coordination with Iranian Balochis. And they insisted that “Pakistan had turned Balochistan into a US cantonment, which affected a lot the relationship between the Afghan and Baloch peoples”.

As a whole, not only BLA sympathizers but the Balochis in general are adamant: although prepared to remain within a Pakistani confederation, they want infinitely more autonomy.

Game on
How crucial Balochistan is to Washington can be assessed by the study “Baloch Nationalism and the Politics of Energy Resources: the Changing Context of Separatism in Pakistan” by Robert Wirsing of the US Army think-tank Strategic Studies Institute. Predictably, it all revolves around Pipelineistan.

China – which built Gwadar and needs gas from Iran – must be sidelined by all means necessary. The added paranoid Pentagon component is that China could turn Gwadar into a naval base and thus “threaten” the Arabian Sea and the Indian Ocean.

The only acceptable scenario for the Pentagon would be for the US to take over Gwadar. Once again, that would be a prime confluence of Pipelineistan and the US empire of bases.

Not only in terms of blocking the IPI pipeline and using Gwadar for TAPI, control of Gwadar would open the mouth-watering opportunity of a long land route across Balochistan into Helmand, Nimruz, Kandahar or, better yet, all of these three provinces in southwest Afghanistan. From a Pentagon/NATO perspective, after the “loss” of the Khyber Pass, that would be the ideal supply route for Western troops in the perennial, now rebranded, GWOT (“global war on terror”).

During the Asif Ali Zardari administration in Islamabad the BLA, though still a fringe group with a political wing and a military wing, has been regrouping and rearming, while the current chief minister of Balochistan, Nawab Raisani, is suspected of being a CIA asset (there’s no conclusive proof). There’s fear in Islamabad that the government has taken its eye off the Balochistan ball – and that the BLA may be effectively used by the US for balkanization purposes. But Islamabad still seems not to have listened to the key Baloch grievance: we want to profit from our natural wealth, and we want autonomy.

So what’s gonna be the future of “Dubai” Gwadar? IPI or TAPI? The die is cast. Under the radar of the Obama/Karzai/Zardari photo-op in Washington, all’s still to play in this crucial front in the New Great Game in Eurasia.

Pepe Escobar is the author of Globalistan: How the Globalized World is Dissolving into Liquid War (Nimble Books, 2007) and Red Zone Blues: a snapshot of Baghdad during the surge. His new book, just out, is Obama does Globalistan (Nimble Books, 2009).

He may be reached at pepeasia@yahoo.com.

Shut down the war criminals wherever they go!

[The following article says what I have been saying for several years--the public has become aware of Israeli war crimes and supremacist ethnic-cleansing in Palestine.  Linkage between the Israeli war criminals and their counterparts in our government has been previously revealed by the Israel Lobby.  It's time to make this awareness center stage in a series of nationwide antiwar protests.]

PFLP: Shut down the war criminals wherever they go!

by PFLP

Protests have recently greeted the leaders and representatives of the occupation state wherever they have traveled – in October 2009 in the United States, former occupation prime minister and war criminal Ehud Olmert has been chased from city to city, shouted down in every venue and exposed for his war crimes. Deputy Foreign Minister Daniel Ayalon was protested and his speech interrupted at the London School of Economics on October 26, 2009. The Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine salutes all of these protesters and calls upon all Palestinian and Arab communities and international activists for justice to shut down these war criminals, racists and oppressors wherever they go!

<!–

–>

The leaders and representatives of the occupation state travel as privileged guests. The notorious Olmert, who presided over the murder of over 1400 Palestinians in Gaza in December 2008-January 2009 and 1200 Lebanese in July 2006, which come only as lowlights in his career of racist, murderous oppression through the mechanism of the illegitimate, colonial-settler Zionist state, sought over $50,000 US for one speaking appearance on his recent tour in the United States. Nevertheless, the most notable accomplishment of Olmert’s tour was the depth of outrage, anger and activity it brought forth in every city he entered, where progressive organizations, solidarity groups and Palestinian and Arab communities joined forces to disrupt his speeches, perform “citizens’ arrests,” engage in protests, die-ins and mass rallies, and expose his crimes before his audiences and the world.

 

Hundreds of thousands have viewed online videos witnessing the power of protesters to shut down Olmert in Chicago and San Francisco. The struggle to expose these war criminals, however, does not end with Olmert. Lawyers in the UK and throughout Europe are planning to utilize universal jurisdiction laws to pursue occupation war criminals and prosecute them for their crimes, and upcoming visits by occupation Jerusalem mayor Nir Barkat and current occupation chief criminal, Benjamin Netanyahu, are scheduled to be met with visible protest in upcoming weeks in the U.S.

Every leader and representative of the occupation state must be shut down wherever they speak and met with the loudest cries of unwelcome. Prevent them from speaking – let it be made clear that the people of the world stand with the people of Palestine and will not accept these criminals, racists and occupiers, that they will not be allowed to speak as normal, when the only place they should be speaking is before an international tribunal, on trial for their crimes against humanity!

The leaders and military commanders of the occupation states should face lawsuits and fear of arrest everywhere they go. We commend the people’s lawyers utilizing universal jurisdiction and other human rights statutes to attempt to bring these war criminals to justice, and call upon the people’s lawyers and legal organizations of the world to continue and expand such lawsuits and petitions for criminal prosecution for arrest. These criminals and commanders walk free with the blood of thousands of Palestinians and Arabs upon their hands, holding tens of thousands of Palestinians hostage within their inhuman occupation prisons. They should face arrest, lawsuits and criminal prosecutions wherever they attempt to go and be turned away from every border. Let the international complicity, silence and support for the occupation crimes on the part of the so-called “international community” be countered by the international popular support for the Palestinian struggle for self-determination, return and national liberation that can and will hold these infamous criminals accountable for their theft of Palestinian land, destruction of Palestinian lives and attempted genocide.

The entire illegitimate settler occupation state should be subject to complete popular international isolation. The United States government is the foremost sponsor of the occupation, bound to it in a full-scale economic, military and political strategic alliance. The European Union is at best complicit and often actively involved in providing support to the occupation state and its crimes against the Palestinian and Arab people, while criminalizing our resistance. Complicit and reactionary Arab regimes sit silent while the occupiers destroy Palestinian homes, besiege Gaza, build colonial settlements and apartheid walls, pollute our water and steal our land, Zionize Jerusalem, threaten the Palestinian people in occupied Palestine 48 with mass ethnic cleansing, deny the right of return of millions of Palestinian refugees, imprison thousands of our people and continue a brutal military occupation. The so-called “international community” is dominated by the will of U.S. imperialism. However, the people of the world, progressive forces and countries building resistance to the unipolar world of the U.S. are a counterforce that cannot be silenced or defeated by the military technology of imperialism.

In Lebanon, Olmert’s killers were forced into defeat by the power of the resistance. In Iraq and Afghanistan, the trillion-dollar military of U.S. imperialism has been trapped time and again by the power of the resistance. Hundreds of thousands of people around the world took to the streets during the aggression on Gaza, demanding an end to the occupier’s crimes. Across Latin America, there is a massive and popular surge standing firm against imperialism and alongside the Palestinian people, from Venezuela to Bolivia to Cuba to Ecuador.

The Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine calls upon all popular organizations and progressive forces in the world to do their utmost to completely internationally the occupation state in all forms and venues. Israel must be a pariah state, completely unwelcome in every international venue and arena. Every Israeli product, business, official, government, cultural or academic institution complicit with Zionism can and must be boycotted, divested from, subject to complete sanction and entirely shamed and isolated. Several international labor union federations and unions – including the British Trades Union Congress, the Congress of South African Trade Unions, the Irish Congress of Trade Unions, and the Canadian Union of Public Employees – have taken action to isolate the occupier. We commend them and call upon trade union and labor activists around the world to emulate their example and act in the name of international workers’ solidarity to refuse to handle Zionist cargo, end all partnerships with the Zionist Histadrut, and engage in full solidarity with their brother and sister Palestinian workers struggling under the brunt of occupation. We remember the people of Greece shutting down the shipment of U.S. weapons to the occupation state during the aggression against our people in Gaza and the alliance of workers, left and progressive forces that ensured this isolation took place, which must be repeated everywhere!

We call upon all Palestinian, Arab and international students and student organizations to organize, reject and shut down all war criminals at their colleges and universities, to unify the student body against war crimes and occupation and to stand with students in Palestine confronting the occupier. We call upon cultural and academic workers, organizations and institutions to boycott and isolate the cultural and academic institutions of the occupation state. These institutions are part and parcel of the Zionist fabric of the state, sponsored by the occupation state itself, engaged in active and silent complicity, service and public relations for the criminal, racist, illegitimate occupier state. There is no welcome and no partnership for the occupier and its crimes. We commend all who have taken up this boycott around the world in support of the mass Palestinian call and urge all to redouble their efforts in this regard!

The war criminals who head the illegitimate, racist, Zionist settler-colonial occupation state called Israel must continue to meet with vocal, loud, disruptive opposition wherever they go. They can and should be prevented from speaking and traveling. They must know that wherever they go, they will be held accountable for their actions and they will not escape the justice of the people of the world.

The Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine greets all around the world who stand with the people of Palestine. Together, we call: “Victory for the resistance! Freedom for all the prisoners! Return for all the refugees! Independence, self-determination, and the liberation of all of Palestine!” Shut down these war criminals – they will speak only when they are brought to trial for their crimes!

Olmert protests highlight growing opposition to Israeli crimes

Olmert protests highlight growing opposition to Israeli crimes

A speech by Former Prime Minister of Israel Ehud Olmert at the University of Chicago was disrupted on October 15th, with protesters both inside and outside the venue objecting to the presence of a man responsible for atrocities during two military actions: the Lebanese conflict in 2006, and the incursion into the Gaza strip in December of 2008.

more about “Confronting the war criminal Ehud Olm…“, posted with vodpod

Protests inside and out

Protesters outside, numbering around 150, held signs and chanted.  Some decried Olmert as a criminal, while others voiced their opposition to his presence without a countervailing Palestinian viewpoint.  During the speech, protestors inside disrupted the proceedings on numerous occasions, reading the names of women and children killed during the recent Gaza incursion, and chanting “Goldstone” repeatedly.

Goldstone report

Commonly referred to as the Goldstone report,  Justice Richard Goldstone’s report from the United Nations Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza conflict details  numerous Israeli war crimes committed during Operation Cast Lead in 2008-2009, the result of which was the deaths of over 1400 people, including 340 children.  In fact, the United Nations General Assembly is set to consider the report on Wednesday, November 4th, to examine crimes committed by both the Israeli Defense Force and Hamas militants.
Fear of travel due to crimes

Recognition of Israel’s crimes continues to grow worldwide.  A prominent human rights lawyer in the United Kingdom has stated that Olmert could face arrest for war crimes if he were to enter the United Kingdom.  Other Isreali officials have been cautioned about traveling throughout Europe, including both civilian and military personnel who could face prosecution under ‘universal jurisdiction’ for greivous crimes against humanity.

Changing world opinion

Isreal’s actions have generally been apologized for in the West, often cast as defensive actions in the face of a barbaric enemy.  As facts show, however, since 2000, the proportion of Palestinian dead to Isreali dead is 6 to 1.  Following the bloody Gaza incursion,  it has become much more difficult for Israeli apologists to justify the actions of an occupying power whose indiscriminate use of force on a subjugated population has killed so many.  While there are certainly crimes worthy of discussion both sides of the Isreali-Palestinian conflict, it is well past time that the West evaluates the actions of Israel with objectivity.

Confronting the war criminal Ehud Olmert at the University of Chicago (again, and again, and again)

Many, many thanks to the Electronic Intifada http://www.youtube.com/user… http://electronicintifada.net for sneaking a camera into this event and providing the footage.On 15 October 2009, for…

The nature of the beast

The nature of the beast

By Ayesha Siddiqa

Soldiers keep guard on top of Kund mountain near Kotkai village. The state has buried its head in the sand by arguing that while there is a problem in Waziristan, there is hardly anything to worry about in Punjab. –Photo by Reuters/Faisal Mahmood

The series of recent terrorist attacks call for a close analysis of the militant threat and the formulation of a strategy to ward off such tragedies. At the moment, we seem to be jumping from one target to another, fighting some enemies and denying the existence of others. Hence the plan lacks strategic depth as the state appears to pursue one type of enemy leaving out others.

It will help to explain that the state of Pakistan is confronted with three enemies that are closely intertwined. Firstly, there is Al Qaeda, which comprises Arabs, Uzbeks and a select group of Pakistanis. Then there is the Taliban who consist of different branches including the Afghan Taliban in Afghanistan. The latter are ideologically connected to the group known as the Pakistani Taliban who, although they consider Mullah Omar their ameer-ul-momineen, are engaged in fighting a battle inside Pakistan to capture the state.

This is considered essential to establish a system that could then be taken to the rest of the world. A glance through Farzana Sheikh’s recent book Making Sense of Pakistan demonstrates that some modern Muslim thinkers such as Abul Ala Maududi and Allama Iqbal also considered the state as a forum. However, this is not to suggest that these two thinkers advocated using violence in the same way as the Taliban.

Then there are the Punjab-based Salafi-jihadi groups wrongly termed as the Punjabi Taliban. Actually, Taliban is a term that has a certain historical context and can only be used in the case of the Afghan Taliban. Nevertheless, the Punjabi jihadis are ideologically-driven and keen to take on the state.

The various Punjab-based groups or those connected with Punjab assist others in Waziristan and Swat. They even use the tribal areas as a hideout. For example ‘Commander’ Ilyas Kashmiri, who heads the 313 Brigade of the Harkat-ul-Jihad-ul-Islami (Huji), took refuge in Waziristan in 2005 after he developed problems with Pakistan’s military. Then there is the Amjad Farooqi group, which was also involved in the assassination attempt on Pervez Musharraf.

The above description is meant to demonstrate that since the enemy is diverse, it cannot just be seen through the single lens of the Taliban. Unfortunately, the state has buried its head in the sand by arguing that while there is a problem in Waziristan, there is hardly anything to worry about in Punjab. The Punjab government in particular seems to deny the fact that there are Punjabis involved in religious militancy. The Punjabi jihadis, in fact, are crucial because they mingle easily with the crowd in places where the attack is to be carried out.

The attackers must reconnoitre the target in advance before chalking out a plan. An outsider can be spotted easily. Thus the dependence on Punjab-based militants to carry out attacks in the capital or Lahore. Recently, it was claimed that the mastermind of the Marriott bombing and the GHQ attack was caught from Bahawalpur.

Reading such reports one wonders why the Punjab government is going on the defensive, withholding information about the presence of militants in Punjab, especially southern Punjab. Naming southern Punjab as a possible place for jihadi recruitment does not mean that youth from other places such as Faisalabad, Gujranwala or Lahore are not involved. However, the concentration of religious militants is in this region.

This fact is logical because of the link between three major militant outfits in southern Punjab. One could argue that the government might not want people to concentrate on this region because of the presence of outfits which do not fight the state, such as Jaish-i-Mohammad or Lashkar-i-Taiba, and that the problem is only with the breakaway factions, as ISPR spokesman Maj-Gen Athar Abbas recently argued. But the fact is that no one can control individuals or groups breaking away from the mother organisation and linking up with the Taliban or Al Qaeda.

It is amazing the extent to which the government can go to withhold information about the seemingly ‘friendly’ groups. For instance, recently during a television programme Punjab Law Minister Rana Sanaullah went out of his way to suggest that the Jaish-controlled madressah, which is also the outfit’s headquarters, is not a no-go area. He even tried to make a lame excuse when informed that a team from a local channel was attacked when they tried to take shots of the area from the outside.

More interestingly, the minister immediately accused me of using a western lens to look at the situation, an accusation also made by Jaish-i-Mohammad in its weekly magazine Al Qalam. The article was written with the specific purpose to incite people against me. The writer had twisted words and facts from one of my previous articles and presented them in a way that made me appear as an enemy. This was immediately brought to the knowledge of the interior ministry, which promised to provide help. Intriguingly, it took the Bahawalpur DPO more than three hours to make the first contact. The lapse might have been at either end but considering that I could survive for three hours I declined their help.

In any case, one does not expect sympathy from a district administration that has lately been going out of its way to hide the activities of an outfit. The game is that you are not allowed an opportunity to prove anything because the evidence suddenly disappears once you raise a hue and cry.

The Punjab government’s attitude reflects political expediency. A lot of big traders in southern Punjab and other parts of the province who are constituents of the different factions of the Muslim League are believed to finance the outfits both directly and indirectly. This is not to suggest that other political parties are any better.

However, the bottom line is that while as an individual one feels unprotected by the state, it is sad to think that the authorities believe they can deal with religious militancy on a piecemeal basis. A holistic strategy is necessary, not to protect western interests but to safeguard the state and its citizens.

The writer is an independent strategic and political analyst.
ayesha.ibd@gmail.com

A half-fought war

A half-fought war

By Cyril Almeida

Soldiers patrolling during an operation organized by the army in the Kotkai village, South Waziristan. The army can grimly march from one tribal agency to another for years but it will never win this war until it recognises the enemy for what it is. –Photo by Reuters/Faisal Mahmood

As things fall apart around us, it is a struggle to make sense of any of it. Hold your head or cover your face or curl up in the fetal position, escape is impossible.It’s there in the newspapers, on news channels, the streets, homes and offices: the graphic, almost ghoulish, intersection of war and politics in this country. And nobody, not one person screeching on TV or expounding in private, is truly able to explain what is happening.

After months of a quasi-siege of the Baitullah Mehsud network’s lairs in South Waziristan, the army has finally moved in. We were told, in private and sometimes on the record, that there were around 10,000 militants there who needed to be killed or captured. But where have they gone? The ISPR’s figures don’t add up; a dozen killed here, a handful captured there, a few score killed or injured elsewhere.

Strongholds of the militants have fallen and been retaken by the army, but it sure doesn’t seem like there is an army of 10,000 militants waiting to fight to the death.

Have the militants done the equivalent of circling the wagons in a small area? Or have they laid elaborate defences to trip up the army and escaped elsewhere?

I can’t help but recall a short, telling exchange at a briefing in Islamabad on the eve of Operation Rah-i-Nijat. The army official was confident that the militants couldn’t flee to Afghanistan because there is a strip of land between the Mehsud strongholds and the Pak-Afghan border where troops were lying in wait to snare the militants.

Yes, but could they not escape via North Waziristan, asked one of the country’s better-informed militancy analysts. If there was an answer, I didn’t hear it and the briefing moved on.

A central problem of the military operations undertaken in the last year and a half is now becoming apparent: the TTP militants have fanned out in so many parts of Fata and northwest Pakistan that the army may be trapped in a dangerous game of whack-a-mole.

Swat, Malakand division, Bajaur, Mohmand, Khyber and now South Waziristan — that’s already a long list of areas in which operations have been undertaken. But, from a security point of view, the alarming thing is that after each area the army enters, new threats begin to be pointed out elsewhere.

Even as the operation in South Waziristan continues, fears have been raised about a ‘second base’ of the militants in Kurram and Orakzai agencies. We have seen this before; during Operation Rah-i-Rast in Malakand division, South Waziristan was pointed out as the ‘centre of gravity’ of militancy. Before that, during the operations in Bajaur and Mohmand, other areas were similarly pointed out.

It is too soon to say, but the army must be aware of the possibility of being dragged into a quagmire, a situation in which it is forced to fan out across Fata and NWFP to deny the militants a ‘base’ but unable to do anything about the militants’ preferred tactic of striking at the soft underbelly of the state inside the country’s cities and towns.

Of course, a counter-insurgency was always going to be a drawn-out, messy affair and these are early days yet, but given the sub-optimal nature of the state it’s not clear if a sequential approach to counter-insurgency can win this war. By sequential I don’t just mean a series of military operations in various parts of the country, but the other crucial element of a successful counter-insurgency: counter-terrorism measures, especially in the cities and towns.

At the moment, the intelligence and law-enforcement agencies seem simply overwhelmed by the wave of violence in Pakistan’s cities and they are playing a desperate game of catch-up. The government of the day will always get the blame for these failures, and to an extent that is correct, but the fact is the issue goes deeper than that: the state itself is not geared towards effective, let alone adequate, counter-terrorism measures.

The militants will know that if they can sustain a wave of terrorist violence across the country, pressure will build on the army and the government in the weeks and months ahead for ‘peace talks’ and ‘deals’ that will once again give the militants’ breathing space in their tribal strongholds. But strengthening the intelligence, surveillance and law-enforcement planks to stop, or at least slow down, the wave of violence is not just a matter of throwing more resources at the problem.

More resources are needed, absolutely, but time and time again knowledgeable analysts point to something else: the lack of will in the army to call a spade a spade and to discard its prioritisation approach, wherein it only regards those groups which are directly, repeatedly and ferociously attacking the state as a threat that needs to be tackled immediately.

If evidence for this was needed, it came during that same briefing on the eve of Operation Rah-i-Nijat. The Laskhar-i-Taiba, we were told, was being deliberately conflated with Al Qaeda as part of an Indian plan to get the state here to do something about a problem that bothered the Indians the most.

There was an acceptance that south Punjab did pose some problem and the correct approach of using civilian agencies rather than the army to fight it was admitted, but you can’t help but wonder: how genuinely can we be fighting all elements of the toxic brew of militancy in the country today when the army is still trotting out the Indian propaganda line?

And the obvious corollary: how can we expect to win this war if we aren’t fighting all the pieces in the militancy jigsaw? Have a look at the names and domiciles of the militants blamed for the current wave of violence in the country. At least half, if not a majority, of them are Punjabi, not tribal.

The army can grimly march from one tribal agency to another for years, give its troops the best counter-insurgency training possible, get all the equipment it needs, but it will never win this war until it recognises the enemy for what it is: deadly, complex, hydra-headed and capable of growing elsewhere even as parts of it are hacked off.

cyril.a@gmail.com

Neglected hearts and minds

Neglected hearts and minds

Neglected hearts and minds

Posted by Sana Saleem

Operation Rah-i-Nijat, ‘the path to deliverance’ is the name given to the military operation in South Waziristan. But as the military makes inroads in the tribal area, evoking a spirit of redemption amongst the locals seems to be the most challenging aspect.

As military troops enter a decisive battle in the heart of the Taliban stronghold, over 120,000 locals have been forced to flee their houses. The exodus is not expected to be as big as that from Swat since the population of the tribal agency is nearly half that of the Malakand division. Still, prompt actions need to be taken.

It is important to note that the differences between the humanitarian crises in Malakand and Waziristan are significant, and involve more than just a numbers game. With the Rah-i-Rast operation in Swat, the military was aided by local lashkars in their fight against insurgents who had occupied the valley. In Waziristan, however, the military is not expected to enjoy local support, which makes things more challenging. Unlike Swat, where militants were outsiders to begin with, the Taliban in Waziristan are amongst the local Mehsud tribe, making things far more complex.

For that reason, the military’s fight in Waziristan will have to go well beyond warfare. It will not only be about battling militants, but also winning the hearts of the locals. In an early gesture to counter Taliban propaganda and win hearts and minds, leaflets – both in Urdu and Pashto – containing a message from the Chief of Army Staff were dropped in Mehsud areas. The purpose was to clarify that the army’s war is not against the Mehsud tribe, but against the Taliban in particular. The pamphlets stated:

The aim of current military operation is not to attack proud and patriotic Mehsud but it is to save them from the clutches of ruthless terrorists who have destroyed peace of the whole region.

The message speaks volumes about the mindset of the locals in Waziristan and the challenges in store for the Pakistan government and military.

These initial attempts by the army to distinguish between Taliban militants and ordinary Mehsud tribesmen have not been too effective, though, and the people fleeing from Waziristan appear to be disillusioned by the ongoing operation. Despite reassurances, the locals still feel that their background immediately provokes discrimination. According to reports, most of the IDPs fleeing Waziristan have alleged discrimination by the authorities and say they are being coldly received as compared to those who fled from Swat. The attitude the tribal displaced are encountering is no doubt humiliating and unwelcoming.

For their part, the authorities justify the strict treatment of refugees by pointing to intelligence reports accusing the majority of the locals of being supportive of the Taliban. The fear of Taliban sneaking out of the tribal area with the displaced locals is higher than ever before. As a result, the IDP camps are not a friendly abode. Most of those fleeing Waziristan are thus refusing to stay in camps, and are renting houses, a decision that makes them vulnerable to security checks (for example, they have been asked to provide adequate paper work as guarantees).

Alarmingly, the anti-Taliban locals are not very hopeful about the operation. Popular belief amongst them pits the army operation as a ‘power show,’ rather than a significant step towards eliminating the Taliban. Forced to evacuate their homes and suffer ill-treatment at the hands of security personnel for a mission that they do not fully believe in makes the IDPs of Waziristan particularly vulnerable to Taliban recruitment.

The fact is, the attitude of the authorities and the public at large towards the Mehsuds is one of caution and fear more than sympathy and concern. Such prejudice only bolsters the Taliban agenda, fueling recruitment from among Mehsud ranks. But the war cannot be won if the Waziristan locals show indifference towards the need for combating Taliban and their infrastructure. Without winning the hearts of the people, the military’s victory will only be temporary. If we want this to be a ‘decisive blow,’ we have to overcome our insecurities and let sympathy overcome prejudice.

Dire situations such as these require us to rise as a nation. Let us extend our support to the IDPs of Waziristan, regardless of their past and their support for the Taliban. This is our chance to help our people break free from the shackles of the Taliban. Let’s take the path of salvation together.

sanasaleem80x80 Sana Saleem is a Features Editor at BEE magazine and blogs at Global Voices

A Taliban haven inside Pakistan?

A Taliban haven inside Pakistan?

By CLIFFORD D. MAY
Scripps Howard News Service

Almost a year ago, New York Times correspondent David Rohde was abducted by the Taliban. I was in Afghanistan at the time and, like many Westerners in the country, I heard about it but agreed not to write about it. Publicity, it was thought, could increase the danger Rohde faced. Even so, over the months that followed, many people figured he would not be seen again except, perhaps, on a videotape with hooded jihadis ecstatically applying a butcher knife to his infidel throat.

But Rohde survived seven months in captivity — briefly, in Afghanistan, then in the Taliban-controlled areas of Pakistan — before managing to escape. His account of this period, published in The Times, is riveting. It is revealing, too — though sometimes in ways Rohde does not articulate and may not intend.

When Rohde’s captors took him across the border into Pakistan, he was “astonished” to find “a Taliban mini-state that flourished openly and with impunity….Taliban policemen patrolled the streets.”

The obvious implication is that the Pakistani government and military were permitting the Taliban to maintain elaborate bases of operation, safe havens where combatants could rest, train and prepare to fight American and Afghan forces on the other side of the frontier.

Has that changed? It’s too soon to say. Recently, while I was visiting Pakistan, the Taliban attacked the military’s General Headquarters, the equivalent of the Pentagon. Since then, a major campaign against the Taliban has been launched in Waziristan.

Does the Pakistani military possesses both the will and the capability to clear the region of Taliban forces and keep it clear for the long run? Perhaps that should be determined before aid to Pakistan is tripled as envisioned under legislation signed by President Barack Obama recently.

Rohde writes that, before his kidnapping, he viewed the Taliban “as a form of ‘al-Qaeda lite,’ a religiously motivated movement primarily focused on controlling Afghanistan.” In captivity, however, he learned that “the goal of the hard-line Taliban was far more ambitious. Contact with foreign militants in the tribal areas appeared to have deeply affected many young Taliban fighters. They wanted to create a fundamentalist Islamic emirate with al-Qaeda that spanned the Muslim world.”

In fact, the evidence suggests this is not new. Though groups such as the Taliban — as well as Hezbollah and Hamas — may fight locally, their leaders have always thought globally, viewing their struggles as part of a broader War Against the West.

The claims that these groups are fighting “national liberation struggles,” that their only goal is to free themselves from “foreign occupation,” are talking points to be used when addressing credulous Westerners, of which there never seems to be a shortage.

The happy ending to Rohde’s story is that he and Tahir Luddin, an Afghan journalist kidnapped with him, escaped late one night while their guards slept. They walked to a nearby Pakistani military base.

Among the questions Rohde does not raise: What arrangement did the Pakistani soldiers on the base have with the terrorists in the surrounding town? Did they know that an American journalist was being held virtually under their noses? Were they just not interested? And what does Pakistani intelligence know now — or what could it learn and share — regarding bin Laden’s whereabouts?

— Former New York Times foreign correspondent Cliff May is president of the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies, a policy institute focusing on terrorism.

Iran’s Sunni militants carve secretive path

Iran’s Sunni militants carve secretive path

By KATHY GANNON (AP) – 1 day ago

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan — Seven years ago, a little-known group called Jundallah emerged in Iran with claims to fight for the rights of minority Sunnis in the unruly tribal areas near the border with Pakistan.

But just last week, Iranian leaders say, this shadowy group with reported connections to countries as diverse as the U.S., Pakistan and Saudi Arabia delivered a devastating attack on Iran’s elite Revolutionary Guard. The Oct. 18 suicide bombing in an Iranian border village killed at least 42 people, including top Revolutionary Guard commanders.

The bombing suggests that ambitions by Jundallah — the Soldiers of God — have risen, and that the group is moving toward a wider uprising. Jundallah’s attack on a Shiite mosque in May and recent use of suicide bombers could point to the growing influence of militant Islamic groups seeking a Sunni revolt against Shiite control in Iran, experts say.

Recent Jundallah attacks “express a clear will for a definitive rupture with the regime in Tehran,” said Stephane Dudoignon, a Paris-based researcher who specializes in the Baluchi region. “It seems to be announcing an unprecedented escalation of violence in the months and years to come.”

Last week’s bombing also shows how Jundallah has become a magnet for theories and suspicions. Immediately after the attack, leaders in Tehran drew a far-reaching web of accusations linking Jundallah to supporters in Pakistan, Britain and the United States. All three nations quickly rejected the claims.

The rumblings — never clearly confirmed or debunked — span from covert U.S. aid, to indoctrination by Islamic radicals to links to smuggling networks. Reports by regional experts and interviews with security officials, including a former military chief in Pakistan, suggest Jundallah has benefited from U.S. and Pakistani help and, more recently, may have drifted closer to anti-Shiite militants with links to Saudi Arabia.

The claims of Jundallah’s outside contacts could not be independently verified. They lend support, however, to long-standing speculation of U.S. and Pakistani encouragement to the group in efforts to rattle Iranian authorities with a low-level rebellion.

Gen. Aslam Beg, a former army chief of staff in Pakistan, told The Associated Press that the border village of Mand has been used as a staging point for U.S. contacts with Jundallah. U.S. aid also was funneled into the region through the Pakistani ports of Kot Kalmat and Jiwani, he alleged.

Beg, who left military service in the early 1990s, gave no other details or definitive timeline on the alleged U.S. links to Jundallah, which operates in one of the most inaccessible areas in the region.

In an article for Time.com, former CIA field officer Robert Baer wrote that the CIA had “sporadic” contact with Jundallah, but it was largely restricted to intelligence.

“A relationship with Jundallah was never formalized,” Baer wrote.

An officer with Pakistan’s paramilitary Frontier Corps, who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the topic, said he could shed no light on Beg’s claims. But he added that Pakistan would never allow its territory to be used for attacks against a neighbor.

Officials in Washington and London also reject any links. Shortly after the suicide bombing, State Department spokesman Ian Kelly called claims of U.S. involvement “completely false.”

Yet Washington has been less clear on how it views Jundallah. The group has not been placed on any terrorist watch list or designation. Instead, it’s been described in various U.S. reports as an “opposition group” or “militant” faction.

A U.S. official, speaking on condition of anonymity to discuss internal administration deliberations, said a decision on Jundallah could come soon, but declined to elaborate. Options include designating Jundallah a “Foreign Terrorist Organization” or placing it to one of several other terrorism blacklists.

Britain, too, denies any ties and has condemned Jundallah attacks. “They had nothing to do with the U.K.,” Britain’s Foreign Office said in a statement.

Experts estimate Jundallah has between 250 and 1,000 fighters. They are believed bankrolled by kidnapping-for-ransom plots and smuggling goods, such as subsidized Iranian fuel, into fellow Baluchi tribal areas in Pakistan and southern Afghanistan.

Jundallah’s statements in the past have called for greater rights and prosperity for Iran’s Baluchi region, which is inaccessible to journalists. But a July report by the Norwegian Defense Research Establishment cites indications that Jundallah has been building ties to Pakistani militant groups, including Lashkar-e-Janghvi and Tehrik-e-Taliban.

Both groups are battling Pakistan’s military offensive into its northwestern Waziristan region.

“The story of Jundallah is the story of how an ethnic resistance movement has transformed into a violent sectarian group adopting tactical and ideological elements from the global jihadi movement,” said the report.

After last week’s suicide blast, Iran sent Interior Minister Mostafa Mohammad Najjar to Islamabad to press Iran’s claims that Pakistan allows Jundallah to operate on its territory — a charge Pakistan denied.

The two countries agreed to set up a joint border monitoring unit. But tensions quickly returned after Pakistan on Monday detained 11 Iranian agents who crossed the rugged border in apparent pursuit of smugglers. Authorities first identified them as Revolutionary Guard members, but then altered the statement to call them only security officers.

Although Pakistan and Iran have pledged cooperation to crack down on Jundallah, the two nations have been deeply at odds on other regional issues.

Pakistan was among the main international backers of Afghanistan’s Taliban, which was fiercely opposed by Tehran. Iran even backed the U.S.-aided Northern Alliance that helped topple the Taliban after the Sept. 11 attacks.

Jundallah’s rise could be an outgrowth of other tensions between the two nations.

A former police official familiar with the region said the government of former President Gen. Pervez Musharraf gave Jundallah space to operate in 2003 and 2004. It came after Iran contributed intelligence that linked Pakistani nuclear scientist A.Q. Khan to an international smuggling ring providing nuclear material and technology.

Speaking on condition of anonymity because he feared retribution from Pakistani intelligence, the official said that Musharraf also opened the floodgates to money from Saudi Arabia. The funds were used to build madrassas, or religious schools, in the Baluchi area and elsewhere espousing the austere Deobandi sect of Sunni Islam, the official said.

Pakistan’s top Interior Ministry official, Rehman Malik, said Jundallah leader Abdulmalik Rigi was hiding in Afghanistan.

Yet Rigi has given several interviews from Pakistan this year, including one to Al-Arabiya television, claiming it trains its fighters in camps outside Iran. Rigi did not specifically name Pakistan, but most experts believe there are substantial cross-border ties.

“We train 20, 30 or 50 men every month and then send them in. So far we have trained over 2,000 men,” Rigi told Al-Arabiya in September. “We’re an Islamic Awakening movement. … We suffer economic problems and very meager resources.”

On both sides of the border, ethnic Baluchis are among the poorest and least educated, according to U.N. statistics.

“Apart from the narcotics trafficking, I don’t know what they do there,” said Christine Fair, regional expert at the RAND Corp.

Associated Press writers Brian Murphy in Dubai, United Arab Emirates, Paisley Dodds in London and Matthew Lee in Washington contributed to this report.