US Training Centers in Pakistan to Increase, Since No One Objects

US military planning to set up new training centres in Pakistan

* US defence official says staffing new centres could require increase in US forces in Pakistan

WASHINGTON: The US military is planning to set up new training centres inside Pakistan where American special operations trainers would work with Pakistani forces close to the Afghan border battle zone, a senior defence official said.

The new centres would supplement two already operating in Pakistan, and they would be used to accelerate and expand the training of Pakistani forces considered key to rooting out Al Qaeda leaders hiding along the mountainous border, the official said.

Increased numbers: Staffing the new centres would require an increase in the more than 100 US special operations forces in Pakistan, but Pentagon officials do not yet know how much of a boost would be needed, said the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity.

US officials see their effort to train Pakistan’s forces, which includes the country’s paramilitary Frontier Corps, its Special Service Group commandos and its Army, as a growing success.

Welcomed by Islamabad, the training has helped repair America’s fragile relationship with the Pakistanis, while also giving elite US special operations forces better access to the rugged border region dominated by Al Qaeda and its militant allies.

At the same time, the small but growing numbers of American troops inside Pakistan have also become targets. Last week, three US special operations soldiers participating in a low-profile programme were killed and two others wounded by a roadside bomb. Military aid to Pakistan is considered key to winning the Afghan war and the ongoing fight against Al Qaeda and the Taliban. ap

Obama Notices Outsourcing–Feigns Concern

Obama calls outsourcing to India unfair practice

2010-02-12 21:09:41

Washington: Accusing US companies outsourcing business to India of following unfair business practices, President Barack Obama says his proposal to tax firms shipping jobs overseas was only intended to provide a level playing field. “If you are a business here, entirely located in the United States, and investing in the United States, and hiring workers in the United States, you are paying a 35 percent rate,” he said in an Oval office interview with Bloomberg/Businessweek. “If you are a multinational and you are investing in India, and your workforce is in India, and your plants and equipment are in India, but your headquarters are here, you are taking deductions on all the expenses in India, but you are keeping your profits outside the United States, that just doesn’t seem entirely fair,” Obama said. “The same is true where you have companies that have 90 percent of their sales in the United States, but are posting 90 percent of their profits overseas.” “You get a sense there that the accountants have been busy,” he said, suggesting that these companies were taking unfair advantage of current tax laws. Obama said taking note of “some legitimate concerns” about a similar proposal last year, “we made modifications around some of these proposals.” More on outsourcing Some US companies had then “pointed out, well, we may be investing a lot in R&D here in the United States, but we have got to have factories or sales forces outside the United States, and you don’t want to discourage [companies] from doing that.” “But our goal here is simply to make sure that there is an even playing field between businesses who are investing in the United States, hiring US workers, selling to a lot of customers here as well as overseas, and those who are operating across borders,” Obama said. “And that is an area where there can be some legitimate debate, but certainly shouldn’t be portrayed, somehow, as being anti-business.”

Jewish “Tolerance”–vs–Muslim Bones

Row over plan to build Jewish museum of tolerance on site of Muslim cemetery Rory McCarthy Dyala Husseini visits a Muslim cemetery, where her ancestors are buried, near the construction site of a museum dedicated to tolerance. Photograph: Dan Balilty/AP • Islamic groups say site contains thousands of graves • Petition challenges court’s decision to back project February 11, 2010 A group of Palestinians descended from 15 of Jerusalem’s oldest Arab families lodged a protest with the UN today in a fresh effort to prevent the construction of a “Museum of Tolerance” on the site of an ancient Muslim cemetery. The project, run by the Simon Wiesenthal Centre in Los Angeles, has been dogged by controversy since its launch in 2004. Islamic groups and individual Palestinians complained that the site, in west Jerusalem, was the ancient cemetery of Ma’man Allah, also known as Mamilla, which housed thousands of graves dating back hundreds of years and where even today there are still many gravestones and tombs. The Simon Wiesenthal Centre argued the site was adjacent to the cemetery and that construction would be on what is today a municipal car park. After legal battles, the Israeli Supreme Court ruled in October 2008 that building could go ahead. But the Israel Antiquities Authority’s chief excavator for the site, Gideon Suleimani, found the site was a cemetery in use for the past 1,000 years that “abounded with graves” and should not be open to construction without a full excavation, which never happened. He said his assessment was ignored by the court. Then late last year Frank Gehry, the celebrity architect working on the project, withdrew. Some 60 Palestinians have signed a petition which was lodged today in Geneva with several UN bodies, including the high commissioner for human rights, the special rapporteur on freedom of religion and belief and Unesco, the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation. “This construction project has resulted in the undignified disinterment and disposal of several hundred graves and human remains, the exact amount and whereabouts of which are currently unknown and threatens to erect a monument to ‘Human Dignity’ and ‘Tolerance’ atop thousands more graves,” the petition says. It describes the project as a violation of international human rights law and calls for a halt to construction, the reburial of all the remains and the preservation of the cemetery as a protected site. “This tolerance museum to us is a museum of intolerance,” said Dyala Husseini, who has ancestors from her family and her husband’s family buried in the cemetery. “It is very inhumane, it is very humiliating and it ignores our existence as Palestinian families here in Jerusalem. Our families are here in Jerusalem and have been here for centuries,” she said. Jamal Nusseibeh said one of his ancestors, the former governor of Jerusalem Burhan al-Din al-Khazraji ibn Nusseibeh, was buried in the cemetery in 1432. “It is part of the rich fabric of Jerusalem which always has been a symbol of tolerance,” he said. “The fact that anybody could wish to wipe out such a structural part of this fabric in order somehow to promote tolerance is very hard to understand.” Last month Rabbi Marvin Hier, the Simon Wiesenthal Centre’s founder, said the project was on a “fantastic site in the heart of Jerusalem” and would bring “to Jerusalem and the people of Israel, a project of crucial significance to its future”. The centre has said the museum is being built on a car park next to the cemetery and that there was no protest about the construction of the car park 50 years ago. “Is it better to let this site remain a parking lot, or build a centre for human dignity there, which would teach young people mutual respect and social responsibility?” it said after the Israeli Supreme Court ruled in its favour. The petition contains maps, photographs and other documents to make the case that the museum site is on the grounds of the cemetery, as is the car park. When the car park was built in the early 1960s there were protests, the petition says, but Palestinians in Israel were under military law, which severely curtailed their civil rights, including their ability to challenge the work.

:: Article nr. 63171 sent on 11-feb-2010 14:02 ECT
www.uruknet.info?p=63171

Link: www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/feb/10/jewish-museum-tolerance-muslim-cemetery

Waging War On Japan Through Toyota

[Nothing could have helped GM and Ford more than the tragedy unfolding for Toyota today.  Very few things could have made the sinking American economy look like an attractive place to invest in, even if just for a short while, than this episode has.  The pay-off to America is far too great to be blamed on mere "coincidence" or "serendipity."] Obama waging economic warfare on several fronts, including Japan By Wayne Madsen Online Journal Contributing Writer

(WMR) – The Obama administration has expanded its economic warfare against other countries, first reported on January 18 by WMR in the case of anauthorized financial campaign against Venezuela. The Obama administration, according to WMR’s Asian sources, is waging an economic warfare campaign, coupled with industrial sabotage, against Japan through a pre-planned operation directed against the Japanese automobile manufacturer, Toyota.

WMR has learned that the Obama administration authorized the anti-Toyota campaign as a warning shot to Japan over its reformist government’s insistence that the U.S. pull its military troops out of Okinawa. WMR has learned that Obama and his chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, have decided to turn the screws on Japan, not only for auto market leverage, but also to punish Japan over the insistence by Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama and the newly-elected anti-U.S. military mayor of Nago on Okinawa to move the U.S. military off of Okinawa.

Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood, a former congressman from Peoria, Illinois, and who is owned and operated by Peoria-based Caterpillar, whose major competitor is Japan’s Kubota Tractor Corporation, kicked off the anti-Toyota campaign when he stated that all Toyoya owners should stop driving their vehicles and return them to the dealership for a fix. LaHood was referring to a problem with some uncontrolled acceleration problems with some Toyota vehicles. However, LaHood painted a wide brush in his comments about Toyotas when the problem, which resulted in a voluntary recall of millions of Toyota vehicles, including the popular Camry and Corolla, by the Japanese auto giant, affected only a small fraction of Toyota vehicles. LaHood has also threatened Toyota with unspecified civil penalties.

Asian intelligence agencies have discovered that LaHood was implementing a White House operation to grab a major portion of Toyota’s market share and hand it over the General Motors and Ford. The Obama administration, through its bailout of GM, has become a virtual auto company and, therefore, is playing economic hardball with Japan. Ford also benefited from the Obama administration’s stimulus package. The chief architects of the anti-Toyota campaign, according to our sources, are Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner and White House Chief of Staff Emanuel.

By increasing GM’s viability at the expense of Toyota, Geithner sees a potential windfall when the federal government sells its share of GM stock to the public. The corporate media have played along with the Obama administration’s anti-Toyota and anti-Japan operation by hyping the safety issues with Toyota’s vehicles, especially the popular Prius hybrid vehicle. The Obama administration has decided on economic warfare against Toyota to restore GM as the world’s number one auto manufacturer, a position enjoyed by GM until 2007 when Toyota overtook it in sales.

The Japanese government is aware of the machinations of the Obama administration in creating the controversy about Toyota. Tokyo is also acutely aware of the ill effects the Toyota recall is having on the value of the yen vis a vis the dollar.

Informed sources point out to WMR that some 37,000 Americans died last year in road accidents. The issue of sticky accelerator pedals arose last year after a California Highway Patrolman and three of his family members were killed when their Lexus ES350 attained speeds in excess of 120 mph and struck another vehicle and was propelled off an embankment, bursting into flames. One of the passengers in the Lexus reported in a 911 call that the accelerator was stuck. There is a controversy over whether the crash was caused by electronics or the floor mat. Toyota recalled millions of vehicles last October over concerns that gas pedals were catching on floor mats.

Ironically, Toyota does not make the sensor-equipped accelerator pedal for its recalled vehicles. Elkhart, Indiana-based CTS (formerly known as Chicago Telephone Supply) manufactures the pedals for Toyota, as well as for Ford and GM. China’s Jiangling Motors has complained about sticking gas pedals from CTS and the firm has developed a reputation for faulty accelerator pedals and their associated sensors. CTS’s president and CEO is India-born Vinod Khilnani. Curiously, the Obama administration, which is flush with Indian-Americans at high levels, has not criticized CTS, especially since it supplied the very same accelerator pedals it manufactures for Toyota and GM to the U.S. military.

WMR has learned additional details about the hype by the Obama administration over Toyota’s accelerator pedals. We are informed by a knowledgeable source that the earlier problem with 2002-2004 Toyota models regarding the so-called sticking floor mat has nothing to do with Toyota Corporation, since the mats are fastened to the floorboard with clips and there’s a space around each pedal. The problem occurs when a cheap substitute carpet is installed by a garage or a cheating dealer. Toyota always prefers to see its own products used inside their vehicles. WMR has also learned that the Prius brake problem is not serious and that it is caused by a difference in torque when the car switches from engine to electric motors.

Some may question why the Obama administration chose to target Toyota in its economic warfare campaign and not other Japanese auto manufacturers. The major shareholder in Isuzu is GM, which the Obama administration effectively owns. In addition, Ford owns Mazda.

The CTS-manufactured accelerator pedal used in Toyotas relies on an electronic pressure sensor. WMR has been informed by knowledgeable sources that the sensors are vulnerable to non-civilian frequencies. The Obama administration, fearful that military transmissions may be responsible for accelerator accidents, may have sought to jump the gun by blaming Toyota for the accelerator problems.

The last time an American president authorized a major economic intelligence operation against Japan was during the administration of Bill Clinton. In 1995, Clinton authorized NSA to spy on companies like Toyota and Nissan during U.S. trade negotiations with Japan over Japanese luxury car imports to the United States. George H W Bush also used NSA to eavesdrop on Indonesia during negotiations between that government and Japan’s NEC on a major multi-million dollar telecommunications contract. Bush shared the intelligence with AT&T, a competitor of NEC on the Indonesian contract. On January 30, Obama met with former President George H. W. Bush at the White House in what was described as a “courtesy call.”

In addition to Japan, the Obama administration is also waging war on the “soft underbelly” of the European Union. The Treasury and the Federal Reserve Bank have decided that if the national economies of the “PIGS” — Portugal, Italy, Greece, and Spain – are attacked, the euro will fall against the dollar, since the European Central Bank will be forced to bail out the most vulnerable large economies in the European Union. Spanish Prime Minister Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero, a Socialist, recently attended the National Prayer Breakfast meeting in Washington, also attended by Obama, in order to plead Spain’s case. Apparently, Zapatero came away empty-handed and he was roundly criticized for attending an event sponsored by an ultra-right wing group, The Fellowship, which had ties with the Spanish fascist government of Francisco Franco. Obama also snubbed Zapatero, the current president of the rotating EU presidency, by saying he would not attend an EU-US summit scheduled for Madrid in May.

Obama’s worsening relations with China, developing from the U.S. administration’s agreement to sell advanced weaponry to Taiwan, and the tweaking of the nose of the Russian bear by placing missile systems in Poland and Romania, have a number of worldwide intelligence agencies wondering whether Obama is trying to outdo George W. Bush in obstinacy and diplomatic bluster.

Previously published in the Wayne Madsen Report.

Copyright © 2010 WayneMadenReport.com

Death Squads In Iraq

View this document on Scribd

America, the Next to Turn Into a Stinking “Greek Tragedy”

A Greek crisis is coming to America

By Niall Ferguson

Published: February 10 2010 20:15 | Last updated: February 10 2010 20:15

It began in Athens. It is spreading to Lisbon and Madrid. But it would be a grave mistake to assume that the sovereign debt crisis that is unfolding will remain confined to the weaker eurozone economies. For this is more than just a Mediterranean problem with a farmyard acronym. It is a fiscal crisis of the western world. Its ramifications are far more profound than most investors currently appreciate.

There is of course a distinctive feature to the eurozone crisis. Because of the way the European Monetary Union was designed, there is in fact no mechanism for a bail-out of the Greek government by the European Union, other member states or the European Central Bank (articles 123 and 125 of the Lisbon treaty). True, Article 122 may be invoked by the European Council to assist a member state that is “seriously threatened with severe difficulties caused by natural disasters or exceptional occurrences beyond its control”, but at this point nobody wants to pretend that Greece’s yawning deficit was an act of God. Nor is there a way for Greece to devalue its currency, as it would have done in the pre-EMU days of the drachma. There is not even a mechanism for Greece to leave the eurozone.

That leaves just three possibilities: one of the most excruciating fiscal squeezes in modern European history – reducing the deficit from 13 per cent to 3 per cent of gross domestic product within just three years; outright default on all or part of the Greek government’s debt; or (most likely, as signalled by German officials on Wednesday) some kind of bail-out led by Berlin. Because none of these options is very appealing, and because any decision about Greece will have implications for Portugal, Spain and possibly others, it may take much horse-trading before one can be reached.

Yet the idiosyncrasies of the eurozone should not distract us from the general nature of the fiscal crisis that is now afflicting most western economies. Call it the fractal geometry of debt: the problem is essentially the same from Iceland to Ireland to Britain to the US. It just comes in widely differing sizes.

What we in the western world are about to learn is that there is no such thing as a Keynesian free lunch. Deficits did not “save” us half so much as monetary policy – zero interest rates plus quantitative easing – did. First, the impact of government spending (the hallowed “multiplier”) has been much less than the proponents of stimulus hoped. Second, there is a good deal of “leakage” from open economies in a globalised world. Last, crucially, explosions of public debt incur bills that fall due much sooner than we expect

For the world’s biggest economy, the US, the day of reckoning still seems reassuringly remote. The worse things get in the eurozone, the more the US dollar rallies as nervous investors park their cash in the “safe haven” of American government debt. This effect may persist for some months, just as the dollar and Treasuries rallied in the depths of the banking panic in late 2008.

Yet even a casual look at the fiscal position of the federal government (not to mention the states) makes a nonsense of the phrase “safe haven”. US government debt is a safe haven the way Pearl Harbor was a safe haven in 1941.

Even according to the White House’s new budget projections, the gross federal debt in public hands will exceed 100 per cent of GDP in just two years’ time. This year, like last year, the federal deficit will be around 10 per cent of GDP. The long-run projections of the Congressional Budget Office suggest that the US will never again run a balanced budget. That’s right, never.

The International Monetary Fund recently published estimates of the fiscal adjustments developed economies would need to make to restore fiscal stability over the decade ahead. Worst were Japan and the UK (a fiscal tightening of 13 per cent of GDP). Then came Ireland, Spain and Greece (9 per cent). And in sixth place? Step forward America, which would need to tighten fiscal policy by 8.8 per cent of GDP to satisfy the IMF.

Explosions of public debt hurt economies in the following way, as numerous empirical studies have shown. By raising fears of default and/or currency depreciation ahead of actual inflation, they push up real interest rates. Higher real rates, in turn, act as drag on growth, especially when the private sector is also heavily indebted – as is the case in most western economies, not least the US.

Although the US household savings rate has risen since the Great Recession began, it has not risen enough to absorb a trillion dollars of net Treasury issuance a year. Only two things have thus far stood between the US and higher bond yields: purchases of Treasuries (and mortgage-backed securities, which many sellers essentially swapped for Treasuries) by the Federal Reserve and reserve accumulation by the Chinese monetary authorities.

But now the Fed is phasing out such purchases and is expected to wind up quantitative easing. Meanwhile, the Chinese have sharply reduced their purchases of Treasuries from around 47 per cent of new issuance in 2006 to 20 per cent in 2008 to an estimated 5 per cent last year. Small wonder Morgan Stanley assumes that 10-year yields will rise from around 3.5 per cent to 5.5 per cent this year. On a gross federal debt fast approaching $15,000bn, that implies up to $300bn of extra interest payments – and you get up there pretty quickly with the average maturity of the debt now below 50 months.

The Obama administration’s new budget blithely assumes real GDP growth of 3.6 per cent over the next five years, with inflation averaging 1.4 per cent. But with rising real rates, growth might well be lower. Under those circumstances, interest payments could soar as a share of federal revenue – from a tenth to a fifth to a quarter.

Last week Moody’s Investors Service warned that the triple A credit rating of the US should not be taken for granted. That warning recalls Larry Summers’ killer question (posed before he returned to government): “How long can the world’s biggest borrower remain the world’s biggest power?”

On reflection, it is appropriate that the fiscal crisis of the west has begun in Greece, the birthplace of western civilization. Soon it will cross the channel to Britain. But the key question is when that crisis will reach the last bastion of western power, on the other side of the Atlantic.

The writer is a contributing editor of the FT and author of ‘The Ascent of Money: A Financial History of the World‘

Obama’s Murder Inc.

by BAR editor and senior columnist Margaret Kimberley February 11, 2010 “There are no warrants or indictments or grand juries impaneled in order for Barack Obama to decide to kill any individual he chooses.” No one has the right to kill, or so we are told. Regardless of motive, murder is illegal, and the legal system rightfully sets the bar at a very high level before excusing this act. Not so where the government is concerned. Our constitutional law professor president, Barack Obama, like his predecessor George W. Bush, claims the right to murder American citizens. After the attacks of September 11, 2001, Bush gave the CIA and later the military, permission to kill American citizens abroad if those persons were declared threats to the United States, its people or its interests. President Obama believes that he too can decide to assassinate Americans if he declares them to be terrorists. This is not some bizarre assertion made by tin foil hat conspiracy theorists. The president’s Director of National Intelligence, Dennis Blair, stated for the record and under oath before a congressional committee, that the president can give “special permission” to target American citizens for death. In words that would make George Orwell proud, Blair explained that the rationale for killing is the taking of actions threatening American lives. “If that direct action — we think that direct action will involve killing an American, we get specific permission to do that.” So, if an American outside of the United States is considered a threat to other American lives, the American suspect can be killed on orders of the president. If that circular logic was followed consistently, then the killers of the terror suspect would also be killed for taking an American life. Of course, that would never happen because acting on behalf of the government absolves any and all criminal behavior. “If an American outside of the United States is considered a threat to other American lives, the American suspect can be killed on orders of the president.” Brown’s assurances are not very comforting and are worthless in any case. There are no checks and balances governing how this permission to kill may be granted. There is no need to prove to congress or to other American citizens when this act is deemed justifiable. There are no warrants or indictments or grand juries impaneled in order for Barack Obama to decide to kill any individual he chooses. This Obama administration policy originally came to light in a Washington Post article about the targeting of Yemen as a so-called terrorist haven. According to the Post, the Obama administration has been trying to kill Yemeni-American Anwar al-Awlaki. Al-Awlaki is a Muslim cleric, allegedly “radical” and a “terrorist” but he is also inconveniently an American citizen, having been born in New Mexico. He came to public notice after the Fort Hood killings committed by Major Nidal Hasan, with whom he is said to have corresponded. The would be Christmas airplane bomber, Umar Farouk Adbulmutallab allegedly met al-Awlaki in Yemen. “Due process rights shouldn’t end at the Oval Office or at the United States’ borders.” No evidence has been presented proving any of these government claims or al-Awlaki’s involvement in any of these acts. Yet members of the Obama cabinet can tell Congress, the media and the public that we have a government run by hit men. The Fifth Amendment to the Constitution guarantees that our life and liberty cannot be taken away without due process. Those due process rights shouldn’t end at the Oval Office or at the United States’ borders and our government should not be allowed to get rid of us because we are unlucky enough to be in Yemen or any other part of the world. We have a “gangsta” presidency and a Congress that isn’t any better. Only Congressman Dennis Kucinich was willing to go on the record in opposition to these crimes. “Even the most superficial reading of Article XIV makes it clear that extrajudicial killings of U.S. citizens by the U.S. government or its agents are by definition outside the law.” Kucinich’s colleagues, most of whom are lawyers, apparently are unable to perform even a superficial reading of the document they are sworn to uphold. Extra judicial killings are to be expected in banana republics and communist dictatorships and Islamic theocracies or, well, by Israel. They aren’t supposed to be committed in violation of the Bill of Rights. There is only one silver lining to this cloud. We now know what Sarah Palin meant when she spoke about “Obama death panels.” Maybe she isn’t so dumb after all. Margaret Kimberley’s Freedom Rider column appears weekly in BAR. Ms. Kimberley lives in New York City, and can be reached via e-Mail at Margaret.Kimberley(at)BlackAgandaReport.com.

:: Article nr. 63203 sent on 12-feb-2010 13:39 ECT
www.uruknet.info?p=63203

Link: www.blackagendareport.com/?q=content/freedom-rider-obama%E2%80%99s-murder-inc

Ahmadinejad Slowly Takes Over In Iraq

Urgent News: Hunted Layla Anwar February 12, 2010 UPDATE 1 —  12 February 2010 As I said, I will be updating this post on a regular basis. As expected and as mentioned in the lines below, the latest news state that Salih Al-Mutlag of the Iraqiiya Alliance has been banned from participating in the elections. I really hope he gets out of Iraq  before being murdered. He and Dhafir Al-Aini both Sunnis have been barred from the elections on charges of Baathism. That is most strange really because Al Mutlaq left the Baath party back in the 70′s. And Iyad Alllawi, a secular Shiite who served as PM during Bremer’s time and who is also running on the Iraqiiya list was also a Baathist in the 70′s and left the party. How come he was allowed to stay ? Furthermore, Salih Al-Mutlag ran for the first round of elections in 2005, and ran in the provincial elections. I even remember in 2005, someone approached me and asked me to vote for his list. Of course,  I refused to vote for anyone since I do not believe in the electoral process under US/Iranian occupation. I really believe that the Arab Sunnis and secular forces of Iraq are really in a tight spot now, in particular the Sunnis. If they don’t participate in the elections, the sectarian Shiite parties of Iran will have it all for themselves along with the Kurds and this is exactly what is asked for and wanted. Some say that this may trigger another round of serious sectarian violence and I say this is exactly what is also aimed at because only then can the Americans stay on a little longer and the full partition plan of Iraq into 3 statelets can be turned into an official reality. So far there has been resistance to this plan either in armed struggle or through peaceful means by joining the political process but it seems to me that the government of Nouri Al-Maliki and his sectarian Shiite parties from Iran are feeling pretty squeezed and desperate to retain their status quo and by implication retain Iran’s grip over “liberated” Iraq. I also received this info right now. Ahmadinejad of Iran has publicly stated, that he will not allow the return of any ” Baathists”, meaning that he is treating Iraq as one of his principalities and at the same time J.Biden stating that Iraq is going to be America’s success. I am also told that thousands of Iraqis are fleeing by car to Jordan and Syria as they are being chased out of their homes… Also am told from inside Baghdad that they are expecting lots more” bloodshed and flames… and that Salih al Mutlag has become a National Hero “… and that many arrests and killings have taken place Thursday with the “Katim” the silencer gun…seems it’s their favorite weapon these days. Furthermore Al-Lami and Chalabi sat with the Appelates Judges for 7 hours today  to have Al-Mutlag banned upon direct orders from Ahmadinejad. Thanks Um Al Ward for some of the info. _________________________________________________________________________________ 11 February 2010 I have urgent news. Yesterday, 10th February 2010 in various districts of Baghdad, 25 Baathists have been gunned down with silencers, silent guns by the Badr Brigades of Ammar Al-Hakeem (ISCI) of Iran. Sunni areas in Baghdad are being evacuated.:  Amiriya is practically empty now, people are getting very scared because a lot of the men are being arrested. Again yesterday at 6.30 pm, 12 Baathists have been arrested in Sammara by Badr Brigades. Warning : A massive campaign of liquidation and/or arrest has started by the Iranian trained, backed and funded Shiite death squads. As promised by Nouri Al-Maliki.when he said ” any Baathist will be meeting his/her black fate “. We are expecting more bloodshed of Sunnis/and seculars under the pretext of a Baathist witch hunt. Furthermore, following my post on the Iraqi elections, it seems that there are frantic attempts to overturn the decision about allowing the barred candidates to participate. Several of whom are already under heavy threats and as for others (I can’t give names now), warrants for their arrests are being issued. Many of us are hoping that they are not killed in the meantime… Also Kuwait and Iran are in cohort in banning the secular forces in Iraq. This is sure information. I will update this post whenever I have more news.

:: Article nr. 63208 sent on 12-feb-2010 14:28 ECT
www.uruknet.info?p=63208

Link: arabwomanblues.blogspot.com/2010/02/urgent-news-hunted_12.html

Economic Warfare: the Plan to Finish-Off Our Economy

more about "Economic Warfare: the Plan to Finish-…", posted with vodpod

Iraq Policy: D

The Obama administration’s policy toward Iraq largely continues the policies of the Bush years.

By Bonnie Bricker and Adil E. Shamoo

Recent suicide bombings in the heart of Baghdad have sent a message to Washington: Maintaining the Iraq policy of the past administration does not inspire hope.

Iraqi insurgents linked to al-Qaeda claimed responsibility for the bombing, which hit hotels frequented by Western journalists. The attacks followed the government’s banning of 511 parliamentary candidates for the upcoming election this March. Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki’s government banned a large number of independents, nationalists, secularists and current opponents of the government, including Sunni and Baathist politicians.

Obama campaigned for the presidency as if he understood the damage done to Iraq by the U.S. invasion. Both the progressives who supported Obama, as well as the Iraqis who embraced the promise of a free and fair Iraq, sought a foreign policy grounded in moral values of fairness and respect for other nations. To Iraqis, current American policy is a mere variant of Bush’s policies.  Bush was planning to pull all U.S. troops from Iraq as long as a compliant government in Baghdad met our needs (not Iraq’s). Under the Obama administration, current Iraqi Vice President Abdul Mehdi was compelled to come to Washington recently to urge the president and policymakers to give Iraq more respect as a sovereign nation. Whether our current policy is perceived as Bush or merely Bush-Lite, Iraqis cannot yet see fair governance in their future.

Obama dispatched Vice President Joe Biden to Iraq following the banning of the candidates. But Biden’s persuasion cannot change the Iraqi perception, that the current government in Baghdad is highly sectarian and subject to competing foreign influences. The Bush administration’s original pick to head Iraq, Ahmed Chalabi, is the head of the Accountability and Justice board in Iraq. It was Chalabi’s recommendation to ban the 511 candidates; it’s Chalabi’s current close ties with former foe Iran that has many Iraqis worried.

As our policies towards governance in Iraq evolve, American policymakers must continue to heed the current status of post-war Iraq. The numbers tell a devastating story. Several hundred thousand Iraqis died as a result of the war; an estimated one half-million were wounded.  Tens of thousands of Iraqis are disabled, physically or mentally. There are over two million refugees outside Iraq and more displaced refugees inside Iraq. Twelve thousand physicians and thousands of intellectuals and engineers — a large percentage of the professionals in Iraq -— left the country, and many will never return. Fifty percent of Iraqis are unemployed.

In order to break with the failed Iraq policy of the past, Washington must acknowledge the misery the invasion of Iraq inflicted on the Iraqi people. While welcoming any progress Iraqis have made post-invasion, we must not conflate the rebuilding of Iraq as a success of the neoconservatives. Rebuilding Iraq has occurred in spite of the neoconservatives’ policies, not because of them. The neoconservatives’ enthusiasm for Obama’s policies in Iraq and Afghanistan provide fair warning that without a clear break from the past, Iraq’s future is in doubt.

The current administration continues to support a sectarian constitution, as well as sectarian military and police forces. These imposed sectarian divisions further divide Iraqis instead of uniting them. The Lebanese example demonstrates that an Arab government based on sectarian divisions instead of non-sectarianism has little chance of success. Further, corporate U.S. interests are evident everywhere, especially in Iraq’s oil fields. Hundreds of laws written by the United States and imposed on Iraq during the initial invasion remain in effect.

How can Obama break from the past and provide Iraqis with hope for their future? He must embrace policies that serve to unite Iraqis by embracing non-sectarianism. He must resist threats of punishing consequences if Iraqi policies do not neatly match our own, demonstrating respect for their sovereignty. He must plan for a minimal American footprint reducing both troops and contractors. Instead of leaving 35,000-50,000 American troops in Iraq, Obama should work with the UN to help with forces beyond 2010 if continued military support is needed. Finally, Obama should direct our policy toward the resettlement of Iraqis back into their homes, both ending the misery of refugee status and helping Iraq to regain the many citizens needed to rebuild their country.

Obama needs to anchor his rhetoric in actions. Hope is a powerful force when it is allowed to bloom. But when it withers, its power turns in a devastating direction. Now is the time to demonstrate that there is still reason to hope.

---

Bonnie Bricker

Adil E. Shamoo

Adil E. Shamoo is a senior analyst at Foreign Policy In Focus. He is a professor at the University of Maryland School of Medicine, and writes on matters of ethics and public policy. Bonnie Bricker is a contributor to Foreign Policy In Focus.  Both can be reached at ashamoo [at] umaryland [dot] edu.

Has Saad Hariri Finally Figured-Out Who Killed His Dad?

Hariri appeals to Lebanese to unite to resist Israeli threat

MICHAEL JANSEN

LEBANESE PRIME minister Saad Hariri has called for national unity ahead of Sunday’s mass rally on the fifth anniversary of the assassination of his father, former premier Rafik Hariri.

Mr Hariri said unity was the “most powerful weapon in our hands to face up to Israeli threats”, including daily intrusions into Lebanese air space by Israeli warplanes in violation of the ceasefire which ended the 2006 war between Israel and the Lebanese Shia Hizbullah movement.

“It’s not a secret that Israel has vicious intentions toward Lebanon because Israel is the enemy,” he said.

He made it clear that the government would stand behind Hizbullah, now a mainstream political party with two cabinet ministers.

In recent weeks, Israel has repeatedly threatened to strike Lebanon in response to any Hizbullah attack on Israel.

Lebanese president Michel Suleiman, a former army chief, warned that an Israeli attack on Lebanon would be “no picnic” while Syrian president Bashar al-Assad said Damascus would support “Lebanon against any possible Israeli aggression”.

In response to a statement by Israeli defence minister Ehud Barak that Israel’s army should prepare for war with Syria if efforts to resume peace talks failed, Syrian foreign minister Walid al-Muallem warned that Israel’s cities could be targeted if Syria was attacked.

Israeli foreign minister Avigdor Lieberman retorted that Syria would lose any conflict with Israel and its regime would be toppled.

In a bid to calm tensions, Israeli prime minister Binyamin Netanyahu declared that war was not imminent. However the exchanges prompted Saudi Arabia to appeal to the international community to deal firmly with Israeli threats against Lebanon and Syria and end Israel’s “inhumane” treatment of Palestinians.

Hizbullah is unlikely to initiate a fresh conflict with Israel. The 2006 conflict left the movement’s strongholds in Beirut’s southern suburbs and south Lebanon in ruins and killed 1,200 Lebanese, the majority civilians, and 157 Israelis, mainly soldiers.

Israel’s devastating campaign was sparked by the seizure of two Israeli soldiers in a cross-border Hizbullah raid. The movement’s secretary general, Sayed Hassan Nasrallah, apologised to his countrymen for miscalculating the Israeli response to the snatch.

Dissident Palestinian factions have on occasion fired rockets into northern Israel from Lebanon, risking conflagration.

Indian Uranium Shortage: Only 3 of 17 Power Plants Running Full Capacity

[The Achilles’ Heel of nuclear power—there is just not enough of the stuff to power the dreams of the power-mad.]

Uranium pinch: Only 3 of 17 N-plants running full tilt

Kartikeya, TNN

MUMBAI: Owing to a critical shortage of indigenously produced uranium, only three of India‘s 17 nuclear reactors are working to their full potential. Data available with TOI shows 11 nuclear reactors were not functioning up to the mark and three others remained completely shut down for long-term maintenance till November 2009.
The efficiency of nuclear power reactors is measured in terms of ‘capacity utilisation factor (CF). Any plant that achieves a CF of 68.5% is said to be functioning to its potential. If the CF falls below this figure — as is the case with the 11 reactors in India — then the plant starts losing out on the amount of electricity it was built to produce.
Only the three nuclear reactors, which are getting imported uranium and are not dependent on local supplies, are working at their maximum capacity. Two of these reactors are in Mumbai and one of them achieved an impressive CF of 99% in 2009. The third is at Rawatbhata in Rajasthan.
The international Nuclear Suppliers’ Group (NSG) lifted its three-decade-old sanctions on India’s nuclear commerce in 2008. After that the first consignment of 60 tonnes of imported uranium from France landed on Indian shores in April 2009.
Thus experts have been able to calculate that last year, two 540 MW reactors in Mumbai with a CF of 56% and 58%, together lost out on 731 million units of electricity. A reactor at Narora in Uttar Pradesh, on which Delhi depends for its power supply, had the lowest CF of 43% in 2009.
The shortage of uranium is a serious roadblock in India’s ambition to produce 20,000 MW of nuclear power by the year 2020. The current installed capacity of nuclear power stands at 4,120 MW with an overall CF of around 60%. In fact, the advocates of the Indo-US nuclear deal had often said that signing the treaty would get India access to imported uranium and thus help its nuclear power program.

India Backs “Transparent” Global Nuclear Disarmament

India last week said that a universal, transparent and verifiable regime of nuclear disarmament was the only way to prevent terrorists from acquiring nuclear weapons, the Press Trust of India reported Saturday (see GSN, Feb. 5).

“India is deeply worried about the potential nexus between clandestine proliferation and terrorism and the ever-present danger of such weapons or vulnerable nuclear materials falling into the hands of jihadi and nonstate actors,” envoy Shyam Saran said at the Global Zero summit in Paris (see GSN, Feb. 5).

“However, over the long term, it is also our view that it is only through the complete elimination of nuclear weapons and by putting in place universally applicable, nondiscriminatory and fully transparent verification procedures, that we can fully prevent and deny nuclear materials from falling into dangerous hands,” he added (Press Trust of India, Feb. 6).

India, like neighboring rival Pakistan, possesses a nuclear arsenal and has refused to join the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. Saran, though, reaffirmed his nation’s intention to maintain a suspension of nuclear testing and its interest in discussing a treaty that would prohibit member nations from producing fissile material for weapons purposes, the Indo-Asian News Service reported Saturday.

“Despite our well-known reservations on the Comprehensive [Nuclear] Test Ban Treaty, India is committed to its voluntary unilateral moratorium on nuclear explosive testing,” he said at the summit.

“We are prepared to negotiate a verifiable FMCT in the Conference on Disarmament in Geneva. We are not a party to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and cannot respond to calls for universal adherence to that treaty as a non-nuclear weapons state” he said.

Saran also raised the matter of the proliferation network once operated by former top Pakistani nuclear scientist Abdul Qadeer Khan (see GSN, Jan. 22).

“India’s security has been adversely impacted by the clandestine proliferation of nuclear weapons in its neighborhood, often ignored and on occasion, encouraged by certain important countries,” he said. “The activities of the so-called A.Q.Khan network is an ominous reminder of the threats India continues to face in this respect” (Indo-Asian News Service/Hindustan Times, Feb. 6).

Pakistan’s dangerous divisions

Antagonism between Sunni and Shia Muslims is entrenched, and there is little the state can do to quell the violence

• 
• • Mustafa Qadri
  • guardian.co.uk

Ordinary Pakistanis have fallen victim to a civil war largely orchestrated by forces well beyond their control. As the recent bombings targeting Shia Muslims in Karachi proves, the violence facing the country is more complex than extremists versus moderates. But how to unravel all the twists in this violent story?

“The Shia are responsible for all our troubles,” one former member of the paramilitary Frontier Corps, a vital cog in Pakistan’s counterinsurgency machine, told me in the Lower Dir region of Pakistan in 2008. Only a few miles from where we broke bread and drank copious cups of hot tea, eight people, including four schoolgirls and three US soldiers were killed last week in a suicide blast later claimed by the Pakistani Taliban.

Anti-Shia graffiti littered lamp posts and walls across the village where we met, a clear sign that this cancerous conflict is not just about anti-Americanism. In the tribal areas, particularly Khurram and Orakzai to the south of the Khyber Pass, Shia and Sunni tribes have been in open, bloody conflict. But apart from mutual resentment and stereotyping, no one precisely knows why.

This is not an indigenous problem. Ever since 1979′s revolution in predominantly Shia Iran and the Islamisation of the Afghan conflict in the 1980s, several countries have supported sectarian organisations to violently push for their version of Islam.

The spectre of sectarianism visited most recently and violently on Karachi – where even the hospital where casualties from an initial bombing was attacked – is only the latest episode.

As early as the prophet Muhammad’s death in the 7th century AD his disciples bickered over his rightful successor. The Shia-Sunni divide born out of this dispute, and the broader theological debate over how to live the good Muslim life remains the most significant source of internecine tension among Muslims.

Yet such divisions, increasingly marked in recent years, are the exception rather than the rule. For most Pakistanis, particularly away from the tribal areas in the urban sprawls, sectarian differences matter little in everyday life.

“This is politics, all politics,” argues Shabeer, a resident of one of Karachi’s Shia neighbourhoods that I interviewed for a story on this topic. “We are all Muslim, you and I are brothers.”

The divisions have nevertheless surfaced on several key moments. In 1953 a group of religious scholars lobbied to have the minorityAhmadiyya community – already considered apostates by most Muslims for claiming that Muhammad was not the last of Allah’s prophets – branded heretics by the state. They had to wait until 1974 when the embattled prime minister, Zulfiqar Bhutto, finally acquiesced to a constitutional amendment to that effect.

In between those dates, in 1971, the mainstream religious party Jamaat-e-Islami was widely implicated in the mass slaughter of Bengali Muslims in what is now Bangladesh. That was not a sectarian conflict, but it set an important benchmark for state support of Islamist violence.

The modern period of sectarian tension arguably commenced around this time.

It accelerated in the 1980s under military dictator Zia-ul-Haq and has continued in the intervening decades as Islamists, ever eager to find a reason to be, and pocket generous funding from the Arabian peninsula, branched off into a plethora of causes – jihad in Afghanistan or Kashmir, and, of course, crusading against false Muslims.

Because Islamist groups claim to uniquely promote authentic Islam, however, they often fall foul of one another. The virulently anti-Shia Lashkar-e-Jhangvi, for example, was created in 1996 after Pakistani mujahideen from the Afghan jihad split from Sipah-e-Sahaba, a large Islamist group created as a Sunni vanguard against the Iranian revolution spilling into Pakistan (at around 23 million, Pakistan has the largest Shia population outside Iran).

Jhangvi’s founders abandoned Sipah after the assassination of a key leader, Maulana Jhangvi, claiming it had strayed from its original goals, an explanation frequently given by ambitious activists seeking their own cadres. Owing to differences of theology and political allegiances, the Pakistan Taliban aligned Lashkar-e-Islami has routinely fought pitched battles with the pro-Pakistan Ansar-ul-Islam in the Khyber and Bajaur tribal agencies, key passageways between Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Every society has its divisions. But a dangerous mix of political instability, poverty, and the tendency to shroud fascism under an Islamic veil have made Pakistani society intensely susceptible to exclusivist conceptions of Islam.

Those with the means and the inclination have long known this. That is why, along with militancy, charismatic preachers and their local and foreign backers have methodically created social welfare organisations across the Punjab and Sindh involved in both. It would be wrong to call all of the schools, hospitals and mosques they have built as hotbeds of extremism. But this infrastructure has given them a platform to shape domestic politics by creating loyal activists and playing on popular frustrations. This inevitably creates a disjointed relationship with the state. Most, like Lashkar-e-Taiba, decry the state – as its leader Hafiz Saeed did at a very public rally recently – but are careful not to stray past rhetoric lest they face elimination like the Pakistan Taliban.

For ordinary Pakistanis the strings that pull this violent drama are as distant as the drones that rain death on successive Taliban commanders.

Chavez Ups the Ante–Plays the Nuclear Power Card

VENEZUELA TO DEVELOP NUCLEAR ENERGY FOR PEACEFUL PURPOSES

NAM NEWS NETWORK Feb 12th, 2010

CARACAS, Feb 12 (NNN-PRENSA LATINA) – President Hugo Chavez said the decision to develop nuclear energy for peaceful purposes is considered a sovereign right of countries.

He said Venezuela was already working on it and there is a committee appointed to study the matter.

Chavez said during the government of Marcos Perez (1952-1958) in Altos de Pipe was installed the first nuclear reactor in South America.

“When we begin to develop our nuclear power as we will do, they will put their eyes on us and will say Chavez is building an atomic bomb”, he said at the Municipal Theater of Caracas, where the First Congress of the United Socialist Party of Venezuela was held .

He assured Venezuela does not need weapons of mass destruction as “we already have a nuclear bomb -the Socialist Party and the people united”.

“Venezuela clearly understands the struggle of Iran, because it is the same struggle for sovereignty. We must continue rejecting the claim of yankee imperialism from the U.S to prevent the economic and energy development in Iran, he said.

Chavez congratulated the Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, on the 31st anniversary of the victory of the Islamic Revolution. — NNN-PRENSA LATINA

Eurozone economic recovery falters

By Ralph Atkins, FT.com

Europe’s economy grew by just 0.1 percent in late 2009.

Frankfurt, Germany (FT) — The eurozone’s economic recovery faltered late last year as a strong performance by France failed to offset stagnation in Germany and contraction in Italy and Spain.

Gross domestic product in the 16-country region crept just 0.1 per cent higher in the fourth quarter compared with the previous three months, reported Eurostat, the European Union’s statistics office. That meant the eurozone was left behind by the U.S., which expanded 1.4 per cent in the same period.

The worse-than-expected figures will heighten fears that the recovery has yet to become self-sustaining and that growth will remain weak throughout 2010. The “snail’s pace” recovery was “another piece of bad news for eurozone policymakers as they struggle to come up with a plan that soothes worries about the creditworthiness of the eurozone’s peripheral economies,” said Nick Kounis, European economist at Fortis Bank in Amsterdam.

Germany’s economy is thought to have been hit by the withdrawal of emergency subsidies for car purchases. The “only positive contribution” to growth in Europe’s largest economy in the fourth quarter was foreign trade, the country’s statistical office said. Consumer spending and investment fell compared with the third quarter.

In contrast, France’s economy expanded 0.6 percent in the fourth quarter, with the increase driven largely by consumer spending, including on cars.

Italy, however, reported a surprise 0.2 percent contraction and earlier this week, Spain reported a 0.1 percent fall.

After the worst recession in continental Europe since the second world war, the eurozone economy started expanding again in the third quarter of last year, when GDP rose by 0.4 percent.

The recovery was led by Germany, which as a result of its high dependence on exports had been one of the industrialised economies worst affected by the global slump. In the third quarter, German GDP had risen 0.7 percent. But France, which was much less affected by global events, has also helped pull the eurozone out of recession.

Germany’s recovery remains on track, economists said, pointing out that business confidence surveys have shown optimism continues to rise. But Axel Weber, Bundesbank president, has warned that the severe winter weather could have hit growth at the start of this year.

At the same time, the fiscal problems of southern European countries have added to uncertainty about the outlook. Ambitious government programmes to reduce public sector deficits in Spain, Portugal and Greece are likely to damp growth this year. Portugal’s economy stagnated in the fourth quarter, while Greece’s contracted 0.8 percent, according to Eurostat.

Although weaker-than-expected by the European Central Bank, the latest data strengthen its case that the recovery will be “bumpy”. The ECB’s main interest rate is not expected to rise until late this year — or beyond.

© The Financial Times Limited 2009

Yemen government and rebels call ceasefire

Matthew Weaver

guardian.co.uk

Hopes that truce will bring an end to six-year conflict which has diverted resources from fighting al-Qaida in the country

A new ceasefire between the Yemeni government and northern Shia rebels, seen as crucial in preventing Yemen becoming a failed state, appeared to be holding today.

The truce came into effect at midnight after Yemen’s president Ali Abdullah Saleh declared an end to military operations against the Houthi clan.

It is hoped that the agreement will bring an end to a six-year conflict that has drawn in neighbouring Saudi Arabia, and diverted resources from efforts to fight al-Qaida.

Bringing an end to the conflict took on a new urgency for western leaders following the failed attempt by Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab to blow up an aeroplane bound for Detroit on Christmas Day. Abdulmutallab said he was trained by al-Qaida in Yemen.

Several earlier ceasefires quickly disintegrated, mainly because the rebels said their demands were not addressed. As part of this agreement government and rebel representatives will sit on committees to oversee the truce.

“We have decided to halt military operations in the north-western region … to stop bloodshed, bring peace to the region, the return of displaced people to their villages, reconstruction and achieve national reconciliation,” Saleh’s office said in a statement.

The leader of the rebels, who complain of social, religious and economic discrimination, have told their followers to abide by the agreement.

“According to what was agreed upon, Abdel-Malik Badreddin al-Houthi issued instructions to all fronts and fighting sites to stop firing coinciding with the timing announced by the government,” said a rebel statement quoted by Reuters.

Last week, the government presented the rebels with a detailed ceasefire agreement after the militants accepted the government’s terms.

The president’s office cautioned that the halt to military operations depends on the rebels’ commitment to observing the government’s conditions. Yemen has demanded the militants to disarm, release captured soldiers and property, clear mountain hideouts, abide by the constitution and vow not to attack Saudi Arabia.

Neighbouring Saudi Arabia became involved in the conflict in November after rebels crossed the border and killed two Saudi border guards. One hundred and thirty three Saudi soldiers have died in the fighting.

The rebels announced a unilateral cease-fire with Saudi Arabia in late January. However, the Saudis responded cautiously to the rebel announcement, and demanded militants pull back from border positions and return five missing soldiers.

Motorcycle-Riding Terrorists Take Their Daily Shot at Authority In Quetta

[Everybody in Pakistan, including the authorities, knows who these guys are, and who they work for.]

Residence of police official attacked with grenade

The Baloch Hal News

QUETTA: Residence of a police official was attacked with hand grenade in Dera Murad Jamali.

Unknown assailants riding on motorbike threw a hand grenade at the house of police constable identified as Noora Bugti which hit the wall of the house and exploded with a huge explosion. Luckily no body was hurt in the grenade blast.

No group has claimed the responsibility for grenade attack till filling this report.

Two ISI officials, ex-corps commander booked in Balochistan

Islamabad, Feb.4 : Acting on the Supreme Court’s order, Balochistan police has booked a former Pakistan corps commander and two top Inter Services Intelligence Services (ISI) officials in connection with the disappearance of a resident of Quetta.

The intelligence officials have been identified as former Quetta ISI chief Brig. Siddique and another senior ISI official Col. Bangash.

The apex court while hearing a case of  disappearance of one Ali Asghar Bangalzai had ordered the concerned authorities to take proper action against the accused.

Bangalzai’s son, Ghulam Farooq said that his father along with two others was arrested by intelligence agencies in June 2000. While the other two persons were released days later his father remained in custody for no reasons unknown to the family.

Farooq said despite seeking help from various human rights groups and higher authorities there has been no information about his father till date.

“No police station has been willing to register a case against the intelligence agencies we hold responsible for the disappearance of our father. We are delighted to have finally managed to register a case against the responsible officials by virtue of the independent judiciary’s interest in the case,” The Daily Times quoted Farooq, as saying.

The SC bench, headed by Justice Javed Iqbal, had ordered the registration of a case against the intelligence officials while hearing the missing citizens’ case.

–ANI

INDIA’S AFGHAN CONTINGENCY PLANS FOR THE DAY AFTER US PULLOUT

[American miscalculations and aggression have set-up the "perfect storm" that will blow through the region if US forces withdraw.  If we leave, there will be total nuclear war between the two antagonists.]

AFGHANISTAN: INDIA’S CONTINGENCY PLANS FOR “THE DAY AFTER”

By Dr. Subhash Kapila

Strategic objectivity would suggest that India’s preference should be for a sustained United States embedment in Afghanistan till such time political democracy takes roots and the Afghan National Army is built upto at least 500,000 strong to take charge of Afghanistan’s security.

Strategic realism would also suggest that India recognize that American commitment to Afghanistan’s stability is dependent on the vagaries of compulsions of United States domestic politics. India also needs to keep in mind that if the situation does not turn around by mid-2011 then the uncertainties of United States sustained commitment to Afghanistan could become diluted by presidential election.

India has legitimate and vital strategic interests in Afghanistan’s stability and emergence as a moderate, democratic Islamic state. India’s historical links and cultural ties with Afghanistan pre-date by centuries the emergence of Pakistan. India is currently engaged in extensive reconstruction programs in Afghanistan in tandem with US & NATO Forces military stability operations to checkmate the Pakistan sponsored Taliban attacks against USA.

United States exit from Afghanistan is not a question of “if” but is a question of “when” Pakistan as the “regional spoiler state” of South Asia and a “proven destabilizer of Afghanistan” could boil over the situation in Afghanistan to contrive an American exit from Afghanistan.

India has wrongly shied away from a military commitment in Afghanistan for two major reasons. The first was the American reluctance to permit Indian military involvement in Afghanistan out of deference to Pakistan Army sensitivities. The second reason was the political and strategic timidity of India’s political leadership who have yet to recognize that being a big power would involve shouldering military responsibilities to reorder in India’s favor the security environment in South Asia.

On United States exit from Afghanistan, whenever it takes place, India would be forced to face some hard options in relation to India’s Afghanistan policy on the “day after” of the US exit.

The execution of hard options by India on the “day after” cannot emerge as knee-jerk reactions. India needs to undertake extensive contingency planning exercises at the political, strategic and military levels to secure India’s national security interests.

Currently, no indicators are available that the Indian Government has undertaken contingency planning for dealing with Afghanistan’s situation on the day after the exit of the United States form Afghanistan.

This Paper intends to briefly examine the following related aspects to offer some recommendations for India’s contingency planning on Afghanistan:

• Strategic Realties Which Should Prod India’s Contingency Planning.
• India’s Contingency Planning: The Political Initiatives Recommended.
• India’s Contingency Planning: The Strategic Steps Recommended.
• India’s Military Contingency Plans for Afghanistan on “The Day After”.

Afghanistan: Strategic Realties Which Should Prod India’s Contingency Planning

India needs to recognize and respect the following strategic realties which suggest that India should undertake post-haste contingency planning on Afghanistan: (1) United States exit from Afghanistan is a certainty with all pointers indicating by and of 2011. (2) USA has not built-up the Afghan Nation Army and by then they would be inadequate to secure Afghanistan in a self-reliant manner. (3) Pakistan would once again re-insert the Afghan Taliban to set up a Pak-friendly Taliban regime in Kabul. (4) A Talibanized Afghanistan would once again emerge as a springboard for Islamic Jihad against India as an adjunct of the Pakistan Army. (5) A Talibanized Afghanistan would pre-empt India’s access to Central Asia politically and economically.

India’s policy establishment needs to vitally recognize that Pakistan has indulged in active contingency planning for its strategic reestablishment in Afghanistan right from 2002, even as it acquiesced to US pressure. Pakistan Army’s double-timing of the United States ever since 2002, its protective sheltering of the Afghan Shura in Blochistan and its refusal to USA of extending US drone operations in Balochistan, are all part of Pakistan’s contingency planning for the “day after” of the US exit from Afghanistan.

India’s lack of geographical contiguity with Afghanistan and Pakistan’s adversarial stances aggravate the difficulties of India’s reactive operations on the day after the US exit. To overcome the problems of geographical contiguity and Pakistan’s anti-India Afghan-centric hostility, India has no choices but to go in for extensive contingency planning on Afghanistan.

The United States if it seriously was committed to a substantive US- India Strategic Partnership could have, and even now, facilitated a graduated Indian military involvement in Afghanistan to secure both US and Indian national security interests after US exit from that nation.

Indian has to face the stark reality that whether the United States goes in for a graduated exit form Afghanistan or a “Saigon-style” exit from Kabul, US strategic preference would still be in favor of Pakistan.

Notably therefore, arises the deduction that India’s contingency planning on all its dimensions would have to include seeking the assistance of countries like Iran and Russia to stabilize Afghanistan, the day after.

However, should strategic wisdom dawn an the United States to recognize that the vacuum in Afghanistan after its exit should be filled by India as a stable regional power and not Pakistan as a failing state, India would still require contingency plans to deal with Pakistan Army incensed by denial of what it perceives as its rightful strategic due of Afghanistan falling into its strategic perimeter.

Basically however, India’s contingency planning on Afghanistan, perforce has to be pursued on the assumption that the United States would not favor India over Pakistan Army’s sensitivity.

India’s Contingency Planning: The Political Initiatives Recommended

The four countries which have vested strategic interests in Afghanistan other then USA are Russia, India, Iran and China. China is the odd-man out in this four- some by virtue of her deep strategic nexus with Pakistan. China would continue to view Afghanistan from the Pakistani prism and therefore disqualifies itself as an effective contributor to Afghanistan’s stability, the day after.

In terms of contingency planning political initiatives India needs to undertake substantial negotiations with Iran and Russia over plans to ensure Afghanistan’s stability and security, the day after. India’s political contingency planning with Russia and Iran should also aim at political preemptive measures against Pakistan to de-legitimatize the existing elected government in Kabul.

Russia, India and Iran could also take the lead in calling for an international conference which could involve the United Nations in a major peace-enforcing, peace-building and nation-building program in Afghanistan, the day after. All these three nations should agree to make major contributions in this direction.

If such a contingency policy thrust is to be adopted by India, then it would call India to reconsider and correct the deviations that it has lately undertaken in its foreign policy on Iran and Russia.

India’s Contingency Planning: The Strategic Steps Recommended

In the strategic sense, Russia and Iran are well-placed geographically for any sustained engagement in Afghanistan to ensure its security and stability. Iran shares a long border with Afghanistan and has may religious and cultural links. Russia was geographically contiguous to Afghanistan earlier, but even now with many inter-dependent linkages with the Central Asian Republics bordering Afghanistan, it can exercise both geo-political and geo-strategic leverages.

India despite its lack of geographical contiguity enjoys political, economic and cultural proximity with the present Kabul regime established under US guidance. India has neglected its psychological warfare to counter-act Pakistani propaganda that India is anti-Pashtun because it is pro-Northern Alliance. India in fact has more historical links with the Pashtuns than Pakistan has and this needs propagation.

Coming back to the point, India to effectively engage itself in Afghanistan, despite its lack of geographical contiguity, would need the strategic assistance of countries like Iran, Russia, Tajikistan etc from whose territories it could ensure both an economic and military presence in Afghanistan till such time it emerges as a secure and stable state.

Iran has already assisted India’s reconstruction efforts in Afghanistan by providing passage of Indian reconstruction materials through its territories as Pakistan has presently refused to do so. India had sometime back set up an air-base in Tajikistan and should explore a wider presence in terms of base facilities in the region. India has existing “strategic partnership” agreements with Iran and Russia. What India needs to do now is to widen in tandem with its political initiatives, the scope of existing strategic cooperation to include specific plans for joint engagement in Afghanistan, the day after, to ensure that Afghanistan is secured and stable with in its border.

India’s Military Contingency Plans for Afghanistan on “The Day After”.

India’s military contingency plans for Afghanistan have to be viewed at two different levels namely (1) Military contingency planning for deployment of Indian military effort in Afghanistan, the day after, to assist the Kabul Government to survive Pakistan- Taliban aggression and (2) Military contingency plans to meet Pakistan aggression on the Western border as a spin-off and also to check-mate China’s military diversions in support of Pakistan, as a consequence.

India’s military contingency plans for Afghanistan would necessarily involve sizeable joint Army and Air Force operations for deployment of sizeable forces to assist the Kabul government to survive. Emphasis on the initial insertion of Indian force would have to rely on India’s sizeable Air-borne Forces and Special Forces.

Follow-up forces accretion would have to perforce depend on India’s strategic cooperation agreements with Afghanistan’s neighbors.

Sizeable Indian Air Force effort would be involved both in terms of transportation and logistics support. Combat air cover for both ground and air effort will be required  to be planned.

Indian military contingency plans would require effective coordination with other countries willing to join in for the consolidation of  Afghanistan. Should the United Nations get involved, then effective mechanisms exist  for planning of UN military operations in which India has much expertise.

At the second level, Indian military contingency planning would have to arrive at realistic assessments of Indian Army deployments on borders with Pakistan and China to ensure a credible defensive posture.

The Indian Navy and specially the aircraft-carrier would have important roles to play.

Since the present Indian government would be in office till 2013, that is much after the estimated 2011/12 US exit from Afghanistan, it is unlikely that it will have the strategic will to use power to secure Indian national security interests.

However, this Indian Government may not be averse to a sizeable UN military intervention to ensure Afghanistan does not fall prey to Pakistan- Saudi Arabia- Taliban machinations.

In such an eventuality, India could be asked and be ready to play a sizeable role militarily in Afghanistan.

So in either eventuality, Indian military contingency planning should be pursued in right earnest by Indian political leadership.

Concluding Observations.

Afghanistan could emerge as a test case for India’s strategic will to emerge as a global power. Ascending of the global power ladder does not come cheap. Power will not be bestowed on India. India will have to wrest power by exhibiting a demonstrated will to use power to secure India’s national security interests.

To come of age strategically, the Indian policy establishment needs to develop an over-the-horizon strategic vision especially within the South Asian confines and contiguous regions.

Success comes to those who can anticipate developments and devise contingency plans to deal with such developments.

Let this Indian process commence with how to deal with Afghanistan, “the day after”.

(The author is an International Relations and Strategic Affairs analyst.  He is the Consultant, Strategic Affairs with South Asia Analysis Group.  Email:drsubhashkapila.007@gmail.com)

Conflict In Balochistan–HRCP Report

HRCP_BalochistanReport

(Read Full Report)

Pak. Supreme Court Opening “Can of Worms”–the DISAPPEARED

[In keeping with the same old pattern of lies, the thousand or so missing from Balochistan are being blamed on foreign powers (usually India), instead of the Army and the secret agencies operating with impunity in the resource-rich, repressed region.  When the Chief Justice dared to challenge Musharraf on this issue in the past, the original Army/Supreme Court confrontation ensued.   SEE: US Being Sucked into Pakistan’s World of Illusions:

"Musharraf had mentioned in the first edition of his book as to how the CIA was paying for every person handed over by the ISI to the US agencies. When his admission caused embarrassment to the CIA he deleted this admission from the subsequent editions. His troubles with Chief Justice Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhury, which ultimately led to his humiliating exit from power, started when the Chief Justice began looking into the cases of a large number of missing persons, who had been allegedly rounded up by the ISI and “sold” to the CIA for money. A large number of innocent Pakistanis and Arabs were branded by the ISI as Al Qaeda suspects and thus “sold” to the CIA."]

SC rejects Interior & Defence Mins reports on missing persons

ISLAMABAD – Presidential spokesman, Farhatullah Babar, who appeared before the Supreme Court on Thursday in the Missing Persons’ case, informed the court that Prime Minister Syed Yousuf Raza Gilani intended to form a special commission to trace out the missing people of Pakistan.
A three-judge bench, comprising Justice Javed Iqbal, Justice Raja Fayyaz Ahmed and Justice Sair Ali, was hearing the cases of missing persons for four years on petitions filed by the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan and Defence of Human Rights.
During the course of proceedings, Farhatullah Babar, however, categorically said that he was appearing on behalf of one of the missing persons and not as a spokesman of President Asif Ali Zardari.
At this point, Justice Sair Ali said, “Then dual responsibility went on to your head to convey our message to government regarding concerns of Supreme Court in this case.”
Meanwhile, Attorney General Anwar Mansoor Khan put his suggestion before the court that a judicial commission may be constituted for the early recovery of mission persons.
However, the court seemed far from convinced and Justice Javed Iqbal, asked the Attorney General to present an example of a positive outcome from any government commission.
Justice Javed, who headed the bench, rejected not only the report presented by attorney general on behalf of Interior Ministry but also termed it mere paperwork being presented before the court.
“From 1947 only ‘Hamood-ur-Rehman Commission Report’ in 1972 out of total 31 was result oriented,” he explained, adding if a commission is formed then all provinces must be given equal representation.
Meanwhile, Balochistan’s Chief Secretary informed the court that certain problems in tracing the missing ones can only be discussed during in-camera proceedings in the court.
Justice Javed said the in-camera session was rejected as the Supreme Court felt that nothing should be kept secret from the public in the missing persons’ case.
Advocate General Balochistan informed the court that due to various reasons, the authorities concerned were not able to trace the missing persons in the province.
Invisible forces were being activated by someone (hinting towards foreign countries) in the province, which led to poor people going missing since former President Pervez Musharraf’s era, one of the high rank officials of Balochistan police informed the court.

On this point, Justice Javed remarked that if someone was involved in treason in the province then he/she will be tried according to the laws.

[Does this threat mean that those who dare to attribute any of the kidnappings and murders to government officials is committing treason?  Is it treason to mention the recent case of the three activists kidnapped from their lawyer's office in Turbat and murdered?  SEE: The Case of Three Baloch Leaders Taken By Agencies Then Assassinated]

Home Secretary NWFP informed the court that only 10 persons were missing in the province so far.
Home Secretary Punjab told the court that 42 persons were missing and some 37 people were missed in Sindh, Home Secretary of the province told the court.
The SP Rawalpindi informed the court that Masood Janjua, husband of Amina Masood Janjua, according to a column written in Urdu newspaper has passed away. The newspaper has given the reference of Malik Qayyum, who informed the writer, the SP said.
Asma Jahangir, Chairperson Human Rights Commission of Pakistan informed the court that the role of intelligence agencies cannot be ignored in Missing Persons’ cases. She also raised the finger over the role of the sitting Director General ISI including his one-year extension the government planned to give him.
Besides, the apex court rejected Defence Ministry’s investigation report in the case of missing persons.
The court ruled out the impression that the apex court can’t enforce its decisions.
“Why the constitution was being breached when the rules and regulations have been set,” Justice Tariq said adding that the government has not even bothered to change the words in the Missing Persons’ case reports.
Justice Sair Ali also said that the reports showed the level of interest the government was taking in the case and its proceedings.
During the course of proceedings, Justice Javed noted that the court would issue verdict in the above said case within a fortnight, adding that, action would also be ordered against the culprits in this regard.
While the case of Mustafa Azam will be dealt with on next hearing as well as the report regarding missing persons in captivity of foreign countries will be presented before the court on 18th February.

Five Americans wounded in attack at U.S. base

KABUL (AP) — A suicide bomber wearing an Afghan border policeman’s uniform blew himself up Thursday at a U.S. base near the Pakistani frontier, wounding five Americans, an Afghan official said.

The spokesman for Paktia province, Roullah Samoun, said the attack occurred after sundown in a barracks at a U.S. facility in the Dand aw Patan district in eastern Afghanistan, about 35 miles (70 kilometers) east of Gardez.

He did not identify the base by name or say what kind personnel are stationed there.

A U.S. statement said "several" U.S. service members were injured in an explosion at a joint U.S.-Afghan outpost in Paktia but gave no further details.

On Dec. 30 a Jordanian believed to be a double agent blew himself up at a CIA base in another border province, Khost, killing seven agency employees and a Jordanian intelligence officer.

The attack reported Thursday occurred about 400 miles (640 kilometers) northeast of theTaliban town of Marjah, which is under siege by U.S. and Afghan troops.

The Politics of Pathological Liars

Mumbai terror attack lawyer shot dead

[One of two surviving Indian participants in the Mumbai attack is shot dead by unidentified gunmen.  Like the killing of Inspector Karkare, someone in this case is eliminating obstacles to their plans to start an anti-Muslim pogrom in India.  Indian officials should be more concerned with these efforts towards starting civil war in India than they are about happenings in Pakistan and Afghanistan.]

MUMBAI, India (AP) — Police and a colleague say the lawyer for one of the suspects in the 2008 Mumbai terror attack was shot dead Thursday.

Shahid Azmi was representing Fahim Ansari, an Indian national accused of helping facilitate the attack on India’s financial capital in November 2008.

A lawyer colleague of Azmi, Rashid Mirza, said unidentified men opened fire on Azmi about 6 p.m. near his home in suburban Mumbai. He was rushed to a nearby hospital but declared dead on arrival.

Ansari is on trial with Ajmal Kasab, the lone surviving Pakistani gunman, and Ahmed Sabauddin, another Indian accused of providing maps that helped the attackers.

The three-day siege of India’s financial capital left 166 dead.

Security Forces Pretend to be Looking for Slain Baloch Leader–MORE GAMES

Pakistani security forces raided Shaheed GM Baloch’s house

and: Pakistani security force have raided the house of Shaheed Ghulam Mohammad Baloch in Mand Soro region in Balochistan. The raid and the siege of the house continued for several hours, family members of late Baloch leader were taken hostages and have been asked ridiculous questions. “Where is GM Baloch”? FC personal questioned the family members. According to details on 5 Feburary 2010 a large number of Pakistani FC (Frontier Corps) have ransacked the house of BNM’s Martyred leaders Ghulam Mohammed Baloch and barred people from coming in and out of the house. After several hours of siege of the house the FC personal eventually made forced entry to the house. On the resistance, the family member including women and children have been beaten up and harassed. According to the occupants of the house the FC kept on asking them; “Where is Ghulam Mohammad”? The FC personal said that Ghulam Mohammad and his friends were wanted for an attack on FC camp recently. [just to remind our readers Ghulam Mohammad Baloch and his friend Lala Munir Baloch and Sher Mohammed Baloch were abducted and later killed in cold blood by Pakistani security forces in April lat year.] They have searched the house of the Baloch leaders for several hours and threaten to come back before they left the house. Meanwhile BNM Turbat region spokeman strongly condemn the raid on their late leader’s house. He stated that it was the sign of failure for the Pakistani forces that they were now even terrified of Baloch martyrs. Courtesy: Daily Tawar

US Being Sucked into Pakistan’s World of Illusions

[As usual, Mr. Raman has given the most accurate analysis of the Pakistani situation available on the planet.]

By B. Raman

The leaders and large sections of the people of Pakistan tend to live in a self-created world of illusions. They have always lived in such a world ever since the birth of the country in 1947.

2. They teach their children in school that civilization was brought to the sub-continent by Islam. They grow up not knowing the history of the sub-continent before the advent of Islam

3. They have always believed that one Muslim is equal to two Hindus. They teach their soldiers that Hindus cannot fight. They believed that their alliance with the US and the US military equipment supplied to them had made them invincible and that India would never be able to defeat them. They invaded Kashmir in 1965 thinking that Kashmir was theirs for the taking.

4. After a few days of fighting they realized that it was not. They realised too that Hindus can fight—–like hell. They found that all the Patton tanks and other modern equipment given to them by the US could not save them from the counter-attacks by the Indian Army. They fled from battle at Khem Karan after abandoning their Pattons.

5. But, they teach their children and soldiers that they won the 1965 war and that they forced India to sue for peace.

6. They looked down with contempt upon the Muslims of the then East Pakistan because most of them were descendents of converts from Hinduism. They convinced themselves that like the Hindus, the Bengali Muslims cannot fight.

7. They treated them like second class citizens of the country and suppressed them thinking that the Bengalis will not rise against their suppression.

8. They did and threw them out in 1971. The Bengali freedom-fighters and the Indian Army fought hand in hand in putting an end to the colonization of East Pakistan. Bangladesh was born. Over 90000 of the officers and soldiers of the Pakistan Army surrendered without a fight when the Indian Army and the Bengali freedom-fighters entered Dhaka. Zulfiquar Ali Bhutto came crawling to Shimla to get them released.

9. They teach their children and soldiers that through his clever diplomacy Bhutto forced Indira Gandhi to release the prisoners of war.

10. When Gen.Zia-ul-Haq overthrew Bhutto in 1977 and assumed power, many of their political leaders appealed frantically to the leaders of India and Afghanistan to help them escape from the country. If the authorities of India and Afghanistan had not helped them to escape to Europe, they would have landed in the gallows as Bhutto did.

11. When they returned to Pakistan from political exile after the death of Zia in 1988, they projected themselves as national heroes, who had hoodwinked the Army, gone into political exile and kept up the fight against the Army and for the return of democracy. They never spoke a word about the help rendered by India and Afghanistan. If India and Afghanistan had not helped, many of the political leaders of Pakistan may not be alive today.

12. In 1989, the very same political leaders who owed their survival to India colluded with their Army in sending a large number of terrorists trained by the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) into J&K. They thought that Kashmir was ripe for picking. Twenty-one years later, they are nowhere near the realization of their illusory dreams.

13. In 1994, they created the Taliban and helped it to capture Kabul in September 1996. It occupied large parts of Afghanistan with the help of the ISI and the Pakistan Army. The Pakistanis thought that was the end of the Indian influence in Afghanistan. They realized with a shock that it was not. Secular elements in Afghanistan, helped by India, Iran and Russia, hit back at the Taliban and its ISI patrons and facilitated the liberation of Afghanistan from the Taliban rule post-9/11. There was an anti-Pakistan uprising in Kabul and many Pakistanis, who were working for the Taliban in Kabul, were hunted down, caught, killed and their dead bodies thrown into the gutters of Kabul by the local population.

14. In 1999, the Pakistan Army under Gen.Pervez Musharraf occupied Indian territory in the Kargil Heights by taking advantage of the withdrawal of the Indian Army posts during winter. They had wild dreams of “liberating” the Siachen Glacier and the Kargil area of J&K. The Indian Army hit back and inflicted heavy casualties on the Pakistan Army. The US insisted that the Pakistan Army should withdraw from the territory occupied by it. Musharraf and after him, Mr.Nawaz Sharif, the then Prime Minister, flew to Beijing and sought China’s support for their occupation. To their shock, China refused to support them. M.Nawaz Sharif flew to Washington DC to plead with the US for a face-saving formula so that they can withdraw without humiliation. The US declined to provide any. They were forced to withdraw unconditionally. They projected their Kargil humiliation to their people and soldiers as a great military victory by awarding a large number of gallantry medals to each other.

15. After the attack on the Indian Parliament in December, 2001, India mobilized its troops and moved them to the border. Unnerved by the threat of war, Musharraf banned the terrorist organizations operating against India, closed their offices and arrested their leaders. When India withdrew the troops from the border, Musharraf claimed it as a great victory for Pakistan. “We forced India to blink,” he said. He removed all the ban orders and allowed the terrorists to operate again against India.

16. After the raid by the Pakistan Army Commandoes in the Lal Masjid of Islamabad in July, 2007, the Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) went on the offensive against the Pakistani Armed Forces, the ISI and the Police. Suicide acts of terrorism, commando style attacks and other kinds of attacks were reported not only from the tribal areas, but also from non-tribal areas, including Islamabad, the capital, Rawalpindi, where the General Headquarters of the Army are located, Lahore, Sargodha, Peshawar, Kohat and even Pakistan-Occupied Kashmir. The TTP even raided the GHQ and occupied it for some hours—– the only instance in the history of terrorism anywhere in the world where a terrorist group had occupied the headquarters of the Army—-even it be for a few hours. The TTP also attacked the offices of the ISI and the Federal Investigation Agency (FIA) in the capital, Rawalpindi, Lahore and Peshawar.

17. Unable to cope with the TTP offensive, they quietly allowed the USA’s Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) to hunt for the TTP leaders through its Drone (unmanned) planes. They allowed US ground forces personnel to operate in different areas under the cover of employees of Blackwater, a US security company, which works in close co-ordination with the CIA.

18. The Pakistani leaders, who are adept in charades, enacted one more and continue to enact it. They pretended to be opposed to the Drone strikes and the operation of Blackwater in Pakistani territory. They called in public for their stoppage, but allowed the US in private to continue with them.

19. The TTP allegedly assassinated Mrs.Benazir Bhutto in Rawalpindi on December 27, 2007. They did not have the courage to investigate it lest the TTP target President Asif Ali Zardari and Prime Minister Yousef Raza Gilani. They were also worried that a thorough investigation might expose the involvement of some army officers in the assassination. They ordered the Police not to investigate and asked the UN to take over the responsibility for the investigation. More than two years after her assassination, the Pakistani people do not know who killed her. There has been no prosecution.

20. They found themselves unable to counter the Baloch freedom struggle, which continues to pick up momentum. They were embarrassed by the repeated successes of the Baloch freedom-fighters. Instead of addressing the grievances of the Baloch people, they accused India of helping the freedom-fighters. Before the elections of 2008, they had promised the Baloch people that they would investigate and prosecute the officers of the security forces who were responsible for the murder of Nawab Akbar Khan Bugti, the legendary Baloch leader. They have not carried out their promise after coming to power. The security forces continue to kill more and more Baloch freedom activists. Balochistan today resembles East Pakistan in 1970 before the birth of Bangladesh.

21. They were unable to protect the Shias, who constitute about 20 per cent of the population. Sunni extremists continue to kill Shias in their hundreds all over Pakistan. They imposed an iron curtain in the Kurram Agency of the Federally-Administered Tribal Areas (FATA), which has been the scene of anti-Shia violence for over two years now. The Shias allege that a genocide of the Shias has been going on in Kurram without the world knowing about it. The Army has no time or inclination to protect the Shias.

22. When the George Bush Administration asked its famous question “are you with us or against us” after 9/11, Musharraf lost his nerve and did whatever the US wanted him to do. He placed the bases of the Pakistan Air Force in Balochistan at the disposal of the US for use against the Taliban and Al Qaeda. He rounded up a number of Pakistani citizens, including two retired nuclear scientists, and handed them over to the US agencies for interrogation in return for cash payment. Musharraf had mentioned in the first edition of his book as to how the CIA was paying for every person handed over by the ISI to the US agencies. When his admission caused embarrassment to the CIA he deleted this admission from the subsequent editions. His troubles with Chief Justice Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhury, which ultimately led to his humiliating exit from power, started when the Chief Justice began looking into the cases of a large number of missing persons, who had been allegedly rounded up by the ISI and “sold” to the CIA for money. A large number of innocent Pakistanis and Arabs were branded by the ISI as Al Qaeda suspects and thus “sold” to the CIA. Musharraf allowed the US intelligence agencies to operate all over Pakistan in search of Al Qaeda leaders.

23. At the same time, he quietly allowed the Afghan Taliban leadership to set up its rear base in the Quetta area of Balochistan and Osama bin Laden, Ayman Al-Zawahiri and other operatives of Al Qaeda to operate from the North Waziristan area of FATA. When the Bush Administration got preoccupied with Iraq from 2003 and diverted its attention from Afghanistan, the Pakistan army took advantage of it for relaxing its supposed hunt for Al Qaeda and for retraining the Afghan Taliban and helping it to re-launch its offensive in Afghanistan.

24. Till 9/11, all major terrorist acts in different parts of the world by Al Qaeda and its associates were planned and orchestrated from Afghan territory under the control of the Afghan Taliban. Since 9/11, all such acts are being planned and orchestrated from Pakistani territory in the FATA. Every terrorist act unearthed in the UK has had a Pakistani hand in it. The planned terrorist strike in Copenhagen by the LET’s Chicago cell and the 313 Brigade of Ilyas Kashmiri was being orchestrated from Pakistan before the FBI got scent of it and quashed it. The brutal murder of seven CIA officers and an officer of the Jordanian intelligence in Afghan territory was carried out by the TTP from Pakistani territory. The planned terrorist strikes in Germany by associates of the Islamic Jihad Union were being orchestrated from the FATA. The terrorist attacks in China’s Xinjiang province before the Beijing Olympics of August 2008, including an abortive attempt to blow up a plane, were orchestrated from the FATA. Acts of terrorism in Uzbekistan and in the Chechnya and Dagestan areas of Russia are planned and guided from the FATA. Even Teheran alleges that the acts of terrorism in its territory by the so-called Jundullah are being carried out from Pakistani territory in Balochistan.

25. Before 9/11, only India was the victim of acts of terrorism mounted from Pakistani territory. After 9/11, the whole world has become the target of Pakistan-based terrorists. The world’s attention is on Pakistan because it has become the GHQ of global jihadi terrorism. But the Pakistani political and military leaders live in such an unbelievable world of illusions that they have convinced themselves and they are trying to convince their people that the world’s attention is on Pakistan because of its geopolitical importance and its successful diplomacy.

26. Peshawar is bleeding. Karachi is bleeding. Balochistan is bleeding. The FATA is out of control. There is a new Great Game on in Pakistani territory with the US intelligence agencies on the one side and Al Qaeda and its associates on the other hunting each other, with the Pakistan Army and the ISI helping both sides in their attempts to kill each other and making money in the process.

27. While playing this treacherous game, the Pakistani leaders have the cheek to project themselves to their own people and to the rest of the world as playing an important role in bringing about peace in Afghanistan. They are unable to bring about peace in their own country. They are patting themselves thinking that they are going to help the NATO forces in bringing about peace in Afghanistan.

28. Pakistan’s penchant to live in a self-created world of illusions is known to us. We are not surprised. But we are surprised by the inability of the US and the rest of the world to see through the games which Pakistani political and military leaders have always played. They are letting themselves be sucked into Pakistan’s world of illusions.

(The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai. E-mail:seventyone2@gmail.com)

http://www.southasiaanalysis.org/%5Cpapers37%5Cpaper3657.html