A Military Coup Is Never A Smart Thing

[Perhaps Mr. Quraishi is repaying a debt to his political benefactors within the Kuwaiti occupation authorities who discovered him, recognizing his potential to contribute to their right-wing cause, or maybe its his lifelong infatuation with the military, but Ahmed has really strained his own credibility with this paean to Gen. Kayani.  Kayani is joined at the hip with Admiral Mullen.  To welcome a military intervention by the Pakistani Army is to welcome American intervention in Pakistan's struggling democracy.  Pakistan's only real hope is for some stout-hearted Pakistani leader, perhaps a doctor, or other respected professional man to come forward and gather popular support to Chief Justice Chaudhry, as he tries to find Pakistan's "disappeared" and reign-in the all-powerful agencies of Pakistan, who answer to no one.]

A Smart Coup: Why One Last Military Intervention In Pakistan

Remains A Possibility

… But we are nowhere near that right now. Gen. Kayani certainly has no such thing in mind according to people who have met him.

By AHMED QURAISHI

Monday, 15 February 2010.

WWW.PAKNATIONALISTS.COM

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan—”This was my first interaction with the soldier who commands the seventh largest military force on the face of the planet.”

With this catchy line, Dr. Farrukh Saleem began his brief and fascinating account of a meeting with General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani.

On Feb. 10, 2010, Gen. Kayani met a group of Pakistani commentators and security analysts. The briefing was the third since the military began asserting Pakistan’s legitimate security and strategic interests in Afghanistan and the region.

On January 28 and 29, Gen. Kayani told NATO commanders in Brussels that Pakistan’s legitimate security interests will have to be respected.

Earlier, he told Adm. Mike Mullen, Gen. David Petraeus, and Gen. Stanley McChrystal that instead of worrying about appeasing India, Washington better start paying attention to Pakistan.

This is a major development in the eight-year US-led war in Afghanistan.

At one point, Mr. Saleem makes an interesting observation about Gen. Kayani’s cool demeanor.

“Yes, he has the capacity for abstract thought, cold rationality and coarse creativity – all in one,” he says. “And yet he inhales reconstituted tobacco. Yes, he uses a filter and a cigarette holder. Yes, he never takes deep puffs and, yes, he only consumes half a cigarette at a time.”

At another point, Mr. Saleem makes an interesting use of pun. Talking about the general’s smoking habits, he says the following: ‘He knows that some of the things that he is doing are wrong, but still won’t give them up.’

Probably it’s a polite reference to the conspiracy theories that fill the US and British media, or the Am-Brit media, about Pakistan, its military and its intelligence agencies. So some skepticism is natural.

But the best part of his column in The News International was this concluding paragraph:

“I can tell you that I came back both proud but with a painful realisation; proud knowing that our legions are being led by strategic minds and sad to have discovered the much too visible an intellectual gap between our top political brains in Islamabad and our strategic minds at work in Rawalpindi. And what does he think about our politicians? When it’s breezy, hit it easy.

Could it be that the army rules not through the barrel of a gun but because of their intellectual superiority? Could it be that the army rules because our politicians have failed to institutionalize politics? Could it be that the army rules because our political parties do not transcend individual human intentions? Could it be that the army rules because it has structures, mechanisms of social order along with strategic thinking?”

In essence, Mr. Saleem hit at the core reason why the Pakistani military intervenes every time politicians lead the nation to a dead end.

Most importantly, the above reasoning answers even a more important question: Why the military mounts successful interventions and why the politicians can’t muster the moral authority to resist them.

Pakistani politicians remain a chaotic, undisciplined and shortsighted bunch. Their parties are messy and loose groupings of special interests in their crudest form. Almost all of them have lifetime leaders who never give way to fresh blood. And they are not public institutions but private, family-owned affairs.

Since the return to democracy in Pakistan in February 2008, hardly any of the parties in government or opposition devoted any high-level party meetings to education, health, culture and sports. None of them has plans in place for running the country. Worse, none has any vision.

The best place in Islamabad these days to see this mess in action is the National Defense University. Since 2002, the NDU has been holding the annual National Security Workshop. This is a unique 6-week course. It brings together politicians, military officers, businessmen, lawyers, social activists and journalists. The group is taken through a virtual tour into the corridors of strategic decision making in Pakistan. The course ends with a weeklong exercise that sees the class divided into a Pakistani government and a shadow government, complete with their own secretariat and staff. On the last day, the two governments frame and deliver a policy plan to deal with a hypothetical strategic crisis confronting Pakistan. The plan has domestic, military and foreign policy components. Often, senior commanders from Pakistani military’s General Headquarters attend the last day’s presentations.

NDU officials, both civilian and military, have one observation that has been constant during the past eight years of national security workshops: Military officers, businessmen, social activists and journalists often show the best performance. Politicians come last. Most can’t even draft a single-page policy brief, or work with a PowerPoint presentation.

In essence, middle class Pakistanis – military officers, businessmen, social activists and journalists – fair better than the politicians, mostly a feudal landowning elite.

This gets blurry sometimes, but you get the general idea.

And middle class Pakistanis can’t make it to political parties, let alone to the federal and regional parliaments and governments.

Elections might change this, but certainly not in the foreseeable future. And Pakistan may not have the luxury of time.

If the national deadlock continues with mounting domestic instability due to massive corruption and mismanagement by our politicians, the military may have to contend with one last intervention. It would be the last because if the military failed this time to help set Pakistan on the right track, it could be a free fall after that because Pakistanis are getting increasingly restless with the existing decay. Social turmoil simmers just beneath the surface.

If it comes to a military-led intervention, both military officers and politicians will have to stay out of actual power. The army chief may not become a chief executive. The military might have to look into a new concept called the ‘Smart Coup’, where the military can bring capable Pakistanis to power with a firm executable plan of reform over five years, or more, fully backed by the military.  There may not be time to put the plan to vote. It will have to be implemented.

This would be the absolute last option. But we are nowhere near that right now. Gen. Kayani certainly has no such thing in mind according to people who have met him. He wants democracy to work for the time being and he has proven this by resisting several opportunities to intervene over the past two years.

Pakistan is full of resources and opportunities, but it lacks good leadership and clean management. Even the bare minimum of these two commodities is not available in today’s Pakistan.

Books on political science and theory in Washington and London can’t help with this. Pakistanis will have to do what’s best for their homeland.

© 2007-2009. All rights reserved. AhmedQuraishi.com & PakNationalists

Pioneer Living “Back to Basics” Online

Pioneer Survival

A True People Publication. Pioneer Living is a  publication for today’s creative doers. People like you!

People who want to get back to basics and work with nature. The “New” homesteaders, survivalists and

ones who will do more with less, the “New Pioneers”.

It is our goal at “Pioneer Living” to inform with solutions as many human beings as possible the

forgotten/lost art of basic human survival.

Pioneer Living is currently accepting articles for those of you who wish to share stories

on pioneer ways of life, homesteading, survival, gardening, preparedness and simple back to basics living.

Thank you,

The Editor.

News and up-dates

1 U.S. member will receive a free Super Survival Pack of seeds from Seed for Security.If you live outside of the country we will send something else do to shipping rules on seeds.

This is a members drive! The person that brings in the most members to our website by Feb 20 2010 wins.

Back To Basics

*  Pioneer Essentials

Even if cash-poor, ranchers of the Old West coveted a rack of shiny pots and pans,

preparation standards of the day didn’t allow fixing a meal with anything but the

most basic cookware.

*  Building an Open Fire Pit for Cooking

*  Soap Making Soap for good and vibrant health is a vital item in any home.

Without soap we would not be able to have clean bodies or clean clothes.

*  Making Charcoal Why Charcoal?  The many uses of charcoal is very important to your survival.

*  Tanning Hides The Indians tanned hides in several ways and by different substances according to the tribe.

Hides were used for clothing and blankets.

*  How to Wash on a Washboard

*  Rendering Lard While lard isn’t considered a food, it was vital to the cooking process for many years.

Food

*  Preparedness

Pioneer Living’s No. 1 Investment Pick For 2009

And Still Our No. 1 Investment Pick for 2010!

Number 1 investment for 2009? Your answer should be….. ”Food”. Millions of Americans

and people around the world lost their jobs these past few years. Are you prepared if you

suddenly lost your job?

* Recipes Chuckwagon Chow With all the modern conveniences we have today it seems we have little

appreciation for our early ancesters’ efforts to make even the most basic foods interesting.

Despite our capacity to bake in the world’s most advanced and well-equipped home kitchens, we

often do less than a pioneer did with just a campfire.

*  Food Storage The storage environment, storage containers, root cellars, rotating your stored foods

are all important to ensure your family is fed year round.

*  Canning and Preserving Canning 101

* Food Storage (Grains) Storing grains and preserving

* Return of the Root Cellar

Food Security, A Trip into Our Past.

Gardening

*  Gardening Basics Ok, maybe you have dreamed it but now it is time to get

educated and learn a few basics of gardening, your life may depend on it.

*  Organic Soil Prep In the fall you can relax? Wrong! Now you must prep your

soil for next years garden.

* Superfoods Power packed nutritional food

*  Composting Composting is the single most important item in Organic gardening.

It is nature’s continuous recycling process.

*  Bug Control

*  Companion Planting

*  Solutions for City Dwellers, Suburbanites

Homesteading

*  Homesteading\Stories

*  Basic Animals Before buying animals, learn as much as you can about them, but don’t expect to become

an expert just by reading

*  Equipment/Tools/Utensils

*  Use and Re-Use

*  Basic Property Layouts

THE HAVE-MORE PLAN…More

“A Little Land – A Lot of Living.”  We can learn a lot from older generations.

Those who went before were just as interested then as you are now in fresh air, sunshine,

green grass and wholesome food. Ed and Carolyn Robinson were one of the few that took the

time to lay down a blueprint for making it all happen.  A Classic 1940′s Must Read!

Survival

* Foraging For Food Food is a very important part of life that you must have to survive.

In an extreme situation you must do what ever it takes to keep you and your family alive.

*  Beating The Cold Did you ever wonder why the Indians could travel so light without freezing to death?

Or why they only built a small fire?

*  Shelters

*  Water Survival

*  Survival Info Downloads

Tentative steps towards realistic lasting co-existence with neighbors India didn’t choose in the first place.

MOSTAQUE ALI
These are matters pondered over years, and written about over the same years.

So again with the recent peace initiative, for the 100 time, my mind focused on the matter over the past few days, and I made some rough notes as they came to me on my receipt book this Sunday past, as I idly passed my time, avoiding the junk on TV.

We have another round of peace negotiations between India, the wannabe super-power egged on by the USA, and Pakistan, the perennially failed state from its very inception.

Can International agreements, and especially peace agreements be made with failed States such as Pakistan? Surely a dodgy slippery proposition? Who has real authority in such a failed state? Zardari, and his kleptocracy…..here today, gone tomorrow? The Pakistan military? or Begum Memsahib Anne Paterson, and the USA?

For the sake of India’s prestige there is no point undertaking peace negotiations yet again, if you are not sure who has final authority in Pakistan. If you are not sure who has the final authority to sign such agreements of peace. Otherwise such events become mere theater for public consumption, and image making. I for one wouldn’t want the corrupt Zardari regime getting unwarranted legitimacy from such meetings with India, especially if such negotiations involved more time wasting on Pakistan’s part.

On the other hand India can’t manage the Maoist ascendancy in Nepal; events in Sri Lanka, which tragically ate up one of India’s PM’s; Bangladesh which purportedly has a very secure land slide victory vindicated pro-Indian government, let alone the near far countries of Afghanistan, Tajikistan or Myanmar. But India is successful in the Maldives and Bhutan, so we can sigh with some relief and gain some comfort from these small mercies.

So how can India with such weak foreign policy strategies and regional track record hope to gain lasting “peace” with ever belligerent failed state Pakistan; perhaps this is yet another case of the triumph of hope over actual experience.

Perhaps in this light the real problem in the region is India, not Pakistan? India is the real problem, and the ultimate source of the solution.

India is big in many senses, population wise, geographically, militarily, economically with an economy measured by PPP at around $3,500 billion, the fourth largest after the USA, China and Japan. It thus has plenty of resources to play with in its geo-strategic sphere, in furthering its interest. The question is does India know how to further these interests; the record indicates it does not. Though logically such a state should be able to exert meaningful, comprehensive influence in its neighborhood, which have a favorable outcome for all in the immediate vicinity. Indeed as a matter of course around the world, small and medium sized countries are striving for regional cooperation and coexistence very successfully, and without any problems. So India is not being asked to achieve impossible insurmountable objectives in its natural regional sphere, South Asia, as the biggest and most influential nation in that region.

Why hasn’t India succeeded with Pakistan?

I mean what is the big deal about Pakistan, which is blocking India from achieving peace with that country?

• Its a failed state; OK so how can India manage that failure within Pakistan.
• Pakistan’s economy is about 1/8 of India’s.
• India exports 10 times more than Pakistan and the gap is/will be widening. Actual Indian exports are also grossly under reported for tax avoidance reasons.
• Militarily India is about 4/5 times more powerful, and if India can sustain a one year war with Pakistan….and mobilize her resources that ratio will widen to 1/10 in India’s favor, as long as foreign arms is not poured into Pakistan during that time.
• Pakistan’s political leadership is weak and fluid; they come and go, with short periods of rule, being destabilized by the Pakistan military in the background, so no actual state policy and governance takes place, as the politicians at least briefly focus on survival and consolidation rather than implementing comprehensive programs of government and governance.

So why can’t India manage such a failed state, and implement lasting bilateral relations which prevents future regional discord?

The problem lies with India as stated before. The Indian ruling elite is a post-colonial rotten figment left behind by the parting British, to rule India as the British ruled in many respects, in terms of actual administration and the organization of that administration. It thus is no surprise to discover that this Indian elite patriotically have stashed away $1,500 billion of the countries assets in the various tax havens around the world……….this is more than any other country, more than the USA, China or Japan.

Thus the Indian military is very much the same military the British ran up to the point of independence. If he could see it now Kipling would be proud of it, as would General Dyer, General Roberts, and even Clive, and Hastings……the Indian military is not a true Indian military serving India, but made up of second hand Gunga Dins in the top brass (General Deepak Kapoor down) who queue up for their slice of the cake from arms procurements from foreign countries…..and not just one source, oh no, but multiple foreign sources. So you can imagine the nightmare of India fighting an actual real war, over a few years, and the “complex” nature of its foreign based arms and ordnance, the sources of which are often highly unreliable (Russia).

The Indian police, amongst the worst in the world, again very much substantially a legacy of the colonial era, as is India’s legal/judicial system, and criminal justice system, ramshackle education system (previous talked about) and political administrative system. There is nothing Indian in any of these state organizations.

With such obvious flaws how can India manage the neighborhood if it can barely manage itself? Running a minimal state where the budget accounts for only 15% of the official GDP, widespread corruption, massive food insecurity, widespread poverty and great income inequality, and 55 billionaires.

One does not have to be a Professor Amartya Sen (married to a member of the Rothschilds banking family) to see what all the “Development” is really about: the abject poverty, dirt, filth, starvation and inequalities that impact the vast majority of ordinary Indians, and the oblivious indifference of the ruling elite to this problem after 63 years of “Independence”, beyond muttering the empty blurry platitudes to do something about it in the near future.

And so India is now steered and run by an illiterate firingi, Senora Sonia, from the back seat, whilst nice smiley weak Dr. Singh fronts her actual policies. This surely is unacceptable, and unconstitutional. Would such a political elite actually want to achieve peace with Pakistan anyway?

• Pakistan is a failed state from the beginning, and will remain a failed state into infinity; India has to accept and manage this fact.
• Pakistan was created by the UK, to clip India’s wings, and has dutifully attacked India in 1948, 1965, 1971, 1990 almost, 1999, and almost again in 2002. This apparent mad dog bravado by little Pakistan against big India is intriguing, and can only be explained in terms of outside encouragement. The UK created Pakistan’s ISI in 1948. Since the 1960′s the USA has been the main foreign power influencing Pakistan’s politics, through the Pakistan military/ISI primarily……running and funding the ISI.

On the one hand simple logic would dictate that there is no point trying to have meaningful negotiations which such a failed state, with its complex foreign alien orientated influence from other countries, which begs the fundamental question of what exactly constitutes independent Pakistan state policy, and on the other hand which of Pakistan’s state policies are shaped and directed by Washington…..a very moot issue that requires clarification. If Zardari and the Pakistan military are mere puppets of Washington, why should India waste its time negotiating with such a drunk failed state in the first place, staggering from one self made crisis to the next?

“In a dimly lit street, in a cold winter month. Excuse me Sir can you tell me the way to the Kashmiri railway station?”

“The drunk slowly fixes a blank vacant gaze at the other party…….burps loudly…..kuch naihee bhai shahib……….muttering to himself……..madar chaud….coexistence….negotiations….friendship…teek hai, Sumje…….you take the left, no the right…..or is it the first left, then straight on………..any Johnny Walker…….sala, no Johnny Walker……….ok.. ok…..wait, wait let me ask and phone Begum Paterson….she knows…she knows everything….bloody women…wait………..Amerikka Firingi woman runs our country, and Italian illiterate firingi woman runs your country, sumje sala…..sumje sala….so were on equal negotiation terms.”

There is something dignifying for India undertaking yet again peace negotiations with such a country. It tends to elevate Pakistan’s position diplomatically, and the ego of negotiating on equal terms, whilst simultaneously devaluing India’s position.

The Pakistanis political and military elite are abject liars, who do not hesitate to lie to their own people. A form of hardened pathology of cynicism has set in, to the point where it becomes an automatic art form, to see who can lie and fool the Pakistani people and others the most…….the military or the politicians.This is also considered as being somehow skillful, and clever.Normal people, with simple logic would not be able to comprehend such perverse warped pathology, and therefore would fail to identify this duplicitous game. Unfortunately still, the poor illiterate majority take at face value the utterances of the military/political elite.

“The Swat Taliban have been effectively defeated” (The Pakistan military set up the SWAT Taliban in the first place to destabilize Zardaris government ……the Pakistan military miss being out of power and are looking to get back in)…

“We have been completely successful in South Waziristan” (The Pakistan military for a couple of months conducted a shadow war, for the benefit of the Americans and the Pakistan people; a bogus war with their own puppets, who had long disappeared from the scene.)…………the lie of the numerous terrorist ops in Pakistan blamed on the TTP, the Pakistan militaries puppets, especially those in the NWFP.

The maintaining the “al-Qaeda” myth. The Pakistan military more than any other military should know the true origins of “al-Qaeda”. The Pakistan military mentored and guided OBL until his last days in December 2001, for America. It is a false fictious organisation which explains Israel’s false flag ops in the Greater Middle East and Europe. Pakistan provides this valuable service.In the pursuit of this fake narrative, Pakistan’s military have handed over 650 wholly innocent Afghans/Pakistanis to the Americans since 2001 as “al-Qaeda”…………….nearly ALL such people have been subsequently released by the Americans.

These cynical warped chaudis can sell their own grandmothers.

The politicians lie informing concerned Pakistanis that there is no Blackwater in Pakistan…….even though they are visible in Pakistan…..and the American defense secretary confirmed their presence in Pakistan. The Pakistani politicians tell everybody that American military and civilians aren’t swamping Pakistan, even though most people know of their presence.

Now failed state Pakistan is sending troops to failed state Yemen to fight “al-Qaeda”, whilst simultaneously still experiencing major security problems inside Pakistan……..on America’s orders. The Yemen problem is not “al-Qaeda”…….Its an on-going civil war between the majority Sunni government and the Shia Houthis, and the incompetence of yet another military man trying to retain power well past the sell buy date. The sheer irony and stupidity of one failed state sending troops to another failed state fighting an unnecessary war, against none existent threats, just so that America with Israel can image and highlight the waning “al-Qaeda” scarecrow.

What is the utility of negotiating peace with such a slippery state? Offering the hand of friendship and peaceful coexistence. Doesn’t all this make India look rather naive and clumsy? I think despite the unpromising bleak scenario, India does have definite interests in somehow finally dealing with and accommodating Pakistan, in a future where India becomes only more stronger whilst Pakistan simultaneously spirals out of control, as a result of the actions of its own politicians and military. A small wound on the side should not be ignored, because one is a little irritated by its periodic nuisance…..India should treat it decisively and finally.

Perhaps what India needs is a bold grand gesture with Pakistan to move out of the rut of negotiations with Pakistan; moving forward involving courage, foresight and imagination coupled with determination. Under SAARC, FTA’s will eventually be instituted within South Asia, to greater integrate South Asia…all well and good. Given the critical situation in Pakistan, and the reappearance of the East India Company in the neighborhood once again, doing exactly what they were doing 250 years ago…..(Opium/ and messy civilian costly wars)…….then it may be prudent to “rescue” Pakistan with Indian rupees……India is not a poor country…….there is after all $1,500 billion stashed away, lying idly in Jewish banks in Zurich and else where.

So why not offer Pakistan an immediate FTA in 2010 with India, backed by financial inducements of $5 billion, over 5 years, as an unconditional loan from India to Pakistan? We’re not talking about revolutionary initiatives here, FTA’s are on the pipeline in South Asia, but in Pakistan’s case why not bring that forward immediately and urgently, and further integrate the Pakistani people with India, bypassing the corrupt ruling elite in Pakistan,in light of the situation in Pakistan?

Now if Zardari wants to use that loan money to buy another mansion in Surrey, thats fine…and if the Pakistani miliary want to buy some artillery pieces with that money thats fine……they cannot and will not change their ways and their corrupt bankrupt mindset………but for India the benefits are clear, as the FTA develops, and the sheer absurdity of trading between the two countries via the UAE, worth more than $5 billion is resolved for good. It is a further process of decisively linking in Pakistan to India, and an important first step towards eventually negotiating peace in Kashmir.

Magnaminity, coupled with strategic thinking, out of the box.

The USA…….since the 1950′s has provided about $30 billion in military aid to Pakistan, and about $30 billion in economic aid……a significant generous amount. The Americans probably invented the concept of foreign aid starting with lend lease to the UK in the 1940′s…….and then the reconstruction of Europe after the war, including significant help for Germany and Japan, arch foes where 300,000 Americans died fighting these countries…..in real, mass, mobilized, mechanized wars. ……………..not the two week mild slapping sessions between India and Pakistan. We can be cynical about this enormous aid, and say there were obviously strategic interests/considerations why American planners were so keen to help……….but the generosity was unmistakable, and the world reciprocated in recognizing, in kind through this mode of soft power and significant help.

China…..is emulating the USA of the 1940′s, exactly the same.

Crazed Zionist Settlers Plot to Rebuild Temple of Solomon

[This has great explosive potential to ignite Israel's cherished "third intifada," especially if the equally loony Christian-Zionists try to build support for this insanity.  I guess that everyone realizes that it is necessary to destroy the second most sacred mosque in all of Islam to rebuild Solomon's Temple?] Sheikh Tamimi: Israel working to build Third Temple Ma’an News February 15, 2010 Jerusalem – Ma’an – Palestinian Supreme Judge Sheikh Tayseer Tamimi warned on Monday that Israeli institutions, settler groups and the current Israeli government are working to fulfill the 18th century Rabbi Vilna Goan’s prophecy declaring that the Third Temple would be re-built by 16 March 2010. Tamimi said that Israeli archeological excavations have caused structural damage to the Al-Marwani Mosque, under the Al-Aqsa Mosque’s northern walls and to Palestinian homes in the Old City of Jerusalem. The Sheikh further alleged that a plan had been implemented in 1993 to intensify efforts to Judaize Jerusalem, which consisted of establishing two major settlements around Jerusalem and a military brigade dedicated to closing off the city and separating it from its surrounding neighborhoods with military checkpoints. Tamimi added that the plan included the shutting down of Palestinian institutions in Jerusalem, the expulsion of dignitaries and the revoking of Israeli ID cards of Jerusalem residents in Beit Hanina, Shu’fat, El-Essawiya, At-Tour and Silwan, in occupied East Jerusalem. Additionally, a network of underground tunnels would be constructed to connect Jewish settlers to the Old City of Jerusalem, Tamimi claimed. By the end of this process, some 36,000 Palestinians living in the Old City will be displaced as a result, Tamimi said. Tamimi called on conveners of the Arab League Summit in Libya next month to create a plan to save Jerusalem and the Al-Aqsa Mosque.

:: Article nr. 63301 sent on 15-feb-2010 18:54 ECT
www.uruknet.info?p=63301

Cheney Admits to War Crimes, Media Yawns, Obama Turns the Other Cheek

Cheney Admits to War Crimes, Media Yawns, Obama Turns the Other Cheek Jason Leopold (Image: Lance Page / t r u t h o u t; Adapted: Mike Licht, NotionsCapital.com, World Economic Forum, stevefaeembra, MissusK) t r u t h o u t, February 15, 2010 Dick Cheney is a sadist. On Sunday, in an exclusive interview with Jonathan Karl of ABC News’ “This Week,” Cheney proclaimed his love of torture, derided the Obama administration for outlawing the practice, and admitted that the Bush administration ordered Justice Department attorneys to fix the law around his policies. “I was a big supporter of waterboarding,” Cheney told Karl, as if he were issuing a challenge to officials in the current administration, including President Barack Obama, who said flatly last year that waterboarding is torture, to take action against him. “I was a big supporter of the enhanced interrogation techniques…” The former vice president’s declaration closely follows admissions he made in December 2008, about a month before the Bush administration exited the White House, when he said he personally authorized the torture of 33 suspected terrorist detainees and approved the waterboarding of three so-called “high-value” prisoners. “I signed off on it; others did, as well, too,” Cheney said in an interview with the right-wing Washington Times about the waterboarding, a drowning technique where a person is strapped to a board, his face covered with a cloth and then water is poured over it. It is a torture technique dating back at least to the Spanish Inquisition. The US has long treated waterboarding as a war crime and has prosecuted Japanese soldiers for using it against US troops during World War II. And Ronald Reagan’s Justice Department prosecuted a Texas sheriff and three deputies for using the practice to get confessions. But Cheney’s admissions back then, as well as those he made on Sunday, went unchallenged by Karl and others in the mainstream media. Indeed, the two major national newspapers–The New York Times and The Washington Post–characterized Cheney’s interview as a mere spat between the vice president and the Obama administration over the direction of the latter’s counterterroism and national security policies. The Times and Post left Cheney’s admissions about waterboarding and torture in general out of their reports. Karl also made no mention of the fact that the CIA’s own watchdog concluded in a report declassified last year that the torture of detainees Cheney signed off on did not result in any actionable intelligence nor did it thwart any imminent attacks on the United States. To the contrary, torture led to bogus information, wrongful elevated threat warnings, and, in one instance, derailed the prosecution of at least one detainee because the evidence against him was obtained through torture. Karl also failed to call out Cheney on a statement the former vice president made during his interview in which he suggested the policy of torture was carried out only after the Bush administration told Justice Department attorneys it wanted the legal justification to subject suspected al-Qaeda prisoners to brutal interrogation methods. Cheney told Karl that he continues to be critical of the Obama administration “because there were some things being said, especially after we left office, about prosecuting CIA personnel that had carried out our counterterrorism policy or disbarring lawyers in the Justice Department who had — had helped us put those policies together, and I was deeply offended by that, and I thought it was important that some senior person in the administration stand up and defend those people who’d done what we asked them to do.” In an interview with Karl on December 15, 2008, Cheney made a similar comment, which Karl also allowed to go unchallenged, stating that the Bush administration “had the Justice Department issue the requisite opinions in order to know where the bright lines were that you could not cross.” Bush’s Key Line of Defense Destroyed Those statements, both on Sunday and in his December 2008 interview with Karl, destroys a key line in the Bush administration’s defense against war crimes charges. For years, Cheney and other Bush administration officials pinned their defense on the fact that they had received legal advice from Justice Department lawyers that the brutal interrogations of “war on terror” detainees did not constitute torture or violate other laws of war. Cheney’s statements, however, would suggest that the lawyers were colluding with administration officials in setting policy, rather than providing objective legal analysis. In fact, as I reported last year, an investigation by the Department of Justice’s Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) determined that DOJ attorneys John Yoo and Jay Bybee blurred the lines between attorneys charged with providing independent legal advice to the White House and policy advocates who were working to advance the administration’s goals, according to legal sources who were privy to an original draft of the OPR report. That was a conclusion Dawn Johnsen reached. Johnsen was tapped a year ago by Obama to head the Office of Legal Counsel (OLC), where Yoo and Bybee worked, but her confirmation has been stuck in limbo. In a 2006 Indiana Law Journal article, she said the function of OLC should be to “provide an accurate and honest appraisal of applicable law, even if that advice will constrain the administration’s pursuit of desired policies.” “The advocacy model of lawyering, in which lawyers craft merely plausible legal arguments to support their clients’ desired actions, inadequately promotes the President’s constitutional obligation to ensure the legality of executive action,” said Johnsen, who served in the OLC under President Bill Clinton. “In short, OLC must be prepared to say no to the President. “For OLC instead to distort its legal analysis to support preferred policy outcomes undermines the rule of law and our democratic system of government. Perhaps most essential to avoiding a culture in which OLC becomes merely an advocate of the Administration’s policy preferences is transparency in the specific legal interpretations that inform executive action, as well as in the general governing processes and standards followed in formulating that legal advice.” In a 2007 UCLA Law Review article, Johnsen said Yoo’s Aug. 1, 2002, torture memo is “unmistakably” an “advocacy piece.” “OLC abandoned fundamental practices of principled and balanced legal interpretation,” Johnsen wrote. “The Torture Opinion relentlessly seeks to circumvent all legal limits on the CIA’s ability to engage in torture, and it simply ignores arguments to the contrary. “The Opinion fails, for example, to cite highly relevant precedent, regulations, and even constitutional provisions, and it misuses sources upon which it does rely. Yoo remains almost alone in continuing to assert that the Torture Opinion was ‘entirely accurate’ and not outcome driven.” For his part, Yoo had already admitted in no uncertain terms that Bush administration officials sought to legalize torture and that he and Bybee fixed the law around the Bush administration’s policy. As I noted in a report last year, in his book, “War by Other Means: An Insider’s Account on the War On Terror,” Yoo described his participation in meetings that helped develop the controversial policies for the treatment of detainees. For instance, Yoo wrote about a trip he took to Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, with other senior administration officials to observe interrogations and to join in discussions about specific interrogation methods. In other words, Yoo was not acting as an independent attorney providing the White House with unbiased legal advice but was more of an advocate for administration policy. The meetings that Yoo described appear similar to those disclosed by ABC News in April 2008. “The most senior Bush administration officials repeatedly discussed and approved specific details of exactly how high-value al-Qaeda suspects would be interrogated by the CIA,” ABC News reported at the time, citing unnamed sources. “The high-level discussions about these ‘enhanced interrogation techniques’ were so detailed, these sources said, some of the interrogation sessions were almost choreographed – down to the number of times CIA agents could use a specific tactic. “These top advisers signed off on how the CIA would interrogate top al-Qaeda suspects – whether they would be slapped, pushed, deprived of sleep or subjected to simulated drowning, called waterboarding,” according to unnamed sources quoted by ABC News. The original draft of the OPR report concluded that Yoo and Bybee violated professional standards and recommended a referral to state bar associations where they could have faced disciplinary action and have had their law licenses revoked. The report’s findings could have influenced whether George W. Bush, Cheney and other senior officials in that administration were held accountable for torture and other war crimes. But two weeks ago, it was revealed that officials in Obama’s Justice Department backed off the earlier recommendation and instead altered the misconduct findings against Yoo and Bybee to “poor judgment,” which means neither will face disciplinary action. Torture Preceded Legal Advice If ABC’s Karl had a firmer grasp on the issues he queried Cheney about he would have known that as recently as last week, three UK high-court judges released seven paragraphs of a previously classified intelligence document that proved the CIA tortured Binyam Mohamed, a British resident captured in Pakistan in April 2002 who was falsely tied to a dirty bomb plot, months before the Bush administration obtained a memo from John Yoo and Jay Bybee at the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) authorizing specific methods of torture to be used against high-value detainees. The document stated bluntly that Mohamed’s treatment “could readily be contended to be at the very least cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment by the United States authorities.” Under the United Nations Convention Against Torture, the treatment of Mohamed and the clear record that the Bush administration used waterboarding and other brutal techniques to extract information from detainees should have triggered the United States to conduct a full investigation and to prosecute the offenders.In the case of the US’s refusal to do so, other nations would be obligated to act under the principle of universality. However, instead of living up to that treaty commitment, the Obama administration has time and again resisted calls for government investigations and has gone to court to block lawsuits that demand release of torture evidence or seek civil penalties against officials implicated in the torture. Though it’s true, as Vice President Joe Biden stated Sunday on “Meet the Press,” that Cheney is rewriting history and making “factually, substantively wrong” statements about the Obama administration’s track record and approach to counterterrorism, it’s difficult, if not near impossible, to defend this president from the likes of Cheney. Case in point: last week the Obama administration treated the disclosure by British judicial officials of the former prisoner’s torture as a security breach and threatened to cut off an intelligence sharing arrangement with the UK government. In what can only be described as a stunning response to the revelations contained in the intelligence document, White House spokesman Ben LaBolt said “the [UK} court's judgment will complicate the confidentiality of our intelligence-sharing relationship with the UK, and it will have to factor into our decision-making going forward." "We're deeply disappointed with the court's judgment today, because we shared this information in confidence and with certain expectations," LaBolt said, making no mention of Mohamed's treatment nor even offering him an apology for the torture he was subjected to by the CIA over the course of several years. Mohamed was released from Guantanamo last year and returned to the UK. As an aside, as revelatory as the disclosures were, news reports of Mohamed's torture were buried by the mainstream print media and went unreported by the cable news outlets, underscoring how the media's interest in Bush-era crimes has waned. Last December, on the day Obama received a Nobel Peace prize, Jameel Jaffer, director of the ACLU’s National Security Project, told reporters that "on every front, the [Obama] administration is actively obstructing accountability. This administration is shielding Bush administration officials from civil liability, criminal investigation and even public scrutiny for their role in authorizing torture.” If one can defend the Obama administration against Cheney’s attacks, it would have to be with the Cheney’s claim that the administration is attempting to prosecute “CIA personnel that had carried out our counterterrorism policy or disbarring lawyers.” The opposite is true. Holder has expanded the mandate of a special counsel, appointed during the Bush administration, who is investigating the destruction of torture tapes, to conduct a “preliminary review” of less than a dozen torture cases involving CIA contractors and interrogators to determine whether launching an expanded criminal inquiry is warranted. And “disbarring lawyers, a clear reference to Yoo and Bybee, which is beyond the scope of the Justice Department watchdog’s authority to begin with, is no longer a possibility given that the OPR report reportedly does not recommend disciplinary action. As Jane Mayer reported in a recent issue of the New Yorker, Holder’s limited scope authorization to Durham did not go over well with the White House and Obama’s Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel made sure Holder knew where the administration stood. “Emanuel worried that such investigations would alienate the intelligence community…,” Mayer reported. “Emanuel couldn’t complain directly to Holder without violating strictures against political interference in prosecutorial decisions. But he conveyed his unhappiness to Holder indirectly, two sources said. Emanuel demanded, ‘Didn’t he get the memo that we’re not re-litigating the past?’”

:: Article nr. 63310 sent on 16-feb-2010 05:29 ECT
www.uruknet.info?p=63310

Names of Mossad Death Squad Published

Names of Mossad Death Squad Published Kawther Salam February 15, 2010 Lt. Gen. Dhafi Khalfan Tamim, Dubai’s police chief, stated during a press conference on Sunday that the team which carried out the killing of Mahmud al-Mabhouh in a room at the Al-Bostan, Rotana hotel in Dubai on January 20 consisted of six British passport holders, three Irish passport holders including the woman, and the holders of each a German and a French passport. Pictures of the death squad members. “This is a list of all the wanted suspects. The list will be given to the press, newspaper and the Interpol”, said Khalfan. Dubai will soon issue arrest warrants for 11 Europeans suspected in the killing of senior Hamas official Mahmoud Al-Mabhouh, but the police chief said on Monday that he was still not ruling out Israeli involvement. Khalfan said that two Palestinians suspected of providing logistical support in Mabhouh’s murder were being held by police. Al Arabiya television said that the pair had been handed over by Jordan. Khalfan said that the 11 suspects were believed to have rented a room across the corridor from al-Mabhouh around the time of the murder, and left Dubai shortly after. Al-Mabhouh entered the United Arab Emirates a day before his death using a passport that did not bear his family name. Khalfan described the assassination of Al-Mabhouh, who was unarmed and alone, “by more than a dozen people” as a cowardly act and not an act of heroism. In an apparent reference to the possibility of state involvement in the assassination of Mabhouh, Khalfan said “if leaders of some countries export orders to their intelligence and security services to commit murders in another country, this is repugnant and unacceptable.” The names of the suspected persons as published by Al-Quds: Peter Ilevenger (sp?) – French passport Kevin Davron – Irish passport Gael Voallard (female) – Irish passport Ivan Diningz (sp?) -  Irish passport Paul John Keely – British passport Melvin Adam Mildainer – British passport Steven Daniel Hodge – British passport Michael Lawrence Barney – British passport James Leonard Clark – British passport Jonathan Lewis Graham – British passport Michael Bodenhaimer – German passport If you know anybody who uses these names, or if you recognize any of the individuals on the pictures, please contact the police station nearest to you.

:: Article nr. 63313 sent on 16-feb-2010 08:12 ECT
www.uruknet.info?p=63313

Link: www.kawther.info/wpr/2010/02/15/names-of-mossad-death-squad-published?utm_source
=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+KawtherSalam+%28
Kawther+Salam+Blog%29

In Haiti, Like Katrina, the Military Mission Is To Convince the World We Are Trying

And the U.S. Calls This a “Model Response?” A Million Homeless in Haiti By BILL QUIGLEY February 15, 2010 Despite the fact that over a million people remained homeless in Haiti one month after the earthquake, the U.S. Ambassador to Haiti, Ken Merten, is quoted at a State Department briefing on February 12, saying “In terms of humanitarian aid delivery…frankly, it’s working really well, and I believe that this will be something that people will be able to look back on in the future as a model for how we’ve been able to sort ourselves out as donors on the ground and responding to an earthquake.” What? Haiti is a model of how the international government and donor community should respond to an earthquake? The Ambassador must be overworked and need some R&R. Look at the facts. The UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) reported February 11 there are still 1.2 million people living in “spontaneous settlements” in and around Port au Prince as a result of the January 12 earthquake. These spontaneous settlements are sprawling camps of homeless Haitian children and families living on the ground under sheets. Over 300,000 are in camps in Carrefour, nearly 200,000 in Port au Prince, and over 100,000 each in Delmas, Petitionville and Leogane according to the UN. About 25,000 people are camped out on one golf course in Petitionville. Hundreds of thousands of others are living in soccer fields, church yards, on hillsides, in gullies, and even on the strips of land in the middle of the street. The UN has identified over 300 such spontaneous settlements. The Red Cross reports there are over 700. The UN reported that barely one in five of the people in camps have received tents or tarps as of February 11. Eighty percent of the hundreds of thousands of children and families still live on the ground under sheets. Many of these camps are huge. Nineteen of these homeless camps in the Port au Prince area together house 180,000 people. More than half of these camps are so spontaneous that there is no organization in the camp to even comprehensively report their needs. Another half a million people have left Port au Prince, most to the countryside. As a result there are significant food problems in the countryside. About 168,000 internally displaced people are living along the border with the Dominican Republic. Many are with families. Others are in “spontaneous settlements” of up to a 1000 people. People living in these densely populated camps will be asked to move to more organized settlements outside the city. Relocation, says the UN, will be on a voluntary basis. The U.S. Ambassador knows full well there are 900 or so aid agencies are on the ground in Haiti. Coordination and communication between those agencies and between them and the Haitian government continues to be a very serious challenge. Though many people are trying hard to meet the survival needs Haiti, no one besides the Ambassador dares say that it is a model of how to respond. Partners in Health director Dr. Louise Ivers reported on the very same day that “there is more and more misery” in Port au Prince as fears of typhoid and dysentery haunt the camps as the rainy season looms. But the still the Haitian spirit prevails. Everyone who has been to Haiti since the earthquake reports inspiring stories of Haitians helping Haitians despite the tragically inadequate response of the Haitian government and the international community. That spirit is something people should admire. Let me finish with a story that illustrates. One orphanage outside of Port au Prince, home to 57 children, was promised a big tent so the children would no longer have to sleep under the stars. The tent arrived but without poles to hold it up. The same group was promised food from UNICEF. Twelve days later, no food had arrived. They improvised and constructed scaffolding to create an awning over the mattresses lying on the dirt. They are finding food from anywhere they can. “We’re holding on,” said the Haitian director Etienne Bruny, “We’re used to difficult times.” Haitians are holding on despite the inadequate humanitarian response. They are the model. Bill Quigley is Legal Director at the Center for Constitutional Rights and a law professor at Loyola University New Orleans. He is a Katrina survivor and has been active in human rights in Haiti for years with the Institute for Justice and Democracy in Haiti. He can be reached at: duprestars@yahoo.com.

:: Article nr. 63329 sent on 16-feb-2010 12:20 ECT
www.uruknet.info?p=63329

Afghan Surge

[This BBC4 report on the new fight near Helmand and the claims of the Taliban, given immediately after, tell a tale that is much different from the usual propaganda flowing forth from the US military and its media mouthpieces.  Forgetting for a moment the uncertainty for the home front during every faraway battle, keep in mind the M.O. of our military and civilian leaders--to always speak as if we have already won, to puff-up its prowess in every description of military encounter and to lie first, whenever things are not going according to plan.  We don't know what is happening there, just as we haven't a clue about any area of any of the wars that we have been locked into.  The truth is--we are screwed in Afghanistan, by our own hand.  Nothing that Obama or Petraeus can do or say will change that.]

Fierce resistance to US Afghan offensive

By Channel 4 News

more about “Afghan Surge“, posted with vodpod

Coalition forces continue to clear the Taliban from strongholds in southern Afghanistan despite heavy fighting in some areas of Helmand province while the civilian death toll reaches 20.

US Marines leading one of Nato’s biggest offensives against Taliban Islamic militants in Afghanistan are facing fierce resistance in the Majar district of Helmand, bogged down by heavy gunfire, snipers and booby traps.

There have been conflicting assessments of what progress Nato has made in Operation Moshtarak, but it seemed clear that the campaign to seize areas before planned troop reductions next year could drag on for weeks.

Coalition forces continued to push ahead in the offensive is the first test of US President Barack Obama’s plan to send 30,000 more troops to Afghanistan.

Hearts and minds
Nato and the Afghan government’s credibility rests on limiting civilian casualtiesduring the offensive.

Defence secretary Bob Ainsworth said the “hard” work to win hearts and minds during Operation Moshtarak was starting today – as the campaign’s civilian death toll continued to grow.

Two US missiles killed 12 civilians by accident on Sunday in an attack on Marjah, a farming area believed to be a breeding ground for insurgents and lucrative opium poppy cultivation, which Western countries say funds the insurgency.

Three Afghan civilians were accidentally killed in separate incidents during the offensive, Nato said.

It also said that a Nato airstrike on suspected insurgents in Kandahar province, not part of the current offensive, had accidentally killed five civilians and wounded two.

Afghan resistance statement Invitation of the Islamic Emirate to (independent) Journalists to Visit Marjah Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan Tuesday, 16 February 2010 Since the enemy have forced the international media through coercion and cash incentives to make partial reporting about (the current fighting) to make it possible to hide their shameful defeat in the Marjah area of Nad Ali district, Helmand province, therefore, the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan requests all independent mass media outlets of the world to send their reporters to Marjah; see the situation with their own eyes and convey the facts to the public of the world. Such visit will portray the ground realities and will show who have the upper hand in the area; what are the facts and who control vast areas of Marjah? In fact, the invading forces have made no spectacular advancement since the beginning of the operations. They have descended from helicopters in limited areas of Marjah and now are under siege. The invaders are not able to come out of their ditches. Wherever they intend to move, they come under severe attacks of Mujahideen and face explosions of planted mines. Then they retreat hastily. The enemy troops have lost their morale. The local people are beholding the foreign troops crying loudly. If the coalition invading forces give permission to independent reporters, they will unearth many secrets. Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan

:: Article nr. 63339 sent on 16-feb-2010 14:37 ECT
www.uruknet.info?p=63339

Link: www.alemarah.info/english/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1297:amer
ican-terrorist-troops-marry-11-innocent-civilians-in-helmand&cati
d=1:afghanistan&Itemid=2

INDIA-PAKISTAN: To Talk Or Not To Talk?

By B. Raman

Should India talk to Pakistan when it continues to use terrorism as a weapon to keep us destabilized?

This question has been confronting us for nearly 30 years since Pakistan started supporting Khalistani terrorism in 1981 and extended this support subsequently to terrorist groups in Kashmir and other parts of India.

This question has conceptual and tactical dimensions. The conceptual aspect is: Should we talk at all? Can talks and terrorism go together?

The tactical dimension is if we decide to talk when, how and under what circumstances.

Conceptually, different Prime Ministers have maintained a certain flexibility of approach. The seven hijackings of Indian Airlines aircraft to Pakistan between 1981 and 1984 and the blowing up of the Kanishka aircraft of Air India in June 1985 by Khalistani terrorists did not prevent the so-called cricket diplomacy when Gen.Zia-ul-Haq and Rajiv Gandhi were in power in the two countries. Rajiv Gandhi accepted a proposal from the then Crown Prince of Jordan for secret meetings between the heads of the R&AW and the ISI to discuss Indian complaints against Pakistan.

The fact that nothing came out of this exercise did not inhibit Narasimha Rao from meeting Nawaz Sharif, the then Pakistani Prime Minister, thrice at Davos, Jakarta and Harare in the margins of international conferences to discuss bilateral relations with specific reference to Pakistani involvement in Punjab and Kashmir.

Similarly, Atal Behari Vajpayee did not hesitate to meet Nawaz Sharif in Lahore in February,1999, and Gen.Pervez Musharraf at Agra as our guest in 2001 despite Islamabad’s failure to satisfy our demands for the arrests and handing-over for trial of 20 Khalistani, Kashmiri and other jihadi terrorists, including many hijackers and those involved in the March,1993, serial blasts in Mumbai.

The initiatives taken by Vajpayee in 1999 and again in 2001 despite the Kandahar hijacking and the Kargil conflict were devoid of results just as those of Rajiv Gandhi and Narasimha Rao were.

Does that mean they were wrong in having taken those initiatives? The hard-liners will say yes, but those, who advocate a more nuanced approach, will see such initiatives as part of a necessary dual policy —- a firm line to make Pakistan realize that terrorism will damage it more than India tempered by a flexibility to enable Pakistan come out of the jihadi trap which it has created for itself.

The fact that wisdom has not so far prevailed on Pakistan does not mean that one was wrong in trying a mix of powers of persuasion and coercion, with the support of the international community where available.

The tactical dimension involves the timing of our shift from firmness to flexibility. If the timing is not carefully decided, one might create a wrong impression in the minds of the Pakistani leadership that its use of terrorism has paid and that India has blinked.

We rightly took a firm line after the 26/11 terrorist strikes in Mumbai that there will be no more formal composite dialogue with Pakistan till Pakistan gave us satisfaction on the question of terrorism. It has taken some action under US pressure, but not to our complete satisfaction.

While taking note of the action taken by it, we should have kept up the pressure through our own efforts as well as through the US for giving full satisfaction.

Our tactical decision to propose a meeting of the Foreign Secretaries of the two countries on February 25 not for resuming the formal dialogue, but to discuss the progress in the action against terrorism taken by Pakistan was wrongly timed.

There are indications of fresh political instability in Pakistan, with pressure for the exit of President Asif Ali Zardari mounting. Pakistan has also been under increasing pressure from the US to do more against Al Qaeda and the Afghan and Pakistani Talibans. By proposing fresh talks at this stage, we have enabled the Pakistani leaders to divert attention away from their own troubles and re-focus on what they project as their problems with India and their perceived success in making India blink.

This was a serious tactical mistake committed by us. We should have waited at least till Shri P. Chidambaram’s visit to Islamabad for the SAARC Home Ministers’ meeting to see the outcome before considering new initiatives.

Having committed this mistake, we will be compounding it further by giving in to public pressure for the cancellation of the meeting of the Foreign Secretaries because of the Pune terrorist attack of February 13. By doing so, we will be handing over a propaganda victory to the terrorists.

We should go ahead with the meeting of the Foreign Secretaries and use it to reinforce our firm line that there can be no forward movement in Indo-Pakistan relations without effective action by Pakistan against the anti-India terrorists.

This is not the time for rhetoric, which could prove counter-productive. This is the time for an intelligent approach to the problem so that neither our firmness is diluted nor any scope for meaningful flexibility is damaged.

(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)

State Terrorists Killed Hariri, But That State Wasn’t Syria

Five years on, the doubts linger

if the tribunal had any evidence against Damascus, it would have released it by now and Sa’ad Hariri would not have gone to the Syrian capital to meet the top leadership.

• By Sami Moubayed, Special to Gulf News
• 

• Based on Mehlis’ findings, four senior Lebanese officers were arrested back in 2005 on charges of involvement in the Hariri case.
• Image Credit: Illustration: Guillermo Munro/Gulf News

When asked about an expected date for verdicts, Antonio Cassese, president of the International Tribunal for the assassination of Lebanon’s former prime minister Rafik Hariri, recently replied: “We cannot set deadlines!” For his part, Prime Minister Sa’ad Hariri stressed last Sunday that there would be no compromise on the issue of the tribunal.

Cassese, who arrived in Lebanon one week ahead of the February 14 commemoration of Hariri’s assassination, did not meet with the slain premier’s son or Defence Minister Elias Al Murr, in order to preserve the tribunal’s impartiality. “The Tribunal is alive and very healthy,” he told Beirut daily As-Safir, trying to downplay fears that Lebanon itself was no longer interested in pursuing the tribunal project any further. Despite all the talk by numerous members of the March 14 Coalition, who never miss an opportunity to remind the Lebanese that they are still rallied, rank-and-file, behind the International Tribunal, many in Beirut have begun to speculate that the international court has indeed been written off into history.

The Netherlands-based Special Tribunal for Lebanon was formed in March 2009, building on consecutive reports of United Nations (UN) persecutors, including the notorious Detlev Mehlis, who authored a controversial 53-page report in October 2005, blaming Lebanese and Syrian security officials of being behind the murder.

Last September, Syria appealed to the UN to bring Mehlis to justice for having said: “There is probable cause to believe that the decision to assassinate former prime minister Rafik Hariri could not have been taken without the approval of top-ranked Syrian security officials and could not have been further organised without the collusion of their counterparts in the Lebanese security services.” The Syrians argue that none of Mehlis’ findings were authenticated by any of the persecutors who succeeded him, including the most recent one, Canadian Daniel Bellemare.

Additionally, based on Mehlis’ findings, four senior Lebanese officers were arrested back in 2005 on charges of involvement in the Hariri case. Last April, however, all of them were released due to lack of evidence, casting serious doubt on the UN probe’s professionalism. One of the officers, Jameel Syed, said that Mehlis had tried talking him into naming any Syrian official in the crime — in exchange for his release from jail — regardless if this official were guilty.

Adding steam to argument

The release of the Lebanese generals, the visit by King Abdullah Bin Abdul Aziz of Saudi Arabia to Syria in October, followed by Sa’ad Hariri’s in December, has added steam to an argument that says: ‘Syria had nothing to do with the murder of Rafik Hariri.’

Simply put, if the tribunal had any evidence against Damascus, it would have released it by now and Sa’ad Hariri would not have gone to the Syrian capital to meet the top leadership.

Making things worse for those who pinned high hopes on nailing Syria through the Hariri tribunal was the resignation last month of David Tolbert, the court’s chief administrator, followed by the stepping down of its Chief of Investigations later this month. Tolbert’s predecessor had stepped down four months after the tribunal started, in mid-2009.

If Syria had nothing to do with the Hariri murder, then who exactly killed the Lebanese premier? In May 2009, a sensational report was published in the German magazine, Der Spiegel, accusing Hezbollah of having ordered Hariri’s killing. The magazine reported that these findings have been kept secret by the International Tribunal, noting that “investigators now believe Hezbollah was behind the Hariri murder.”

It adds that a “special force” from Hezbollah, “planned and executed the diabolical attack.” The magazine did not quote sources, nor did it support its argument with documents, prompting people like Walid Junblatt and former prime minister of Lebanon, Fouad Siniora, to say that Israel was behind the Der Spiegel story.

The Israel angle

The Syrians for their part claim that Israel is behind the elimination of Rafik Hariri, wanting to use it to incriminate, isolate and weaken the Syrians. They argue that the country to suffer most from Hariri’s murder was Syria, claiming that they too want justice in the International Tribunal to prove that Damascus was right in all its denials since 2005. Another theory says Hariri was murdered by Al Qaida-style terrorists. A third argument blames it on different players within Lebanon, who wanted to get rid of the Sunni heavyweight who had prevented the rise of anybody in Beirut politics who was not operating underneath his direct umbrella. A fourth argument blames it on Hezbollah — words that were spoken just last week by Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman.

A fifth argument — and the most probable perhaps — says that we will never know for sure who really killed Rafik Hariri, due to the complexity of the crime and the involvement of so many different and contradicting accomplices, placing the “Hariri Affair” at par with classic and eternal mysteries like the murder of John F. Kennedy. Forty-seven years down the road, we still don’t really know if Lee Harvey Oswald gunned down the US president in Dallas on November 22, 1963.

And we might never know who pressed the EXPLODE button in Beirut on February 14, 2005.

- Sami Moubayed is editor-in-chief of Forward magazine

Rising extremism, war on terrorism and women’s lives in Pakistan

Bushra Khaliq

Genesis of Extremism

Sixty two years ago at the time of Pakistan’s birth in 1947 as a result of partition of United India, the majority of the population in this part of the world was not fundamentalist. The state structures, though weak, nevertheless had chances to grow as a democratic country but on account of repeated interferences by Military regimes, the state started adopting Islamic ideology, giving maximum space to religious extremist forces to promote their non-democratic agenda in the country.

Many religious political parties and sectarian groups were pampered and encouraged to grow by military regimes. Millions of petro dollars were poured in by Saudi Arabia and Kuwait to strengthen these parties and groups under direct state patronage. The Islamist forces had a quiet walk over democratic and progressive forces, to consolidate their socio-political spaces in the country. Religious schools (madrassas) were set up to groom and recruit jehadis. These madrassas emerged like mushrooms across Pakistan particularly in tribal areas, which served as real breeding grounds for religious fundamentalism.

The Constitution of country was injected with pro-Islamic clauses, imposing restrictions on women rights, curtailing their mobility to participate in social life. Burka culture was promoted and women were pushed inside the four walls of the house. Segregation on basis of gender was introduced at all levels in the name of Islam. Military dictator Gen.Zia-ul-Haq enacted discriminatory laws against women to please religious forces. Parallel Islamic courts were established by Saudizing the constitution. Under Evidence Act women’s’ evidence was declared half in comparison to a man. Burden of proof of rape was shifted on woman, while in case of unwanted pregnancy as result of rape, victim was used to subject to punishment by lashes, prison and stoning to death. Women movements and progressive forces though in their limited capacity reacted to these barbaric state measures but could not stop the ugly onslaught of extremist forces.

War on Terrorism

`

After 9/11 attacks and subsequent US war on terrorism, madrassas continued to grow and so were the influence of extremist forces. Though madrassas are only about 7 per cent of primary schools in Pakistan, their influence is amplified by the inadequacy of public education and the innate religiosity of the majority of the population. Right now there are more than 15,000 registered religious seminaries in the country catering over 1.5 million students and more than 55,000 teachers. This lot of religious proponents has spread in every nook and corner of the country, clamoring for Jehad against everything which, to them, is non-Islamic.

This unchecked growth of religious fundamentalism was not only result of the US war on terrorism or that of Pakistani intelligence agencies policies, but it was also the complete failure of civilian and military governments as well to solve any of the basic problems of the working class in Pakistan. Successive regimes remained unsuccessful to break the socio-politico-economic grip of feudalism and absolute exploitive nature of Pakistani capitalists.

The on-going US “war on terror” has proved counter productive and further fueling religious fundamentalism in Pakistan. The heavy price of war against Taliban is being paid by civilian population. Thousands of innocent people particularly women and children have been killed in Drone attacks and operations by Pakistani army. About 2 million people had to flee from conflict zones of Swat valley in 2009. Women were the worst sufferers among internally displaced people (IDPs). By many in Pakistan it is seen as a war on Muslims, rather a war on terrorists. It is really difficult situation for left and progressive forces to convince the people that war on terrorism has purely long-term capitalistic agenda.

Thus the war on terrorism not only helped grow further extremism but also created non-conducive atmosphere for the progressive and women rights forces to work in. The agenda of women rights is relegated to large extent. Any body talks about women rights is branded as anti-Islamic and pro-west. The imperialist occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan provided the religious fanatics a political justification to promote their agenda of further religiosity of state and society.

Women as punching bag for extremists

The rapid rise of religious extremism has made the lives of women in Pakistan more miserable and oppressed. The few freedoms and democratic rights earlier available to women are being crushed by the extremist groups. They banned Girls’ education declaring it as “western conspiracy”. More than 300 girls’ schools were burnt, destroyed or closed down by local Taliban in Swat. Women have also been banned from markets and shops. A strict dress code was imposed. In North West Frontier province of Pakistan, a woman must be fully covered, from head to toe. Even girls of eight-nine years have to follow the dress code. Women are not allowed to take part in the political activities and are barred from voting in elections. Women have become an invisible community in the areas controlled by the fundamentalist religious groups. Even after flashing them out of these areas by military, situation for women remains same.

Women have become a punching bag for local militant groups, attempting to impose their own brand of Islam on them. They want to establish Taliban style government in Pakistan. They have been attacking and bombing the music shops and girls’ schools, scaring women to remain in their homes. They banned female workers in the public and private sectors.

Women in Pakistan are already deprived of their basic democratic, political and economic rights. In many parts of the country, they have to confront centuries-old traditions and customs. Honor killing, social and economic discrimination, repression, domestic violence, discriminatory laws and sexual harassment are common issues being faced by women.

Musharraf regime made tall claims about legislation to protect women rights. The “Women’s Protection Bill” in reality helped little to improve conditions for working class and poor women. The new PPP government also made similar statements to improve women rights conditions but women have little hope with regard to materialization of these statements. Though it has recently introduced legislation against sexual harassment at work place, obviously a welcome step, but what needed is a constitutional package covering socio-economic and political rights of women, in order to mainstream them.

Extremism & Feudalism one against women

In patriarchal Pakistani society, women are mere a symbol of family honor and dignity. Female members of the family are considered as private property. Under the prevailing feudal culture women are confined to home to “save male honor and dignity”. It is strongly believed that if women are allowed out of the home to receive education, to do shopping or a job, the society will become “immoral and vulgar”. Even a common Muslim male, who does claim not to be a fundamentalist believe that outspoken and rights-demanding women are responsible for promoting immorality and vulgarity in society.

The extremists are bent upon imposing their code of ethics on women in the name of Islamic teachings. While feudalism implements its code of morality in the name of “tradition and custom”. Both are one to crush women rights and unfortunately they are in abundance in Pakistan. About 70 percent population of Pakistan lives in rural areas, where poor masses, particularly women have no control over lives. They do not have right to choice marriage. Girl education is strongly discouraged and women are told to tolerate oppressive norms in the name of morality. The nefarious nexus of feudalism and religious militancy is virtually driving their lives. Their influence is no more confined to the most backward areas of the country. It also gaining ground in the big cities and towns as well.

Though state introduced some laws to stop the practice of inhuman traditions and customs, but these legislations failed to stop the practice of anti-women traditions, particularly in rural areas. For instance a piece of legislation was introduced in 2005 which declared honor killing a heinous crime and the death penalty was imposed as punishment under this law. But this strict law and capital punishment failed to reduce the number of honor killings. There were more than 800 such cases reported in 2007. The number of unreported cases was many times higher. While customs such as ‘swara’ and ‘vani’ are banned by law, they continue to take place. The ‘swara’ and ‘vani’ are practiced in some parts of southern Punjab and NWFP.

These customs allow young girls to be offered to settle the dispute between rival families. For example, if a person is accused of murder, wants to settle a dispute with deceased family, they can offer their daughter or sister to ‘absolve’ themselves of the crime. Young girls, two or three years old are simply passed to the rival family. This custom is used to settle all sorts of disputes, without involving the country’s law or police. Other traditions include child marriage, exchanged marriage, Forced marriage and marriages to the Holy Quran also continue, despite the existence of the laws and widespread social consensus against them.

The marriage to the Holy Quran is a custom that exists among the feudal families of Sindh. Under this custom, the male members of the family refuse to allow the female members to marry and declare that they have been married to the Quran. The main reason behind this custom is to safeguard part of the land which, otherwise, will go away with marriage of daughter or sister. In the presence of the laws, these barbaric and inhuman traditions and customs are still flourishing. The rising wave of fundamentalism, coupled with results of war on terrorism are making the lives of women more miserable, curbing their fundamental and universal rights.

What is really needed is a united class-based struggle against the rotten system of capitalism, which is directly encouraging religious extremism and feudalism to continue. Capitalism, coopting with feudalism and extremism can not create the conditions in which women can enjoy full rights, freedom and equality. The need for a democratic socialism, providing guarantees of equal rights and opportunities to women is the need of the hour. Women in Pakistan can only enjoy full liberty and freedom in a true socialist society, free from all exploitation, repression and discrimination.

Bushra Khaliq is General Secretary of the Women Workers Help Line based in Lahore Pakistan. Web: http://www..wwhl.org.pk

ISI and Its Islamists—vs—the Will of the People

Radical Islamist leader stirs passion in Pakistan

Cleric who had key role in bloody showdown with government insists revolution is imminent

By Rick Westhead

South Asia Bureau

ISLAMABAD–When many Pakistanis discuss their country’s tumult, they do so with a furrowed brow or a grimace.

Not Maulana Abdul Aziz.

A radical and charismatic Islamist leader who was a central figure in a bloody showdown between security forces and religious conservatives three years ago, Aziz now says he’s confident Pakistan is indeed on the road toward becoming a "true Islamic state." He says Pakistan is on its way to adopting strict sharia law – forcing the women of this country of 170 million to begin observing purdah, or being removed from public life.

Aziz is among Pakistan’s most controversial personalities and has preached in front of massive crowds, encouraging suicide bombings and repeatedly promising the country is on the verge of "an Islamic revolution" and that "the blood of martyrs will bear fruit."

In July 2007, Aziz and his supporters brought this nation’s capital to a standstill when they barricaded themselves inside Islamabad’s Red Mosque for more than a week as thousands of supporters rallied outside.

Eventually, police stormed the mosque, formally known as Lal Masjid, and 102 people were killed, including Aziz’s brother and son.

Aziz himself was captured when he tried to escape. He fled the mosque wearing a burqa, the head-to-toe veil worn by female students at his conservative seminary.

Sitting in his small home office in central Islamabad, surrounded by eight of his followers and a machine-gun toting security guard, the 60-year-old Aziz spoke with theStar at length about Pakistan’s deteriorating security situation, Canada’s planned withdrawal from Afghanistan and his embarrassment over being caught fleeing the mosque while wearing a burqa.

"Our friends talked to us and said one of us had to get out at any cost," Aziz says, referring to himself and his brother Abdul Rashid Ghazi.

"I just took it as an order and followed what I was supposed to do. Maybe I was embarrassed (about wearing the burqa), but maybe this is what God had planned for me. I didn’t want to go out, I wanted to be martyred. My son was inside. Why would anyone want to go?"

Sharia law in Pakistan "is coming very soon," Aziz assures. "Our country is in a very precarious state. There is no peace and looting, mugging, murder and kidnapping are increasing."

Indeed, the streets of the capital are blanketed with police checkpoints, blast walls and barbed wire, and people are tense.

At a coffee shop in an affluent section of Islamabad, several teenagers gather for hot chocolate and sandwiches.

"Our friends are too afraid to come out of their houses," one says.

A few days later, several dozen young professionals gather at a rooftop house party for a barbecue that features an open bar serving whisky and vodka. Debate at one point turns to whether someone remains conscious for a few final seconds after they are beheaded.

At one point, someone close to the house fires a dozen or so rounds from a machine gun into the air. It’s a neighbour upset over the loud music, the host explains, turning down the volume of a Black Eyed Peas song.

"Maybe Aziz is right," one guest remarks.

In some Pakistani circles, the debate isn’t over what Aziz says, but that he’s allowed to say anything publicly at all.

Several security analysts say they are baffled at the release on bail of Aziz, who travels freely between the Lal Masjid and his home a few blocks away.

"He’s a living martyr," says Ahmed Rashid, a leading Pakistani terrorism analyst and author ofJihad: The Rise of Militant Islam in Central Asia. "Aziz is a great risk and a symbol of extremism."

Aziz says he now faces 27 criminal charges of inciting violence against the state and is awaiting trial.

"There were many benefits," Aziz now recalls of the siege.

"If we struggled for 1,000 years we wouldn’t have achieved the same progress as we did through this one incident."

Ex-CIA Man Hopes to Ride Wave of Discontent to Power In Texas

Primary Color: CD-23

by Morgan Smith

Two lawyers, two doctors and an ex-CIA officer are all banking that public displeasure over health care legislation, anxiety about the economy and general discontent with the federal government will put Congressional District 23back in the GOP column in November.

In 2006, Democrat Ciro Rodriguez wrested the southwest Texas seat away from 13-year Republican incumbent Henry Bonilla, six months after a U.S. Supreme Court opinion carved new boundaries for the district. The territory of the 23rd is vast  — more than one candidate joked that it encompasses two time zones and three climates — and extends from pockets of San Antonio to a corner of El Paso to cover all of Big Bend National Park and roughly 600 miles of the state’s Mexican border. But most of the population (which is 65 percent Hispanic, according to the 2000 census) lies in Bexar County.

At a Bexar County Republican Businesswomen’s Luncheon and a Medina County GOP candidate forum on February 11, the Republican candidates said the public is ready for “citizen legislators instead of career politicians,” that voters want representatives “who will actually do what they say when they started and not turn into whatever they turn into up there,” and that they feel like their “voices aren’t being heard on either side of the aisle.”

Laredo-born and San Antonio-based lawyer and businessman Francisco “Quico“ Canseco, who has run, and lost, in the district’s Republican primary before, said his past experience adds to the strength of his campaign, which is “very smart, very targeted, very calculated,” this time around.

Will Hurd, fresh off a nine-and-a-half-year stint in the CIA, said he was motivated to run because he was “shocked” at elected officials’ “lack of interest in or grasp of the issues” during the congressional briefings he gave, noting that a senior member of the House intelligence committee once asked him the difference between a Sunni and a Shia Muslim.

San Antonio doctor Robert Lowry, who described himself as the “guy on the side of the soccer fields or the football fields trying to get all the other parents awake during the year saying our government is taking over way too much,” said he has the “foundational morals” to make a good congressman. Lowry has been endorsed by U.S. Rep. Ron Paul, R-Lake Jackson.

Mike Kueber, who brands himself as a “pragmatic conservative,” said he hopes his four opponents will split the primary voters who share their “very far-right view.” The retired USAA regulations and claims lawyer collected 700 signatures to get on the ballot and said he’s running because “both sides are so stuck in their ideological purity that they won’t work out a position,” so nothing ever gets done in Congress. Kueber, who doesn’t accept campaign contributions over $200 (the Federal Election Commission limit is $2,400 per individual donor), said his candidacy is “an experiment as to whether or not you actually have to have money” to win.

The only candidate who lives outside of San Antonio is Joseph “Doc” Gould, an Alpine-based doctor. Gould, whose YouTube videos on his campaign site indicate he might feel at home shouting about government loans on a late-night infomercial, said he’s running because he believes that the federal government should have to balance its checkbook like everyone else. Another one of his core principles, he said, is energy independence: Americans should “drill, drill, drill, drill,” until the country is no longer dependent on foreign oil.

None of the candidates have held statewide public office before, but all of them argue that’s precisely what will appeal to voters in this anti-politics-as-usual election cycle.

Of the five, Canseco, who has the backing of the conservative establishment, and Hurd, who Monday announced he had the endorsement of the San Antonio Express-News, are the clear frontrunners. Each is equally upbeat about his prospects. Canseco, who said his opponents have made his bid “a little bit more difficult,” said he remains “very confident and strong” about his campaign despite the competition. Hurd said his career in the CIA taught him the value of being underestimated: “Our campaign is Hannibal, and we’re coming over the Pyrenees and the Alps, and people don’t know we have elephants with us.”

Canseco and Hurd also happen to be the only two candidates to file campaign finance records electronically with the elections commission. As of the latest reporting period, Hurd has about $70,000 on hand to Canseco’s $90,000. Lowry, who made a paper filing, has raised about $14,000 but has $865 on hand. Gould and Kueber said their records were not available because they have not met the $5,000 filing threshold.

In its 2006 redistricting decision, the Supreme Court identified the 23rd as a “Latino opportunity district,” something Canseco pointed out when he described the “elephant in the room” —  that many Republicans think a candidate won’t be able to beat Rodriguez in the general election without a Hispanic surname. “The 23rd is a Hispanic district and it is cut for a Hispanic candidate, whether that candidate is an independent, blue party, red party, Democrat Party, Republican Party,” Canseco said. “The district isn’t cut for an Anglo to win. It’s not designed that way scientifically. It’s like trying to mix salt and mud in order to get gold.” If any other GOP candidate won the primary, Canseco said, it would be a “Pyrrhic victory,” adding that if he came out on top, the national Republican Party would contribute to winning the district in November.

The 32-year-old Hurd, who typically displays an easy-going, what-you-see-is-what you-get affability, bristled at the assertion that his Anglo-sounding name might be a liability in the general election. “The Hispanic population is no different from any population. You talk about the issues they care about, you have better ideas, and be likeable — period,” Hurd said. “The people who ask [whether it takes a Hispanic to beat a Hispanic] don’t understand San Antonio. They don’t understand the border. They don’t understand West Texas.”

Rodriguez, who served in the Texas House for 10 years and in Congress from 1997 to 2004 before winning his current seat, said “anything could happen,” but he is undeterred by the number of Republicans lined up to challenge him in November because of the close ties he’s maintained with the district. “The beauty is that I don’t just campaign through campaign time; it’s an ongoing process. We’re always out there,” Rodriguez said. “I go to every single county quarterly, and that’s not just during the campaign. I come home every single week — more than any other member of Congress.”

Attack pre-emptive against govt action: Maoist leader

more about "Attack pre-emptive against govt actio…", posted with vodpod

India Maoists Kill 24 Troops To Disrupt Operation Green Hunt

India Maoist rebels kill 24 troops in West Bengal

By Subir Bhaumik BBC News, Calcutta There has been a surge in Maoist violence in recent months At least 24 troops were killed when armed Maoists attacked a camp of the paramilitary forces in India’s West Bengal state, officials said. Nearly 50 rebels on motorcycles encircled the camp of the Eastern Frontier Rifles (ERF) at Silda village on Monday and started firing on it. More fighters joined the assault on foot, firing from automatic weapons. More than 6,000 people have died during the rebels’ 20-year fight for communist rule in many Indian states. The Indian government recently began a major offensive against the rebels in several states. Indian Prime minister Manmohan Singh has described the Maoist insurgency as India’s “greatest internal security challenge”. The rebels now have a presence in 223 of India’s 600-odd districts. Landmines The camp was overrun by the Maoists after the troops put up brief initial resistance, district magistrate of West Midnapore district NS Nigam told the BBC. “The Maoists then burnt down the camp and planted landmines on the entire length of the road leading to the camp. Reinforcements with night vision and anti-landmine vehicles reached the camp late at night,” Mr Nigam said. At least 24 bodies have been recovered from in and around the camp and some of them are badly charred, he said. The government has launched a major offensive against the rebels The seriously injured troops were being taken to the state capital, Calcutta, for treatment. Officials said at least 12 soldiers were still missing. It took four hours for reinforcements to reached Silda as there were landmines planted on the entire stretch of the road. Police officials leading the reinforcements that reached Silda late at night said many of the paramilitary troops were shot dead by the rebels as they tried to escape the fire. West Bengal’s police chief Bhupinder Singh said there were nearly 50 ERF troops in the camp when the attack took place. The Maoists pulled out of Silda after looting a huge amount of weapons from the camp’s armoury. Chief of the rebels’ military wing, Koteswara Rao – alias Kishenji – claimed responsibility for the attack. He said this attack was the beginning of “Operation Peace Hunt”, the Maoist answer to the government “Operation Green Hunt” launched against the Maoists recently. “We are looking for peace but we are forced to fight and kill the poor troops of the government forces. We will mourn the death of those killed but the government is responsible for their death,” Kishenji told the BBC by phone from an undisclosed location. The Maoist leader warned of more such attacks unless Operation Green Hunt was stopped. Earlier this month Home Minister P Chidambaram held a meeting of four Maoist-affected states – West Bengal, Jharkhand, Bihar and Orissa – in Calcutta. He threatened to intensify Operation Green Hunt if the rebels did not start talks by abjuring violence. The Maoists said they would agree to talks if four of their senior leaders now in jail were released and Operation Green Hunt was halted. The government has not responded to that conditional overture.

Don’t Let Pune Prevent Dialogue–Indian Experts

Experts back India-Pakistan dialogue

Sandeep Dikshit

Do not allow Saturday’s Pune blast to weaken the resolve, they say

---

India should keep its cool even if there are more provocations: Subrahmanyam

It’s necessary to allay Islamabad’s suspicions by entering into dialogue: Dubey

---

NEW DELHI: The country’s leading strategic analysts have urged India to go ahead with talks with Pakistan and not allow Saturday’s Pune blast to weaken its resolve. They see the blast as part of the continuing pattern to thwart India and Pakistan from fostering closer ties ever since trouble erupted in Afghanistan in 2001.

Noted strategic affairs analyst K. Subrahmanyam pointed out that certain elements averse to the pressure being put on militants on the Afghanistan-Pakistan border have attempted to vitiate the atmosphere between India and Pakistan. The December 2001 Parliament House attack and the November 2008 Mumbai attacks were both aimed at derailing bilateral dialogue. The Pune blast is part of the same sequence and India should not be dissuaded from the coming meeting of Foreign Secretaries here on February 25.

The former Foreign Secretary, Salman Haider, also made the same point: “This deliberatively disruptive act [Pune] occurred when India and Pakistan were showing signs of communicating with each other. They always try and take a disruptive approach.”

Another former Foreign Secretary, Muchkund Dubey, also voiced his views against Pune impacting the talks and felt the initiative to restart the dialogue should have been taken long ago. “I don’t think we should necessarily go by calculations of what will be achieved if the talks are held. A smaller neighbour feels ignored when there are no talks and this is a very important psychological aspect to keep in mind,” he said.

Kanwal Sibal, who also headed the Foreign department, was not sure if this month’s talks would produce results, especially because the Opposition now had fresh ammunition to oppose the initiative. Though the government had to counter several dilemmas of its own, it should go ahead with the dialogue. Not doing so would amount to playing into the hands of forces against normalisation of bilateral ties.

Mr. Subrahmanyam wanted India to keep its cool even if there were more provocations. This would frustrate the Pakistan Army’s design to thwart talks and maintain the tension between the two sides. If trust and confidence were built up between the two sides, the Pakistan Army would be forced to act against militant organisations on the Af-Pak border, most of which were its own creation. In case of talks and normalisation of ties, its excuse of maintaining forces on the border with India because of tensions would not wash with the U.S.

Note of caution

Mr. Sibal also sounded a note of caution against accepting Pakistan’s demand for restarting the composite dialogue (CD) because that would dilute India’s bid to focus on terror. In the CD, the Foreign Secretary-level talks dealt only with Kashmir and peace and security whereas terrorism was dealt by the Home Ministry. “Accepting CD would undermine our whole strategy that focusses on terrorism,” he pointed out.

Mr. Haider said the talks were overdue and while the Prime Minister was ready at Sharm-el-Sheikh in Egypt, he had to draw back because the public was not ready. “I don’t believe talking to Pakistan is easing up the pressure. Not talking is a diminishing asset. We can show our anger but there is a time when we can enter into discussions. By drawing away from talks we exclude the possibility of any kind of step forward by bilateral means,” he said.

Mr. Dubey questioned the lack of absence of communication between neighbours as close as India and Pakistan and pointed out that it was necessary to allay Islamabad’s suspicions by entering into dialogue.

“We understand that public opinion influences policymaking but the doors for the talks should be kept open. Even under the worst provocation we should keep the dialogue going.”

Giving an example of how dialogue opens doors, he recalled that the then Prime Minister Narasimha Rao had avoided going to Bangladesh because he apprehended that Dhaka would raise the issue of a settlement on the Farakka barrage. But the next government, which was intrinsically unstable, entered into talks and reached an agreement.

Dems Fan-Out Across the Country to Save Their Own Asses In Midterm Elections

White House defends year-old stimulus

By PHILIP ELLIOTT (AP) – 1 hour ago

WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama, defending his economic stimulus plan on its first anniversary, is dispatching his Cabinet across the country to try to calm an anxious public as Democrats head into potentially devastating midterm elections.

A weeklong push to highlight the stimulus program’s first year was starting with a Tuesday trip by Vice President Joe Biden to hard-hit Saginaw, Mich., to tour a small business, a jobs training program and a solar factory that all received Recovery Act dollars.

Obama’s fellow Democrats planned to tout programs putting people back to work under the $787 billion spending bill. Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius was touring a medical center in Atlanta on Tuesday; Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano was promoting stimulus projects in Virginia and Texas the same day.

In all, senior administration officials are scheduled to visit 35 communities before Friday to counter Republican claims the massive deficit-spending program has failed. Obama plans to surround himself at the White House on Wednesday with people who have jobs because of the stimulus plan, then travel to Colorado and Nevada.

Obama’s political team believes the bricks-and-mortar projects across the country could help Democrats stave off emboldened Republicans and their attempts to reclaim majorities in Congress. Although voters have soured on the stimulus spending, individual components have fans across party lines.

The tax cuts Democrats included in their bill have the backing of 70 percent of the public, according to a CNN poll last month. Another 80 percent support the infrastructure investments, such as the water projects Environmental Protection Agency chief Lisa Jackson plans to tout in Columbus, Ohio, on Thursday.

Even so, 56 percent of the public opposes the broad plan, according to the CNN poll.

Biden is expected to give Obama a report Wednesday assessing the stimulus’ effects.

Banking Panel Senators Running Like Rats On a Sinking Ship

Banking panel hit by Senate turnover

By EAMON JAVERS

Evan Bayh talks to reporters after announcing his retirement. Photo: AP

Within minutes of the announcement Monday by Sen. Evan Bayh (D-Ind.) that he’s not running for reelection, financial industry experts began piecing together what it means for Wall Street interests in Washington.

Bayh’s surprise resignation makes him the second major Democratic player on the Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee to announce his retirement in the past two months. In January, the panel’s chairman, Chris Dodd of Connecticut, said he would not seek reelection.

The committee will have several other new members after the November midterm elections because Sen. Jim Bunning (R-Ky.), an aggressive critic of the Federal Reserve, is also retiring, and Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-Texas) is running for governor back home.

And with banking reform legislation moving through the committee this year, the retirements have Wall Street’s Washington operatives scrutinizing the panel for any change in direction.

“It’s a remarkable shakeup of the committee,” said one financial-services executive who was busy trying to suss out the potential impact of the changes. The executive added, “It’s basically a third of the committee turning over in a year.”

Potential beneficiaries of the change include relatively new members of the committee who have already been taking leadership roles on financial issues. Sen. Mark Warner (D-Va.), for instance, has been increasingly visible on the committee, and Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) has agreed to negotiate with Dodd on the financial reform package.

“When you have this kind of turmoil, it allows for guys like Corker to have such important positions,” said the financial services executive. “Corker has been in the Senate for just a few years, and he’s a huge go-to player now.”

Wall Street POLITICO is a weekly column looking at issues that drive business.

Pak. Army Has Always Lied About Relationship With Islamist Militants–July 8, 1999

[After arming training and relocating several hundred Afghan mercenaries to use in their open aggression at Kargil, while giving Pakistan a measure of "deniability," Pakistani generals like Beg boasted that their mujahedeen ("freedom fighters") were waging open war against India on their own initiative.  I urge you to read the article below to see firsthand the level of deceit and "machismo" these guys shared, as they widened their war of aggression and undermined any chance that Pakistan had for democratic government and fostered the international terrorist movement that plagues the world today.]

Retreat from Kargil

july 8, 1999
General Mirza Aslam Beg (R)
Frontier Post (Article)

The dramatic occupation of Kargil-Drass and Batalik heights by the valiant Kashmiri Mujahideen in May this year, came as a bolt from the blue to the Indian repressive force, which despite its massive size of over six lakh, have not been able to quell the Kashmir uprising. In fact, its momentum has increased in direct proposition to the reign of terror let lose on the hapless people of the Indian-held Kashmir, who are not willing to compromise on their inalienable right of self-determination __ a solemn commitment made by the United Nations, now unfortunately under strategic slumber on the contentious issue. The disillusioned freedom fighters had no option but to mobilise their will and determination to challenge the military might of India __ rated third in the world in its sophistication and killing propensity __ from a vantage point of Kargil __ a height they scaled to baffle the Indian military planners.

The Indians, therefore, are seized with a grave problem, how to oust the Mujahideen, as they, from the strategic positions are controlling the route through which the Indian troops located in Siachen and against China, are supplied logistics and succour. After initial set-back and perplexity, the Indian government, it appears, is well poised to undertake a large-scale offensive against the Mujahideen and from the way they are going about, one is reluctantly inclined to think that they may succeed in turning the table in their favour, not so because of their military might or strength, but because of the wooliness, the Pakistan government is gripped with, lacking a clear delineation of objective and emitting confusing signals.

In moments of grave crisis, however, there has to be an orchestrated sense of direction, where the people, the government, the opposition and the armed forces have to act in unison, but alas! it is surprisingly lacking. Part of the reason could be that the Mujahideen prior to their action neither consulted the army nor apprised the government of their contemplated move. Now when two months have lapsed, it was not at all difficult for the government to bring into effect an integrated diplomatic, military and political line of action.

In pursuance of the military objective, the propaganda machinery of India kept harping on the theme that the regular Pakistani troops are on the Kargil mountains, disguised as Mujahideen. It was followed by a command-oriented message that the “intruders” vacate the positions they have occupied or else India would not refrain from waging an allout war against Pakistan. In turn, Pakistan gave a rather apologetic reply that its troops had not crossed the LoC and that they have not occupied Kargil- Drass and Batalik mountains. To appear more defensive in tone and tenor, it was further contended that Mujahideen were not getting any material support from Pakistan. After this proclamation, Mujahideen’s heroic success is reduced to a mere “tactical gain”, having only temporary bearings and, in turn India has gained time to plan for an all-pronged decisive encounter with Mujahideen and reverse the situation in its favour. What indeed is ironic that Mujahideen’s great feat of tactical success which could have been channelised into strategic advantages has been squandered away. If the government of Pakistan could have cognized the deeper imperatives of the opportunity, and having full faith in the capability of its armed forces, to extricate the issue of Kashmir from a lingering status quo, and chronic imbroglio, the outcome would have been entirely different.

India depicts a different frame of mind. Equipped with its forces in Kashmir ten times larger than Pakistan, and having full support of a large number of guns and its air force, it would not be difficult for India to dislodge the Mujahideen from the coveted positions and bring their achievement to a naught, if they are tragically left without any help and support, which is the case at present. Indian armed forces, it appears, are prepared to pay the price, and are determined to incur losses, no matter of what magnitude, to consolidate their position. Reportedly they have, so far, lost over five hundred soldiers and may be they sacrifice one or two thousands more, but there is no letup in their commitment to achieve their final objective. Their decision not to engage in an allout war with Pakistan appears a well-thought-out strategy, because, in the first place, more than half of their ground troops are engaged in Kashmir, while the geo-political climate of the region is also not conducive to war, having ominous nuclear overbearings.

Dispassionately viewed, Indian counter-moves since May show a well-conceived plan, targetted to achieve a definite objective which aims towards “opening up the road link to Srinagar, Kargil and Leh and establish the finality of the so-called Line of Control so that it is ultimately accepted as a fait accompli international border”. As a first step towards the furtherance of this objective, it is planned to occupy Tolang heights, especially the area of the Tiger Hills, opposite Drass, to reestablish the broken links between Drass and Kargil. This way, Indian forces, using this route would at least mobilise two to three divisions in a few weeks’ time, enjoying the massive support of the Indian artillery and at least four squadrons of air force.

After mustering these forces in Kargil and Drass area, India would be in a formidable position to launch a big offensive against Pakistan’s LoC in the north and west of Kargil. It is not too unrealistic to conceive an eventuality that after capturing key positions on the LoC India may be able to humiliate Pakistan and take revenge of its setback that it initially encountered. For Pakistan air force the “Time over Target” would considerably be less but, with the installation of the radar in Deosai Plain area, it has, however, provided appreciable advantage to its air force against India, in the Kargil region.

On the diplomatic front, India’s success is quite substantial, as the US and the G8 countries have endorsed India’s stand and Pakistan is held responsible for the flare-up in Kargil. The preposterous theme of the so-called “sanctity” of LoC is systematically being projected, as if it were internationally recognised dividing lines. In a disputed territory, where India is a usurper, there is hardly any logic of permanence of LoC. Our diplomatic effort has only succeeded to the extent that China has been convinced to pursuade India to refrain from a conventional war, which India itself has resolved not to indulge in any such venture.

It is not hard to decipher why Nawaz Sharif dashed to Washington to meet President Clinton. It was as per programme scheduled during General Zinni’s visit to Pakistan, when the prime minister consented to accept the LoC as determined during Simla Agreement and had promised to pull back the Mujahideen, who had gone beyond the LoC. Therefore, it is obviously clear that the Indian diplomacy has worked and arrangements have been made to bail out India by allowing a safe passage through Kargil to Siachen and further to Ladakh __ something reminiscent of the favour granted to India by Ayub Khan in 1962 border conflict with China. Thus once again the Indo-US axis has come into play to help India in its aggressive diplomacy and military intimidation against Pakistan to achieve what otherwise it could not accomplish through military power alone. Pakistan would thus be manipulated to submission and India allowed to maintain a forward leaning posture against China __ “the enemy number one”.

Iran and Afghanistan __ our well-trusted neighbours __ have not been approached except in the ritualistic sense. Pakistan has made enormous contributions to the war of liberation of Afghanistan, and it is a debt on them, which they would happily pay back in Kashmir. The politicians are touring Brazil, Belgium and Bahrain, the countries who are only very distantly related to the Kashmir issue.

Indian political manoeuvring is with a sense of purpose, as they have mounted a war hysteria all over the length and breadth of India, even in distant places such as Calcutta and Madras, to forge unity among the nation. The government of BJP wants to extract maximum political dividends in the forthcoming September elections. In contrast, there is a lull and quiet prevailing in Pakistan. Neither the armed forces have been allowed to render any support to the Mujahideen nor the people have been prepared for this purpose. In other words, in Pakistan, there is an apathy and indifference writ large all over. The government has centralised all power and institutions exist but only in a ceremonial sense. The Assembly, though theoretically autonomous and independent, yet it is constrained to remain tight-lipped. The opposition parties who could play a positive role, are in utter disarray. The only refrain they have is, that, the government relinquish its power and an interim national government be saddled in its place. Thus many high-profile politicians are anxiously waiting that some vested power should intervene and remove this government from power so that the opportunists cadre will get power and privileges. What a distressing national scenario indeed!

The people are justified in asking, for whose ends are we bartering away the phenomenal success Mujahideen have achieved in capturing the mountainous strategic heights. Why is the government so seemingly paralysed? Is it a political game or a politics of expediency? How long shall we tolerate the tyranny against our Kashmiri brethren? These are the questions which seek answers. Some one said, “The peak of tolerance is most readily achieved by those who are not burdened with convictions.”