At today’s plenary session, the Federation Council adopted a statement in connection with the murder of the Russian Ambassador Andrey Karlov in Turkey, which condemns the attack and calls on the international community to join the forces to combat terrorism.
“The Federation Council is outraged by this brutal act, strongly condemns it and states that the international terrorism not only continues to attack civilians, but also organizes the assassination of the high-ranking officials of states, expecting to provoke the conflicts and crises in the international relations,’’ TASS leads the text of the statement.
The upper chamber of the parliament of the Russian Federation noted that such actions aiming the split of the international community, only confirm the need to unite the efforts of all countries in confronting terrorists. To do so, it is necessary to postpone the political differences and take a firm stand, engage in establishing of the broad and effective inter-parliamentary and inter-state cooperation in the fight against the international terrorism.
‘’Finally, it is time to stop the senseless attempts to divide the terrorists into ‘moderate’ and ‘immoderate’, stop manipulating the public opinion and stop the media campaigns against those who, in fact, are fighting against the terrorists and providing the humanitarian assistance to the victims of the militants – not in word, but in deed,’’ the senators stressed.
“We have a common goal – to prevent the terrorists achieve their criminal aims, and unite to confront the total and absolute evil, which has no religious, ethnic or ideological grounds and cannot be justified by anything,’’ the Federation Council drew attention.
In addition, the MPs made it clear that they hope for the help of the Grand National Assembly of Turkey to be provided to the competent authorities in the investigation of all the circumstances of the murder, and the development of robust and effective measures to prevent the acts of terrorism.
The senators also thanked their colleagues from the parliaments of other countries and inter-parliamentary organizations, that expressed solidarity and support to the relatives and friends of Andrey Karlov and Russian people.
At the beginning of the plenary session, the parliamentarians observed a moment of silence in memory of Andrey Karlov.
As Veronika Krasheninnikova, the CEO of the Institute for Foreign Policy Studies and Initiatives, an Aid to the CEO of Russia today IA, noted earlier in an interview to Vestnik Kavkaza, Andrey Karlov was killed at the opening ceremony which aimed at strengthening of human and cultural ties between Russia and Turkey. “A terrorist attack under such circumstances is especially outrageous. Of course, we have to work even more intensively with our partners who share the Russian course of the anti-terrorist struggle in deed not in word,’’ she said.
“We must reconsider security measures of Russia’s embassies in the Middle East, where it is necessary, probably in other countries as well. Finally, we all must understand that Russian diplomats are providing such a serious important work that they have to pay their lives for it,’’ Veronika Krasheninnikova said.
Deputy Chairman of the Association of Russian Diplomats Andrei Baklanov pointed out that first of all it is necessary to investigate thoroughly the tragedy, and then to punish all guilty for this crime. “At the same time, it is necessary to improve in other directions: strengthen physical and other securities of our diplomatic missions. It is necessary to analyze whether we are doing everything in order to constantly be on guard organizationally, technically and morally. It is necessary to additionally work with our foreign teams, and most importantly – prevent such acts of terrorism, which requires national efforts, hard work on organization of cooperation between all countries where it can be useful,’’ he said.
The diplomat recalled that the terrorist threat continues to grow in recent years, which eventually led to the creation of the Daesh terrorist group (banned in Russia). “No one could imagine this even in wartime, that a time will come when the medieval bandit state will be established in the territory of two independent states. It shows helplessness of the international community, it is a shame for all of us and it can’t be tolerated. But in order to fight against it, we must resume cooperation through the Security Council, at least at a minimum level, with the adoption of coordinated, competent decisions,’’ the expert said.
‘’We had this cooperation in the early 2000s, we had joint working groups with the largest western countries and a number of Middle Eastern countries. But then, unfortunately, around 2010-2012, these working groups basically stopped their work and our cooperation on the anti-terrorist front disappeared altogether, Russia is no longer part of the G8. But this policy does not correspond to the current historical moment. Moreover, we can say that all kinds of sanctions and pressure on us, imposed by the West, helps terrorists and is a continuation of terrorist activity – it’s just another side of it. It must end. Europe should elect leaders of the new generation, who would look at the situation more soberly,’’ Andrey Baklanov concluded.
Selfie recovered from suspect’s, (“Abu Muslim Horasani”) I- phone.
Turkish anti-terror teams conducted an operation in four addresses in Izmir’s Bornova and Buca districts.
Twenty suspects have been detained over the attack so far, which Daesh has claimed, while NTV reported that two foreign nationals had been detained at Istanbul’s main Ataturk airport.
Of the 20 suspects, 11 are women from Dagestan, East Turkestan and Syria.
A sniper rifle, night vision binoculars, bandoleer, backpack, GPS and other military equipment were seized.
The suspects allegedly stayed with the gunman at the same terror cell in Konya.
Security forces are narrowing in on the Daesh terrorist who opened fire on New Year’s Eve revelers at Istanbul’s Reina nightclub in Ortaköy.
The gunman, who fled after the attack by blending into the crowd of fleeing victims, remains at large.
Authorities have released security camera images of the alleged killer, who shot dead a police officer and civilian outside the venue on the European shore of the Bosporus before entering and opening fire on New Year’s Eve revelers.
No, Not all out war, yet, but war nonetheless. The proxy war and the war of rhetoric. Pakistan & Afghanistan are among the very few countries that hate each other while sharing the same religion, both being Islamic republics and big chunks of our populations share the same heritage, Yet we couldn’t be further apart. Like Other Countries, what we share doesn’t unite but actually divides us.
For most Af-Pak commentators, the history and the problems or interference start at 1979 and they consider Mujahideen and afghan Taliban the problem. But Afghan Taliban aren’t the problem or even the Pakistani Taliban, or Daud Khan’s Invasion Of Bajaur In 1960-61, Or his support for racial militants in Pakistan in the 1970s or Bhutto’s support for Massoud and Haqqani or Zia’s Support for mujahideen. None of them are problems for they all are PRODUCTS of the same problem, which is the day of July 26, 1949, when the Afghan Loya Jirga unrecognised the Durand line and unilaterally declared Durand line agreement, Void.
Afghan Viewpoints & Legitimacy of Durand Line
There are many arguments Afghanistan and its leaders have made but some of them have been the centrepiece or their narrative.
The biggest argument the Afghan side made is that “The agreement had a 100-year expiry date” This claim is totally false. The expiry date myth has its roots in ‘Second Convention of Peking’ of 1898 Between Qing dynasty of China & UK, where a 99 years clause was written in the agreement, There is no mention of any time frame in the Durand line agreement. There is also a contradiction in this narrative and Afghan govt actions. If the agreement was to expire after 100 years, in 1993, why declare it void in 1949?
Afghanistan answer to this question is that “The Agreement was between Afghanistan & British India (British raj), not Pakistan, and with the end of British Raj, Afghanistan declared it void” This argument is technically incorrect. Afghanistan declared it void TWO YEARS AFTER the end of British Raj and formation of a Pakistani successor state which inherited the Durand Line agreement and Vienna Convention on Succession of States in Respect of Treaties (VCSSRT) backs the Pakistani argument on the inheritance of the agreement.
One argument Afghanistan makes is that “It was signed by Amir Abdur Rahman Khan under duress, without consulting his government” But considering that the successive Afghan regimes ratified the agreement in 1905, 1919 & 1921, the “duress” narrative falls apart.
The third argument that Afghan politicians make is that “The border divides the Pashtun population in two.” But this argument is a two-edged sword, their own purposed Indus river border would also divide Pashtuns in two. Today there are more Pashtuns in Karachi than in Peshawar, let alone Kabul. Many others live in Rawalpindi, Lahore or like me, in Islamabad.
Another argument includes equating Durand line with Line of control (LoC) in Kashmir. This is the most absurd as both are worlds apart in reality. No one, neither India or Pakistan consider it a permanent border. It is disputed territory according to UN. Durand line on other hand is literally considered international border by everyone except Afghanistan.
And The last major argument made is that “Pashtun land on Pakistan’s side of Durand Line belongs to Afghanistan or Pashtuns should be reunited as Pashtunistan under Afghanistan, due to similar language and customs.” There is no legal basis for this claim, otherwise, half the world will be claiming the other half & vice versa. But if the argument is even considered, logically the smaller Pashtun body should join the larger one & consider there are twice as many Pashtuns in Pakistan, this argument will only backfire on Afghanistan.
Pashtunistan is a dead horse. Even the staunch Pashtun nationalists, Like ANP, don’t call for secession.
The Products of Loya Jirga rejection of Durand Line Agreement
Its only natural for a state to follow the policies its govt has described for it. And thus we saw Afghan army under Prime Minister Daud Khan unsuccessfully invading Bajaur twice in 1960-61. Then came 1971, We saw President Daud Khan hosting and arming, Mukti Bahini styled, Anti-Pakistan militants of BPLF and politicians like Ajmal Khattak in 1973. National Awami Party leaders were paid in Afghanistan by India for ‘Pashtunistan‘. This is confirmed by Jumma Khan Sufi, a close aide of Ajmal Khattak, in his book ‘Faraib e Natamam’. These policies also continued after communist Saur revolution.
But before Saur, naturally, came Pakistan’s first response after 26 years in 1975, Bhutto replied Daud Khan with Ahmad Shah Massoud, Hekmatyar & Jalaluddin Haqqani. They failed in the 70s but were much more successful under Zia in 80s. Post-1979 history is well discussed and we all know how this tit for tat has been going on since then.
The Only Available Antidote
What’s the Solution? Peace Talks between Afghanistan and Pakistan like Ashraf Ghani suggested? No. The only reason Ghani tried to make then hearted outreach to Pakistan was because Afghanistan has realised it has lost the asymmetric war with Pakistan (TTP was in full retreat in 2015) like PM Daud realised that he has lost the conventional war with Pakistan in the 1960s & started the asymmetric one. These Peace talks will bear no fruit as they aren’t the antidote.
Afghanistan needs to understand, Every action has an equal & opposite reaction. As long as Afghanistan doesn’t recognise the Durand border agreement, its state apparatus will naturally have to keep kicking the dead horse of Pashtunistan & foment trouble for Pakistan, and Pakistan will naturally reply in the same tongue.
If Afghanistan can live with their other borders, in which they had no say in, why can’t they abide with the one they once agreed to? If Afghanistan doesn’t reverse the 1949 decision made by Loy Jirga, Af-Pak region is destined for conflict