The humanitarian dilemma
Friday, May 29, 2009
Editorial, Dawn, Pakistan
By Maheen A. Rashdi
Friday, 29 May, 2009
THE Sri Lankan government might have forced the Tamil rebels to lay down their arms but the destruction which the intensive military action wreaked hardly spells peace for the region. In fact the morality of the action is being questioned by Tamil communities in the West.
In Canada, as the action between the Sri Lankan military continued to rage, supporters of the Tamil Tigers thronged the streets in Canada’s main cities protesting against the ‘genocide’ being perpetrated by Sri Lanka on Tamil civilians. Who are the Tamils? Why do they call themselves Tigers? Why are their innocent family members being killed by their government? These and many other questions were soon raised and the local media scrambled to educate itself on the Sri Lankan-Tamil conflict.
And that began their dilemma. The LTTE they realised was not only an internationally banned outfit but its early members were the ones to conceptualise and perfect the ‘art’ of suicide bombing. But being painfully correct in their ‘humanitarian’ outlook, the Canadian government — despite acknowledging the LTTE as a terrorist organisation — could neither ignore the call for humanitarian assistance nor condemn LTTE supporters in Canada for critically disrupting life on an almost daily basis.
When Tamil Canadians decided to protest by picketing on the main streets, especially in densely populated Toronto, the workforce was held up by many hours for consecutive days. When the police began to intervene with force, they were immediately condemned for hindering a Canadian’s ‘freedom of expression’. Editorials and columns began commenting on the right of these ‘free’ Canadians to protest peacefully and the intolerance and apathy of the average Canadian to the problems of lesser mortals outside their safe haven. Canada’s commitment to diversity was deemed superficial.
The police eventually found a middle ground and in the name of protecting the protesters continued to ‘surround’ Tamil Canadians every time they came out. Mounted police were deployed, guardsmen monitored the traffic flow and Tamil Canadians were allowed their space despite frowns from many inconvenienced civilians who could not care two hoots for the freedom of expression if it constrained their daily existence. The Toronto police has now forwarded a bill of CAD$900,000 to the federal government as cost for manning the protests.
Being a Pakistani one can’t help but draw a parallel with the situation in Swat. What if immigrant ‘supporters’ of the Taliban decide to start picketing in Ottawa against the innocent civilian deaths in Swat, Lower Dir and Mingora? What if they too start shouting slogans of ‘stop military action in Swat’ and hold Tamil Canadian-style peaceful protests in downtown Toronto? Will this too be looked upon as ‘freedom of expression’ by the western media with protesters given police protection? Or will they be put behind bars and sent to an unknown prison as ‘supporters of Taliban and Al Qaeda’ and presumed culpable?
Freedom of expression has many expressions of its own. Diversity and inclusiveness cannot escape the hidden undertones of discrimination — and it is tricky being politically correct at all times. It would be most uncomfortable to see ‘polite Canadians’ facing the humanitarian dilemma if protesters came out on the streets to stop the operation in Swat.
Many international calls for ‘restraint’ were issued to the Sri Lankan military but the action raged on and has now ended in victory declared by the Sri Lankan government. But much depends on what the Sri Lankan authorities do next and the extent to which they win Tamil trust. Currently the Tamils are garnering much sympathy and the military action could have given birth to a new generation of Tamil supporters, both within Sri Lanka and the Tamil diaspora. The crowds of protesters were proof of this — the majority were students.
The same fears could apply to the military action in Swat. Like the Lal Masjid debacle when Pakistanis settled in foreign countries could only see the belligerent military action being perpetrated on women and children in the mosque, so too the humanitarian crisis arising out of the Swat action might find a new generation of supporters being created for the Taliban whose barbarism might be overshadowed by the civilian casualties and human tragedies caused by the ongoing operation.
Source
By Maheen A. Rashdi
Friday, 29 May, 2009
THE Sri Lankan government might have forced the Tamil rebels to lay down their arms but the destruction which the intensive military action wreaked hardly spells peace for the region. In fact the morality of the action is being questioned by Tamil communities in the West.
In Canada, as the action between the Sri Lankan military continued to rage, supporters of the Tamil Tigers thronged the streets in Canada’s main cities protesting against the ‘genocide’ being perpetrated by Sri Lanka on Tamil civilians. Who are the Tamils? Why do they call themselves Tigers? Why are their innocent family members being killed by their government? These and many other questions were soon raised and the local media scrambled to educate itself on the Sri Lankan-Tamil conflict.
And that began their dilemma. The LTTE they realised was not only an internationally banned outfit but its early members were the ones to conceptualise and perfect the ‘art’ of suicide bombing. But being painfully correct in their ‘humanitarian’ outlook, the Canadian government — despite acknowledging the LTTE as a terrorist organisation — could neither ignore the call for humanitarian assistance nor condemn LTTE supporters in Canada for critically disrupting life on an almost daily basis.
When Tamil Canadians decided to protest by picketing on the main streets, especially in densely populated Toronto, the workforce was held up by many hours for consecutive days. When the police began to intervene with force, they were immediately condemned for hindering a Canadian’s ‘freedom of expression’. Editorials and columns began commenting on the right of these ‘free’ Canadians to protest peacefully and the intolerance and apathy of the average Canadian to the problems of lesser mortals outside their safe haven. Canada’s commitment to diversity was deemed superficial.
The police eventually found a middle ground and in the name of protecting the protesters continued to ‘surround’ Tamil Canadians every time they came out. Mounted police were deployed, guardsmen monitored the traffic flow and Tamil Canadians were allowed their space despite frowns from many inconvenienced civilians who could not care two hoots for the freedom of expression if it constrained their daily existence. The Toronto police has now forwarded a bill of CAD$900,000 to the federal government as cost for manning the protests.
Being a Pakistani one can’t help but draw a parallel with the situation in Swat. What if immigrant ‘supporters’ of the Taliban decide to start picketing in Ottawa against the innocent civilian deaths in Swat, Lower Dir and Mingora? What if they too start shouting slogans of ‘stop military action in Swat’ and hold Tamil Canadian-style peaceful protests in downtown Toronto? Will this too be looked upon as ‘freedom of expression’ by the western media with protesters given police protection? Or will they be put behind bars and sent to an unknown prison as ‘supporters of Taliban and Al Qaeda’ and presumed culpable?
Freedom of expression has many expressions of its own. Diversity and inclusiveness cannot escape the hidden undertones of discrimination — and it is tricky being politically correct at all times. It would be most uncomfortable to see ‘polite Canadians’ facing the humanitarian dilemma if protesters came out on the streets to stop the operation in Swat.
Many international calls for ‘restraint’ were issued to the Sri Lankan military but the action raged on and has now ended in victory declared by the Sri Lankan government. But much depends on what the Sri Lankan authorities do next and the extent to which they win Tamil trust. Currently the Tamils are garnering much sympathy and the military action could have given birth to a new generation of Tamil supporters, both within Sri Lanka and the Tamil diaspora. The crowds of protesters were proof of this — the majority were students.
The same fears could apply to the military action in Swat. Like the Lal Masjid debacle when Pakistanis settled in foreign countries could only see the belligerent military action being perpetrated on women and children in the mosque, so too the humanitarian crisis arising out of the Swat action might find a new generation of supporters being created for the Taliban whose barbarism might be overshadowed by the civilian casualties and human tragedies caused by the ongoing operation.
Source
Labels: Extremism, LTTE, Militancy, Pakistan Army Operation, Swat Operation, Taliban, Tamil Tigers, Terrorism
posted @ 6:57 PM,
,
Consensus against violent groups
Tuesday, May 19, 2009
Daily Times, Pakistan, May 19, 2009
Analysis: —Rasul Bakhsh Rais
Dialogue with violent groups is about ending violence and not about conceding political ground or territorial control. In a fragmented political scene like ours, it is a major challenge to reach this understanding
Political support for fighting insurgencies of all types requires national consensus. The term consensus however doesn’t mean perfect or total agreement. The major stakeholders, players and state institutions must have an agreement on who the enemy is and how best to end the violence against citizens.
In the present political map of Pakistan, the political parties, civil society and social groups from the Swat region and FATA are the real stakeholders. Rationally speaking, their interests are peace, stability, progress and good governance. There should be no doubt about the true aspirations of the people of this region.
All militant political or religious groups that take up arms against the state have a narrative of grievances, both real and fictional, that they use to build up a support base and to convince people about their path. But argument is never a strong weapon for the militants; it is through the gun, through torture and through mass murder that they establish control over communities.
Every insurgent group in our region, throughout history, has the narrative of injustice and hopelessness. They deliberately trashed the good intentions of governments and those political elements that wanted to reach out to them, and doubted their sincerity in resolving disputes through negotiations and peaceful means. This is not to say that all governments or those in positions of authority in Pakistan or other parts of South Asia were always people of peace and good judgement. Many of them are greatly responsible for the conditions of conflict.
We have often written about the causes of our current troubles, but this piece is essentially about how we can defeat those who are not willing to live under the Constitution and threaten the people, society and state of Pakistan with violence.
Sadly we have been through many violent conflicts and the threat of non-religious political violence still persists. Ethnic violence in Karachi for the past few years, notably on May 12, 2007 and April this year is a stark reminder of the many trouble spots that could divert our political attention and spread our security resources too thin.
What is then the consensus about? It is primarily about zero tolerance of violence and violent groups, regardless of their religious, sectarian or ethnic make-up. One reason some of these groups have become more violent is to establish territorial domains and dominance in the face of a weakened state and government. It is weak in terms of political legitimacy, moral standing and the political capacity to take bold decisions. Economic strains, ineffective leadership and disagreements among some vital sections of society on how to deal with terrorists further add to the weakness of the Pakistani state.
The narrow political interests of Pervez Musharraf and political expediency shaped his regime’s alliances with an ethnic group with a violent past in Karachi and the religious right, which has very close affinity with the Taliban. We now face the boomerang effects of his political strategy both in Karachi and in the border regions.
The writ of the Pakistani state is threatened by more than one group and in more than one region. Our present focus on Swat shouldn’t blind us to even greater and clearer dangers that we may face if we continue to fail in building national consensus against violent groups.
There are two important reasons for this failure. The first is duplicity; for example when a head of state celebrates violence in one part of the country as a sign of his political strength while using force against militants in another part, or when a political government fails to call a spade a spade owing to political expediency.
Such duplicity is a clear and dangerous sign of the weakening of the state. The politics of any party or group needs to be separated from the violent and criminal acts of activists, workers or hired guns, regardless of their affiliation. Tolerating the violence of one group encourages others to do the same, and further undermines the legitimacy of use of force by the state, especially if it is being selective in its targeting.
Use of force is not the preferred solution or the only option that a state must employ; and in an ethnically pluralistic and politically complex society like Pakistan, it cannot be the weapon of choice. As we have seen, it can be more divisive than uniting when the violent groups have a strong ethnic social support base and are plugged into nationwide religious networks.
The second important reason for our failure is a lack of clarity among our political elites on the identity of the enemy. The definition of enemy is politically loaded and every group will have its take based on its particular political imperatives. The picture becomes more confusing when there is more than one enemy, internal and external, and prevents the formation of a national consensus both on the identification of threat and how to deal with them.
Pakistan faces multiple internal and external threats today; we have referred to the linkages between the internal enemies, and the identity of our external foes is also very clear. We need to have clarity on these threats and how best to use our social, political and military resources to counter them, and to bring violent groups into mainstream politics and society.
This is what makes politics an art, and not a science; it seeks to make things possible and explore the outer limits of dialogue and understanding to resolve conflicts. But dialogue with violent groups is about ending violence and not about conceding political ground or territorial control. In a fragmented political scene like ours, it is a major challenge to reach this understanding; but without such an understanding and consensus, we will neither be able to point out our enemies nor find the right means to fight them.
Analysis: —Rasul Bakhsh Rais
Dialogue with violent groups is about ending violence and not about conceding political ground or territorial control. In a fragmented political scene like ours, it is a major challenge to reach this understanding
Political support for fighting insurgencies of all types requires national consensus. The term consensus however doesn’t mean perfect or total agreement. The major stakeholders, players and state institutions must have an agreement on who the enemy is and how best to end the violence against citizens.
In the present political map of Pakistan, the political parties, civil society and social groups from the Swat region and FATA are the real stakeholders. Rationally speaking, their interests are peace, stability, progress and good governance. There should be no doubt about the true aspirations of the people of this region.
All militant political or religious groups that take up arms against the state have a narrative of grievances, both real and fictional, that they use to build up a support base and to convince people about their path. But argument is never a strong weapon for the militants; it is through the gun, through torture and through mass murder that they establish control over communities.
Every insurgent group in our region, throughout history, has the narrative of injustice and hopelessness. They deliberately trashed the good intentions of governments and those political elements that wanted to reach out to them, and doubted their sincerity in resolving disputes through negotiations and peaceful means. This is not to say that all governments or those in positions of authority in Pakistan or other parts of South Asia were always people of peace and good judgement. Many of them are greatly responsible for the conditions of conflict.
We have often written about the causes of our current troubles, but this piece is essentially about how we can defeat those who are not willing to live under the Constitution and threaten the people, society and state of Pakistan with violence.
Sadly we have been through many violent conflicts and the threat of non-religious political violence still persists. Ethnic violence in Karachi for the past few years, notably on May 12, 2007 and April this year is a stark reminder of the many trouble spots that could divert our political attention and spread our security resources too thin.
What is then the consensus about? It is primarily about zero tolerance of violence and violent groups, regardless of their religious, sectarian or ethnic make-up. One reason some of these groups have become more violent is to establish territorial domains and dominance in the face of a weakened state and government. It is weak in terms of political legitimacy, moral standing and the political capacity to take bold decisions. Economic strains, ineffective leadership and disagreements among some vital sections of society on how to deal with terrorists further add to the weakness of the Pakistani state.
The narrow political interests of Pervez Musharraf and political expediency shaped his regime’s alliances with an ethnic group with a violent past in Karachi and the religious right, which has very close affinity with the Taliban. We now face the boomerang effects of his political strategy both in Karachi and in the border regions.
The writ of the Pakistani state is threatened by more than one group and in more than one region. Our present focus on Swat shouldn’t blind us to even greater and clearer dangers that we may face if we continue to fail in building national consensus against violent groups.
There are two important reasons for this failure. The first is duplicity; for example when a head of state celebrates violence in one part of the country as a sign of his political strength while using force against militants in another part, or when a political government fails to call a spade a spade owing to political expediency.
Such duplicity is a clear and dangerous sign of the weakening of the state. The politics of any party or group needs to be separated from the violent and criminal acts of activists, workers or hired guns, regardless of their affiliation. Tolerating the violence of one group encourages others to do the same, and further undermines the legitimacy of use of force by the state, especially if it is being selective in its targeting.
Use of force is not the preferred solution or the only option that a state must employ; and in an ethnically pluralistic and politically complex society like Pakistan, it cannot be the weapon of choice. As we have seen, it can be more divisive than uniting when the violent groups have a strong ethnic social support base and are plugged into nationwide religious networks.
The second important reason for our failure is a lack of clarity among our political elites on the identity of the enemy. The definition of enemy is politically loaded and every group will have its take based on its particular political imperatives. The picture becomes more confusing when there is more than one enemy, internal and external, and prevents the formation of a national consensus both on the identification of threat and how to deal with them.
Pakistan faces multiple internal and external threats today; we have referred to the linkages between the internal enemies, and the identity of our external foes is also very clear. We need to have clarity on these threats and how best to use our social, political and military resources to counter them, and to bring violent groups into mainstream politics and society.
This is what makes politics an art, and not a science; it seeks to make things possible and explore the outer limits of dialogue and understanding to resolve conflicts. But dialogue with violent groups is about ending violence and not about conceding political ground or territorial control. In a fragmented political scene like ours, it is a major challenge to reach this understanding; but without such an understanding and consensus, we will neither be able to point out our enemies nor find the right means to fight them.
Labels: Militants, Pakistan Army Operation, Swat Operation, Taliban, Terrorism
posted @ 11:45 AM,
,
Losing Pakistan
P U L S E
US drones have just killed 29 tribesmen in Mirali, North Waziristan. The military invasion of Swat continues meanwhile. The story has already dropped out of headlines, in some cases vanishing altogether, meanwhile nearly a 1000 people have been killed, more than a million displaced, with most of their property and livelihoods destroyed. The following analysis from Brig (ret) F. B. Ali is astute when it comes to describing the error and futility of this operation, but it overstates the likelihood of Islamist take over in Pakistan, the chances of which are close to zero. (via Col. Pat Lang’s indispensable Sic Semper Tyrannis).
The tragedy now unfolding in Pakistan is occurring due the pursuit of shortsighted policies by the United States as well as the Pakistan government and military. The US has pressured Pakistan into engaging in brutal military operations in Bajaur and Swat, with no regard for how this would affect its own vital interests in the region. The Pakistani rulers (bedazzled by the glitter of all those promised billions) have meekly complied in waging war on parts of their own people, again with no thought to the likely outcome for them and their country. The main impact of this has been to the civilian population, some million and a half of whom have been displaced (with many killed and maimed, although no figures for these are yet available).
Incidentally, what Pakistan is doing is little different from what Sudan did in Darfur and what the Sri Lankan government is now doing – fighting an insurgency with minimal or no regard for civilians in the area. This got Sudan’s President Omar al-Bashir indicted as a war criminal, while the Sri Lankan government is the object of widespread condemnation in the West. Even Israel got a few taps on its knuckles for its indiscriminate brutality in Gaza. Pakistan, however, is being widely lauded for its resolute “war on terror”. Apparently, causing avoidable human suffering while waging this particular war is more palatable than in other cases.
In a previous article (Marching to the Edge – Eyes Wide Shut) I analysed the real threat that the United States faces in this theatre, and recommended what might be a rational policy for it to pursue. This was to first shore up Pakistan instead of waging a war in Afghanistan (with Pakistan forced to act in a supporting role). I warned that a failure to do this risked losing Pakistan to the Islamists, which would render pointless whatever the US could achieve in Afghanistan. The likelihood of such a policy being adopted is nil, unfortunately, since the present administration has continued the Bush practice of letting generals set national policy in this theatre. The generals are fixated on their war in Afghanistan, and Pakistan figures only as an often-reluctant subordinate player in their operations.
What remains to be described is how this tragedy will likely unfold as Pakistan slides ever closer to an Islamist takeover. The current military operation in Swat (like the earlier one in Bajaur) consists mainly of subjecting successive areas to heavy bombardment from the air and the ground, behind which ground troops advance, shooting at anyone they encounter (including unfortunate civilians trying to flee). The area thus occupied is then subjected to an indefinite curfew, and again anyone seen outside is shot (often civilians trying to flee or seek food and water). The hardened Taliban militants, who had moved into Swat from the adjoining tribal area (FATA), have mostly slipped back to their own areas, leaving behind local diehards to attain the honour of martyrdom (those not so inclined merely bury their weapons and mingle with the escaping refugees).
So, even though a famous victory will undoubtedly be won, this military operation is unlikely to do much lasting damage to the Taliban. The army will, in due course, occupy much of the inhabited portions of the Swat valley (but not the hilly regions). The million plus displaced refugees will rush back to find their homes demolished or looted, and most civic infrastructure destroyed, and with it their means of livelihood. As would already have happened in the camps they came from, the flood of US and international aid dollars would dwindle to a trickle by the time it reached them after passing through so many sticky fingers. The main relief effort will be mounted by the Islamist aid organizations, just as they did after the 2005 earthquake in Northern Pakistan. They will thereby win many friends and much goodwill, unlike the Pakistan government and the US, which is even now seen as the instigator of this operation and the resulting calamity. Ultimately, the army will have to depart, and the same ineffective, corrupt and complicit civil administration will return. And so will the Taliban, digging up their black turbans and AK-47s.
Meanwhile, the US war in Afghanistan will continue, and the need to stop the Taliban from using the FATA as a base and launching pad for attacks will intensify. Washington will twist some arms and thump some tables, and the hapless Pakistan military will have to go in and clean up FATA as it did Bajaur and Swat. Another miserable wave of destitute Pashtun refugees will flood back into the adjoining settled areas, to meet the same indifferent care that the refugees from Bajaur and Swat received. The Taliban will not only fade away into the hills and caves of FATA and Afghanistan, but also infiltrate into the interior of Pakistan. FATA will become a depopulated free-fire zone, but scattered garrisons and air attacks will not be able to stop guerrillas from using it as a base to attack both Afghanistan and Pakistan (nor will magical drones manipulated from balmy Florida).
Taliban infiltration and Pashtun alienation (due to these operations by a largely Punjabi military) will likely lead to the collapse of government in the NW Frontier province, allowing an insurgency to grow in this area (low-level, but considerably worse than the one now occurring in Baluchistan). The ethnic conflict now simmering in Karachi will escalate. The Taliban militants who have infiltrated into the cities and towns will stage bombings and attacks in them. All this will intensify the many internal strains and problems already plaguing Pakistan (which I spelt out in my earlier article). Throwing US money at this mess will not make much difference, except to hugely inflate some bank accounts in obscure tax havens. Pakistan is not a very strong and stable structure as it is; under all these additional pressures and complications, something has to give.
Casual or uninformed outside observers are quick to predict the break-up of Pakistan under pressure. That is unlikely, though it remains a possibility at the end of a long chain of adverse events. What is most likely is a change in the present governance structure. Pakistan is currently ruled by one man, Asif Zardari (the facade of democracy notwithstanding). Mr. Zardari, and his policy of unlimited support for US policies in the region, is extremely unpopular (in an opinion poll conducted by the International Republican Institute in March 2009 he was the most disliked politician in Pakistan (72%) with only 17% liking him). When conditions in the country worsen due to the “war on terror”, he and his subservience to the US will be blamed, and he is unlikely to be able to remain in power for long. (The delegation from Dubai is ever ready to depart, uttering in farewell those immortal words that Douglas Adams put into the mouths of his departing celestial dolphins: So long, and thanks for all the fish).
Mr. Zardari’s most likely replacement will either be his political rival, Mr. Nawaz Sharif, or an Islamist military junta. Mr. Sharif is currently displaying a somewhat tentative friendship for the US. But, if he comes into power on a wave of anti-US sentiment (whether through an early election, a popular movement, or military intervention), his policies will be radically different from those of the present government. This will probably cause US (and international) aid to dry up, and as this exacerbates the country’s problems, he will have to lean increasingly on Islamists (political Islamists, not the Taliban), and they will gradually take over the government.
Another possible scenario is an Islamist military coup. Though possible at any time (it is unclear how deeply they have penetrated the military, but nationalist fervour easily shades into the Islamist variety), it becomes much more likely if governance in the country seriously breaks down, or the military buckles under the combined pressures of trying to support the US war in Afghanistan, combatting insurgencies and militant attacks at home, while all the time looking apprehensively over its shoulder at the “threat” posed by an India it does not trust. A takeover of the military and the government by a group of Islamist officers could well occur in such circumstances.
Whatever the actual chain of events that transpires, the great (and avoidable) tragedy is that the policies the US is pursuing in the region greatly increase the likelihood of the loss of Pakistan to the Islamists. The frightening consequences of this, for both Pakistan and the US, are easy to imagine. Any successes the generals can achieve in their war in Afghanistan would be meaningless; military campaigns divorced from the real needs of national policy usually end up as expensive failures. The pages of history are littered with them.
© F B Ali (May 2009)
US drones have just killed 29 tribesmen in Mirali, North Waziristan. The military invasion of Swat continues meanwhile. The story has already dropped out of headlines, in some cases vanishing altogether, meanwhile nearly a 1000 people have been killed, more than a million displaced, with most of their property and livelihoods destroyed. The following analysis from Brig (ret) F. B. Ali is astute when it comes to describing the error and futility of this operation, but it overstates the likelihood of Islamist take over in Pakistan, the chances of which are close to zero. (via Col. Pat Lang’s indispensable Sic Semper Tyrannis).
The tragedy now unfolding in Pakistan is occurring due the pursuit of shortsighted policies by the United States as well as the Pakistan government and military. The US has pressured Pakistan into engaging in brutal military operations in Bajaur and Swat, with no regard for how this would affect its own vital interests in the region. The Pakistani rulers (bedazzled by the glitter of all those promised billions) have meekly complied in waging war on parts of their own people, again with no thought to the likely outcome for them and their country. The main impact of this has been to the civilian population, some million and a half of whom have been displaced (with many killed and maimed, although no figures for these are yet available).
Incidentally, what Pakistan is doing is little different from what Sudan did in Darfur and what the Sri Lankan government is now doing – fighting an insurgency with minimal or no regard for civilians in the area. This got Sudan’s President Omar al-Bashir indicted as a war criminal, while the Sri Lankan government is the object of widespread condemnation in the West. Even Israel got a few taps on its knuckles for its indiscriminate brutality in Gaza. Pakistan, however, is being widely lauded for its resolute “war on terror”. Apparently, causing avoidable human suffering while waging this particular war is more palatable than in other cases.
In a previous article (Marching to the Edge – Eyes Wide Shut) I analysed the real threat that the United States faces in this theatre, and recommended what might be a rational policy for it to pursue. This was to first shore up Pakistan instead of waging a war in Afghanistan (with Pakistan forced to act in a supporting role). I warned that a failure to do this risked losing Pakistan to the Islamists, which would render pointless whatever the US could achieve in Afghanistan. The likelihood of such a policy being adopted is nil, unfortunately, since the present administration has continued the Bush practice of letting generals set national policy in this theatre. The generals are fixated on their war in Afghanistan, and Pakistan figures only as an often-reluctant subordinate player in their operations.
What remains to be described is how this tragedy will likely unfold as Pakistan slides ever closer to an Islamist takeover. The current military operation in Swat (like the earlier one in Bajaur) consists mainly of subjecting successive areas to heavy bombardment from the air and the ground, behind which ground troops advance, shooting at anyone they encounter (including unfortunate civilians trying to flee). The area thus occupied is then subjected to an indefinite curfew, and again anyone seen outside is shot (often civilians trying to flee or seek food and water). The hardened Taliban militants, who had moved into Swat from the adjoining tribal area (FATA), have mostly slipped back to their own areas, leaving behind local diehards to attain the honour of martyrdom (those not so inclined merely bury their weapons and mingle with the escaping refugees).
So, even though a famous victory will undoubtedly be won, this military operation is unlikely to do much lasting damage to the Taliban. The army will, in due course, occupy much of the inhabited portions of the Swat valley (but not the hilly regions). The million plus displaced refugees will rush back to find their homes demolished or looted, and most civic infrastructure destroyed, and with it their means of livelihood. As would already have happened in the camps they came from, the flood of US and international aid dollars would dwindle to a trickle by the time it reached them after passing through so many sticky fingers. The main relief effort will be mounted by the Islamist aid organizations, just as they did after the 2005 earthquake in Northern Pakistan. They will thereby win many friends and much goodwill, unlike the Pakistan government and the US, which is even now seen as the instigator of this operation and the resulting calamity. Ultimately, the army will have to depart, and the same ineffective, corrupt and complicit civil administration will return. And so will the Taliban, digging up their black turbans and AK-47s.
Meanwhile, the US war in Afghanistan will continue, and the need to stop the Taliban from using the FATA as a base and launching pad for attacks will intensify. Washington will twist some arms and thump some tables, and the hapless Pakistan military will have to go in and clean up FATA as it did Bajaur and Swat. Another miserable wave of destitute Pashtun refugees will flood back into the adjoining settled areas, to meet the same indifferent care that the refugees from Bajaur and Swat received. The Taliban will not only fade away into the hills and caves of FATA and Afghanistan, but also infiltrate into the interior of Pakistan. FATA will become a depopulated free-fire zone, but scattered garrisons and air attacks will not be able to stop guerrillas from using it as a base to attack both Afghanistan and Pakistan (nor will magical drones manipulated from balmy Florida).
Taliban infiltration and Pashtun alienation (due to these operations by a largely Punjabi military) will likely lead to the collapse of government in the NW Frontier province, allowing an insurgency to grow in this area (low-level, but considerably worse than the one now occurring in Baluchistan). The ethnic conflict now simmering in Karachi will escalate. The Taliban militants who have infiltrated into the cities and towns will stage bombings and attacks in them. All this will intensify the many internal strains and problems already plaguing Pakistan (which I spelt out in my earlier article). Throwing US money at this mess will not make much difference, except to hugely inflate some bank accounts in obscure tax havens. Pakistan is not a very strong and stable structure as it is; under all these additional pressures and complications, something has to give.
Casual or uninformed outside observers are quick to predict the break-up of Pakistan under pressure. That is unlikely, though it remains a possibility at the end of a long chain of adverse events. What is most likely is a change in the present governance structure. Pakistan is currently ruled by one man, Asif Zardari (the facade of democracy notwithstanding). Mr. Zardari, and his policy of unlimited support for US policies in the region, is extremely unpopular (in an opinion poll conducted by the International Republican Institute in March 2009 he was the most disliked politician in Pakistan (72%) with only 17% liking him). When conditions in the country worsen due to the “war on terror”, he and his subservience to the US will be blamed, and he is unlikely to be able to remain in power for long. (The delegation from Dubai is ever ready to depart, uttering in farewell those immortal words that Douglas Adams put into the mouths of his departing celestial dolphins: So long, and thanks for all the fish).
Mr. Zardari’s most likely replacement will either be his political rival, Mr. Nawaz Sharif, or an Islamist military junta. Mr. Sharif is currently displaying a somewhat tentative friendship for the US. But, if he comes into power on a wave of anti-US sentiment (whether through an early election, a popular movement, or military intervention), his policies will be radically different from those of the present government. This will probably cause US (and international) aid to dry up, and as this exacerbates the country’s problems, he will have to lean increasingly on Islamists (political Islamists, not the Taliban), and they will gradually take over the government.
Another possible scenario is an Islamist military coup. Though possible at any time (it is unclear how deeply they have penetrated the military, but nationalist fervour easily shades into the Islamist variety), it becomes much more likely if governance in the country seriously breaks down, or the military buckles under the combined pressures of trying to support the US war in Afghanistan, combatting insurgencies and militant attacks at home, while all the time looking apprehensively over its shoulder at the “threat” posed by an India it does not trust. A takeover of the military and the government by a group of Islamist officers could well occur in such circumstances.
Whatever the actual chain of events that transpires, the great (and avoidable) tragedy is that the policies the US is pursuing in the region greatly increase the likelihood of the loss of Pakistan to the Islamists. The frightening consequences of this, for both Pakistan and the US, are easy to imagine. Any successes the generals can achieve in their war in Afghanistan would be meaningless; military campaigns divorced from the real needs of national policy usually end up as expensive failures. The pages of history are littered with them.
© F B Ali (May 2009)
Labels: Militants, Pakistan Army Operation, Swat Operation, Taliban, Terrorism, Tribal Areas
posted @ 11:25 AM,
,
Bloody Urban Battles Could Lie Ahead in Pakistan
By ASIF SHAHZAD, Associated Press Writer – 1 hr 36 mins ago
ISLAMABAD – Pakistani security forces fought Taliban militants on the outskirts of the main city in the northwest's Swat Valley and entered two other Taliban-held towns there, the army said Sunday, foreshadowing what could become bloody urban battles.
A top government official said the offensive near Afghanistan had already killed more than 1,000 Taliban fighters, while a group of pro-government religious leaders endorsed the operation but condemned U.S. missile strikes in the northwest.
The developments underscored Pakistan's resolve and frustration in its battle against militancy.
Washington has pressed Islamabad to crack down on al-Qaida and Taliban strongholds along the Afghan frontier, saying the militants threaten not only U.S. and NATO troops in Afghanistan but also nuclear-armed Pakistan's future. But many in Pakistan believe the militancy here has metastasized because of U.S. intervention in Afghanistan.
ISLAMABAD – Pakistani security forces fought Taliban militants on the outskirts of the main city in the northwest's Swat Valley and entered two other Taliban-held towns there, the army said Sunday, foreshadowing what could become bloody urban battles.
A top government official said the offensive near Afghanistan had already killed more than 1,000 Taliban fighters, while a group of pro-government religious leaders endorsed the operation but condemned U.S. missile strikes in the northwest.
The developments underscored Pakistan's resolve and frustration in its battle against militancy.
Washington has pressed Islamabad to crack down on al-Qaida and Taliban strongholds along the Afghan frontier, saying the militants threaten not only U.S. and NATO troops in Afghanistan but also nuclear-armed Pakistan's future. But many in Pakistan believe the militancy here has metastasized because of U.S. intervention in Afghanistan.
Labels: Militants, Pakistan Army Operation, Swat Operation, Taliban, Terrorism
posted @ 11:21 AM,
,
Pakistan Has Survived Many Trials and Will Triumph
The Wall Street Journal
LETTERS MAY 18, 2009
Bret Stephens's "Pakistan's Existential Challenge" (Global View, May 12) fails to address a key point regarding Pakistan's identity. Pakistan has faced an existential threat for most of its 61-year history, starting with its first war fought mere months after its independence, its dismemberment as a state in 1971 and, most recently, its one of many balance-of-payment crises. Not only has it survived, but its contribution to the world, and especially the U.S., has been significant.
The irony is that after having survived against this backdrop for so many years, most Pakistanis find the sound of alarm bells in the Western media somewhat amusing. To answer Mr. Stephens's question, "too stubborn to fail" is probably the closest answer to the question of a Pakistani identity.
Faraz Rana
New York
LETTERS MAY 18, 2009
Bret Stephens's "Pakistan's Existential Challenge" (Global View, May 12) fails to address a key point regarding Pakistan's identity. Pakistan has faced an existential threat for most of its 61-year history, starting with its first war fought mere months after its independence, its dismemberment as a state in 1971 and, most recently, its one of many balance-of-payment crises. Not only has it survived, but its contribution to the world, and especially the U.S., has been significant.
The irony is that after having survived against this backdrop for so many years, most Pakistanis find the sound of alarm bells in the Western media somewhat amusing. To answer Mr. Stephens's question, "too stubborn to fail" is probably the closest answer to the question of a Pakistani identity.
Faraz Rana
New York
Labels: Militants, Pakistan Army Operation, Swat Operation, Taliban, Terrorism
posted @ 11:15 AM,
,
Zardari seeks drone technology: Pakistan to take Taliban war into Tribal Areas
Monday, May 18, 2009
Daily Times Monitor
Monday, May 18, 2009
LAHORE: Pakistan will soon extend its war on the Taliban to the Tribal Areas bordering Afghanistan, President Asif Zardari said on Sunday.
“We’re going to go into Waziristan, all these regions, with army operations,” he told The Sunday Times in an interview. “Swat is just the start. [There’s] a larger war to fight.”
He said Pakistan would need billions of pounds in military assistance and aid for up to 1.7 million internally displaced persons (IDPs), on account of the operation.
“We need much, much more than the $1 billion [military aid] we’ve been getting, which is nothing,” Zardari said. “We’ve got 150,000 troops in [the Tribal Areas] – just the movement of that number would cost $1 billion,” he added.
Zardari may get the cash but the US administration is less likely to accede to his wish of being given US drones, claimed a Times report.
“I want drones,” Zardari had said. “I want transfer of technology so I can manufacture them at home and use them myself.”
Last week, for the first time, the US shared surveillance data collected by drones with Pakistan.
Referring to his recent visit to Libya, the US, Britain and France, Zardari shrugged off all suggestions that he has abandoned his country in its darkest hour. “This is not just Pakistan’s problem,” he said, “It’s the world’s problem”.
Sufi’s exposure: Zardari still insists the peace deal under which the Taliban were to administer Swat and six other districts, in return for laying down their arms, was the right move. “It was a good thing, because it exposed Sufi Muhammad for what he was,” he said.
To take on the Taliban, Pakistan Army is for the first time accepting counter-insurgency training on its own soil from British and US troops.
Senior US officials told The Wall Street Journal that 25 to 50 special forces personnel are to be based at two new training camps in Balochistan. The army is planning to open new fronts in Waziristan and Darra Adam Khel.
Monday, May 18, 2009
LAHORE: Pakistan will soon extend its war on the Taliban to the Tribal Areas bordering Afghanistan, President Asif Zardari said on Sunday.
“We’re going to go into Waziristan, all these regions, with army operations,” he told The Sunday Times in an interview. “Swat is just the start. [There’s] a larger war to fight.”
He said Pakistan would need billions of pounds in military assistance and aid for up to 1.7 million internally displaced persons (IDPs), on account of the operation.
“We need much, much more than the $1 billion [military aid] we’ve been getting, which is nothing,” Zardari said. “We’ve got 150,000 troops in [the Tribal Areas] – just the movement of that number would cost $1 billion,” he added.
Zardari may get the cash but the US administration is less likely to accede to his wish of being given US drones, claimed a Times report.
“I want drones,” Zardari had said. “I want transfer of technology so I can manufacture them at home and use them myself.”
Last week, for the first time, the US shared surveillance data collected by drones with Pakistan.
Referring to his recent visit to Libya, the US, Britain and France, Zardari shrugged off all suggestions that he has abandoned his country in its darkest hour. “This is not just Pakistan’s problem,” he said, “It’s the world’s problem”.
Sufi’s exposure: Zardari still insists the peace deal under which the Taliban were to administer Swat and six other districts, in return for laying down their arms, was the right move. “It was a good thing, because it exposed Sufi Muhammad for what he was,” he said.
To take on the Taliban, Pakistan Army is for the first time accepting counter-insurgency training on its own soil from British and US troops.
Senior US officials told The Wall Street Journal that 25 to 50 special forces personnel are to be based at two new training camps in Balochistan. The army is planning to open new fronts in Waziristan and Darra Adam Khel.
Labels: Pakistan Army Operation, Swat Operation, Taliban, Terrorism, Tribal Areas, Zardari
posted @ 12:38 PM,
,
As the fighting between the Pakistani military and the Taliban heats up in the war-torn district of Swat, the Taliban has moved a small force eastward
According to the media reports and credible sources, Pakistan Security Forces has killed more than 1000 militants, hundred of insurgents suffered serious injuries and many arrested too in the recent anti militancy drive of Swat and FATA areas. During the ongoing operations, huge quantity of ammunition, latest weapons, number of training camps and hideouts of the terrorists have been destroyed. On May 17, 2009 Pakistan Security forces have been entered into Matta (Swat village) and are fighting the battle of Pakistan bravely and courageously. The whole nation is backing her forces against terrorism. Taliban has now realized that Security Forces means business and determined to eradicate them from the area. It is encouraging too that operation has been planned and is being conducted purely by Pakistani Security Agencies and heavy losses are being inflicted on the Taliban in terms of men and material. The operation started when foreign sponsored Taliban refused to adhere the state’s law despite that NWFP government has acknowledge the demands of enforcing Shariat Law in Swat and Malakand Agency . On MAY 15, 2009 Prime Minister Syed Yousuf Raza Gilani while addressing the national Assembly expressed that future of military operation in Swat and Malakand will continue till complete whipping out of the terrorists and establishing government writ in the area. Prime Minister appreciated too the Military efforts and sacrifices of security forces during the war against terrorism. He also added that the whole nation is standing firmly shoulder to shoulder with the armed Forces and ready to fight the foreign sponsored terrorism.
On May 15, 2009, Chief of Army Staff (COAS) General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani briefed all the national political parties attending in camera meeting held at the Prime minister’s House. COAS, DG ISI, Lt General Pasha and his staff gave the complete picture and latest situation of the Swat operation. In turn the political top brass has assured their full support and cooperation in the ongoing offensive against militants in western parts of the country. As we all knew that Swat situation has been converted into grave security threat to the sovereignty of Pakistan and security forces have been directed to carry out operation to meet the threat to our sovereignty. But unfortunately there are some religious’ elements including Imran Khan have started creating hurdles in the way of reinstating government writ by opposing the military operation. I really failed to understand that why particularly Mulana Munwar Hassan, Qazi Hussain Ahmed, Mulana Fazulur Rehman and Imran Khan are reluctant to play their positive role of eradication of militancy . Why they are criticizing military operation once almost whole nation has the desire of get rid of the militancy and stood against the Taliban? And why these leaders are helping in promoting Talibanization and thus indirectly fulfilling American agenda of creating instability in the country. It is also notable here that some of the leaders like Khawaja Saad Rafique are too crying and shedding tears on the TV for killing of Taliban and are reluctant to acknowledge the sacrifices of the brave soldiers of our security forces and Why are they supporting terrorism on the name of negotiations . I would like to request them to please for God sake start supporting Pak forces in eradicating of militancy openly and stop backing extremists .Taliban are causing instability in the country and same is being done by the American and its allies too. Thus, reluctance of supporting security forces will be taken as historical mistake of so called national leaders. I think either these leaders have failed to weigh the war or does not comprehend the sensitivity of the issue at this crucial juncture of time. They are unintentionally facilitating the plans of anti Pakistan forces and agencies like RAW, RAAM, CIA and Mossad. I do appreciate our media that have realized the critical time on Pakistan and supporting Security Forces now. Here, I would like to suggest to our media to show true faces of the self composed Mujjaddin and so called national leaders who have put a side national interests and playing in the hands of their foreign masters. At this perilous occasion, the parliamentary leaders of the political parties’ general masses, media, and government must reiterate their vow to defend the country’s sovereignty at all cost and praised the role of the forces under the prevailing security.
Chief of Army Staff (COAS) General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani has also visited the valley and vowed to flush out militancy from the area. He met with field commanders and troops taking part in the operation. The COAS appreciated the high morale of the troops and rightly claimed that our security forces will defeat militancy from Swat and remaining part of the country. Anti Pakistan forces are also making use of this opportunity to force a long desired two front war scenario on us. Thus, Pentagon, western countries and their media started showing concerned while saying that Pakistan Nukes can go into the ends of Taliban in case of fall of Islamabad and similarly some high officials of US defence authority also offered to train our professional Pakistan Army. In this context an article ‘” U.S. has plan to secure Pakistan Nukes if country falls to Taliban” was published on Stratfor. The article revealed that special commando units of Joint Special Operation Command have the tasks of taking over and securing Nukes Arsenal in case of paralyses of Pakistan.
On the other hand on May 17, 2009 President Obama while addressing a news conference in White House said Pakistan Armed Forces has the capability of protecting the nuclear assets but at the same time also said that all options have to be kept open. Such type of statements of American top brass once our security forces are committed in elimination of militancy is not understood and would be taken as defaming Pakistan, its forces and intelligence agencies. Therefore Swat operation is genuinely a huge test for the nation, government and security forces.
On May 17, 2009 Chief of Army Staff (COAS) General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani while commenting on remarks from various quarters on the level of Low Intensity Conflict (LIC) training of the Pakistani troops and about their shifting from eastern borders has said that Pakistani Army does not require any generalised foreign training for countering insurgency, except for much specialised weapons, equipment and high technology. He also maintained that strategic decisions regarding where, when and how many troops were deployed in each operation or sector was always a Pakistani decision, based on objective analysis and “our full understanding of threat spectrum”. President, Prime Minister and foreign office spokesman too categorically rejected western media campaign and American concern over Pakistan nukes and said that our Army is capable enough to protect our nuclear assets.
Major General Athar Abbas, Director General Inter Services Public Relations expressed in various press briefing that Security Forces are trying to reinstate peace in Swat, Matta and Mangora. He added that forces have also entered in the towns of local militants heads. General said that the security forces are hopeful of establishing peace in the Swat valley and would not let these militants succeed in their designs. Earlier he also discarded the BBC report over and declared it rubbish.
The inhabitants of Swat and Malakand valleys were in the state of horror and panic as a result of the radical’s ruthless actions. So far more than 1700 girls school have been destroyed, as a result of current Swat operation over 25 lacs individuals have been internally displaced which are being settled in Peshawar, Noshera, Mardan, Swabi and other parts of the countries. Pakistan would be requiring $600 to $800 to tackle the world’s largest internal exodus of 2.5 million people in the wake of full scale war against terrorists in Malkand Division. More than 1000 troops have scarified their lives in eradication of militancy from FATA and Swat area. On the name of religion, militants were hanging the bodies on trees and shooting down innocent people. These belligerents are in the possession of rocket launchers, mines, anti crafts guns, ammunition and modern guns along with latest vehicles. These are being funded from across and drug trafficking smugglers . I feel not any hesitation while saying that militants and their so called leaders are being sponsored and launched in FATA, Swat and other areas by RAW with the tenet support of CIA and Mossad. The unrest of Baluchistan, Bajuar and political instability are directly linked with the present militancy of Swat. The malevolent propaganda of Jews media is targeting Pakistan Military Forces, its agencies and nuclear assets to hit Pakistani solidarity since their masters knew that direct attack on our country is not possible. In short operation Swat is being progressing well and nation has been awakened and now asking her forces for rooting out the militancy on permanent basis. ”Ulema Musiakh” (Islamic Scholars) Convention and “Grand Jerga” held at Islamabad and Peshawar have condemned the Taliban militancy and have also gave “FATWA” (act against Islamic teaching) against the suicidal missions and declared it illegal (“Haram”). They favoured the on going operation and vowed to fight against Taliban shoulder to shoulder with Pakistan Security Forces. Concluding, I must say that there is a need to display solidarity against common enemy of the society and government should also make a plan of developing the region. The war against terrorism must be concluded till its ultimate end and no negotiation are recommended till de-weaponization of the area.
On May 15, 2009, Chief of Army Staff (COAS) General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani briefed all the national political parties attending in camera meeting held at the Prime minister’s House. COAS, DG ISI, Lt General Pasha and his staff gave the complete picture and latest situation of the Swat operation. In turn the political top brass has assured their full support and cooperation in the ongoing offensive against militants in western parts of the country. As we all knew that Swat situation has been converted into grave security threat to the sovereignty of Pakistan and security forces have been directed to carry out operation to meet the threat to our sovereignty. But unfortunately there are some religious’ elements including Imran Khan have started creating hurdles in the way of reinstating government writ by opposing the military operation. I really failed to understand that why particularly Mulana Munwar Hassan, Qazi Hussain Ahmed, Mulana Fazulur Rehman and Imran Khan are reluctant to play their positive role of eradication of militancy . Why they are criticizing military operation once almost whole nation has the desire of get rid of the militancy and stood against the Taliban? And why these leaders are helping in promoting Talibanization and thus indirectly fulfilling American agenda of creating instability in the country. It is also notable here that some of the leaders like Khawaja Saad Rafique are too crying and shedding tears on the TV for killing of Taliban and are reluctant to acknowledge the sacrifices of the brave soldiers of our security forces and Why are they supporting terrorism on the name of negotiations . I would like to request them to please for God sake start supporting Pak forces in eradicating of militancy openly and stop backing extremists .Taliban are causing instability in the country and same is being done by the American and its allies too. Thus, reluctance of supporting security forces will be taken as historical mistake of so called national leaders. I think either these leaders have failed to weigh the war or does not comprehend the sensitivity of the issue at this crucial juncture of time. They are unintentionally facilitating the plans of anti Pakistan forces and agencies like RAW, RAAM, CIA and Mossad. I do appreciate our media that have realized the critical time on Pakistan and supporting Security Forces now. Here, I would like to suggest to our media to show true faces of the self composed Mujjaddin and so called national leaders who have put a side national interests and playing in the hands of their foreign masters. At this perilous occasion, the parliamentary leaders of the political parties’ general masses, media, and government must reiterate their vow to defend the country’s sovereignty at all cost and praised the role of the forces under the prevailing security.
Chief of Army Staff (COAS) General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani has also visited the valley and vowed to flush out militancy from the area. He met with field commanders and troops taking part in the operation. The COAS appreciated the high morale of the troops and rightly claimed that our security forces will defeat militancy from Swat and remaining part of the country. Anti Pakistan forces are also making use of this opportunity to force a long desired two front war scenario on us. Thus, Pentagon, western countries and their media started showing concerned while saying that Pakistan Nukes can go into the ends of Taliban in case of fall of Islamabad and similarly some high officials of US defence authority also offered to train our professional Pakistan Army. In this context an article ‘” U.S. has plan to secure Pakistan Nukes if country falls to Taliban” was published on Stratfor. The article revealed that special commando units of Joint Special Operation Command have the tasks of taking over and securing Nukes Arsenal in case of paralyses of Pakistan.
On the other hand on May 17, 2009 President Obama while addressing a news conference in White House said Pakistan Armed Forces has the capability of protecting the nuclear assets but at the same time also said that all options have to be kept open. Such type of statements of American top brass once our security forces are committed in elimination of militancy is not understood and would be taken as defaming Pakistan, its forces and intelligence agencies. Therefore Swat operation is genuinely a huge test for the nation, government and security forces.
On May 17, 2009 Chief of Army Staff (COAS) General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani while commenting on remarks from various quarters on the level of Low Intensity Conflict (LIC) training of the Pakistani troops and about their shifting from eastern borders has said that Pakistani Army does not require any generalised foreign training for countering insurgency, except for much specialised weapons, equipment and high technology. He also maintained that strategic decisions regarding where, when and how many troops were deployed in each operation or sector was always a Pakistani decision, based on objective analysis and “our full understanding of threat spectrum”. President, Prime Minister and foreign office spokesman too categorically rejected western media campaign and American concern over Pakistan nukes and said that our Army is capable enough to protect our nuclear assets.
Major General Athar Abbas, Director General Inter Services Public Relations expressed in various press briefing that Security Forces are trying to reinstate peace in Swat, Matta and Mangora. He added that forces have also entered in the towns of local militants heads. General said that the security forces are hopeful of establishing peace in the Swat valley and would not let these militants succeed in their designs. Earlier he also discarded the BBC report over and declared it rubbish.
The inhabitants of Swat and Malakand valleys were in the state of horror and panic as a result of the radical’s ruthless actions. So far more than 1700 girls school have been destroyed, as a result of current Swat operation over 25 lacs individuals have been internally displaced which are being settled in Peshawar, Noshera, Mardan, Swabi and other parts of the countries. Pakistan would be requiring $600 to $800 to tackle the world’s largest internal exodus of 2.5 million people in the wake of full scale war against terrorists in Malkand Division. More than 1000 troops have scarified their lives in eradication of militancy from FATA and Swat area. On the name of religion, militants were hanging the bodies on trees and shooting down innocent people. These belligerents are in the possession of rocket launchers, mines, anti crafts guns, ammunition and modern guns along with latest vehicles. These are being funded from across and drug trafficking smugglers . I feel not any hesitation while saying that militants and their so called leaders are being sponsored and launched in FATA, Swat and other areas by RAW with the tenet support of CIA and Mossad. The unrest of Baluchistan, Bajuar and political instability are directly linked with the present militancy of Swat. The malevolent propaganda of Jews media is targeting Pakistan Military Forces, its agencies and nuclear assets to hit Pakistani solidarity since their masters knew that direct attack on our country is not possible. In short operation Swat is being progressing well and nation has been awakened and now asking her forces for rooting out the militancy on permanent basis. ”Ulema Musiakh” (Islamic Scholars) Convention and “Grand Jerga” held at Islamabad and Peshawar have condemned the Taliban militancy and have also gave “FATWA” (act against Islamic teaching) against the suicidal missions and declared it illegal (“Haram”). They favoured the on going operation and vowed to fight against Taliban shoulder to shoulder with Pakistan Security Forces. Concluding, I must say that there is a need to display solidarity against common enemy of the society and government should also make a plan of developing the region. The war against terrorism must be concluded till its ultimate end and no negotiation are recommended till de-weaponization of the area.
Labels: Militants, Pakistan Army Operation, Swat Operation, Taliban, Terrorism
posted @ 12:32 PM,
,
Taliban move forces eastward into Battagram
The Long War Journal
By Bill RoggioMay 17, 2009
As the fighting between the Pakistani military and the Taliban heats up in the war-torn district of Swat, the Taliban has moved a small force eastward into the district of Battagram.
More than 150 Taliban fighters advanced into the northern district on May 14, linked up with local supporters, and attacked a police checkpoint in Batta Mori. The Taliban force quickly captured the four policemen on duty, took control of the checkpoint, and seized the policemen’s rifles and ammunition.
The Taliban then threatened to torture and behead the policemen, according to a report in The News. The police were released after they promised to quit their jobs. The Taliban then torched the checkpoint.
The checkpoint was established to block a Taliban advance into the district after fighting broke out in the neighboring districts of Shangla and Buner, as well as in nearby Swat and Dir.
Unnamed Pakistani sources close to President Zardari claimed the Army was moving six brigades of troops from the border with India to help halt the Taliban movement from the combat zone. But President Zardari himself contradicted these reports and said there were no more troops available for the fighting in Swat. General Pervez Kiyani, the Chief of Army Staff, confirmed Zardari's statement when he told parliament that no troops would be moved from the Indian border despite guarantees by the international community that India would not attack Pakistan.
US military and intelligence officials said the Taliban attack in Battagram highlights the disorganization and lack of planning behind the Swat operation.
“Clearly the military launched the Swat operation due to international pressure a need to show progress against the Taliban as President Zardari visited the US, and not out fear of the Taliban’s advance,” a US intelligence official told The Long War Journal.
“If they were serious, they would have deployed the forces to block any potential Taliban retreat or redeployment prior to kicking off the operation,” the official continued. “Instead they talked of moving forces after the fighting began, but then again we’re not even convinced they are moving significant forces.”
Other officials said the Battagram incident shows the military isn’t serious about the operation. “They put four police officers at an outpost when its well known the Taliban are attacking in large formations?,” a military officer who is tracking the situation in Pakistan said in disbelief. “Have they been paying attention to what has happened in their own country over the past few years?”
The Taliban have expanded eastward from Swat since the government agreed to a peace agreement with the Taliban that would impose an end to the fighting and impose sharia, or Islamic law, last February. Hundreds of Taliban fighters poured into Buner and Shangla and took over the districts, while advance parties have moved into Haripur and Mansehra, just on the outskirts of Islamabad. Unconfirmed reports indicate the Taliban have established a presence in Swabi as well.
Meanwhile, the Pakistani military said it is advancing toward the main town of Mingora in Swat, where the Taliban are said to have dug in for a siege. Between 100,000 and 200,000 civilians are said to be trapped in Mingora. Previously the military claimed it had surrounded Mingora.
The Pakistani military currently has an estimated 15,000 troops in Swat, while the Taliban forces are numbered at between 5,000 to 7,000 fighters. The military claims that more than 1,000 Taliban fighters have been killed since the fighting began in late April, but US officials are highly skeptical of these reports. Today, the military claimed 47 Taliban fighters were killed during fighting over the past 24 hours.
Labels: Battagram, Militants, Pakistan Army Operation, Swat Operation, Taliban, Terrorism
posted @ 12:27 PM,
,
Pakistani Army Warns Civilians as Soldiers Advance on Taliban Town
By VOA News17 May 2009
The Pakistani army is urging civilians to stay away from militants as security forces advance on a key Taliban stronghold.
Troops moved into the northwestern towns of Matta and Kanju Sunday, drawing closer to the Swat Valley's main town, Mingora, where thousands of insurgents are believed to be based.
Security officials say they have relaxed a curfew and are urging people to leave the towns. The army is also asking people to help troops identify militants, saying they will only be defeated when people rise up against them.
The military says it has killed 25 militants in the last 24 hours. Interior Minister Rehman Malik told reporters Sunday that 1,000 insurgents had been killed since the latest offensive began last month.
The numbers have not been independently verified, because the government is banning journalists from areas where fighting is taking place.
President Asif Ali Zardari says the Swat Valley offensive is part of a bigger mission.
He told Britain's Sunday Times newspaper that military action would follow in Waziristan, another militant stronghold on the Afghan border.
The United Nations Refugee Agency says the military operation has caused at least 1.1 million people to flee their homes in recent weeks.
The agency's high commissioner, Antonio Guterres, is calling for massive international support to help the displaced.
Labels: IDPs, Militants, Pakistan Army Operation, Refugees, Swat Operation, Taliban, Terrorism
posted @ 12:22 PM,
,
Female IDPs blame Taliban for their hardships
* Say Taliban destroyed their children’s schools, prevented them from going to jobs
Daily Times, Pakistan
Monday, May 18, 2009
By Akhtar Amin
MARDAN: Displaced women from conflict-hit Swat rejected the Taliban form of sharia, saying it was due to the Taliban that they faced hardships and were suffering in their own homeland.
During a visit to Mardan’s Jalala and Sheikh Shahzad camps set up for internally displaced persons (IDPs), women lashed out at the Taliban holding them responsible for bombing their daughters’ schools, ruthlessly beheading their sons and security forces personnel and stopping women from their jobs in the district.
“Today, we are spending miserable lives in camps and are homeless because of the Taliban,” said Naoreen, 40, a mother of five, living in a tent at the Jalala camp along with the children.
She said the women in Swat had been living a peaceful life in accordance with sharia, but the Taliban had begun targeting women in the district, in the past four years.
“Two of my daughters stopped going to school after the Taliban issued threats. Women were forced to stop their jobs and remain indoors,” she said.
Shazia, 50, another displaced woman from the Charbagh area of Swat strongly condemned the Taliban for their miseries in the camps. “First, the Taliban destroyed our children’s schools. Now they are slaughtering people and looting houses,” she said.
Rukhsana, a teenaged resident of Barikot in Swat said she was now in Jalala camp instead of in her school. “ The Taliban shattered my hopes to become a doctor. The future of thousands of female students in Swat is as dark as mine,” the girl added.
Some male IDPs from Swat – despite facing difficulties in camps and having had their houses destroyed in the operation – showed sympathies for the Taliban. “Taliban are not bad people. They were only struggling for the implementation of sharia in Malakand division,” said Mohammad Islam.
Home National
Daily Times, Pakistan
Monday, May 18, 2009
By Akhtar Amin
MARDAN: Displaced women from conflict-hit Swat rejected the Taliban form of sharia, saying it was due to the Taliban that they faced hardships and were suffering in their own homeland.
During a visit to Mardan’s Jalala and Sheikh Shahzad camps set up for internally displaced persons (IDPs), women lashed out at the Taliban holding them responsible for bombing their daughters’ schools, ruthlessly beheading their sons and security forces personnel and stopping women from their jobs in the district.
“Today, we are spending miserable lives in camps and are homeless because of the Taliban,” said Naoreen, 40, a mother of five, living in a tent at the Jalala camp along with the children.
She said the women in Swat had been living a peaceful life in accordance with sharia, but the Taliban had begun targeting women in the district, in the past four years.
“Two of my daughters stopped going to school after the Taliban issued threats. Women were forced to stop their jobs and remain indoors,” she said.
Shazia, 50, another displaced woman from the Charbagh area of Swat strongly condemned the Taliban for their miseries in the camps. “First, the Taliban destroyed our children’s schools. Now they are slaughtering people and looting houses,” she said.
Rukhsana, a teenaged resident of Barikot in Swat said she was now in Jalala camp instead of in her school. “ The Taliban shattered my hopes to become a doctor. The future of thousands of female students in Swat is as dark as mine,” the girl added.
Some male IDPs from Swat – despite facing difficulties in camps and having had their houses destroyed in the operation – showed sympathies for the Taliban. “Taliban are not bad people. They were only struggling for the implementation of sharia in Malakand division,” said Mohammad Islam.
Home National
Labels: Militants, Pakistan Army Operation, Plight of Women, Swat Operation, Taliban, Terrorism
posted @ 12:19 PM,
,
Ulema reject Taliban sharia, back operation
Daily Times, Pakistan
Monday, May 18, 2009
* Ulema convention declares suicide attacks and beheadings haram
By Mahtab Bashir
ISLAMABAD: Hundreds of Sunni scholars on Sunday rejected the Taliban brand of sharia and fully endorsed the ongoing military operation in Swat and other areas of the country.
A convention organised by Jamiat Ulema-e-Pakistan (JUP) Fazal Karim Group at the Convention Centre unanimously adopted a nine-point resolution, rejecting the Taliban’s version of sharia and beheading of people in Malakand and fully backing the ongoing military operation.
The resolution demanded an end to the assassinations of clerics, adding shrines should be cleared of terrorists. It said the pro-US foreign policy must be discarded. The resolution said all provinces should be granted sovereignty as per the 1973 constitution.
The resolution also condemned the ostentatious ways of the country’s elite and declared suicide attacks and beheading haram
Monday, May 18, 2009
* Ulema convention declares suicide attacks and beheadings haram
By Mahtab Bashir
ISLAMABAD: Hundreds of Sunni scholars on Sunday rejected the Taliban brand of sharia and fully endorsed the ongoing military operation in Swat and other areas of the country.
A convention organised by Jamiat Ulema-e-Pakistan (JUP) Fazal Karim Group at the Convention Centre unanimously adopted a nine-point resolution, rejecting the Taliban’s version of sharia and beheading of people in Malakand and fully backing the ongoing military operation.
The resolution demanded an end to the assassinations of clerics, adding shrines should be cleared of terrorists. It said the pro-US foreign policy must be discarded. The resolution said all provinces should be granted sovereignty as per the 1973 constitution.
The resolution also condemned the ostentatious ways of the country’s elite and declared suicide attacks and beheading haram
Labels: Islamist Parties, Militants, Pakistan Army Operation, Swat Operation, Taliban, Terrorism, Ulema
posted @ 12:17 PM,
,
Pakistan - wrong tactic, wrong battle
SanFrancisco Chronicle
Joel Brinkley
Sunday, May 17, 2009
Imagine for a moment that the United States had used a different military tactic to drive militants out of Baghdad during the surge last year. Instead of pursuing Gen. David Petraeus' counter-insurgency strategy, what if the military had ringed the city with heavy artillery and fired at will to drive the insurgents out, while advanced fighter jets and helicopter gun ships fired hundreds of missiles into residential areas.
Imagine the carnage. You can picture many thousands of residents fleeing the city. No military would pursue a brutal and foolhardy strategy like that, right?
Think again.
That's exactly how the Pakistani army is fighting the Taliban in the Swat Valley and surrounding communities. That's why the United Nations reported that more than 800,000 residents of the areas under attack have run for their lives since the offensive began. Antonio Guterres, the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees, declared a refugee crisis in Pakistan and described the situation as "a huge and rapidly unfolding emergency which is going to require considerable resources beyond those that currently exist in the region."
Pakistani newspapers have offered only scattered reports of civilian casualties; journalists are not allowed into the area. The Dawn, Islamabad's English language paper, noted, for example, that "in Buner district, one minor was killed and another suffered injuries when a mortar shell hit a residence." But the paper also reported the military's claimed body counts.
"At least 44 militants were killed when jet fighters, helicopter gun ships and artillery shelled different areas in Swat, Dir and Malakand," the paper reported. So much for counter-insurgency.
Should Americans expect better? Of course. During the Bush administration, the United States spent more than $10 billion to train and equip the military so that it could pursue an aggressive campaign against the Taliban and al Qaeda in Pakistan's lawless tribal areas. That was money flushed down the drain. As if the Pentagon had not learned a thing, last month the Defense Department announced a new, $3 billion plan to train and equip Pakistan's military.
The money is to be spent on counter-insurgency training and equipment, such as night-vision goggles. Perhaps you saw some of the TV reports from Baghdad last year showing American troops creeping around dangerous street corners in Baghdad at night, looking for insurgents through the greenish screens of their night-vision goggles.
Well, in Pakistan, soldiers would use those expensive American goggles to find their way to the ammunition boxes so they could reload their artillery pieces.
In one sense Pakistan's strategy is not too surprising. The army's all-encompassing preoccupation is the next war with India, should it ever come. No soldier or officer is admired or promoted except for achievements related to that theoretical conflict. In fact, while the Taliban were seizing control of the Buner district last month, coming to within 70 miles of the capital, the bulk of Pakistan's forces remained at the southeastern border with India, poised for the possibility of attack.
As the district fell to the Taliban, not a single soldier budged. They behaved as if the problem were occurring in some other country. Only an international outcry - and the realization that President Asif Ali Zardari would have to defend himself when he met with President Obama the following week - finally provoked the army to act.
Last week, Richard Holbrooke, the special envoy to the region, found himself in an uncomfortable position, trying to defend Pakistan's counter-insurgency strategy before hostile members of Congress. Rep. Gary Ackerman, a Democrat from New York, asked him how on earth an F-16 fighter jet could be used as a counter-insurgency weapon.
Holbrooke said, "I am told by F-16 pilots that F-16s with modern avionics can be used as a counter-insurgency tool, but quite honestly, it requires very sophisticated training. They did use aging F-16s in the battles in Swat." In other words, the planes did not have up-to-date avionics, and the pilots were not properly trained.
Pakistan's army is attacking insurgents embedded in their own cities in the same way they would go after advancing Indian troops because that is all they have ever been trained to do. What's more, Pakistani generals have been clear that they will not move substantial numbers of their troops from the border unless India offers security assurances.
Those generals ought to think this through. If substantial portions of Pakistan fall to the Taliban, placing the nation's nuclear weapons arsenal at risk, what do you think India might do then?
Joel Brinkley is a professor of journalism at Stanford University and a former foreign policy correspondent for the New York Times. To comment to him, e-mail brinkley@foreign-matters.com.
Joel Brinkley
Sunday, May 17, 2009
Imagine for a moment that the United States had used a different military tactic to drive militants out of Baghdad during the surge last year. Instead of pursuing Gen. David Petraeus' counter-insurgency strategy, what if the military had ringed the city with heavy artillery and fired at will to drive the insurgents out, while advanced fighter jets and helicopter gun ships fired hundreds of missiles into residential areas.
Imagine the carnage. You can picture many thousands of residents fleeing the city. No military would pursue a brutal and foolhardy strategy like that, right?
Think again.
That's exactly how the Pakistani army is fighting the Taliban in the Swat Valley and surrounding communities. That's why the United Nations reported that more than 800,000 residents of the areas under attack have run for their lives since the offensive began. Antonio Guterres, the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees, declared a refugee crisis in Pakistan and described the situation as "a huge and rapidly unfolding emergency which is going to require considerable resources beyond those that currently exist in the region."
Pakistani newspapers have offered only scattered reports of civilian casualties; journalists are not allowed into the area. The Dawn, Islamabad's English language paper, noted, for example, that "in Buner district, one minor was killed and another suffered injuries when a mortar shell hit a residence." But the paper also reported the military's claimed body counts.
"At least 44 militants were killed when jet fighters, helicopter gun ships and artillery shelled different areas in Swat, Dir and Malakand," the paper reported. So much for counter-insurgency.
Should Americans expect better? Of course. During the Bush administration, the United States spent more than $10 billion to train and equip the military so that it could pursue an aggressive campaign against the Taliban and al Qaeda in Pakistan's lawless tribal areas. That was money flushed down the drain. As if the Pentagon had not learned a thing, last month the Defense Department announced a new, $3 billion plan to train and equip Pakistan's military.
The money is to be spent on counter-insurgency training and equipment, such as night-vision goggles. Perhaps you saw some of the TV reports from Baghdad last year showing American troops creeping around dangerous street corners in Baghdad at night, looking for insurgents through the greenish screens of their night-vision goggles.
Well, in Pakistan, soldiers would use those expensive American goggles to find their way to the ammunition boxes so they could reload their artillery pieces.
In one sense Pakistan's strategy is not too surprising. The army's all-encompassing preoccupation is the next war with India, should it ever come. No soldier or officer is admired or promoted except for achievements related to that theoretical conflict. In fact, while the Taliban were seizing control of the Buner district last month, coming to within 70 miles of the capital, the bulk of Pakistan's forces remained at the southeastern border with India, poised for the possibility of attack.
As the district fell to the Taliban, not a single soldier budged. They behaved as if the problem were occurring in some other country. Only an international outcry - and the realization that President Asif Ali Zardari would have to defend himself when he met with President Obama the following week - finally provoked the army to act.
Last week, Richard Holbrooke, the special envoy to the region, found himself in an uncomfortable position, trying to defend Pakistan's counter-insurgency strategy before hostile members of Congress. Rep. Gary Ackerman, a Democrat from New York, asked him how on earth an F-16 fighter jet could be used as a counter-insurgency weapon.
Holbrooke said, "I am told by F-16 pilots that F-16s with modern avionics can be used as a counter-insurgency tool, but quite honestly, it requires very sophisticated training. They did use aging F-16s in the battles in Swat." In other words, the planes did not have up-to-date avionics, and the pilots were not properly trained.
Pakistan's army is attacking insurgents embedded in their own cities in the same way they would go after advancing Indian troops because that is all they have ever been trained to do. What's more, Pakistani generals have been clear that they will not move substantial numbers of their troops from the border unless India offers security assurances.
Those generals ought to think this through. If substantial portions of Pakistan fall to the Taliban, placing the nation's nuclear weapons arsenal at risk, what do you think India might do then?
Joel Brinkley is a professor of journalism at Stanford University and a former foreign policy correspondent for the New York Times. To comment to him, e-mail brinkley@foreign-matters.com.
Labels: Militants, Pakistan Army Operation, Swat Operation, Taliban, Terrorism
posted @ 11:02 AM,
,
Linked futures
Sunday, May 17, 2009
Analysis, Daily Times, Pakistan
Dr Hasan-Askari Rizvi
It is disappointing that some parties, especially the Islamists, cannot overcome their narrow partisan interests, which makes it difficult for them to fathom the gravest ever threat to Pakistan’s internal harmony and security
The on-going Swat operation is the most difficult internal security assignment for Pakistan’s security forces in a long time. The army is leading the operation with determination to re-establish the authority of state in the areas controlled by the Taliban. This will demonstrate if the Army has upgraded its counter-insurgency capacity. The outcome of this operation will also have implications for the future direction of Pakistani state and society. If this operation fails, it will weaken Pakistan’s resolve and capacity to engage in counter-insurgency in the tribal areas.
Withdrawal of the army and paramilitary forces without restoring the authority of the state is not an option; that would amount to surrendering Swat to the Taliban, and would encourage such elements elsewhere to pursue similar action against the state. This will also give impetus to various Islamist hard-liners in mainland Pakistan to impose their religious and cultural preferences on others.
Pakistan is engaged in an intense struggle to restore its soul, and faces the danger of being overwhelmed by religious and cultural extremism backed by violence. Given Pakistan’s regional, ethnic and cultural diversity, individuals and groups cannot be allowed to operate as self-styled vigilantes to enforce their socio-cultural and political preferences. That would not only destroy the fabric of Pakistani state and society but also invite external intervention by those who would like to contain the fallout from the ascendancy of extremists.
Read more
Labels: Islamist Parties, Islamization, Pakistan Army Operation, Swat Operation
posted @ 11:11 AM,
,
APC: a ‘second thoughts’ conference?
Saturday, May 16, 2009
Editorial, Daily Times, Pakistan
May 16, 2009
On Monday, the government will try to persuade the opposition inside and outside parliament that the military action in Malakand Division should be allowed to go on. Before that our army chief General Ashfaq Kayani would have given them an in-camera briefing on how the military operations in FATA and Malakand are faring, after the army’s earlier declaration that the Taliban no longer control any area.
The APC has been convened after a strident demand made “in retrospect” by the opposition inside a parliament that has apparently changed its mind for the third time. The APC call was ignored when the parliament supported the military operation last week. But after the refugees started pouring out of Swat and other places, the mood changed back to the APC. So what will be the intent behind the APC?
Normally a government risks an APC when it knows that it will obtain a policy consensus out of it. If this consensus is not obtained, what are the options open to the government? It can either ignore the APC and go against the “nay-sayers” in it, relying more on its own popularity than on an all-parties support, or call off the operation. Will the APC be any help on Monday?
Read more
May 16, 2009
On Monday, the government will try to persuade the opposition inside and outside parliament that the military action in Malakand Division should be allowed to go on. Before that our army chief General Ashfaq Kayani would have given them an in-camera briefing on how the military operations in FATA and Malakand are faring, after the army’s earlier declaration that the Taliban no longer control any area.
The APC has been convened after a strident demand made “in retrospect” by the opposition inside a parliament that has apparently changed its mind for the third time. The APC call was ignored when the parliament supported the military operation last week. But after the refugees started pouring out of Swat and other places, the mood changed back to the APC. So what will be the intent behind the APC?
Normally a government risks an APC when it knows that it will obtain a policy consensus out of it. If this consensus is not obtained, what are the options open to the government? It can either ignore the APC and go against the “nay-sayers” in it, relying more on its own popularity than on an all-parties support, or call off the operation. Will the APC be any help on Monday?
Read more
Labels: APC, Militants, Pakistan, Pakistan Army Operation, Swat, Taliban, Terrorism
posted @ 11:52 AM,
,
U.S. drones tracked militants in Pakistan
Members of banned group help Pakistan war refugees
By RIAZ KHAN – 1 day ago
MARDAN, Pakistan (AP) — Members of a charity banned for its alleged links to the Mumbai terror attack have resurfaced in northwestern Pakistan under a new name, distributing food and medicine Thursday among thousands of refugees from the government's bloody fight against the Taliban.
The makeover of Jamaat-ud-Dawa raises awkward questions for the embattled government, which has been trying hard to convince its skeptical Western sponsors that it is serious about taming Islamist extremism.
...
"We have sent 2,000 of our members to help our brothers and sisters," Mian Adil, deputy chairman of Falah and a former member of Jamaat, told The Associated Press. "We are silently helping the homeless, hungry and needy people, and let us do our work without maligning us."
The U.S. and the U.N. say Jamaat-ud-Dawa is a front for Lashkar-e-Taiba, the militant group accused of planning and carrying out last year's attacks in India's financial hub, Mumbai, which left 166 people dead and hundreds more wounded
Read more
By RIAZ KHAN – 1 day ago
MARDAN, Pakistan (AP) — Members of a charity banned for its alleged links to the Mumbai terror attack have resurfaced in northwestern Pakistan under a new name, distributing food and medicine Thursday among thousands of refugees from the government's bloody fight against the Taliban.
The makeover of Jamaat-ud-Dawa raises awkward questions for the embattled government, which has been trying hard to convince its skeptical Western sponsors that it is serious about taming Islamist extremism.
...
"We have sent 2,000 of our members to help our brothers and sisters," Mian Adil, deputy chairman of Falah and a former member of Jamaat, told The Associated Press. "We are silently helping the homeless, hungry and needy people, and let us do our work without maligning us."
The U.S. and the U.N. say Jamaat-ud-Dawa is a front for Lashkar-e-Taiba, the militant group accused of planning and carrying out last year's attacks in India's financial hub, Mumbai, which left 166 people dead and hundreds more wounded
Read more
Labels: Pakistan, Pakistan Army Operation, Refugees, Swat
posted @ 11:13 AM,
,
Where’s the national spirit? (Army Operation in Swat and IDPs)
Friday, May 15, 2009
Editorial, Dawn, Pakistan
May 15, 2009
HUNDREDS of thousands of internally displaced persons are fleeing the strife-torn areas of Swat, Buner and other parts of the Malakand division while reportedly thousands more remain caught in the crossfire between the TTP insurgents and the military. The plight of these refugees constitutes a humanitarian crisis that may prove to be the litmus test of how far the government and citizenry support those who are the first and most immediate victims of the horror unleashed by the extremists. Unlike the overwhelming outpouring of sympathy and aid after the 2005 Kashmir earthquake, the current crisis is marked by a lack of either material support or societal solidarity for the IDPs. Yet they are no less deserving of assistance and compassion than the victims of the earthquake — perhaps more so, considering that natural disasters cannot be prevented but the current tragedy is a result of a crisis that is political in nature and as such man-made.
The aid required by the IDPs includes, most immediately, food, shelter, clothing and sanitation. In the longer-term — given the uncertain security situation in their hometowns — affected families will require rehabilitation through employment opportunities, education and absorption into society at large. The primary responsibility for this falls upon the state, for it is incumbent upon the government of the day to protect the life and livelihood of the citizenry. Moreover, only the state has sufficient resources and outreach for long-term rehabilitation. This does not mean, however, that civil society can be absolved. Citizens across the country who have so far not been directly affected by the Taliban’s activities must come to the aid of their brethren. This can be done through making financial and material contributions to private and governmental agencies that are working towards the IDPs’ welfare. Then, the issue of the refugees must be de-linked from ethnic and political concerns since these undermine societal solidarity and further intensify the misery of the IDPs. As citizens of Pakistan, the refugees have a right to protection and assistance offered by not just the state and but also fellow citizens. Most importantly, perhaps, civil society must lobby with the government and its institutions for a successful, speedy end to the military operation and a clean-up of militant-infested areas. The government’s writ must be extended immediately to all its territories, for slow or evasive action against the insurgents may not only give the latter time to regroup, it may also encourage other militant organisations with intentions to spread anarchy.
May 15, 2009
HUNDREDS of thousands of internally displaced persons are fleeing the strife-torn areas of Swat, Buner and other parts of the Malakand division while reportedly thousands more remain caught in the crossfire between the TTP insurgents and the military. The plight of these refugees constitutes a humanitarian crisis that may prove to be the litmus test of how far the government and citizenry support those who are the first and most immediate victims of the horror unleashed by the extremists. Unlike the overwhelming outpouring of sympathy and aid after the 2005 Kashmir earthquake, the current crisis is marked by a lack of either material support or societal solidarity for the IDPs. Yet they are no less deserving of assistance and compassion than the victims of the earthquake — perhaps more so, considering that natural disasters cannot be prevented but the current tragedy is a result of a crisis that is political in nature and as such man-made.
The aid required by the IDPs includes, most immediately, food, shelter, clothing and sanitation. In the longer-term — given the uncertain security situation in their hometowns — affected families will require rehabilitation through employment opportunities, education and absorption into society at large. The primary responsibility for this falls upon the state, for it is incumbent upon the government of the day to protect the life and livelihood of the citizenry. Moreover, only the state has sufficient resources and outreach for long-term rehabilitation. This does not mean, however, that civil society can be absolved. Citizens across the country who have so far not been directly affected by the Taliban’s activities must come to the aid of their brethren. This can be done through making financial and material contributions to private and governmental agencies that are working towards the IDPs’ welfare. Then, the issue of the refugees must be de-linked from ethnic and political concerns since these undermine societal solidarity and further intensify the misery of the IDPs. As citizens of Pakistan, the refugees have a right to protection and assistance offered by not just the state and but also fellow citizens. Most importantly, perhaps, civil society must lobby with the government and its institutions for a successful, speedy end to the military operation and a clean-up of militant-infested areas. The government’s writ must be extended immediately to all its territories, for slow or evasive action against the insurgents may not only give the latter time to regroup, it may also encourage other militant organisations with intentions to spread anarchy.
Labels: Pakistan Army Operation, Refugees, Swat, Taliban, Terrorism
posted @ 11:58 AM,
,
The act of killing (Army Operation in Swat)
Daily Times, Pakistan
May 15, 2009
INSIGHT: Ejaz Haider
One cannot dismiss the plight of anyone, even a single individual. But neither can the policy-maker sit back and allow a situation to get out of hand. So while the heart bleeds, as it must, the hand must wield what is necessary
Here is a dilemma. How would I report from Swat at this point? Here’s the intro:
“The military operation in Swat continues and security forces are notching successes against the Taliban extremists. Public opinion in the area seems to have turned against the Taliban and that fact, combined with good intelligence and effective planning and execution, has allowed the security forces to gain ground against the Taliban.”
Clear, concise, straight, simple, deadpan?
Is it really that simple? What, for instance, does a military operation entail? What does notching successes mean? What does gaining ground against the Taliban mean?
Use of the military means the use of force. Use of force means to capture, maim or kill. Shorn of any value judgement or without taking any partisan position on either side of an armed conflict, it means one human being using a lethal weapon to take the life of another human being.
Read more
May 15, 2009
INSIGHT: Ejaz Haider
One cannot dismiss the plight of anyone, even a single individual. But neither can the policy-maker sit back and allow a situation to get out of hand. So while the heart bleeds, as it must, the hand must wield what is necessary
Here is a dilemma. How would I report from Swat at this point? Here’s the intro:
“The military operation in Swat continues and security forces are notching successes against the Taliban extremists. Public opinion in the area seems to have turned against the Taliban and that fact, combined with good intelligence and effective planning and execution, has allowed the security forces to gain ground against the Taliban.”
Clear, concise, straight, simple, deadpan?
Is it really that simple? What, for instance, does a military operation entail? What does notching successes mean? What does gaining ground against the Taliban mean?
Use of the military means the use of force. Use of force means to capture, maim or kill. Shorn of any value judgement or without taking any partisan position on either side of an armed conflict, it means one human being using a lethal weapon to take the life of another human being.
Read more
Labels: Pakistan Army Operation, Swat, Taliban, Terrorism
posted @ 11:47 AM,
,
Politicking on refugees (Army Operation in Swat Region)
Editorial, The Daily Times, Pakistan
May 15, 2009
As the refugee problem intensified in Malakand Division after the military operation there, PMLN legislators in the National Assembly decided on Wednesday to criticise the government for not consulting parliament before launching the offensive. The answer from the PPP MNAs was that the government had no other option after the failure of the peace deal with the Taliban. Is this the beginning of a policy of isolating the government on a national issue of paramount importance for narrow party political ends?
A PMLN leader delivered a hard-hitting speech favouring the street rumour — and the line adopted by the opposition outside the parliament — that “the government had launched the military operation on the US dictate in order to earn dollars”. Surprisingly, the same leader, at a loss for a solution of his own, insisted that the government should still try “a negotiated settlement of the dispute”.
Read more
Labels: IDPs, Pakistan Army Operation, Refugees, Swat, Taliban, Terrorism
posted @ 11:42 AM,
,
Beggars and choosers (Swat Region IDPS)
Editorial, The News International,Pakistan
Friday, May 15, 2009
We have begun to see an effort from the government, NGOs and others to persuade people to open their hearts to the people displaced from the northern areas, whose number now exceeds 700,000. Aid centres have indeed been set up in major cities, and students, young doctors and other groups have begun collecting goods to send up to camps or to families hosting IDPs. The effort will no doubt expand over the coming days. Philanthropy is a well-established trait among citizens and many are anxious to give. Some indeed have already been travelling to camps to see what help they can offer on the ground. But in all this there is also a need to exercise sensitivity. Reports say that among the items sent to the IDPs have been old, quite obviously dirty and in some cases badly damaged clothes. These have been cast aside with considerable anger. The people forced out of their homes are after all not beggars. Most have lived in dignity, even if their earnings are limited, for most of their lives. They need now too to be treated with respect. Pride is the one thing they still retain. It must not be snatched away from them through insensitivity or a desire to show off how much is being given away. This too was a factor we saw up close following the 2005 quake, with many – individuals and organizations alike – seeking to claim credit for what they sent, rather than to do so silently – in the true spirit of giving.
Other steps too need to be taken. The stage has come where needs should be ascertained so that goods that are most urgently needed can be dispatched. The services of female doctors are too urgently needed as are summer clothes, supplies of flour and milk for children. The experience from 2005 must be put to good use now. The relief effort must be expanded. But it must also be organized so that the people it is intended to help truly benefit and we do not see huge wastages of goods and of effort.
Friday, May 15, 2009
We have begun to see an effort from the government, NGOs and others to persuade people to open their hearts to the people displaced from the northern areas, whose number now exceeds 700,000. Aid centres have indeed been set up in major cities, and students, young doctors and other groups have begun collecting goods to send up to camps or to families hosting IDPs. The effort will no doubt expand over the coming days. Philanthropy is a well-established trait among citizens and many are anxious to give. Some indeed have already been travelling to camps to see what help they can offer on the ground. But in all this there is also a need to exercise sensitivity. Reports say that among the items sent to the IDPs have been old, quite obviously dirty and in some cases badly damaged clothes. These have been cast aside with considerable anger. The people forced out of their homes are after all not beggars. Most have lived in dignity, even if their earnings are limited, for most of their lives. They need now too to be treated with respect. Pride is the one thing they still retain. It must not be snatched away from them through insensitivity or a desire to show off how much is being given away. This too was a factor we saw up close following the 2005 quake, with many – individuals and organizations alike – seeking to claim credit for what they sent, rather than to do so silently – in the true spirit of giving.
Other steps too need to be taken. The stage has come where needs should be ascertained so that goods that are most urgently needed can be dispatched. The services of female doctors are too urgently needed as are summer clothes, supplies of flour and milk for children. The experience from 2005 must be put to good use now. The relief effort must be expanded. But it must also be organized so that the people it is intended to help truly benefit and we do not see huge wastages of goods and of effort.
Labels: IDPs, Pakistan Army Operation, Swat, Taliban, Terrorism
posted @ 11:33 AM,
,
