In his ever first interview with Dr. Shahid Masood in “Meray Mutabiq” here on Friday, he said that Baitullah Masud, Fazlullah, Osama bin Laden and Mullah Omar are those people who do not ready to accept moderate and democratic Pakistan rather want to destabilize it.

When asked that the name of militants are not disclosed killed in the drone attacks, he said that Islamabad is responsible to answer the question as the US is working with it against the terrorism but everybody knows these people like Baitullah Masud, Fazlullah, Osama bin Laden and Mullah Omar who penetrated into Pakistani society to threat Pakistan.

He went on saying that the news published in some sections of the US media regarding secret agreement between Bush-Musharraf administrations on the drone attacks as Islamabad will only condemn the attacks but to know the truth it is better to ask such questions from the previous administrations.

He said that it is very necessary for people of Pakistan to know the truth about these attacks as they are protesting against them both at the public and the parliament level; therefore, the issued should be clarified.

He, however, rejected Islamabad’s claims that the attack are creating hatred among Pakistanis against the US saying that the US came here to help Pakistan against militants who are posing threats to integrity and ideology of Pakistan.

When asked regarding the US reservations about ISI, he said that ISI Chief Lieutenant General Ahmad Shuja Pasha is doing everything in the interest of his country. Rejecting the news published in media that Lieutenant General Pasha declined to meet him and Admiral Mike Mullen during their last visit to Islamabad, Holbrooke said that he and Mullen held meeting with him and on another occasion he and ISI Chief discussed situation of the region in detail.

Responding another question regarding tension in Pak-US relations, he said that there is no such difference between Pak-US administrations over the war on terror as both the countries are combating with the common enemy. He said that all terrorist are jointly working against Pakistan to destabilize it; therefore, without joint Pak-US efforts the terrorists cannot be defeated. He went on saying that the terrorist are not only threat to Pakistan and US but also to India as well, the Mumbai incident is the clear example of it.

He said that Pakistan is the only country which leadership was invited twice during last three month which shows the close Pak-US close ties. President Obama is eager to meet with President Zardari during his up coming visit in May.

When asked about US role regarding restoration of Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry on the night of March 15, he said that the US played mediatory role between PML-N and PPP and asked them to work together for betterment of the country. He said that at last President Zardari took positive decision of restoring Chieef Justice Chaudhry which normalized the whole situation.

Answering to a question regarding the US dealing with whom—- President Zardari or General Kayani, he said that it is exactly difficult to answer as everybody has different approach in democracy. He, however, rejected the autonomous image of Pak army saying that General Kayani and General Pasha are completely supporting to the government.

To another question about Indian role, he said that Indian is the second largest country of the world; so, it is necessary to talk to Pakistan’s neighbors including China and Afghanistan to resolve its issue. He, however, said that US never urged India to do any thing in Afghanistan.-SANA

Sindh Governor Dr. Ishrat?ul? Ebad Khan, Chief Minister Syed Qaim Ali Shah were also present on the occasion. The PM said it was a wrong impression that Pakistan does not have its policy on war on terror. “Our policy is ready,” he said adding that Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi will visit the United States in the first week of next month to share this policy with the American administration.

PM’s Advisor on Interior Affairs, DG ISI and other relevant officials of law enforcement will accompany the foreign minister. President Asif Ali Zardari might also visit US in this regard, he said. To a question, he said the government wants to have good relations with neighbours including Iran, Afghanistan and India.

Relations with India had been improving till the Mumbai incident that affected them negatively. “We need to start confidence building measures (CBMs) afresh with India. However, it will take some time,” he said. To a question regarding the demands of Sindh in the context of National Finance Commission (NFC), he said that he will consult with the Advisor on Finance who was on a visit to Japan and China with President Asif Ali Zardari.

He said that Nizam-e-Adl accord was linked with restoration of peace in Swat. If there is peace in Swat, the accord will remain intact, he added.The PM said that government functionaries including Secretary Interior and IG NWFP had visited bazars in Swat on Friday and met with people. However, there was still room for improvement, he added.

Replying to a question about the development projects being built in Sindh, the Prime Minister said these constituted top priority of the federal government. He said “We will support these projects and complete them.” He said “extremism, terrorism, talibanisation posed a threat to the country and we have to jointly fight against them”.

He said the government was pursuing a policy of reconciliation. We have a three? pronged policy and that included dialogue, development and deterrence. The government will talk to only those who lay down their arms and and are ready to hold dialogue.

Gilani said Pakistan has prepared its own policy to deal with terrorism and we take our decision according to this policy which is based on ground realities, traditions, customs, self respect, honour, dignity and sovereignty .

We are trying to convince the United States and we hope we will be able to convince them . They know that Pakistan is the victim of terrorism, he observed. The Prime Minister said that his party was taking along two different ideological parties MQM and ANP as coalition partners and it was his effort to defuse the situation.

To a question about Sindh government’s performance, he said it was satisfactory during the last one year. He said that Ms Sherry Rehman and Senator Raza Rabbani are an asset for the party and their help is being sought on various important matters. Gilani said that people had voted for a change in February elections and PPP was on the path of democracy and politics of reconciliation to bring in economic stability. We need to show political maturity, he said.

To a question, he said all the chief ministers have been invited to submit their point of view regarding new education policy. He also announced to raise the salaries of police staff in Sindh in accordance with the raise in Punjab police. Responding to a question about two systems of justice, the Prime Minister said the people of Northern Areas have different traditions. Swat was the last to announce its accesion to Pakistan in 1969.

We will not touch their customs. We respect their heritage which is a speedy justice. Shaheed Mohtarma Benazir Bhutto had also allowed their system of justice in 1994 and former president Musharraf in 1999. Gilani made it clear that no law in Pakistan was repugnant to the Holy Quran and Sunnah.-APP

“So I want the American people to understand that we have a clear and focused goal: to disrupt, dismantle and defeat al Qaeda in Pakistan and Afghanistan, and to prevent their return to either country in the future.”

Apparently, the strategy was more of an escalation of Bush policy than a policy shift. However, foreign policy experts like Henry Kissinger and Zbigniew Brzezinski remain skeptical of the goals set for, what Secretary of Defense Robert Gates called, “long slog” war.

Not long before President’s announcement, Secretary Gates was lowering nation’s expectations for winning the war. Testifying before the Senate Armed Services Committee, he cautioned against setting unrealistic goals, “This is going to be a long slog, and frankly, my view is that we need to be very careful about the nature of the goals we set for ourselves in Afghanistan”. He warned, “If we set ourselves the objective of creating some sort of central Asian Valhalla over there, we will lose, because nobody in the world has that kind of time, patience and money”. Considering, no power has ever been able to hold Afghanistan for too long, his warning was right on the money.

Despite bipartisan approval of Obama Af-Pak Strategy, experts believe the policy is fraught with unrealistic optimism, unattainable goals and erroneous calculations. Even worst, it fails to meet the tenets of the Powell Doctrine. Many analysts hail the doctrine to be the Holy Grail of modern warfare. According to the Doctrine, before America takes a military action its tenets would have to be answered affirmatively:

1. Is a vital national security interest threatened?

2. Do we have a clear attainable objective?

3. Have the risks and costs been fully and frankly analyzed?

4. Have all other non-violent policy means been fully exhausted?

5. Is there a plausible exit strategy to avoid endless entanglement?

6. Have the consequences of our action been fully considered?

7. Is the action supported by the American people?

8. Do we have genuine broad international support?

Coincidently, with the exception of the first tenet, Obama policy falls short of affirming every other tenet. However, before glancing over the negations, a retrospective accounting of genesis of the Af-Pak crisis might assist in understanding the crisis.

Roots of the current mess can be traced back to the political and administrative vacuum left by the CIA, when it suddenly left Afghanistan without even saying bye to its wartime partners, Inter Services Intelligence (ISI) and the Mujahideen – who used to frequent White House as state guests. Its premature departure was resented by the abandoned, which gave birth to equally cold-hearted phenomenon of Talibanization. They controlled over 80% of Afghanistan; hence, they became its default government. In exchange for financial support, the cash-strapped Taliban provided safe heavens to terrorist organizations, like Al Qaeda.

At least initially, Al Qaeda’s core was made up of the CIA funded and trained Mujahideen; who should been rehabbed after the Soviets withdrawal. Unsupervised and forsaken by Americans and their native countries, these fighters who knew no other trait but guerrilla warfare searched for new causes. When none found, they invented their own.

Similarly, Pakistanis also found themselves deserted and heavily sanctioned by their allies. On its Eastern borders India was still as hostile as ever. Pakistanis decided to defend themselves by creating a buffer through a proxy. Pakistanis diverted thousands of idle guerrilla fighters from Afghanistan to Kashmiri. The buffer kept India engaged in an asymmetrical warfare.

After the 9/11 attacks, instead of seeking assistance of the patrons of Taliban and its time tested partner ISI, America aligned itself with a pro Indo-Iran-Russian mercenaries, the Northern-Alliance (NA). Soon after the American lead invasion, the Taliban dispersed into the civilian population. By placing an ethnic minority NA government (Tajiks, Hazaras and Uzbeks) in Kabul, the allies further alienated the Pushtoon majority.

If things weren’t already complicated enough, Bush team made the worst possible mistake; it allowed a massive Indian influx into Afghanistan. Indians who were itching to settle scores with Pakistan wasted no time in opening at least 11 consulates on the western borders of Pakistan. Pakistanis viewed these consulates as launch pads for the subversive elements tasked to destabilize Pakistan. The Pakistanis felt entrapped by what they interpreted as a hostile Indian encirclement. They countered the move by reassembling the Taliban proxy.

That is when an Afghanistan, which was apparently turning to normalcy, took a turn for the worst. It became the shooting gallery for many; including the NATO, India, Iran, Pakistan, and non-state elements like Al Qaeda, Pakistan Sponsored Taliban (PST) and RAW/CIA Sponsored Taliban (RCST). The RCST were primarily tasked to infiltrate PST and to conduct subversive activities inside Pakistan. Additionally, it was meant to erode public support for the PST and to generate anti-Taliban sentiments among the global community. The risky strategy runs a too realistic danger of destabilizing nuclear armed Pakistan to a point of no return. Pakistan may end up fracturing into multiple unmanageable pieces, each with its own share of extremists. Clearly the strategy violates tenets 2 and 3 of the Powell Doctrine.

While analyzing President Obama’s European (G20) trip with Charlie Rose, both Henry Kissinger and Zbigniew Brzezinski offered their criticism of Af-Pak review. Henry Kissinger warned of an unmanageable mess, if something is not done soon to stabilize deteriorating conditions in Pakistan. He called Af-Pak policy a “fluid military strategy.” Mr. Brzezinski was more specific with his criticism. He asked, “how do we really get Pakistan to help us?” Then he answered, “Pakistanis are convinced they are under threat from India.” But Af-Pak policy does exactly the opposite. It recommends a greater role of India in Afghanistan, which only adds to Pakistan’s fears and goes against the prevailing wisdom of stabilizing Pakistan. A contradiction of the 3rd tenet.

President’s special representative, Richard Holbrooke announced Af-Pak exit strategy,

“The exit strategy includes governance, corruption, but above all, and this is the single most difficult aspect of what we are talking about today, it requires dealing with Western Pakistan.”

The unattainable and ambiguous exit strategy stood in stark contrast of the 5th tenet of the Powell Doctrine. He explained,

“If the current situation in Western Pakistan continued, the instability in Afghanistan will continue.” Meaning, success in Afghanistan is tied to the threats in the ‘Western Pakistan’.

An interdependent strategy gives birth to a range of new complexities: either, the US will have to depend on Pakistan’s resolve and capacity to deal with the extremists, or it will have to root them out itself.

America has already voiced its mistrust of Pakistan’s resolve to fight the extremists. If Pakistan cannot be trusted then US will have to do it itself. It will have to: either divert the resources from Afghanistan, or send additional troops to Western Pakistan. But the resources from Afghanistan cannot be diverted, until Afghan National Security Forces are first brought up to a level where they could function independently; an ambitious goal, considering Afghan president still can’t leave his Kabul palace without the protection provided by the US Navy SEALS. The other option is equally impractical, because it will require pumping-in additional American troops – paralleling the numbers deployed during the ‘Gulf War’.

Since American allies are already fatigued from the long drawn Afghan war, they want to leave Afghanistan altogether. Allies, like Air Chief Marshal Sir Jock Stirrup (head of Britain’s armed forces), also expressed their reservations over the practicality of the American strategy. He advised, “Just as in Afghanistan, that kind of insurgency cannot be defeated by conventional military means. It can only be dealt with, in the long term, through politics.” An obvious negation of tenet 8 of Powell Doctrine.

US will have to dip into its own pool to exercise the second option, because no amount of covert/shoot & scoot missions can stem the militancy. No Pakistani government will be able to ignore populous’ demands to fight the invaders. It will be compelled to fight with any or all means at its disposal. Naturally, a Pakistani reaction cannot be calculated, without invoking the forbidden phrase of ‘nuclear exchange’. Much to be desired to affirm the 6th tenet.

Reportedly, even Vice President Joseph Biden argued against the troop surge in Afghanistan. Moreover, American public is not in mood to embark on another never-ending war. Besides, neither the US nor its allies’ economies are hardly in a shape to be able to afford yet another trillion dollar war. Cardinal sins, per 7th and 8th tenets.

Despite thumbs up from the Afghan and Pakistani presidents, the public remains extremely suspicious and resentful of the American policy. Reportedly, between January 14, 2006 and April 8, 2009, 60 UAV hits in Pakistan killed 14 Al Qaeda men, 687 innocent civilians, including women and children. Fairly or unfairly, an ordinary Afghan or a Pakistani believes, West is in there to destroy their faith, their country and the Muslim world altogether. If the war is to be won, then Obama’s team will have to reevaluate and reform its strategy.

The emphasis should be on winning hearts and minds of Afghans and Pakistanis. Before exercising the military option, a really heavy dose of diplomacy, political and financial support will have to be thrown in the mix. Above all, US will have to win back the trust and goodwill of their Pakistani counterparts. Suspension of UAV attacks and phenomenal reduction of Indian presence in Afghanistan would be good starting points in generating goodwill and normalcy in the region.

Secretary Gates was prophetic when he said, “If we set ourselves the objective of creating some sort of central Asian Valhalla [in Afghanistan], we will lose, because nobody in the world has that kind of time, patience and money”. Listen to him!

It is told that Lt Gen. Shuja Pasha’s visit to the US is due to increasing concerns raised by US generals regarding the ISI’s alleged relationship with militant organisations. During a recent visit to Pakistan, Admiral Mike Mullen briefed a select group of media personnel on US apprehensions regarding the ISI’s support for certain organisations, conveying a message that the US wants such support to end. However, Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi came to the ISI’s defence in recent interviews, saying the ISI is fully on board with the government.

Input from Agencies

He said, “those foreign powers or individuals are now critical of ISI they know it well that same organisation has crushed cells of Al-Qaeda in Pakistan’s main cities and made Al-Qaeda operatives on the run”.

He opposed President Obama’s planned drone attacks inside Pakistan saying, “if the US-led NATO finds any high value target Pakistan government and security agencies be taken into confidence before striking at them.

When he was asked about his reaction to several case to be instituted against him in Pakistan’s several courts, he said, “I am not running away if and when any court calls me I will not hesitate to face courts”.

Responding to a question about Red Mosque Operation during his tenure where a large number of people were killed in July 2007, Musharraf said, “only 93 people were killed and we acted after lot of persuasion to clerics of Red Mosque to give up militancy’.

He said, “I am going to China for 10 days and later I will be visiting United Arab Emirates at the invitation of two countries and I will come back to Pakistan. Referring to recent decision of Zardari administration to reinstate Chief Justice Iftikhar chaudhry, “its the action of present government I will not comment on it”.

Musharraf said Pakistan is facing grave threats from militancy, extremism and terrorism. He said we have to combat these challenges in a strong manner”. When asked will he join politics, he replied, “when you will invite me I will join politics”.

When asked, why deposed Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry was not being restored, he asked the journalists to read out the reference sent to the Supreme Judicial Council against him in order to know the draw backs of Iftikhar Chaudhry’s personality and let the nation decide that such a person could deserve for the post of Chief Justice of Pakistan.

He also criticized the Ex-Servicemen Society terming them as used bullets and said that he was feeling insult while talking about them. He also said that he had a lot to tell the nation about their deeds but he would make it public on proper time. He also termed them as useless and rejected part of the society.

When inquired about his enmity with PML-N Quaid Nawaz Sharif, he said that Nawaz himself responsible for whatever the action was taken on October 12, 1998, however, he said that there should be politics of reconciliation and the principle ‘let be gone by be gone’ should be followed.

He said that he did not have enmity with any one; however, he criticized the usage of langue by PML-N leadership for him saying the civilized language should be used. When asked about his and President Asif Ali Zardari’s contact in the context of Governor Punjab Salman Taseer’s appointment but he did not give proper answer of the question.

When inquired about Swat peace deal, he said that the agreement was not made with Taliban rather the demand of the local people was fulfilled as they had been demanding for speedy justice since long. Musharraf said that the US authorities did not understand the situation of the area; therefore, it was necessary to take them into confidence; however, he categorically stated that the foreigners were living in the tribal areas and the government had to deal them with iron hands.

To a question, he said that the country was facing challenges in the political, economical and law and order sectors and these were needed to be addressed within no time for the country’s survival.

Regarding ISI, he said that he conveyed to Indians that ISI was doing what RAW, CIA or other secret agencies were doing to safeguard their national interests; therefore, it was not fair to single out ISI and to make it as subject to criticism. Musharraf regretted over the voices being aroused inside the country against the army and ISI. He, however, hailed India Today for organizing an international level seminar on “Challenges for Change” he said that it was held under extremely friendly atmosphere where the views were exchanged freely.-SANA

Christopher Dell, who currently runs the US embassy in Kabul, was speaking in the aftermath of the attack on the Sri Lankan cricket team in Lahore and the news that Pakistani Taliban groups had formed a common front to attack NATO troops in Afghanistan, in what is widely expected to be a bloody and possibly ­decisive summer this year.

“From where I sit [Pakistan] sure looks like it’s going to be a bigger problem,” Dell said in an interview in the heavily fortified US embassy in Kabul. “It is certainly one of those nuclear armed countries the instability of which is a bigger problem for the globe.

“Pakistan is a bigger place, has a larger population, its nuclear-armed. It has certainly made radical Islam a part of its political life, and it now seems to be a deeply ingrained element of its political culture. It makes things there very hard.”

Fears over Pakistan’s ability to cope with the rise of violent religious extremism were intensified by claims yesterday that police in Lahore had abandoned the Sri Lankan cricketers whom they were supposed to be protecting when gunmen opened fire on Tuesday. Surveillance ­footage showed three of the attackers walking down the middle of a street, apparently under no pressure. But Pakistani officials pointed out that six police officers died in the attack.

Senior officials in the Foreign Office and the Obama administration have privately expressed concern that Pakistan could prove to be more of a danger to global peace and security in the long run than Afghanistan, because of its nuclear ­weapons and its highly politicised and Islamicised secret service, the Inter-Services Intelligence agency (ISI).

Barack Obama is particularly alarmed at the decline in Pakistan’s stability, and appointed a special envoy, Richard ­Holbrooke, to Afghanistan and Pakistan to coordinate diplomatic efforts. In a ­reflection of rising anxiety in Washington, Dell expressed those concerns openly.

Dell, who is serving as the US chargé d’affaires in Kabul after a similarly outspoken stint as ambassador in Zimbabwe, said there were signs the rate of infiltration of insurgents across the frontier from Pakistan’s semi-autonomous tribal areas had increased in recent days. He said it was possible the increase was a result of ceasefire deals agreed by militants and the Pakistani government.

“Every time the Pakistanis have signed a peace deal, two things happen,” Dell said. “There is an uptick in the fighting on this [the Afghan] side, and the peace deals have fallen apart quickly. We think we’ve already seen an increase of fighters crossing the border.”

The epicentre of the problem is Pakistan’s Federally-Administered Tribal Areas (Fata) which have become a ­stronghold for an array of jihadist groups including al-Qaida and various splinters of the Taliban. “Everybody says: ‘We’ll go into the Fata and clean out those nests’. Well, you know you could do that in theory. But you’d only create another problem with the backlash against the presence of American or other foreign soldiers,” Dell said.

“There are no easy solutions in Pakistan. There is no silver bullet out there that we’re going to discover one day that will make the problem go away. I think for all those reasons it’s a deep challenge, and yeah, probably harder than Afghanistan.”

The Guardian reported on Tuesday that three warlords in Fata had settled their differences, formed a group calling itself Shura Ittihad-ul Mujahideen, or Council of United Holy Warriors, and had agreed to focus their efforts on launching attacks in Afghanistan.

Major General John MacDonald, the new deputy commander of US forces in Afghanistan, told the Guardian the insurgents were “most dangerous when they begin to collaborate with one another”. “We think we have already seen an increase in the number of fighters coming across the border particularly in the Kunar area right opposite Bajaur,” he added. He predicted that the coming surge in the number of coalition troops in Afghanistan would lead to an increase in fighting.

About 17,000 more US troops are due to arrive in the country in the next few months, and between three and five thousand are expected to reinforce British forces in Helmand province. General MacDonald said those troops would be used to push into places hitherto considered no-go areas for Nato troops. “So yes, this summer you will see more violence,” he said. “We’re just about to kick a beehive.”-SANA

It is true that the slightest shift in the electoral demographic could send a government from the heaven of office to the hell of irrelevance. But does the Cabinet of Dr Manmohan Singh and the party of Sonia and Rahul Gandhi actually believe that the Indian voter sits biting his nails before a television set in order to make up his mind about how he will vote?

The really accurate psephologist is not a pseudo-scientist available on hire, but the social scientist whose name you do not know.

The facts that are moulding the mood of the voter have been gathered by the ISI, based on data collated by the National Sample Survey Organisation from about 124,000 households across the country. Get
ready for a sharp crack in your first illusion. The UPA government, through its economic spokesman Montek Singh Ahluwalia, has sold us the bait that poverty has gone down under its watch. Fact: the number of
people living below the poverty line has actually increased by a horrifying 20%. India had some 270 million people below the poverty line in 2004-5, when the present government took office. That number has gone up by 55 million, or 20%, after five years of policies named after the “aam aadmi” (common man) but shaped for the “khaas aadmi” (vested interests).

The economic map of India has shifted the axis of tension. The old notional north-south line that divided the country into broad politico-cultural halves is passé. There is a new poverty diagonal that separates the nation on a north-west to south-east arc. The India to the east is sinking towards Bangladesh and Burma; India to the west is rising, and becoming the stuff of popular aspiration and fantasy.

If you want to know why Mamata Banerjee could undermine the ramparts of the red fortress in Bengal, pore over the ISI report. A stunning 14 out of Bengal’s 18 districts are among the 100 poorest in India, after
three decades of Marxist rule. The most indigent district in the country is not in Bihar, Orissa or Jharkhand, but in Bengal, Murshidabad, capital of a principality that once included the whole of Bengal, Orissa and a significant part of Bihar. When Robert Clive stepped into Murshidabad in 1757 after victory in the Battle of
Plassey, he looked around in wonder and exclaimed that it was richer than London. Today he would look around and find women slaving away, making bidis at the rate of Rs 41 for a thousand, out of which the
middleman keeps six rupees. In percentage terms, the rich pay far less to their middlemen.

Muslim-majority Murshidabad has a population density of 1,102 per square km against a national average of 590. Among its constituencies is Jangipur. Its Member of Parliament is the present Finance Minister
of India, Pranab Mukherjee. Wouldn’t it be ironic if the Marxists were pushed back in Bengal but won Jangipur, as the law of accountability began to extract its price? The job losses that could cross over a
hundred million by March are going to have significant impact on voter mood. January saw a fall of 24% in exports from last year. Realists consider the Reserve Bank of India’s projection of 7% growth optimistic.

Rising India might be under a cloud for the last six months, but Stagnant India has been in gloom for years. There is little coverage of this gloom since media is driven by advertising; advertising is interested in consumption, and the hungry do not even consume food. It is extraordinary how political parties shy away from decisive facts, and chase ephemeral ones. The extended BJP family is sending vigilantes to check on what the young are doing in their leisure time, but displays little interest in what the young really want — someone to worry about their workplace. It is understandable when a ruling party shies away from the economy because it has no answers. Why should an Opposition party be averse? All it has to do is ask
questions.

The political discourse, on all sides, is consumed not by issues that are relevant to the voter, but by posturing and negotiations for partnerships of convenience. The parties do not even pretend to have any ideology in common, or even a purpose that is vaguely similar. Everyone knows that the negotiations for office after the results will have little to do with the manifestos that will be printed before the elections. There is only one weight that will be placed on the scales of judgment, the weight of numbers. [The scales of justice have no place in politics.] One is often reminded, while watching the pantomime, that when you dance with a bear you don’t stop. Those who stop get mauled before they can walk off.

A friend reminded me of an even more appropriate aphorism, and was kind enough to add that this had become relevant to the whole of South Asia. The quotation was from the Bible of South Asian democracy, Alice in Wonderland. If you don’t know where you are going, any road will take you there.

He was ostensibly going to present evidence on the role of Pakistanis in the terrorist attack on Mumbai. Is there any paper in his travelling files that is so secret that it could not have been handed over to the FBI in Delhi? Chidambaram was going to talk, and therein lay a minor opportunity and a major danger.

Chidambaram might be justified in believing he has a persuasive tongue, but he might have returned with a problem, instead of solving the one he went to pursue. To start with, Washington does not need to be convinced that there are terrorist outfits in Pakistan that have India in their gun sights. They know this already. They deal with these groups, and have the most extensive intelligence on them, information built up not just during the current war in Afghanistan-Pakistan, but over at least two decades. According to one American assessment, Osama bin Laden has placed India at the top of the list of the world’s soft targets, now that America has hardened its security regime. Washington has already accepted Delhi’s line as credible. So the only subject for real discussion is follow-up action. This is where the dangers lie.

Chidambaram would have been the last foreign politician to do business with the Bush administration. Was this fortuitous or deliberate? Deliberate, I reckon. Prime Minister Manmohan Singh is still bathing in the glow of a special relationship he manufactured with George Bush, and believes that Bush will be as loyal to him as he has been loyal to Bush. After all, in that unique opinion poll taken by Dr Singh, every Indian loves Bush. But Bush has no real authority to take any serious decisions, apart from whom to invite for a picture opportunity. Every strategic matter now awaits the arrival of Barack Obama on 20 January. There is no foreign policy issue more important on Obama’s table than the Afghan war. His views are known: a big stick in one hand, and lots of carrots in the other. The “surge” has already begun, and by the middle of this year America will have 63,000 troops in Afghanistan. While the Taliban is being “tamed” on the battlefield, bribes will be liberally distributed to tribal chiefs to wean them towards the side of American civilisation. Pakistan is an invaluable ally in both operations. Its forces will be asked to sanitise those regions in Pakistan, which are a base for Taliban, while its famous Directorate of Inter Services Intelligence (popularly known as ISI) will be invaluable in identifying the recipients of carrots. Obama will need Pakistan far more than Bush did.

No deal with Delhi, nuclear or strategic, can change a basic fact. As long as America is in Afghanistan, India is a friend and Pakistan is an ally.

This alliance has been integrated into firm institutional relationships, beginning with the Cold War when Pakistan bought into Pentagon goodwill by offering Peshawar as a base for spy reconnaissance missions across the Soviet Union on U2 planes. This was further honed during two Afghan wars, against the Soviet Union and now the Taliban, into an intimate interaction between intelligence services. The CIA and the ISI are sister agencies. The ISI first flourished when it became the major conduit for funds and arms to the Mujahideen against the Soviets. It now has some 10,000 regular employees on its payroll. Washington will not jettison this equation because of a terrorist attack in Mumbai. Organizations like the Lashkar-e-Toyeba have emerged from the murk in which a war with parallel, and occasionally shifting, loyalties is being fought.

The head of the ISI is clearly the second most powerful general in the Pak Army. Former ISI chief Ashfaq Kayani was fortunate enough to be in the right place when Pervez Musharraf first fell from grace and then fell from power. When the present chief General Ahmed Shuja gives an interview it is front-page news.

Washington gives the ISI and Pakistan a great deal of leeway in deference to ground realities. It understands that the political structure in Islamabad is wobbly at best, and it will do nothing to weaken it further by backing such Indian demands as may be unpopular in Pakistan. The FBI has already said that it is not interested in picking up suspects from the Lashkar-e-Toyeba, noting that Pakistan is quite capable of trying them in its own courts.

Washington could also place linkage on the table in any talks with Delhi on Pak-sourced terrorism. We have, with great difficulty and greater diplomatic consistency, finally managed to convince America and Europe to treat Kashmir as a bipartisan issue after the disastrous reference we made to the United Nations in the winter of 1947-1948.

Pakistan has responded to our diplomatic offensive after the Mumbai attack by seeking to once again internationalise Kashmir through the “root causes” argument. Islamabad’s line is not very complicated: terrorism is fuelled by despair over Kashmir, so if you want to end terrorism, you have to solve the Kashmir dispute.

Washington would, in all likelihood, have raised this during talks with Chidambaram since it has accepted Pakistan’s argument that if the war in Afghanistan deserves the full attention of Pak armed forces, then its security concerns on the eastern front must be neutralised by a settlement of the Kashmir problem. Ergo, settle.

There is a signature petition being circulated in the Kashmir valley at this moment seeking Obama’s intervention, amid expectations that the new President will be receptive. He comes to office riding on a promise (“Yes we can”), but without that optimism pinned to any delivery system. It might take him 18 months or two years to realise that in Kashmir, “No we can’t”. It would be naïve to offer Washington an inroad into the Kashmir dispute before experience in office has taught Obama that intellect is not necessarily synonymous with wisdom.

The Soviet Union’s first foreign minister and Marxist ideologue Leon Trotsky had a message that is still relevant to new leaders bubbling with hope and audacity: “You may not be interested in war, but war is interested in you.” Israel and Palestine have already started a war that is interested in Obama. He would be wise to limit Afghanistan’s battlefields to either side of the Durand Line. Even good intentions can engender a slip into the treacherous quicksands of South Asia that would send us all into a toxic swamp.

I never thought I would write this so soon, but one is already turning nostalgic for General Musharraf: he understood the healing powers of the status quo.

Pakistan army unfortunately has spent around 4 decades in power corridors and no other but indecisive & corrupt politicians who lack political will, weaker institutions, tame judiciary and selfish & unprofessional bureaucracy is cumulatively responsible for not erecting a viable democracy where rule of law, good governance, justice and constitutionalism holds sway. In fact, non action on ‘Murree accord,’ continued violation of our air space by drones and China’s support of unchallenged UNSC Resolution no. 1267 is a self evidence of our politician’s poor performance. In fact, our rulers allegedly in an ultra parliamentary decision requested china to let go of the technical hold, making it a strong case for Parliamentary intervention to probe unless they seek army intervention by their default. Former premier Nawaz Sharif is through his vision calling those who are calling shots to make their promises to learn lessons from the history before its too late and is foreseeing those coming who never went out of politics. In the absence of Parliament which stood on 12 Oct 1999, it will be an uphill struggle to put barricades in the way of military unless Charter of Democracy is enacted forthwith, though it is not looking imminent. I think Q league’s Mushahid Hussain has put forward a claim for national government but to many when air force is on high alert and any time Indian air forces may attempt to target some of the MDI outlets emphasises the need of ‘national security government’ due to a weaker political leadership who endanger the security more. That National Security government may be a joint work of DSC and Parliament where army and civilian leadership in conformity work to safeguard the country and avert the threat of aggression against its borders as it’s do or die stage for Pakistan.

As long as all stake holders do not sit on one table and see eye to eye with each other and have a joint aim to safeguard the national interest, promote supreme parliament concept and produce a good governance. In the absence of a failure of the implementation on COD and negation of 18th Feb mandate, I am afraid we will keep seeing illusions everywhere. Pakistan no doubt, is in a very critical situation but sending DG ISI will not solve problems with India. India is playing at the hands of others and going to aggression will ignite a fire within India too which will not be easily put out. With Bombay attacks India is coercively rewarded and Pakistan’s hand is twisted to do more. Pakistan though is committed on war on terrorism but wishes to redraw the procedure under which he will contribute.

Pakistani leaders need to decide whether they wish to move forward democratically or are ready to cave in meagerly at the hands of US pressure as matters have gone ahead of drone attacks now. In this cloud the work of ISI is praiseworthy, As it is combating major intelligence forces in the region and in particular Indian threat successfully. Its a thankless job, unlike Army Generals who enjoy the perks and privileges but the work of this agency is far more difficult then one can comprehend. Extremism has given new twist to international information sharing process, and India has rightly advantaged this weakness. Their aim is to weaken the country and do not allow it to flourish an economic or military power. They also wish it to remain weak on political front with a military run regime where legitimacy always question their viability as a state. I think ISI made Pakistan stronger in the wake of emanating threats from around since 1971 and no doubt, it has advanced in order to meet the 21st century requirements and has developed from human intelligence to scientific knowledge. It’s a high time that people sees ISI separately than army rule. In army rule ISI’s job is doubled but in civil they revert to their old task to safe guard the state from any danger to its ‘national security’ from outside. Looking at the bleak situation of Pakistani rulers, there is not much help to this institution from our incumbent leaders and this freelance protector of national security is carrying on its job silently, rewardlessly and quietly in the line of its duty. Pakistanis need to understand that their country’s security from foreign espionage is intact despite the high level of threat

PESA, in an emergent meeting held here in the wake of Mumbai attacks here on Friday, said that India used to seek opportunity to implicate ISI in every mishap took place in its territory to hide its own security failure saying it is not fair to blame ISI for barbaric act of Mumbai without any solid evidence.

It was said that India had already blamed Pakistan for Samjhota Express incident in which 68 Pakistanis were killed brutally but later it went wrong as extremist Hindus were found guilty in the bloody incident.-SANA

The meeting made it clear to India that Pakistan would not be silent over its baselessly blaming and Pak army is ready to foil Indian aggression; however the meeting also stated that to blame Pakistan for Mumbai attacks is the part of US, India and Israel’s joint agenda to weaken the army and ISI in order to deprive the country of atomic power

A consensus was sought in the meeting not to let the Pakistan’s land use for terrorism and to continue war against militancy and extremism at all fronts. The three leaders condemned the Mumbai incidents and renewed the offer of Pakistan’s cooperation in investigating in to these. Meeting also discussed the issue of proposed visit of ISI chief’s representative to India.-SANA

Talking to a private TV channel, Gul said that President Asif Zardari replaced US first envoy former president Pervez Musharraf as he is doing whatever his boss demanding. He said all allegations leveled by India in past had proven wrong as even its on duty Colonel was found involved in the terrorist incidents; however, he demanded of India to excuse first to Pakistan about those allegations.

Hameed Gul said that some civilians ISI officials should be sent to India if it was necessary. Answering a question, he said that there was no agreement between Pakistan and India which mandates ISI officials to visit India. Hameed Gul said that Indian extremist Hindus after conducting the Bombay attack successfully given a message to US new-elect President Barrack Obama to stay away from the Kashmir dispute as well as Indian scholars were started to raise their voices in the favour of Kashmiris freedom struggle and Bombay attacks were conducted to suppress those voices.-SANA

“Initially, Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh urged to Prime Minister Syed Yousuf Raza Gilani to send the ISI to India to help in ongoing investigations and further intelligence sharing,” he said. He said that the PM responded positively and said both the governments need to work out modalities for the early arrival of the ISI chief in India.”

While Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) former Vice President Muhammad Akram Chaudhry on Friday demanded of the government not to sent ISI Chief Ahmed Shuja Pasha to India. He said that Pakistan is being targeted at a time by US, Europe and India to deprive it of atomic power; however, he strongly criticized the government for remaining silent on the involvement of the said countries including Israel in the tribal areas and other parts of the country.

He said that the government should condemned the criminal acts of the countries for hatching conspiracies against the country as it is not only the matter the government’s weakness but also a black stigma on honor of the country. He urged the government to devise a balance foreign policy instead of showing unnecessary flexibility and to assure the protection of the country’s interest.-SANA

The government is adopting a two-pronged strategy by protesting against the attacks on one hand while on the other hand, it is allowing its border territories be violated, creating furor at home, they commented.

On the occasion, Former ISI Chief General (Retd.) Asad Durrani said that the Chief of Army Staff (COAS) General Ashfaq Kayani should resign if the government’s polices did not let him fulfill his constitutional responsibilities. He said that his organization had written a letter containing seven political options to Speaker National Assembly Dr. Fehmida Mirza that to take the country out of the crisis.

Durrani demanded of the government to call back its ambassador from US and to banish its ambassador form the country and to cut NATO supply line, as 90 percent of its logistic support is going through Pakistan, to halt the operation.

The government should claim compensation of Pakistanis who were killed by US-led forces attacks by filing a case against in Internal Court of Justice, he added. He said that if the government would not give positive response then the options would be made public.

He said that the government should bring the secret agreement regarding permission of US-led forces attacks before the parliament if there is any; however, the government should reinstate pre-Nov 3rd judiciary in order to take country out of the economic crisis and law and order situation as it is indispensable for the country.

He flayed the government for not fulfilling the people’s expectations as it was given the mandate to devise the polices in accordance with the nation’s aspiration but the government laid down before US instead of raising the voice against the attack it faced 29 critical attacks with silence. He said that the government has made up expectations form US president-elect Barack Obama regarding halting of the operation in vein.

Meanwhile, former ISI Chief General (Retd.) Hameed Gul, General (Retd.) Saleem Haider, former governor Gul Orangzaib, Brig (Retd.) Khalid Usman, Brig (Retd.) Khadam Hussian, Brig (Retd.) Salam Akhtar and MaJ (Retd.) Islam-ul-Haq also attended the meeting.-SANA

He said that despite having respect for PPP his party would not join hands with the government if it kept continue former President Musharraf’s polices. However, he revealed that his party had formed a committee to table the bill for removal of 17th amendment as PML-N decided to move the bill with the consultation of other political parties if the government would not table the bill.

He flayed PPP for making parliament as a dummy institution saying that the government don’t have any strategy to cope with the crisis as it used to take dictation form somewhere else. To a question, he said that his party welcomed disbanding of ISI political wing as it wanted to strength democracy in the country; however, he hoped that martial law would never be imposed.

The government should not go to IMF as its loan is just like to take a cup of poison, he added. When asked, he said that the use of army is not a last option for halting US incursion into Pakistan as the government could get desired results through diplomatic means.-SANA

He said that the government was making all out efforts for repatriation of Dr. Aafia Siddiqui from US to Pakistan and expressed the hope that these efforts would bear fruit. He announced that her son has already been brought back to Pakistan.

He dispelled the impression that agriculture income tax was among the conditions for IMF bailout plan, neither was it a condition nor this tax was under consideration these days, FM said adding that this tax was a provincial subject. He said that IMF package was meant to fill the immediate resource gap and to pursue an economic stabilization plan. He reiterated resolve to improve ties with India saying that his visit to the neighboring country will help remove misunderstandings between the two countries.

He said that he would meet his counterpart Pranab Mukherjee and Indian leadership and bilateral issues will be discussed during the interaction. He hoped that his visit to India will help bridge the gulf and end trust deficit between the two countries and will prove fruitful in strengthening ties with India.
Foreign Minister said that it is our desire that both countries should live like friendly neighbors. He said that he will talk to the Indian leadership on water issue and added that Kashmir issue, already being a part of the composite dialogue between the two countries, will also be discussed.

About the Indian cricket team’s forthcoming tour to Pakistan, he said that the government wishes that Indian cricket squad should visit Pakistan. He added that government wants to improve people-to-people contact with India and exchange of delegations such as cultural delegations and sports teams will help improve relationships. He said that intellectuals, authors and sports persons of the two countries should have frequent interaction through exchange of delegations. Chief operating officer PCB Saleem Altaf said that Chairman Pakistan Cricket Board (PCB) Ijaz Butt will visit to India this month.

To a question, Qureshi categorically said there was no possibility of martial law in the country stating that the government, the parliament and the armed forces have unanimity of views on national issues. People may have this view but we do not agree with it, FM said adding that we are moving forward to combat challenges with consultations and understanding.

Mehmood Qureshi disclosed that after the Jan 13-16 expert level meeting scheduled to be held in Islamabad, he will invite FoDP Foreign Ministers to Pakistan in February next to move ahead with the plan to combat economic and security challenges confronting Pakistan.

About the IMF bailout package that is expected to be approved on Nov 24, Shah Mehmood Qureshi said its approval will pave the way for more assistance from other international financial institutions like World Bank, Asian Development Bank (ADB), Islamic Development Bank besides the Friends of Democratic Pakistan (FoDP) Group and other countries.

It was interesting and heartening to note that our home-grown plan prepared by 16-member panel of country’s economic experts headed by Dr. Hafeez Pasha that has also been discussed by the federal cabinet and the talks with IMF had similarities in approach and experts believe it was the best suitable option Pakistan could avail under the given conditions, FM said.

He said that Rupee was gaining strength against dollar and capital flight has stopped and hoped that capital flight phenomenon will soon witness a reverse trend with the arrival of foreign remittances. FM said that an expert level meeting will be held in Islamabad from Jan 13 to Jan 16 during which projects will be identified and discussed in four sectors with the assistance promised by FoDP in its Nov 17 meeting in Abu Dhabi.-SANA

BabayChen Mathew

( Journalist-entrepreneur. Worked in several media organizations in India) by saying “can i also ask for one favour “Somebody has to take Initiative“ can you please Stumble it and write a small review for it”

Here is the dialogue started after this favour

Babaychen: okay, i read it earlier, my opinion of it is quite different though, and for example…he could say that to the US ambassador in US, right? Now, how safe is an American speaking about India or Pakistan in our countries in a public forum? Our people throw stones instantly

me: let them but tell you they don’t they respect to opinion?

Babaychen: Who Indians and Pakistanis? We are quick to take offence, quick to arrest, beat up, we would say, how can someone come to our country and speak against us throw him out, arrest him that’s one aspect…

me: yups, but if we are not on mistake, if we attacked on some country to we must accept that offence but if we have not committed any offense why should we?

Babaychen: do we ever accept our mistakes? Your country, mine, and probably china are some of the most self deceiving about our own mistakes we are always right

me: in Pakistan our politicians do not admit but we Pakistanis are always offensive over their deeds.

Babaychen: India is not very different

me: to what our government does we are the ultimate sufferers so we are ashamed.. and adding we are apologetic also..

Babaychen: yea, but we also think our countries can do no wrong

me: see we are peace lovers right? You, I and millions like us do not want to see any problem on LOC but our armies have been fighting like dogs “aray nahee hum yeh nahee sochtay”

Babaychen: see, have you tried making any Pakistani admits that they were wrong in something very big, something to do with the country? Same goes for Indians

me: I cant claim that I tried to convinced them, these are not the people who do wrong things but governments commit mistakes and on individual level, I tell you it is a cognitive dissonance for what our and any government do to our country

Babaychen: see there is one more thing….look at the increasing dislike towards Musharraf

me: yups?

Babaychen: now, where is it all coming from? True, he is unconstitutional
but coups have happened before and may still happen again then he allied with America

me: hmmnn…

Babaychen: but at that point anyone would have allied with America. They were perfectly willing to attack Pakistan if Pakistan did not help them fight the Taliban, if Musharraf had refused there would have been hell so he tried to use the bad situation; it didn’t work..No Pakistani prime minister or president has ever stood up to America and that’s real politics. India is lucky that we did not face such a situation but if America gives an ultimatum to any Pakistani or Indian PM or president we would give up

me: you guys are better i must admit u stood up against every odd to your country, Pakistanis Particularly politicians never did this

Babaychen: not that better, we are luckier in some ways

me: hmmnn.. True see people like Shaukat Aziz are imported from US how can they be standing up against anything

Babaychen: but against America, we are all in the same boat.

me: hmmn…

Babaychen: see, I have read that every Pakistani politician is a hardcore businessman; imagine if America gives an ultimatum to Pakistan now to the new PM…… he would also give in..

me: Let me add here that if he is not hardcore business man, he becomes after getting some Federal or provincial Ministry and corruption starts. It becomes really easier for politicians to earn money from the people who have some kind of work to be done

Babaychen: India has been careful not to get into such a situation. But in that particular situation when US wanted Pakistan’s Yes or NO Musharraf did not have any choice, and nobody is left with choice when country is being threat like this. Imagine china giving an ultimatum to India. China is a country which will allow 10 % of its population to be nuked if they can destroy 40 % of India. You think India can fight? we cant when faced with a much larger force every politician gets practical the student Sammad! What is your real choice? If you were the president what would you do? Say, Richard Armitage comes and tells you side with US or we bomb your country to the Stone Age

me: i agree being practical and differentiate between idealism is machvellian politics and realistic politics, but even then no one can allow invading anyone’s country.. And recently Obama has shown his desire to bomb Pakistan.and if contextualizing in what u say, Samad’s step was breaking the silence and a drop of water or may be small stone in stream to create causation

Babaychen: Sammad could say it because in America, he could say it and still live there. And despite all America’s foreign policy evils, they believe in freedom to talk

me: yups and why do they say, self interests of few

Babaychen: and he will live there in India if he sys something like that against us; he wont be able to go to college someone will kill him, same
Is the case in Pakistan. It’s easy to be a hero in words

me: i guess we discussed the same things in circle who thinks they are really skeptical and pay attention more to the conspiracy theories more than the reality itself. We discussed that it can be his finagled act to be in mainstream politics.. and though his security .. but finally we concluded if someone is so daring to take step like this he is secured..
i know me and my friends also discuss that anti Musharraf is good idea to be popular and on International forums anti Pakistan mood is good to be popular

Babaychen: saying that India is wrong in India by a Pakistani – that is gutsy. Saying that Pakistan is wrong in Pakistan by an Indian – that’s gutsy. in America, they will listen to you politely, maybe a few people will shout… that’s it.. Yes, every politician in Pakistan knows that Musharraf did not have any option every single one of them but if they were in his position they would have obeyed America, made lots of money and left the country by now .. Msuharraf at least is still there

me: had they been in his position they could have refused sweetheart Nawaz Sharif did, BB did

Babaychen: they never got an ultimatum like mush got they were just lucky

me: but they get nothing in return one is killed other was exiled for several years

Babaychen: Nawaz Sharif went to US and begged with Clinton who scolded him like schoolteacher

me: Nawaz Sharif was phoned by Clinton himself not to test nukes

Babaychen: Benazir Bhutto ran away from the country. Yea.. What about kargil.. Every single person says it was humiliating treatment testing nukes. That was nothing. America knew Pakistan had nukes, they knew India had nukes too.. No practical difference

Babaychen: see gutless politicians are normal everywhere

me: in this region a balance of power was needed, humiliation in kargil was due to our generals.. They are bikao maal.. Yeah they are normal but some one can take some action?

Babaychen: who? Pakistan can be totally safe

me: never.. it can never be safe

Babaychen: if they decide that ISI would not help al Qaeda or Taliban but even Pakistani government says they do give America no reason to come to Pakistan. Is America going to Sweden? No.

me: Musharraf said it because he has to make himself safe and prolong his rule, Government does not say agencies and establishment are both running govt.. Very diplomatically they can say at the right time and really know when to admit it and when not or even say they are helping them..

Babaychen: Is u saying no support in Pakistan for Taliban or al Qaeda?

me: nops, I am not saying this.. That no support. Everyone knows who is helping al Qaeda and who is not, Afghanistan and India both are involved. Raw is directly involved

Babaychen: yes

Babaychen: RAW wants a foothold that’s international politics but in international politics and strategies. The trick also is to stay out of trouble
India supports Iran even in the UN

me: their r certain elements when lal masjid incidents happens, when Bajour and Waziristan and Mohammand agency is attacked directly by the US allied NATO forces..

Babaychen: yes

me: who will not stand against government?

Babaychen: standing against government, without fixing the real problem is pointless… the frontier provinces are out of control. Why? In a country no place should be out of control like that

me: tribal areas are out of control for their own problems..

Me: when it is RAW then its international political strategies, and when ISI it is involved in everything even in supporting al Qaeda

Babaychen: hahaha.. yes.. That’s called reality. You have to play the game and stay safe. Pakistan plays the game but very badly

Babaychen: aren’t the tribal areas bordering Afghanistan?

me: they had their own issues and the terrain they have in those areas do not support anyone to hide there so then it is seepage from Afghanistan

Babaychen: yes

me: if they bordered

Babaychen: it is

me: a missed and failed US policy ; Afghanistan.. Creating problems for Pakistan totally mishandled. And repercussions are in front of Pakistan..

Babaychen: America is only concerned about their own safety. If they feel safe, they will not care about anything in ur country. They don’t feel safe if u have nuclear bombs, they don’t feel safe if there are Taliban
fix the problem. Who will fix it?

me: Pakistan faces music only for having dictators, and who is not letting the democracy flourishing in Pakistan.. And who’s interest are involved in it. It is very clear. And what if some other country is unsafe due to US?

Babaychen: who has the military muscle? That’s all that matters in the end

me: should they not start taking measure like pre emptive doctrines

Babaychen: yes if they can

me: well, in political economy it is all game by the international monetary agencies who play gimmicks.. To control and through media sets moods and public opinion… if they can then y u say that Sammad was wrong

Babaychen: Sammad is not wrong

me: or even his gesture was not supportive

Babaychen: its easy heroism, If Musharraf had said NO to US, and US had attacked Pakistan. You would have been happy?

me: i do not refuse, it is easy heroism. I admitted it
even in my article, I have admitted it

Babaychen: yea

me: we are skeptical and can smell things

Babaychen: yea but see if Mush, very patriotically, had gone against US… the country would have been very happy…. or would everyone have said, his arrogance cost us our country

me: come on man.. If we admit for some time he took a prudent step to save country.. ok.. His work is done he should stepped down.. y is he sticking as an unconstitutional president

Babaychen: 2 part answer
1. He wants power, now used to it.
2. He is someone who attacked India, and is patriotic in that sense. He thinks that the politicians will sell the country as they don’t have even his guts or realism both are right people are not one sided

me: and see US needs Pakistan, they deliberately played a game, Nawaz was pre planed exiled to bring Mush to get US interests served cause he was not accountable in front of public as he was not elected president

me: Musharraf is shameless… he thinks he is only panacea to Pakistan’s problem.. Playing scams.. Yesterday said that other 9/11 is being planed in Pakistan

Babaychen: yes.. Is that a bad thing? If he thinks so, u can say he is wrong, but not evil

me: masses only need basic necessities now.. They hardly pay attention to what is going in politics.. He is wrong, these r the chaal bazi of pita hoa mohra… when he says this entire one can clearly smell that he needs to gain favors from US.

Babaychen: see u are moving from one topic to the other. Try to answer each one. i can answer such questions about India easily. For example, would you like a patriotic defeated president? or a practical president who’s crooked but saved the country from war? what’s ur answer?

me: and listen he has nothing in his pocket to show on table, You are compelling me to move right left, i am just answering.. Now for me.. What he did at that time was practical and prudent for that time.. US needed Pakistan due to its strategic location… in this region to reach warm waters..

Babaychen: agreed. so we cant blame him for what he did then. Right?

me: president with practicality is ok for that time, now even US does not want him to stay.. and Military is not supporting him

Babaychen: yes. Now let’s look at the options say mush goes

me: he must quit, see even establishment knows when to get suicide attacks in country? Pakistan could never handle its own attacks how can it promote and support A Qaeda

Babaychen: then what happens? Things will get better? hahahah its not that simple

me: yes its not that simple , for other country’s attack planning

Babaychen: but anyway, every country does all kinds of stuff simultaneously India screws up in the north east and plots in Afghanistan why? every country does that

me: I am going to give this conversation on my blog

me: see against China US helped India..

Babaychen: okay, but you think things will get better if mush leaves?

me: at least in tribal areas.. Large extent people have grudge against him. He let NATO to violate our airspace and kill our innocent people

Babaychen: I will tell u that if mush goes, tribal areas will cool down. But US will still do what it wants, as when Taliban run away from there to tribal areas, they will follow and attack inside and the new president will make some noises that’s it

me: he was involved in attackin masjid where innocent females including 5-10 years old small girls studying there.

Babaychen: haha see Indian army once attacked the golden temple

me: i know

Babaychen: lots of innocents died but there were terrorists with bombs inside too what’s the difference?

me: it was proved no terrorist was there in lal masjid

Babaychen: There were bombs and machine guns discovered
it even came on TV. Your own TV channels

me: aray bhai those arms were produced by the army people who were there for operation silence

Babaychen: it came on your own TV channels, private TV channels, which the army dislikes

me: All TV channels reveal truth? see phosphorus bombs were used there human flesh was not there, guns were found what a funny thing

Babaychen: are you saying, there was no one inside with a gun?

me: tell me something if you are dying, and know that people standing out will kill you, would you tell a lie? yes or no

Babaychen: who’s dying

me: i am asking u just for example, You are dying suppose

Babaychen: whatever i think will save my life, if it’s a lie which will save my life, i will lie, if its truth, i will say the truth

me: but if you are 100 % sure you are going die then?

Babaychen: 100 % sure? i don’t know. Have u seen someone in absolute panic? He becomes an animal, he may say anything, same for me..” the answer means nothing, as i am not human when i am in full panic”

me: even he is in panic he would never lie, and same was the case with Ghazi Rasheed who was in the mosque and he told while bomb were thrown in the masjid that they don’t have anyone there in masjid no foreigners or no guns

Babaychen: see the siege was there for 2 weeks or more

me: anyways.. Listen if it was the case the weapons were dumped it was Mush who let those go in the heart of capital..

Babaychen: military shouted for two weeks for everyone to come out and surrender

me: come on

Babaychen: i saw people firing weapons from inside on your own TV

me: Military did not shout it was Chuadry Shujaat Hussain who mishandled situation; they cut off their electricity, gas, food supply.. and detained them

Babaychen: Tell me who were the people who were shouting at the army from inside? i saw them on TV; are u saying it was a movie show by the army on tv?

me: They were the people who were against the policies of Musharraf; and IF there were weapons (according to media reports upon which you and other people think; those people were shouting on army), Here I strongly believe were not.. Why government had allowed those to be dumped in center of capital

Babaychen: ahahh

me: listen lal Masjid is total mystery we know what went there

Babaychen: first, let’s assume there were weapons… how did they get inside? They did not walk inside by themselves, someone carried them, and someone allowed them inside; who? The government is not a single focused entity, parts of the government maybe ISI were in support of that, and other parts weren’t; so some people allowed them in, and others wanted them to surrender

me: yups , i know its not single entity… mush himself let thosego and then attacked to make the US clear that “oh I am performing great job against these terrorists”..

Babaychen: maybe.. see what you are saying is possible, but not likely no politician is that stupid

me: How much stupid? see what US did, pre emptive measures.. Now they are letting the Iran get Nukes, Iran would never get.. Cause like in Iraq on pretext of WMD US attacked but got nothing only oil..

Babaychen: not even oil

me: hmmn.. now not even oil that’s what we know.. So now new strategy is to put things first there what you want to produced.. And they make noise against it and then discover and then tell world see we were right. Iraq oil ministry has allowed 4 companies to extract oil from iraq now in last four decades this is first time

Babaychen: they went to Iraq because bush wanted Saddam Hussain. And a big miscalculation that war would be easy.

me: miscalculation.. Sounds WOW.. US can monitor one single act through satellite and they can’t calculate the war would be easy

Babaychen: yes.. okay if what you are saying is true, then we cant do anything in any case, we should just give up and let America rule your country.. if America is that smart

me: We are already a neo colony of US.. Cause our economy is hijacked by IMF and World Bank

Babaychen: why? in 1980 Pakistan was financially better than India i have heard so what happened?

me: they want to get sympathies over their soldiers.. That they r being killed there for self defense.. And now we are responsible to protect them.. khud aaj main jhonk ker us ki aag seeknay wali baat hai

Babaychen: they have made mistakes again and again
You don’t read American newspapers? No body there thought the war would last that’s why they are struggling and failing

me: those newspapers are balancing factors my dear friend..
just to cool their people down … it is again political strategies.. Media hah media is in hands of those who start wars

Babaychen: see i notice one thing when I talk to u which is somewhat different in India…. we will quickly blame ourselves, not just our politicians now You are just being funny.. Too many conspiracy theories see when things go wrong in India.. We may blame everyone.. but we blame ourselves the most. We say, our own people encouraged problems. i don’t see u saying that my Hindu friends will say that we have made mistakes, Sikhs will say it………Christians will say it that We made mistakes and i don’t see u saying, we Pakistanis made mistakes

me: tell you if u will scroll back i in start admitted about the mistakes

me: they can say “WE”.. Because their representatives take actions but we are surviving under imposed dictatorship for almost 40 years.. Those dictators are not our elected representatives

Babaychen: its always military, politicians, America.. why are there dictators in Pakistan?

Babaychen: ok.. Agreed

me: see when politicians are coming from feudal families and imported from west.. They ultimately have to be like CIA agents

Babaychen: ok. so now we admit that your military has dictatorial tendencies, and politicians are CIA agents. Who is left who is truly capable and patriotic and can lead the country?

me: I have a reason to say that they suddenly start saying oh things are going out of control.. And then military beaurcracy plunges and takes the control.. and then you realize that US has to have a proxy war against Soviet Union so it needed Zia to use Afghanistan again USSR then there is along period.. then democracy then again US needs to play its games for twin towers.. Then its Musharraf.. Before they need Ayyub to break Pakistan.. to weaken it..

Babaychen: so we say, army can’t be trusted, politicians can’t be trusted. US too. So now where is the solution?

me: being prudent, we admit no one reliable.. This time we thought Benazir Bhutto will be solution as she behaved matured though she had deals with Musharraf. But she realized that it was difficult to fulfil those deals thus she started aligning herself and result was her assissnation. She talked about the people of Pakistan.. In whole South Asia no leader is there who talks about the rights of general masses. If any leader say he or she can not survive and always assassinated.. check the history.. Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto was assassinated only because he talked right.. Bugti and a ling list.. see in your own country..

Babaychen: ok ok

me: now this is youth.. Who has to come up to end this pseudo democracy

Babaychen: end and then what

me: youth that understand the problems but again i have problem
Our youth has been taught what US agenda is, our curriculum is changed

Babaychen: see if things are that bad, Pakistan should merge with America

me: Their cognitive development is now in powerless and hand cut things.. in this context we can admire the heroic deeds of Samad. Listen, i told you we r neo colony of US.. we need not merge.. jab US ka kaam chal rha hai aisy he to why Pakistan should merged

me: it is not a solution it is a statement coming from a man who considers Musharraf is right, he might have read kotlya chankya
Urth Shaster

Babaychen: mush is not right, but nobody seems to be right.. say there is an honest politician.. who becomes the president or PM.. what should he do to fix things?

me: we wanted Imran Khan to come, but people think he played immature.. Anyways he knew establishment would never want him to come.. So he prudently withdrawn his papers to keep himself safe from shamelessness that he himself could not win cause elections are manipulated not in Pakistan but everywhere.. it is good question, like India in Pakistan there are 101 political parties.. Unlike US where only two parties operates.. people in India and Pakistan remain divided on issue like provincialism, autonomy, constitution, ethnic issue, racial issues, human rights, justice etc etc.. Even separatists like Sikhs are there so political instability is due to these so many parties.. Like Kala Bagh Dam was made intentionally an issue political issue..

Babaychen: yes

me: all new PM needs to unite this mob to one direction and build confidence in them and keep his all machinery in the straight lines to follow his instructions..our confusion and politician’s corruption needs someone who has confidence within all Pakistan..

Babaychen: yes… there is no such person

me: there was Benazir.. now People think Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudary.. the politics in Pakistan has very interesting maslaful story in Pakistan..

Babaychen: but what if the army doesn’t trust that guy? does the army trust any politician?

me: army suppose to be in barracks , they are to follow not to order

Babaychen: but that’s not the reality

me: every organ of state machinery has its specified functions to perform.. Every institution has its norms.. And all the problems emerge when those institutions powers are intermingled and people try to snatch power.. This week institutionalism

Babaychen: yes and if one organ likes the army refuses to do so? like they have been doing

me: this has got its roots since British were here they revolt, civil war.. and yes there is a power called media.. They sets moods and Public Opinion

Babaychen: yes but what do u do now?

me: i recommend a constitutional fair government where everyone is doing their own jobs,.. and where rights are protected justice is available to everyone.. and people are provided with basic necessities of life like food, education, health, electricity, housing.. etc

Babaychen: army doesn’t give up their power. they will not become a normal army in a long time

me: yups case military and civil burucracies are the left overs and seeded evils of British rule. They can never because the norms are set in a way. They are to stick to power. However the connotation of power is changed..

Babaychen: yes but its the same army in India too.. same leftover

me: your institutions are strong and let these to be flourished in one direction.. and those have been stronger with passage of time..

Babaychen: yes but its still a leftover of the British. so what went right here? and what went wrong there? and why?

me: many think tank in Pakistan say that had India been Muslim country there problems would have been more or less like us..

Babaychen: why so?

me: You know this very well.. and if i ll start explaining it will be a new chapter so lets sleep.. Lets finish this episode here..

Babaychen: hehe.. yea.. Good night too late here too

me: Good Night

Nisar A. Memon in his speech said that terrorists are reorganizing their force due to wrong policies of the present government on war on terrorism that are major threat to national security. Mushahid Hussain Syed criticized Pakistan’s stance on the controversial India-US nuclear deal at the International Atomic Energy Agency. He was of the view that while Kabul, New Delhi and Washington have one voice while criticizing Pakistan to not control terrorism and extremism it is imperative for Pakistan to be more proactive while taking sensitive decisions and work to promote its relations with China and Iran.

Leader of the House Mian Raza Rabbani while contradicting the claim of Mushahid Hussain Syed regarding taking U-turn by the government at IAEA on India-US nuclear deal said it was not the present regime but President Pervez Musharraf and government of Shaukat Aziz who retreated and said there is no comparison between Indian and Pakistan on the nuclear issue.

He said both the President and the Prime Minister were present while President Bush on 4th March, 2006 addressing a joint news conference in Islamabad said that Pakistan should not expect nuclear programme from the United States like India as there is no comparison between the two countries. He said Mr. Musharraf after two days of the visit of the US President himself said that Pakistan is not in competition with India.

Mian Raza Rabbani stressed to keep the record straight and said it is not the present government but the previous government of PML-(Q) who is responsible for taking turn around on the US-Indian nuclear deal.

He also referred various policy decisions of the previous government which it took under the guidance of President Pervez Musharraf including major shift on Kashmir policy, decisions post nine eleven and CBMs with India where the parliament was never taken into confidence while the present government after assuming charge took the parliament into confidence in its first session of the foreign policy.-SANA

He said that to follow American directions regarding a very sensitive institution of the country was a shameful act. Jamaat-e-Islami is against ISI’s involvement in politics, he added. When asked, he said “the Prime Minister’s visit to America was nothing but appearing of a slave before his master which has no national significance”.

Commenting on Pakistan Muslim League-N (PML-N) leader Nawaz Sharif and PPP Co-Chairman Asif Ali Zardari,s meeting, he said that it would not be in interest of the nation. He said that All Parties Democratic Movement (APDM) will not take part in any movement which through country into swamp of dictatorship. To a question, he said that MMA’s future would be decided on 23rd August on the occasion of Ulama Convention.-SANA