Al-Khorasan launched to replace al-Qaeda?

Mian Saifur Rehman

Looking closely at the developments in the post-American/Nato drawdown, one gets an impression that Al-Khorasan has been launched by global vested interests to replace al-Qaeda for prolonging a more perfidious battle and violent terrorism in and around Afghanistan whose logical spillover will impact Pakistan, China and the periphery.

These views were expressed by academicians and analysts Muhammad Saeed and Muhammad Hafeez while talking with The News.
The two analysts went on to explain Al-Khorasan and said, “This (al-Khorasan) is an IS outfit for Afghanistan and the adjoining region. Coincidentally, with the impending drawdown of American forces in Afghanistan, the IS has also ‘announced’ its organisational structure in Afghanistan by naming this extension as al-Khorasan (Khorasan theoretically includes Iran and Central Asia, in addition to Afghanistan and Pakistan), although its commitment is confined at present to certain Arab and African countries. Of course this proclamation suffices to mean more nuisance in the region. 

In view of this imminent but predictably overplayed threat of IS arrival and the anticipated antagonist posture towards Pakistan, Afghanistan and China, these three countries have showed their willingness to carry out active and defensive counter-terrorism cooperation with the international community under principles of UN charter and other basic norms governing international relations to preserve regional as well as global peace, stability and security. The three have in fact embarked upon an arduous journey but objective of the journey is to bring peace and stability in Afghanistan and its surroundings.
China, in this particular case, has shown extra concern for the security environment in the region with greater focus on Pakistan’s solidarity and stability. Beijing, through its foreign ministry, has consistently maintained at regional and international channels that Pakistan has remained the major victim of terrorism. America has also most of the time acknowledged the contribution of Pakistan for playing an imperative role as a non-NATO ally in war on terror yet has frequently been pushing the country for doing more to a level of bitterness. As regards the Chinese leadership at all levels, it possesses the logical wisdom about subsistence and root causes of extremism and terrorism in the region as well as within their territory. It is because of this reason that they have adopted a reasonable standpoint of showing concerns with Pakistan as well as other countries with a sincere view to overcome the issue. Pakistan in turn has constantly responded to China with the same esteem to defeat violent extremism in its true perspective.”
The analysts are also quite concerned about the reports (which though still fall short of complete confirmation) about fresh recruitment and positioning especially in the wake of several radicals taking a liking for the sprouting IS particularly in the liberal Western countries as well as from other former European colonies, as is evident from the increased incidents in certain European countries to include France. They opine, “The kind of jihad marketing that the stage-managed IS has done in other regions of West’s interest would attract many more unerringly similar to the CIA’s operation of hoarding them together after recruitment for pouring into Afghanistan during Soviet Union’s intervention in Afghanistan down the history. Drum beating of IS footprints in Pakistan and Afghanistan is on the increase and likely to catch further impetus in the Indian as well as Western media. In this context Indian and British newspapers while quoting Mullah Abdul Rauf Khadim of Afghan spy agency and British journalist John Cantlie, have even mentioned incidents substantiating the presence and recruitment spree of ‘black flags flying IS’ in far-flung areas like Gilgit-Baltistan of Pakistan and Helmand of Afghanistan. Control over or fomenting trouble in Gilgit-Baltistan, which is immediate neighbour of China and also means of critical access to the water resources, precious gems and trans-Asian trade between Pakistan, China and Central Asia besides access to warm waters, by such radicals will be beneficial for extra regional players rather than regional countries. Hence the challenge before Pakistan, Afghanistan and China as well as Iran and Central Asian countries with Russian influence, would be to ensure that there is no spillover into their territories from extra regional players. 

Interestingly in the same context EU foreign ministers have recently pledged to counter “radical Muslims” returning from Syria and Iraq with a better strategy at home and abroad. This ministerial level meeting was to lay the groundwork for a string of meetings that culminated into an EU leaders’ summit during mid February 2015 in Brussels that has set out the EU strategy to deal with what they term “the Muslim (not specifically IS) extremism”. Indian and Israeli inclusion in the EU’s strategy was also an integral part while the US was overarching.
China, Pakistan and other countries including Russia and certain non-aligned countries across the globe must anticipate radical changes in the US and EU policies specific to bilateral agreements on extradition treaties or exchange of criminals in foreseeable future. These efforts in most of the cases may be aimed at extraditing legally or exporting illegally the radicals and criminals to disturb the countries of interest in line with the “improved strategy” to deal with ‘Muslim radicals’ and terrorism. More attacks, preferably lone wolf, on EU countries and more caricature type arm twists to perpetuate the breeding ground for radicals may also be expected in future. 

Against the backdrop of newly emerging reconciliation and peace and security initiatives collectively started by Pakistan, China and Afghanistan, the current Afghan unity government led by President Ashraf Ghani, without compromising on the core interests of his country, has arranged arrest and handing over of several Uighur militants from China’s west in recognition of the sincere peace and reconciliation efforts of China in addition to seeking tangible cooperation for rebuilding Afghanistan that has repeatedly been ravaged for the last several decades. 

GIVING UP KASHMIR???????

By Ali Sukhanver

A very honourable Pakistani diplomat Hussain Haqqani said speaking at the Royal Institute of International Affairs at Chatham House in London that Pakistan must give up its ideological obsession over the Kashmir issue. He further said that Pakistan no longer enjoys the support of the international community.

He stressed that Pakistan needs to have the kind of approach China has over Taiwan. It doesn’t need to give up its claim but it needs to move on other issues first. Haqqani’s statement proved astonishingly heart-breaking and agonizingly painful to the people of Pakistan who have ever been considering Kashmir a sacred guarantee to their existence. It is something very striking that a person who once had been representing the whole of Pakistani nation is now churning out the words which reflect a typical Indian type of philosophy. Certainly Mr. Haqqani would not have given such a baseless example and this childlike statement if he were aware of China’s reaction to Modi’s visit to Arunachal Pradesh in the last week of the last February. Mr. Modi visited Arunachal Pradesh to inaugurate a new railroad line. Arunachal Pradesh is a state in eastern India that borders Tibet to the north. A large portion of this state is claimed by China, and the two countries had been in a state of severe war over the area in 1962. It is said that India and China could never be friends unless until the issue of Arunachal Pradesh is settled. When the news of Modi’s visit to Arunachal Pradesh reached the Chinese authorities, it really raged them a lot. At once India’s ambassador in Beijing was summoned to the Chinese Foreign Office and a note of protest was handed over to him. In other words this protest was a sophisticated reminder, not only to India but also to whole of the world that territorial disputes could not be taken light. While advising Pakistan to adopt the kind of approach China is adopting over Taiwan, Mr. Haqqani must not have over-looked the example of China’s reaction to Modi’s visit to the disputed area of Arunachal Pradesh; the valley of Indian Occupied Kashmir is also a disputed area same as Arunachal Pradesh. But as far as Mr. Modi is concerned, it makes him no difference how China views at his visit to the disputed area of Arunachal Pradesh. He simply damn cares the Chinese protest because he is a man of his own will and of his own resolve. He never hides his love or his hatred. Everyone is aware of his temperament as an extremist Hindu; he simply hates the Muslims and wants to shun them out of India. And the most dominating aspect of his personality is that he never tries to conceal his temperament against the Muslims. 

Just look back at the Gujrat Massacre of 2002. Mr. Modi was the Chief Minister of Gujrat that time. Here is an extract from a report prepared by the Human Rights Watch after the Gujrat Massacre of Muslims, ‘Between February 28 and March 2, thousands of attackers descended on Muslim neighborhoods, clad in saffron scarves and khaki shorts, the signature uniform of Hindu nationalist groups, and armed with swords, sophisticated explosives, and gas cylinders. They were guided by voter lists and printouts of addresses of Muslim-owned properties-information obtained from the local municipality.’ Smita Narula, a senior South Asian researcher on various minorities living in India says, ‘What happened in Gujarat was not a spontaneous uprising; it was a carefully orchestrated attack against Muslims. The attacks were planned in advance and organized with extensive participation of the police and state government officials.’
According to official figures, the riots resulted in the deaths of 790 Muslims whereas more than 223 were reported missing but independent sources do not agree with the officially released figures. They claim that up to 2,000 Muslims lost their lives during the riots. There were countless incidents of rape and widespread looting and destruction of Muslim property. So many innocent children were burned alive. And this all was done under the ‘kind’ command and supervision of Mr. Narendra Modi, the honourable Chief Minister of Gujrat that time. Even the Indian journalists are of the opinion that Modi was the person who initiated the violence against the Muslims and then innocently closed his eyes to this brutality; unfortunately Mr.Haqqani seems representing the same Narendra Modi. 

Plight of minorities in India

By S M Hali

Theoretically, the Indian Constitution safeguards the rights of minorities but the Hindu majority, led by the BJP, is oblivious to the rights of the minorities and has indulged in excesses against Muslims, Sikhs, Christians and Dalits with impunity

India has been a vocal promoter of secularism but, unfortunately, the plight of minorities there tells a different tale. Maulana Abul Kalam Azad, one of the strongest advocates of Hindu Muslim unity, once said, “I firmly hold that communal frenzy will disappear when India assumes the responsibility of her own destiny.” Regrettably, Azad’s hope was not only dashed on the altar of Hindu fanaticism but the predicament of minorities in India has worsened.
In 2005, the then Prime Minister (PM), Manmohan Singh, appointed the Rajinder Sachar Committee to prepare a report on the social, economic and educational conditions of minorities in India. Headed by the former Chief Justice (CJ) of the Delhi High Court (DHC), Rajinder Sachar, and six other members, the committee prepared a 403-page report and presented it in the lower house (Lok Sabha) of Indian parliament on November 30, 2006. The committee concluded that, “the status of Indian Muslims is below the conditions of scheduled castes while the overall percentage of Muslims in the bureaucracy and armed forces in India is just 2.5 percent whereas Muslims constitute above 14 percent of the Indian population.” To ensure equity and equality of opportunities to Indian Muslims in the residential, work and educational sectors, the committee proposed multiple measures to be adopted, with suitable mechanisms. Alas, the Sachar Committee’s findings and recommendations were buried in red tape.
The advent of the BJP government in mid-2014 has caused further concern since the BJP’s election manifesto was directed towards extremist Hindus, dropping the idea of secularism. Theoretically, the Indian Constitution safeguards the rights of minorities but the Hindu majority, led by the BJP, is oblivious to the rights of the minorities and has indulged in excesses against Muslims, Sikhs, Christians and Dalits with impunity. In recent weeks, a number of religious ceremonies have been organised in different parts of India by Hindu hardliner groups close to Mr Modi’s governing BJP and there have been allegations that they involved force, fraud or inducement. Extremist Hindu groups like the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), Bajrang Dal, Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) and others say that Indian Muslims and Christians were all Hindus who have converted to other faiths over the last few centuries. These groups regularly hold ceremonies that they call “ghar vapasi” (returning home) to allow Christians and Muslims to return to their ‘original’ religion. 

The Tom Lantos Human Rights Commission Testimony by Human Rights Watch presented before the US Senate Committee the atrocious attitude of the Hindu majority and has highlighted the plight of minorities in India. It concluded that in the run-up to the 2014 elections in India, tensions have escalated between Hindu and Muslim communities, leading to a 30 percent increase in incidents of communal violence as compared to 2012. The central government’s ministry of home affairs reported 823 incidents of communal violence in 2013, in which 133 people died and over 2,000 were injured. Although the report was presented before the Indian general elections of 2014, it not only fell on deaf ears but, ironically, the US government, which had previously denied a visa to Mr Modi on the basis of his involvement in the Gujarat pogrom, is now bending over backwards to woo him after his election as the Indian PM because they find India a lucrative market for their goods and services.
Some fanatic Hindus do not support a distinct culture for Indian minorities. They are led by the Skardu-born Professor Balraj Madhok, the one time president of the Bharatiya Jan Sangh, who unified Hindus to stand against the Pakistani forces and local separatists in 1948. He has been propagating that Indian minorities must adopt Hindu names. 

There has been a deliberate endeavour to ‘Hinduise’ the syllabus of schools and other educational institutions by inserting references to Hindu gods and goddesses in the textbooks. Simultaneously, history books prescribed by the Indian Education Board contain lessons depicting false stories of Muslim atrocities on Hindu women, kidnapping and forced conversion to Islam.
One would like to have faith in the Indian judicial system being impartial and fair but the truth is to the contrary. In the alleged attack on the Indian parliament building in December 2001, one of the accused, Afzal Guru, was falsely implicated and hanged although the evidence against him was flimsy. Perversely, despite eyewitness testimony implicating the highest elected political officials, justice continues to evade the victims in the Gujarat massacre of 2002 where over 70 accused persons of the Gujarat pogrom, including then Chief Minister (CM) Narendra Modi, were acquitted by the court. 

If India wants to be recognised as a champion of democracy and supporter of secularism, it will have to improve its track record of treatment of its minorities. Instead of persecuting or harassing them, it must treat them with dignity and grant them the human rights assured to them by the Indian Constitution. 

Who benefits from the CPEC?

By S M Hali

A project of the scale of the CPEC perhaps comes once in the lifetime of nations, hence it is imperative to delve deeper into its advantages

There is a lot of bickering going on amongst Pakistani politicians from various provinces regarding the China Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC). Some claim that it is going to benefit only the ruling party, others allege that only Punjab will gain from it while the other provinces will be left in the lurch. Others find fault with the route and surmise that it has been deliberately altered to promote the interests of Punjab. A few relegate the importance of the CPEC, considering it to be just a freeway. The fault perhaps lies in the way that the ruling was issued in Islamabad, without explaining the importance and magnitude of the project or elucidating the advantages that Pakistan will accrue from this all encompassing plan. Normally, politicians love to crow on about even minor achievements from the rooftops. A project on the scale of the CPEC perhaps comes once in the lifetime of nations, hence it is imperative to delve deeper into its advantages. For a country like Pakistan, which faces enormous challenges in terms of both law and order and a dwindling economy, the CPEC offers a panacea to most of its problems and will uplift the quality of life of its citizens.

The project embraces the construction of a cross-border optical fibre cable system between China and Pakistan, textile garment industrial park projects, numerous ventures in the energy sector yielding power from various sources comprising hydel, coal, wind power, solar and nuclear. It also entails the development of coal mining projects, the construction of dams, the installation of nuclear reactors and creating networks of roads, railway lines and oil/gas pipelines. Agreements have been made to construct a new international airport, Eastbay expressway, fully equipped hospital, a technical and vocational training institute, water supply and distribution, infrastructure for free zone and export processing zones, port related industries, refineries and marine works. The infrastructure projects planned comprise of the Karakorum Highway Phase II (Raikot-Islamabad), Karachi-Lahore Motorway (Multan-Sukkur section), expansion and reconstruction of existing the mail railway line from Peshawar to Karachi, the construction of a Havelian dry port, orange line project in Lahore and a cross-border optical fibre cable system project. 

Some of the significant energy projects being installed will yield around 10,400 megawatts of electricity. Those ventures include the Port Qasim Electric Power Company, producing 1,320 megawatts, Engro Thar coal-fired power plant, producing 660 megawatts, Sindh Sino resources power plant of Thar Coal (Block-1), producing 1,320 megawatts, Gwadar coal power project, producing 300 megawatts, Rahimyar Khan coal power, producing 1,320 megawatts, Muzaffargarh coal power, producing 1,320 megawatts, Sahiwal power plant, producing 1,320 megawatts, Suki Kinari power project, producing 870 megawatts, Karot Hydro power station, producing 720 megawatts, UEP wind power project, producing 100 megawatts, Sunec wind power project, producing 50 megawatts, Sachal wind power project, producing 50 megawatts, Dawood wind power project, producing 50 megawatts and Quaid-e-Azam solar, producing 900 megawatts.
In order to make the CPEC operational, the Chinese government has set up a special economic zone in the historical city of Kashgar, the border city between China and Pakistan. The Chinese government plans to complete this economic zone by the year 2020, for which duration Pakistani industrialists have been offered a tax-free zone and other concessions. This economic zone will prove to be the key to trade between China, Pakistan, India, Afghanistan and eight other central Asian states bordering both China and Pakistan. A railroad network is being constructed to ensure swift trade via this link. Some Pakistani politicians are becoming impatient regarding the construction of the road network plying through their constituencies. They fail to comprehend that the communication infrastructure will benefit all of Pakistan. Linking the existing infrastructure with the detailed planned project has been made a priority. Thus the region will be linked through modern means of communication including rail and road links providing trade and economic opportunities to not only China and Pakistan but the entire South Asian region through Gwadar and Karachi ports.
Both sides have pushed forward the implementation of early harvest projects as well as the preparation of the projects of the long-term plan in all sectors, have agreed to finalise the long-term plan of the corridor by July, 2015 and to speed up the process of its drafting. The early harvest projects of the CPEC, which include the laying of rail and road networks besides several long and short-term energy projects will be completed within a span of two to three years. The CPEC route starts from Kashgar, the traditional business centre in China’s Xinjiang province, which connects China to South Asian and central Asian states. The CPEC then enters Pakistan through the 1,300 kilometre long Karakoram Highway (KKH) and runs throughout Pakistan, finally reaching Gwadar Port in the South of Balochistan. It is clear that the CPEC will not only benefit the whole of Pakistan but will also contribute to regional peace, stability and prosperity if only we are patient. 

MIGRATION- A DOMINATING FEATURE OF HUMAN HISTORY

By Ali Sukhanver

Ali SukhanverMigration to safer lands has ever been a dominating feature of human history. People who migrate into a territory are called immigrants, while at the departure point they are called emigrants while populations displaced by immigration are called refugees. Another terms used for immigrants is asylum seeker.

A person who is outside his home country just because he has suffered or feared persecution on account of race, religion, nationality, or political opinion is called asylum seeker. Immigrants always prove a huge burden over the economy of the country they migrate to and usually such people never get the status of first grade citizens in the countries they strife to settle in but in Pakistan the situation seems altogether different. Here the refugees enjoy all possible liberties and all possible facilities and sometimes the refugees are so powerful that they seem dominating over the local population. At present in Pakistan, the term ‘Refugees’ is specifically used for the Afghan immigrants whose migration into Pakistan started somewhere in 1980 during Soviet war in Afghanistan. According to various survey reports more than 1.7 million Afghan refugees were living in Pakistan by the end of year 2012. Most of them were living in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Federally Administered Tribal Areas and Northwestern Balochistan. In 2013 Pakistan was home to an estimated 2.6 million Afghans and among these 1.7 millions, around 1.6 million were registered refugees and the rest were living undocumented and unaccounted for along the two countries’ shared border. There are two categories of the Afghan refugees living in Pakistan, the registered ones and the unregistered ones. Though the government of Pakistan is providing all possible help and support to the registered refugees in collaboration with the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees but the actual problem is because of the refugees who are living in Pakistan without any information and registration. Such illegal Afghan Refugees have become a painful burden on the limited resources of Pakistan. The government of Pakistan had been continuously requesting the Karzai government to make proper arrangements for repatriation of these refugees to Afghanistan but this request was never taken serious. However a tripartite agreement was signed in 2003 between the governments of Pakistan and Afghanistan and the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees which held the UNHCR responsible to assist the repatriation of Refugees who wanted to return until 2005; later, the agreement was extended to March 2006 and then to December 2006. At present the final date for the repatriation of Unregistered Refugees to Afghanistan is 31st December 2015. In the first week of this January, a high level meeting on policy recommendations for repatriation and registration of Afghan refugees residing in Pakistan decided that there will be no extension in deadline of return of Afghan refugees beyond 31 December 2015. The meeting also decided that those refugees living in urban areas will be sent back to refugee camps and for this purpose new sites for refugee camps will also be established. 

Illegal and unregistered Afghan refugees are creating a lot of problems for Pakistan regarding terrorism and law and order situation. There are countless people who claim to be Afghans but in fact they are not. Every day hundreds of Afghan people cross the Durand Line without any papers or permission. Since these Afghans have a lot of resemblance with the local people living in Pakistani area along the Durand Line, it becomes very difficult for the law enforcement agencies to put a check on them. These illegal ‘trespassers’ so many times try to settle themselves in refugee camps also. The situation is becoming grave and serious day by day. When the law enforcement agencies take any action against such illegal refugees, the government of Pakistan has to face a lot of resistance and opposition from the so-called human-rights organizations. These organizations defame the government of Pakistan by blaming that the Afghan refugees are being harassed by the law enforcement agencies of Pakistan in the name of the National Action Plan. A spokesman of the Ministry of Interior has recently rejected all such blames and allegations by saying that in line with the tripartite agreement between Pakistan, Afghanistan and UNHCR, no action is being taken against any Afghan refugee, all legal action is against those individuals who do not possess CNICs or other document which can authenticate their antecedents. Pakistan has always been very helpful and supportive to Afghanistan and the Afghan nation. It has no ill-will or grudge against any Afghan national. But at the same time it is the right of the government of Pakistan to keep a vigilant eye on those who are involved in terrorist activities either they are from Afghanistan or any other country. 

India’s Increasing Defense Budget: At What Cost?

By Sajjad Shaukat

On February 28, this year, India announced its ambitious defense budget amounting to 2.47 trillion Indian rupees ($40.07 billion), a 7.9 percent increase for the fiscal year starting from April 1, 2015, suggesting that it will move with the military’s long wish list for fighter jets, ships and artillery, as Narendra Modi’s government presented its first budget. For the current fiscal year, the allocation was 2.29 trillion rupees, a jump of 12 percent over the previous year.

While exposing India’s unlimited defense policy, Washington-based Center for Strategic & International Studies (CSIS) had disclosed in its report of April 2011 that India had planned “to spend an estimated $80 billion on military modernization programs by 2015 so as to further increase its military build-up against China and disrupt security-balance in South Asia…India is expected to maintain this position in the coming years.” 
The CSIS report elaborated, “Consequently, India’s defense budget has roughly quadrupled (in real terms) since 2001…reaching $36.3 billion in the 2011–2012 budget…and enabled the implementation of long-term acquisition plans.” 
It is notable that in February 2010, Indian military procurement units descended on the DefExpo 2010 trade fair in New Delhi. Inaugurating the Indian Defense Exhibition, Defense Minister A.K. Antony had said that India’s defense expenditure which is 2.5 percent of its gross domestic product (GDP) is going to increase. He pointed out, “Our government is committed to rapid modernization of armed forces.” 

In this regard, in its report, the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) revealed on March 20, 2012, “India is the world’s largest recipient of arms…India’s imports of major weapons increased by 38 percent between 2002-06 and 2007-11.”

 
New Delhi’s military is acquiring a slew of new equipments from combat aircraft to submarines and artillery. It is currently finalising a deal with France’s Dassault Aviation to buy 126 Rafale fighter jets in a contract worth an estimated $12 billion. 

Although peace and brinksmanship cannot co-exist in the modern era, yet India seeks to destabilize Asia through its aggressive designs. 
In this respect, US still backs Indian hegemony in Asia to counterbalance China. During American President Barack Obama’s visit to India, on January 25, this year, the US and India announced a breakthrough on a pact which would allow American companies to supply New Delhi with civilian nuclear technology. On November 2, 2010, US agreed to sell India the most expensive—the new F-35 fighter jets including US F-16 and F-18 fighters, C-17 and C-130 aircraft, radar systems, Harpoon weapons etc. Besides acquisition of arms and weapons from other western countries—especially Israel, America is a potential military supplier to India. US also pressurized International Atomic Energy Agency and the Nuclear Suppliers Group to grant a waiver to New Delhi for obtaining civil nuclear trade on larger scale. 

As a matter of fact, US wants New Delhi to assume anti-China role. Beijing is apprehensive about the emerging threat, as the intent of President Obama and Prime Minister Narendra Modi was quite clear, while mentioning about free sea lanes and air passages in the South China Sea. 

In the recent past, tension arose between India and China when Indian army erected a military camp in Chumar Sector of Ladakh at the Line of Actual Control (LAC)-disputed border, situated between the two countries. Similarly, Indian soldiers crossed over the Line of Control (LoC) in Kashmir on January 6, 2012 and attacked a Pakistani check post, killing one Pakistani soldier. Afterwards, Indian troops shot dead more Pakistani soldiers on the LoC. 
It is mentionable that under the Pak-China pretext, Indian ex-Army Chief, General Deepak Kapoor disclosed on December 29, 2010 that the Indian army “is now revising its five-year old doctrine” and is preparing for a “possible two-front war with China and Pakistan.” 

It is noteworthy that after 9/11, both India and Israel which had openly jumped on Bush’s anti-terrorism enterprise are acting upon a secret diplomacy, targeting Pakistan China and Iran. It could be assessed from the interview of Israel’s ambassador to India, Mark Sofer, published in the Indian weekly Outlook on February 18, 2008. Regarding India’s defense arrangements with Tel Aviv, Sofer had surprisingly revealed, “We do have a defense relationship with India, and “with all due respect, the secret part will remain a secret.” In fact, with the support of Israel, New Delhi has been acquiring an element of strategic depth by setting up logistical bases in the Indian Ocean for its navy. 

Particularly, fast growing economic power of China coupled with her rising strategic relationship with the Third World, and especially Pakistan has irked the eyes of Americans and Indians. Owing to jealousy, America desires to make India a major power to counterbalance China in Asia. While, New Delhi continues cross-border terrorism in Pakistan including violations at the LoC and the Working Boundary, located at Pak-India borders. 

And, on July 20, 2011, while hinting towards Pak-China ties, the then US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton urged India to be more assertive in Asia, saying that as American ally, the country should play more of a leadership role. She explained, “India has the potential to positively shape the future of the Asia-Pacific.” 
However, India’s increasing defense budget not only indicates her offensive designs, but also has other drastic consequences in the region as well as for India itself. 

In this context, in May 1998 when India detonated five nuclear tests, it also compelled Pakistan to follow the suit. The then Defense Minister George Fernandes had also declared publicly that “China is India’s potential threat No. 1.” New Delhi which successfully tested missile, Agni-111in May 2007, has been extending its range to target all Chinese cities. Now, by setting aside peace-offers of Beijing and Islamabad, New Delhi has entangled the latter in a deadly arms race.

 
While, international community has been making strenuous efforts for world peace in wake of global financial crisis and war against terrorism, but India has particularly initiated deadly nuclear arms race in South Asia where people are already facing multiple problems of grave nature. Majority of South Asian people are living below the poverty level, lacking basic facilities like fresh food and clean water. While yielding to acute poverty, every day, some persons commit suicide. 
In fact, currently, more than half of India’s budget is allocated for military and paramilitary forces. That leaves less than half for everything else including infrastructure development projects, education, healthcare, poverty alleviation, and various human services. New Delhi’s latest arms buildup will leave even less for what India needs most to lift hundreds of millions of its citizens from abject poverty, hunger, illiteracy and disease. 

In the recent past, Indian civil society organizations, while complaining of excessive defense spending, indicated that the government spends very little amount for the betterment of people. 

Indian defense analyst Ravinder Pal Singh, while pointing to New Delhi’s unending defense spending at the cost of poverty-alleviation, calls it guns-versus-butter question. 
Even some of Indian officials are surprised in relation to Indian defense expenditure which has no bounds. For example, an official of the country’s finance ministry remarked, “There is a dilemma…poverty needs to be eradicated to prevent men from taking to the guns…but more funds for security means less money for poverty alleviation.” 

Meanwhile, a report of United Nations pointed out that India ranks 134th of 182 countries on the United Nations Development Programme’s Human Development Index. It estimated that 50 per cent of the world’s undernourished population lives in India. Nearly 31 per cent of the billion-plus Indians earn less than a dollar a day. 

Secretary General of the Control Arms Foundation of India Binalakshmi Nepram said, “When people are dying of poverty and bad sanitation, what protection will arms provide them?” 

Nevertheless, by ignoring regional problems and particularly resolution of Indo-Pak issues, especially the Kashmir dispute, Indian rulers state that they do not have any belligerent policy. But, it becomes a big joke of the 21st century, reminding a maxim, “armed to the teeth, but no enemy”, if we take cognizance of India’s increasing defense budget in wake of her aggressive designs, destroying South Asian peace and stability at the cost of modern world trends such as peaceful settlement of disputes, economic development and disarmament, giving a wake up call to other regional powers including Middle East and the Western World. 

India Pakistan Talks: Difference of Approach

By Khalid Iqbal

Following the resumption of foreign secretary level talks between India and Pakistan, the Foreign Secretary of Pakistan briefed the ambassadors of P-5 countries and the EU Mission, stationed in Islamabad, regarding the visit of Indian Foreign Secretary. Pakistan India-5India had characterized it as a visit in the context of SAARC; Pakistan portrayed it as a visit taking place in lieu of the August visit and termed it as an ice breaker. India ticked off an item to ward off international pressure; Pakistan’s conduct symbolized a wholesome engagement. Despite varied perceptions, the meeting was held in a constructive and positive atmosphere; no fireworks were reported, both sides restated their positions on various contentious events. Pakistani side was careful in not declaring the visit a failure and called it as part of a process. However, Advisor to Prime Minister on Foreign Affairs and National Security has acknowledged that there was no breakthrough during the talks. The menace of terrorism is a known problem that affects most of the countries of the world, including this region. Pakistan also has its concerns on this issue, these were elaborately articulated during the talks, especially the persistent Indian involvement that ferments terrorism in Pakistan, more so in FATA and Balochistan. While India talked about trial of those allegedly involved in Mumbai attacks, Pakistan reminded India that investigations about bombing of Samjhota express that took place much earlier than Mumbai attacks has not ended-up anywhere close to conclusion and that those who have made self-incriminating confessions are out on bail.

 

Pakistan has suffered the most because of terrorism; and has done more than any other country to counter terrorism. Pakistan expects similar approach from other countries. As regards blaming Pakistan, it is not a good approach to blame every terrorist attack on Pakistan right on the onset of the event. Pakistan expects that thorough investigations should be conducted before any finger pointing. Blowing off of a smugglers’ boat by Indian coast guards in December 2014 is the latest example the way India jumps the gun. Another important issue between the two countries is right of self-determination by the people of Jammu and Kashmir, who are larger in number than 123 currently independent nations and have a defined historical identity. They are, at present, engaged in a massive, indigenous and non violent struggle to win their freedom from the foreign occupation of their land. Relevance of the principle of self-determination to the specific case of Jammu and Kashmir has been, time and again, recognized by the United Nations. It was upheld equally by India and Pakistan when the Kashmir dispute was brought before the UN Security Council by India. The two countries entered into an agreement to allow the people of Jammu and Kashmir to exercise their right of self-determination under impartial auspices and in conditions free from coercion from either side. 
Envoys from India and Pakistan agreed to “narrow differences” and find common ground, both Jaishankar and, Aizaz Chaudhry, stressed the need to work together; but there was no decision on whether the meeting would result in future negotiations. Indian Foreign Secretary’s two-day visit marked the first high-level meeting between India and Pakistan since talks were disrupted by India last year. “We engaged on each other’s concerns and interests in an open manner. We agreed to work together to find common ground and narrow differences,” Jaishankar said. “The overall tone of the meeting was positive…We need to make a concerted effort to resolve this dispute,” he said.

 
Jaishankar said that Pakistan will be the next Chairman of the SAARC and India wants to see the forum as successful. He also met Pakistani Prime Minister and delivered a letter from Prime Minster Narendra Modi; both sides were tight-lipped about the contents of Modi’s letter, sources said it focused on the need to rebuild peaceful, friendly ties between the two nations by removing trust deficit. Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif said in a statement that both countries need to start a new chapter in their relationship.images The visit of the senior Indian diplomat is seen in Pakistan as a move to revive the stalled “Composite Dialogue” process between the two neighbours. India is also hoping to revive regular contacts between the border security forces on both sides to ensure peace on the border. A BSF-Pak Rangers consultation mechanism may be restarted, as well as other conversations. “We agreed that ensuring peace and tranquillity on the border was vital,” Jaishankar said. “Pakistan also sought to keep the focus on Kashmir in the talks.” India wants to replicate the China border template with Pakistan. That is, intensify interactions between security forces and even DGMOs that would bring in a more peaceful border. The firing on the border, the Indian government has concluded, is proving to be a big hindrance to normalizing bilateral ties, and that 2003 ceasefire arrangement has been one of the biggest confidence building measures in operation. This ceasefire has unravelled since early 2013 with regular provocative firing by India, extending from the LOC to the international boundary. One of the first things that India wants to restore could be cross-LOC CBMs and agree to opening up more roads like the Kargil-Skardu, more border trade and more popular contacts. With a BJP-PDP government in operation in Jammu & Kashmir, there is greater incentive for India now to quieten the border. 

A second message Jaishankar took with him to Pakistan concerned SAARC, which is a personal imperative of the Modi. “I conveyed the expectations of our leadership on SAARC and their determination to forge a cooperative relationship with all our neighbours. We discussed ideas and initiatives to take SAARC forward. Pakistan will be the next SAARC Chair and India would like to work with Pakistan to help SAARC achieve its potential.” India has conveyed to Pakistan that connectivity and trade would be implemented in the SAARC region, even if Pakistan chose to stay away. India is pushing the Bangladesh-Bhutan-India-Nepal (BBIN) sub-grouping to clear hurdles to connectivity between these four countries to pressurise Pakistan. Modi will make the pledges during a visit to Sri Lanka, Mauritius and Seychelles. New Delhi is hoping to tie the islands into a closer security embrace. “India has a role as a net security provider in the Indian Ocean region,” said a defence official involved in preparations for Modi’s trip. Modi is expected to tighten defence and security cooperation and push for final approval for a 500 MW power plant to be built by India’s state-run National Thermal Power Corporation and a strategic port in eastern Sri Lanka. 

Back home Prime Minister Narendra Modi disapproved of Jammu and Kashmir chief minister Mufti Mohammad Saeed’s statement that Pakistan, Hurriyat and militants created a conducive atmosphere for elections in the state. Differences between the alliance partners burst out in the open after group of PDP MLAs demanded the Centre hand over the remains of Parliament attack convict Afzal Guru to his family. Modi is well on its way for two-pronged strategy to squeeze Pakistan. He wants to bypass Pakistan within SAARC and create conditions that Pakistan softens its stance on Kashmir. Under these circumstances Pakistan should be in no hurry to talk to India. Pakistan should wait for the right kind of strategic environment, and that may happen when Modi mellow down on his over ambitious regional and global objectives. This could happen when he is well into the second half of his tenure and issues arising out of his ongoing erratic regional policy begin to haunt him. 

Refocus on Manawan Police Academy Attack

By Sajjad Shaukat

Pakistan has become special arena of the different war, being waged by the security forces against the ruthless terrorists who have continued their terror-activities such as suicide attacks, bomb blasts, targeted killings, beheadings of the innocent people, assaults on security personnel and prominent religious figures. Besides blowing children schools and attacking the female teachers in order to deny education to girls, the terrorists, particularly of the Indian-backed Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) also targeted mosques, Imambargahs, mausoleums, temples, churches and disgraced dead bodies. Their pitiless acts resulted into killings of several persons in Pakistan.

In this regard, 30 March reminds the day when in 2009, the Manawan Police Academy in Lahore was attacked and captured by an estimated 12 gunmen who also seized hostages.

In the deadly attack, at least 13 people, including four police trainees and two instructors, were killed and other 100 wounded in eight hours of gun battles with armed assailants. During exchange of firing between the terrorists and police and army personnel, surrounding the compound, there was a series of loud explosions. This fact proved that the perpetrators were armed with automatic weapons, grenades and rockets.

Despite the continued firing of the gunman on the troops, police, and on helicopters which were monitoring the situation, the valiant security forces successfully coped with the militants and were able to take back the building. It was due to their boldness that three of the attackers blew themselves up, three others were taken into custody and four were taken to undisclosed locations for interrogation by the security forces.

Regarding the Manawan Police Academy attack, Afzal Ali, the former head of Pakistan’s police academy said, “We are at a state of war.”

The then chief of the TTP, Baitullah Mehsud took responsibility for the attack on the Manawan Police Academy, Lahore.

In this respect, various terror-attacks indicate that Indian secret agency, RAW has been waging a guerilla warfare in Pakistan through its well-trained insurgents, especially of the TTP, who could conduct attacks in major cities of the country.

After sponsoring bomb blasts and suicide attacks in the past, a perennial wave of the same in 2009-particularly in the last 18 months clearly proves that RAW has modified its tactics of subversion in Pakistan. Apart from direct suicide events, militants, armed with hand grenades, machine guns and other weapons also come to help the explosive-laden vehicles so as to penetrate the security at the target points. Sometimes, exchange of fire takes place between the saboteurs and the security guards, and sometimes, purpose is to directly kill the security personnel of our country. A number of terror-events in Pakistan endorse that RAW’s agents have been acting upon the guerilla techniques. In most of the terror-tragedies, huge quantity of explosives has also been used.

Apart from the latest incidents in Lahore, similar tactics of exchange of fire were occurred in connection with many terrorist incidents, as the militants reached their directed targets with latest weapons. In this respect, on March 3, 2009, terrorist attack which targeted the bus of Sri Lankan cricket team in Lahore had killed 8 persons after a continuous gunfire by the militants. Pakistani officials confirmed that “grenades and rocket launchers had been recovered” which were of foreign origin. Afterwards, official inquiry disclosed that RAW was behind that attack. On May 27, 2009, more than 30 people were killed in Lahore when an explosive-laden Suzuki van exploded near Rescue 15 building of the police which was completely destroyed. It also damaged the building of the Lahore Capital City Police Office (CCPO) and that of the Inter Services Intelligence (ISI) which was the main target, but could not be hit due to heavy firing by the security guards on the terrorists who came along with the vehicle, firing at the security guards. Punjab Law Minister Rana Sanaullah said on the same day that Indian involvement in “suicide attack in Lahore cannot be ruled out.”

Similar types of terror-tactics were applied by the culprits in relation to the Pearl Continental hotel in Peshawar where more than 20 persons had been killed in the suicide blast. Eyewitnesses had pointed out that the gunmen, sitting in one car first started firing at the security persons and then exploded their first vehicle to give a safe-passage to other truck which was carrying 500 kilograms of explosives. Attack on the Marriot Hotel in Islamabad might also be cited as an example.

Another guerilla technique of the RAW-trained terrorists is that they camouflage themselves by wearing the uniform of Pakistani security forces so as to deceive the security guards and to get inside the targeted point for conducting their assigned task. In 2009, U.N.’s World Food Program in Islamabad was attacked by a suicide bomber who was wearing an official uniform, evaded tight security and killed five people. Again, the militants who attacked the GHQ on October 10, 2009 were wearing army uniforms.

It is mentionable that regarding the 2009 simultaneous terror attacks in Lahore and that of the GHQ, the then Spokesman of the ISPR, Maj. Gen. Athar Abbas, Interior Minister Rehman Malik and other TV commentators had indicated Indian involvement behind the attack, remarking: “Hakimullah Mehsud and other terrorists are “the enemies of the state” and “are mercenaries who receive arms from Afghanistan to destabilize the country.”

While, Pakistan’s civil and military high officials have openly revealed that Indian RAW, Israeli Mossad and other foreign agencies are involved in supporting insurgency in various regions of Pakistan including separatism in Balochistan.

Nevertheless, on November 2, 2013, suicide bomber targeted a checkpoint at Wagah in Lahore and like other terror-assaults, Indian-supported TTP claimed responsibility. Afterwards, investigations proved Indian involvement in this attack. As regards the most brutal incident, TTP took responsibility for the massacre of 132 school children at Army Public School and College in Peshawar on December 16, 2013. Recently, TTP again accepted responsibility in relation to two suicide attacks on the churches in Lahore.

As a matter of fact, based in Afghanistan, Indian RAW with technological support of Israel and other anti-Pakistan countries have been sending the culprits to Pakistan so as to weaken the latter, as it is the only nuclear country in the Islamic world.

Undoubtedly, Pakistan is in the state of new war, being waged by the Armed Forces and intelligence agencies against terrorists. In this connection, our Armed Forces have almost obtained their objectives in North Waziristan Agency (NWA) through military operation Zarb-e-Azb against the terrorists who had challenged the writ of the state, and had frightened the entire nation by their terror-acts. In Balochistan, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Karachi and other parts of the country including tribal areas, our security forces and law-enforcing agencies are successfully coping with the militants.

Nonetheless, 30 March reminds the day when Pakistan’s courageous personnel of the security forces retook the building of the Manawan Police Academy in Lahore, after fighting with the well-equipped terrorists.

Sajjad Shaukat writes on international affairs and is author of the book: US vs Islamic Militants, Invisible Balance of Power: Dangerous Shift in International Relations

Email: sajjad_logic@yahoo.com