Mwaqar
Afzal Khan Lala , who spent most of his time struggling for getting the rights of his nation. The enemies of Pashtun are bent upon to eliminate him physically and create a vacuum in the Pashtun for a leader of the caliber of Khan lala. It is evident to all including international community that Pashtun region is engulfed by the terrorists and their promoters .What is happening to the people of Swat is a tragedy. When Swat has gone out of control and there is no writ of the government and even the elected member of the assemblies have either been killed by the terrorists or they have fled the area, there is one person who is like ‘Last Man Standing.’ One man who hasn’t bowed in front of ignorant Taliban despite of many attempts on his life and property. That brave son of pukhtunkhwa is, ’’AFZAL KHAN LALA’’. Through your newspaper, I salute him for his courage and bravery. I salute to his heroism,he is Pukhtun’s Hero. Mohammad Afzal Khan has chosen a place in history for himself. From the gravity of the situation it seems he is up against insurmountable odds. It is a do or die situation for the veteran nationalist leader. His opposition to the Taliban puts his opponent in unfavorable position. Mohammad Afzal Khan will be remembered as a brave leader of the landed classes and of Pakhtun nationalism. In spite of leaving his people he will prefer to die and only a real man, a brave man can face death without any fear. Afzal Khan Lala is one of those leaders who is willing to risk his life for his people. He is presently resisting the ignorant and thugs TTP (Tehrik Taliban Pakistan) from his village near Matta, Swat. Unlike some other leaders who have decided to take shelter in Islamabad or Norway ,Afzal Khan Lala does not want to abandon his people to the brutality of the TTP. Today People of Swat are suffering under the mediaeval and archaic and cruel “laws” being “administered” by the illiterate and backward Taliban in full sight and hearing o f the “law-enforcement agencies”. Where is Islamabad’s writ??? Why one powerful army can’t control this situation??? Why can’t you shoot or arrest leaders of Taliban who are involve in crimes against humanity? Are they more powerful then Army??? It is a matter of life or death for the country, the way in which the Taliban have been allowed to have their way. I use the term “allowed to” advisedly and purposely. The question to ask, however, is who will hold the security agencies to account for what has been wrought by the Taliban in Swat? Who will hold the intelligence establishment to account for its shameful and massive failure in Swat and also in Fata? Who, indeed, will take stock of the present standards of training of the army which seems helpless against the motley and ragtag Taliban. (A passing thought: if the much-touted and very expensively maintained Pakistan Army cannot handle the Taliban whom they outnumber 1,000 to one how the devil will they face a greater, numerically superior enemy? From all accounts it is not even picketing and patrolling, the two most important military operations that are absolutely essential for Frontier/tribal warfare. What Pakistani Govt doing for all those kids who can’t go to schools any more? Where is the writ of the government? Why is not anything being done is the questions generally raised by people after reading the bloody incidents taking place in Swat on daily basis. While scrutinizing the theory of Taliban aiming at enforcement of Shariah one can see that the brutal acts done by them on daily basis do not justify any context of Islamic preaching. One can find many references and quotations made by the Holy Prophet and Kalifas of Islam that instead condemn these acts. For instance; in a hadith narrated by the Caliph Omar (Bukhari, 4:258): Abu Bakr, the first caliph and friend of the Prophet Mohammad, summarizing the Prophet's message, telling the leaders of his armies, "Do not kill a woman, a child, o r an old man. Do not cut down a blossoming tree, do not destroy a building, and do not kill a sheep or camel, except for the purpose of eating it. Do not submerge or cut down a palm tree. Do not be excessive, and do not be cowardly." What Islam do they want to preach? The people of swat have been in this suffering for almost 18 months now, and they are all alone in their suffering as they have suffered more than the Taliban and the military forces who are supposed to fighting each other. According to local sources, there have been more than 2800 deaths (official sources, always trying to reduce the numbers, put it at 1000), and more than 90% of them innocent civilians. There is no electricity, no water, no gas, no education, no health facilities, not even a good night sleep. There are reports that the people of Swat pray for American drones to come and bombard the bases of Taliban. Today Swat is also waiting for justice that has been denied to many in the pages of history.
In the view of analysts, the growing nightmare in Swat is a capsule of the country's problems: an ineffectual and unresponsive civilian government, coupled with military and security forces that, in the view of furious residents, have willingly allowed the militants to spread terror deep into Pakistan. This bloody movement started with "Maulana radio" and his radio and should end with silencing his 500 KV FM radio! I can't believe that Pakistani Government and its allies in terror can not afford a one Mega Volt radio to silence .Why can't the Government shut down his radio and start information warfare against these ignorant, criminals of pukhtuns, thugs, religious fanatic Taliban.??? How is it possible that a killer uses a tool, the radio, a tool of civilization, for spreading his message of killers around? Obviously technology is then good when the notorious criminals are calling for support of his crimes! For how long that stupidity will be tolerated??? This Taliban "lea der" communicates by radio instead of coming out in the open to do so , but what can one expect from someone who, under all that religious bluster, is probably just some spineless coward who uses religion to deal with his personal issues about the world. Those so called religious Waco’s should read the Qur'an! Their violence and subjugation is so anti-Muslim. How can they not see it! And their misinterpretation of "jihad' is so off the real meaning. These people are nuts.
The crushing, un-Islamic cruelty of this fanatical movement is felt by all, but mostly by the women and girls who are being punished, even killed, for having careers and for desiring to get an education. I remember Swat from the 80s and 90s as a peaceful place, where people were gentle and polite, the environment was pristine, and girls schools were flourishing , female literacy was actually higher than the national average. I cannot believe the brutal crimes that are being committed in this beautiful region in the name of some mis-guided concept of religion. Pakistani citizens everywhere must stand up against this terror and reject this inhumanity. Taliban got to be crushed and there is no other option. Pakistani army and security establishment has failed in making any real progress, despite all claims that army operation has been undertaken to control the situation. What is pakistani army for? Why is it so ineffective? Why cant it control a group of few thousand hardliners and mercenaries who have terrorized the whole region. People are being misled and great efforts are being made in pakistani media to portray all this as the price of supporting the American war on terror. The civilian government, led by nationalist party, in the Frontier province has been made totally ineffective as elected representatives fear for their lives. Who is supporting and financing taliban? Why is no one talking about Saudi connection as huge amount of private saudi money is coming to support the arab millitants operating in the region. Islamic radicalism like Saudi-supported wahaabism and the taliban movement could be strongly denounced by sincere and true and educated Islamic thinkers and theologians. Governing by fear and destruction is a direct path back into the dark ages. What kind of educational back ground do these Taliban "leaders?" have ... 6th grade or less? Too bad they are not required to at least have a bachelor's degree.
ISI brought out this jinnee from the bottle. World and Pakistan government should ask ISI to go to Swat and face this terrible music. Pretty faces of women activists appearing on Paki TV to " defend" their rights, have a lot to defend, before Taliban reaches their cozy homes in Lahore, Islamabad and Karachi. Pak armed forces keep warning India about giving befitting reply in case of a conflict ,they too should feel ashamed that they are unable to rein in these mercenaries.
Anyone who thinks that Govt should talk to Taliban is either living in fools paradise or hiding their heads in sand, how can we reason with individuals who throw acid on young girls for attending school? This is humanity at its worst and it is an ideology that must be exposed for what it is. It must become socially and morally unacceptable in their own culture and that can only be achieved through education and example. For every school you burn, we will build two more. Enemies of education and Pukhtun’s are targeting schools. They started out with girls schools. Now it is indiscriminate and boys schools are being destroyed too. Swat was a state found in early 20th century on modern principles. The only way to defend against the menace of ignorance is education to innocent minds. Can we stop destruction of existing beacons of light. This systemic and well planned brutality will have a huge price for humanity. There are no more schools in Charmang, a rural village of mud-brick homes and lush wheat fields nestled in the mountains of Bajaur, a tribal territory, along the Pakistan-Afghanistan border. The Taliban are in control now, dreams of pukhtun kids are shattered by ignorant Taliban.
Some interesting questions remain though, who is paying the mercenary Taliban foot soldiers? Where are night goggles and FM transmitters coming from? Who is paying the suicide bomber's families? I suggest the Pakistani Government and Swat residents do the following:
1-Since almost everyone have guns in their home, they should accompany their daughters/sisters to schools....2000-4000 Taliban can not fight every one.
2-Start effective propaganda and information warfare separating Taliban from being the custodian of Islam. Their name should be "anti-Islam" not Taliban(which literally means students!)
3-shut down their radio!
4-The houses of suicide bombers be demolished and family watched for receiving compensation money
5-Put the soldiers on the ground rather than tucked in insulated areas. Stop using long range ineffective artillery indiscriminately.
6-Increase the ratio of soldiers to Taliban to 10:1, provide them with modern spying gears/equipment.
7-Make s pecial courts for trying these bastards and legislate the sentence as hanging for documented Taliban combatants.
8-No one should impose their will on Swatis ...if any doubt...do opinion polls/referendum.
I find it highly distressing that this erstwhile idyllic, peaceful and picturesque Swat valley is now hounded by these ignorant religious zealots. A corrupt and inept political system has given rise to illiteracy and lack of economic opportunity. Combine that with the puritanical form of Islam imported from Saudi Arabia during the anti-Communist Jihad in the 80s .Taliban is an evil which must be destroyed. These Talibans are product of thousands of madarsas set up throughout Pakistan by ISI and its military initially to fight USSR in Afghanistan with the help of CIA ,West and Saudi Arabia.
At the advent of 21st century intellectuals the world over predicted that the new millennium will usher in peace, human rights and dignity of man. Mankind will show tolerance, endurance and maturity. The man of this planet who has conquered space will be a messenger of peace to other planets. But unfortunately this century began with such chaos, wars, religious and sectarian extremism, violence, brutality, suicide bombing, and destruction that it rather disgraced humanity. There seems no end to this phony, aimless reign of terrorism. Economy is shattered in Pakistan and particularly in Pakhtunkhawa. The Gateway towards central Asia for international trade is closed. The worsening law and order situations and fragile economy have led to capital flight. Investors in Hayatabad “Industrial state” are compelled to shift their business from Peshawar.
Taliban have no right to force their views on people who disagree with them . Swat, a city of breathtaking natural beauty turned into a nightmare by those who use the name of Islam but all their actions are against Islam. Taliban have no right to deny girls education, Taliban are not only denying pukhtun girls education but they are destroying whole generation of pukhtuns by denying education and destroying their schools.
The Pukhtun belt stretching from Kandahar to Swat is burning, roads, bridges, schools, houses are blown , people get beheaded on mere suspicion. Hundreds of people are kidnapped every day for ransom or as part of campaign to eliminate the elements who oppose the thugs. Is it Islam? Pukhtuns are caught in the middle in a fight which serves OTHERS strategic interests. Normal day to day living has become a painful experience leave alone Education, economic,social, cultural activities. In such a situation we Pukhtun are in a state of shocksimply flabbergasted. Our minds have turned blank as if we all have collectively suffered a concussion injuries to our head. Our eyes are wide open but see nothing. It is for the Muslims to raise against these psychopaths ignorant Taliban. What are the oil-rich countries doing? If the Muslim world will not raise against this evil, their future generations would look back in d isgust and shame for what their fathers and grandfathers did or did not do.. (like Germans reckoning with their Nazi past!). It's really up to them. I think the Swat residents would welcome foreign help in removing the Taliban, if the Pakistani government would be courageous enough to invite them or afraid to use iron hand against them. People in Pakistan should realize that the Taliban are as much a foreign power as western nations are. The Taliban are not about religion, but only about gaining power to abuse people. We need brave leaders like AFZAL KHAN LALA, who can look into eyes of these monsters and not afraid of them, what a great man of principles, I salute his moral values and courage.
AFZAL KHAN LALA VS CRUEL TALIBAN !!!!!!!
POLISH ENGINEER VIDEO,Pakistan unsure over identity of man beheaded in Taliban video
video is from youtube.com,I am not sure if its reaaly him,but its very sad and I offer my condolences to his family in Poland,Readers comments are welcome on this story.
ISLAMABAD, Pakistan (CNN) -- Pakistani authorities have not confirmed that a kidnapped Polish engineer is the man that was beheaded on a Taliban video, despite assertions from Polish officials that they are certain the man is Piotr Stanczak.
"We want to be absolutely sure," said Abdual Basit, a spokesman for Pakistan's foreign office."Hopefully we would be able to confirm it shortly, but unless we are 100 percent sure, it would be premature for us to react."He noted that the Pakistani government is waiting to be informed by "concerned authorities."News of Stanczak's death came on Friday. Polish officials have said they were kept in the dark during negotiations for his release, but Basit denied that.Stanczak was kidnapped September 28 from the city of Attock in the Punjab province. He had been based there for a Polish survey company searching for natural gas.Polish embassy spokesman Peter Adams said there had been no demands for ransom. The Taliban had demanded the release of Taliban prisoners being held by the government and a pullout of government security forces from the tribal areas.Adams said all efforts had been made by Polish authorities to pressure the Pakistani government to do whatever it could to secure Stanczak's release."From the Polish side we did whatever we could, pressuring the Pakistani government on the presidential and prime minister level," Adams said. "Problem was, this was solely Pakistan's responsibility. Demands were only towards (the) Pakistan government."While there were assurances that the Pakistani government was doing everything it could and that Stanczak would be freed soon, Adams said it was never clear what the government was actually doing to secure his release."We are waiting for confirmation and waiting for any answer (about) how this happened and why did this happen," Adams said.Kidnappings and attacks against foreigners have risen sharply in recent months throughout the country. Most recently, an American working for the United Nations was kidnapped in Quetta, and Peshawar has also been the scene of various attacks against foreign diplomats and journalists.
Afghan Leader Finds Himself Hero No More
By DEXTER FILKINS(New York Times)
KABUL, Afghanistan — A foretaste of what would be in store for President Hamid Karzai after the election of a new American administration came last February, when Joseph R. Biden Jr., then a senator, sat down to a formal dinner at the palace during a visit here.
Between platters of lamb and rice, Mr. Biden and two other American senators questioned Mr. Karzai about corruption in his government, which, by many estimates, is among the worst in the world. Mr. Karzai assured Mr. Biden and the other senators that there was no corruption at all and that, in any case, it was not his fault.
The senators gaped in astonishment. After 45 minutes, Mr. Biden threw down his napkin and stood up.
“This dinner is over,” Mr. Biden announced, according to one of the people in the room at the time. And the three senators walked out, long before the appointed time.
Today, of course, Mr. Biden is the vice president.
The world has changed for Mr. Karzai, and for Afghanistan, too. A White House favorite — a celebrity in flowing cape and dark gray fez — in each of the seven years that he has led this country since the fall of the Taliban, Mr. Karzai now finds himself not so favored at all. Not by Washington, and not by his own.
In the White House, President Obama said he regarded Mr. Karzai as unreliable and ineffective. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said he presided over a “narco-state.” The Americans making Afghan policy, worried that the war is being lost, are vowing to bypass Mr. Karzai and deal directly with the governors in the countryside.
At home, Mr. Karzai faces a widening insurgency and a population that blames him for the manifest lack of economic progress and the corrupt officials that seem to stand at every doorway of his government. His face, which once adorned the walls of tea shops across the country, is today much less visible.
Now, perhaps crucially, an election looms. Mr. Karzai says he will ask the voters to return him to the palace for another five-year term. The election is set for Aug. 20, after what promises to be a violent and eventful summer. In a poll commissioned by a group of private Afghans, 85 percent of those surveyed said they intended to vote for someone other than Mr. Karzai.
Meanwhile, the Obama administration will have to decide what it wants from Mr. Karzai as it tries to make good on its promise to reverse the course of the war. Or whether it wants him at all.
With the insurgency rising, corruption soaring and opium blooming across the land, it perhaps is not surprising that so many Afghans, and so many in Washington, see President Karzai’s removal as a precondition for reversing the country’s downward surge.
“Under President Karzai, we have gone from a better situation to a good situation to a not-so-bad situation to a bad situation — and now are going to worse,” said Abdullah, a former foreign minister in Mr. Karzai’s government who may now challenge him for the presidency (and who, like many Afghans, has only one name). “That is the trend.
“So let us say Karzai stays in power through the summer and that nothing serious happens and then he wins re-election,” Dr. Abdullah said. “Then there will be two scenarios, and only two scenarios — a rapid collapse or a slow unraveling.”
People close to Mr. Karzai say the man is exhausted, wary of his enemies and worried for his physical safety. He feels embattled and underappreciated, they say, but is utterly determined, in spite of it all, to run again and win. In recent weeks, the growing American dissatisfaction with Mr. Karzai, coupled with a simmering frustration among Afghans over what they regard as the reckless killing of civilians by American forces, has prompted extraordinary reactions from Mr. Karzai.
At a news conference on Tuesday at his marble-floored palace, Mr. Karzai appeared side-by-side with Ban Ki-moon, the United Nations secretary general. Mr. Karzai wore his signature outfit of fez and cape, but his visage was wan and slack. Asked by an Afghan reporter about his relations with American leaders, Mr. Karzai sprang to life, accusing unnamed people in the American government of trying to “pressure” him to stay silent over the deaths of Afghan civilians in attacks by Americans.
“Our demands are clear — to stop the civilian casualties, the searching of Afghan homes and the arresting Afghans,” Mr. Karzai said of the Americans. “And of course, the Americans pressured us to be quiet and to make us retreat from our demands. But that is impossible. Afghanistan and its president are not going to retreat from their demands.”
Mr. Karzai did not touch on larger frustrations, which Afghan and Western officials here say he harbors, about the overall American effort, namely, the relegation of Afghanistan to second-tier status after the invasion of Iraq. Many Afghans and Western officials here believe that it was the Iraq war, more than any other factor, that deprived Mr. Karzai of the resources he needed to help the Afghan state stand on its own, and to prevent the resurgence of the Taliban that Mr. Obama is now vowing to contain.
Yet for all the doubts about Mr. Karzai — and for all the strains he labors under — he remains by far the strongest politician in the country. He commands the resources of the Afghan state, including the army and the police, and billions of dollars in American and other aid that flows into the treasury.
In his seven years in office, Mr. Karzai has successfully presided over the transition of the Afghan state from the devastated, pre-modern institution it was under the Taliban to the deeply troubled but largely democratic one it is today. Perhaps most important for his future, Mr. Karzai has assembled a team of senior administrators whose competence and experience would be difficult for any challenger to match.
Perhaps for that reason, of the many prominent Afghans who have hinted that they may run against him, including Dr. Abdullah and a former finance minister, Ashraf Ghani, only a handful of Afghans have so far declared their intentions. Some Afghan leaders say they will announce their candidacies soon, but it seems just as likely that they are waiting to see if Mr. Karzai stumbles.
As for the members of Mr. Obama’s team, they may yet discover that Mr. Karzai is the man they will be forced to deal with, whether they like him or not.
At the palace news conference, Mr. Karzai acknowledged his own unpopularity, and then offered a vigorous defense of his record. He declined to be interviewed for this article.
“Well, I have been in government for seven years. It’s natural that I would not be as popular now as I was seven years ago,” Mr. Karzai said.
“The institutions of Afghanistan have worked very well,” he added. “The Afghan people participated in the election for president. They participated in elections for Parliament. The parliamentary system has been functioning a lot better than some established parliaments in the world. They have been making laws, approving laws. The government institutions are increasingly in progress — the economy, the national army, the growth of education. We went from almost two or three universities in 2002 to 17 universities, to the freedom of the press, hundreds of newspapers and radios and all that. I and the Afghan people are proud of our achievements.”
And, he might also have said, six million Afghan children attending school, a quarter of whom are girls, whose education was prohibited by the Taliban.
One of the people with the most generous words for Mr. Karzai is William Wood, the American ambassador. Under the ambassador’s former boss, President Bush, Mr. Karzai enjoyed a favored personal status, even if his state did not. That special relationship was symbolized by the videoconferences in which the two men participated regularly.
“The guy works very hard,” Mr. Wood said of Mr. Karzai. “He faces a problem set every day that would daunt anyone. He’s got an insurgency based outside the country, and a level of poverty and criminality inside the country that feeds the insurgency. He’s got an army that had to be built from zero following the ouster of the Taliban. He’s got a police force that had to be reformed.
Speaking in an interview at his office in Kabul, Mr. Wood added: “Yeah, I think he’s tired. And I think frankly that everyone — the international community, the United States, the United Nations, Western Europe, the international press — were unrealistically optimistic about the problem of Afghanistan following the ouster of the Taliban.”
Mr. Wood will soon be replaced by Lt. Gen. Karl W. Eikenberry, a former commander of American forces here.
In his last tour, which ended in 2007, General Eikenberry enjoyed good relations with Mr. Karzai. Given Mr. Karzai’s mood these days, that is probably a good thing.
At a ceremony last month for the first graduates of Afghanistan’s National Military Academy, Mr. Karzai stood and addressed the assembled 84 cadets as well as a group of diplomats, including Mr. Wood. Mr. Karzai turned the occasion into a populist barnburner.
“I told America and the world to give us aircraft — otherwise we will get them from the other place!” Mr. Karzai roared, prompting applause. “I told them to give us the planes soon, that we have no more patience, and that we cannot get along without military aircraft!
“Give us the aircraft sooner or we will get them from the others!” Mr. Karzai roared again. “We told them to bring us tanks, too — otherwise we will get them from other place!”
Mr. Karzai never said what the “other place” was.
Pakistan heads toward crisis as coalition flounders
GOVERNMENT INSTABILITY
U.S. looks on with alarm as key Western ally's inability to deal with jihadist menace threatens to destabilize region.
ISLAMABAD -- Almost a year after elections were held in Pakistan, which restored democracy after more than eight years of military rule, growing Islamist violence, a crisis of governance and an economy in a tailspin threatens this key Western ally with collapse.The new U.S. administration of President Barack Obama has made Pakistan one of its foreign policy priorities. Aides say that the U.S. President is "scared" by what he sees in Pakistan, a country that is crucial to meeting his goals of stabilizing Afghanistan and routing al-Qaeda. Next week, Richard Holbrooke, the special envoy just appointed to handle Afghanistan and Pakistan, arrives in Islamabad on a fact-finding mission, which is expected to be followed by swift action by Washington.Critics say the Pakistani government is gripped with paralysis, as patronage, not policy, occupies Islamabad under President Asif Zardari. Some see echoes of the last period of civilian rule in Pakistan, between 1988 and 1999, when a series of floundering governments were repeatedly toppled by the army amid allegations of massive corruption and misrule.Already the military and civilians are privately blaming each other for inaction as jihadists push ever deeper into the country from the northwest, with a de facto extremist mini-state now existing in Swat, a valley just 160 kilometres from the capital, Islamabad. Along the border with Afghanistan, Taliban and al-Qaeda enjoy a safe haven, undermining the international coalition's fight against insurgents in Afghanistan.
"The civilian leadership is weak and fearful of the inevitable in Pakistan, that it oversteps the mark and runs the risk of being removed [by the army]," said Rashed Rahman, a political analyst based in Lahore. "It is a non-functional government. There is no legislative program. Parliament was always a talking shop in Pakistan but they have taken it to new heights."A coalition central government led by Mr. Zardari's Pakistan People's Party is made up of an unwieldy 70 ministers from four different political parties - ranging from the secular to reputed Taliban sympathizers. But power is said to rest with the President, leading to a logjam. Critics say it is simply too much work for one man.Mr. Zardari's government enjoyed no honeymoon period. In a poll taken last October by the International Republican Institute, a U.S. pro-democracy group, just 21 per cent of people responded positively to the government, while Mr. Zardari's personal approval rating was a paltry 19 per cent. Since October, conditions in the country have sharply deteriorated by most measures.The violence seems to mount every week. On Thursday, a bombing of a Shia religious procession in the central town of Dera Ghazi Khan, in Punjab province, claimed at least 27 lives - the Taliban and al-Qaeda belong to the majority Sunni sect of Islam. Yesterday, attacks by government helicopter gunships killed 52 militants in the Khyber area of the tribal borderland with Afghanistan, the army said.There is little doubt about Mr. Zardari's personal commitment to fighting terrorism, which claimed the life of his wife, former prime minister Benazir Bhutto, in 2007. In a speech in Peshawar yesterday, he pledged to "finish off this cancer or it will dictate to us."But the government has been unable to forge a political consensus on the campaign against terrorism, with opinion deeply divided - even within the ruling coalition - between those political parties who favour military action against the extremists and those who want to negotiate with them. As a result, no clear direction has been given to the army by the government."The civilian government just doesn't have enough capacity, especially in security issues," said a retired general with experience of dealing with the government, who declined to be identified because of the sensitivity of the subject. "When there's a vacuum like that, it has to be filled, and who else is there but the army?"Worse, there are many in Pakistan, including members of parliament, who question the army's commitment to fighting the extremists, pointing to its apparent helplessness against the insurgency in Swat and its inconsistent actions elsewhere - the military is fighting Taliban in one part of the tribal area, Bajaur, but there are no active military operations in other parts, including Waziristan, the base for the Pakistani Taliban and al-Qaeda.
"There is this notion that the Taliban can be an ally," said Hasan Askari Rizvi, author of the book Military, State and Society in Pakistan. "It's a question of Pakistan's identity: Was it created for Islam? This kind of confusion is a threat to Pakistan's existence as a nation state."The army insists that, after the terrorist attacks in the U.S. on Sept. 11, 2001, it abandoned a policy that had seen it openly patronize the Afghan Taliban and Pakistan-based jihadist groups.The problem, the army says, is a lack of manpower to fight on so many fronts - the border with traditional enemy India to the east is given priority even before the militancy-plagued tribal area on western frontier in Afghanistan - and a lack of key military hardware, including night-fighting equipment.It is unclear whether Pakistani politics is heading toward its familiar meltdown or whether civilian rule is just taking time to establish itself."We have been through a very long military dictatorship. Transitions take time," said Afrasiab Khattak, a senior member of the Awami National Party, part of the Islamabad government.
"Democracy is a messy, noisy business."
PAKISTANI DREAMS ‘SHATTERED’ BY TALIBAN AND ARMY
By NBC News’ Mushtaq Yusufzai and Carol Grisanti
PESHAWAR, Pakistan – There are no more schools in Charmang, a rural village of mud-brick homes and lush wheat fields nestled in the mountains of Bajaur, a tribal territory, along the Pakistan-Afghanistan border. The Taliban are in control now.
"First, the Taliban imposed a ban on wearing western-style school uniforms at my private school," said Amjad Ali, a 17-year-old former student from Charmang. "Then they stopped all the girls from attending classes and finally they just blew up the building."
In Charmang, the Taliban torched and destroyed more than 40 private schools because the students wore Western-style uniforms and learned English. The Taliban also accused the schools’ administrators of following a pro-Western curriculum and allowing co-educational classes – in Taliban terms that makes them un-Islamic.
But Saleh Mohammed, Ali’s father, was determined to educate all his children. After their school, The Islamia Model School, was destroyed, he brought Ali and his two younger daughters – Shaista and Nafeesa – to the public school in Charmang. Ali’s father wanted to ignore the Taliban threats, but the principal of the school was too afraid – he registered Ali but refused to accept the girls.
"The Taliban would come to my public school and deliver lectures about jihad against the infidels, who they said are occupying Afghanistan and will soon invade Pakistan," said Ali. "Most of my classmates registered for jihad training and would go to their meetings after school."
Ali explained how things just got worse with time. "Later on the Taliban just took over our school and turned it into a training camp. I refused to join the Taliban, and my family became very afraid, so we left Charmang in the dark one night."
He said he still thinks about Charmang every day.
"Charmang was so beautiful in those days," he recalled.
"What happened to me and my family was so sudden that I sometimes think I am having a bad dream. My whole world just disappeared," Ali said sadly. "And now I have to live in this tent," referring to the internally displaced persons camp he now lives in with his family outside of Peshawar, the provincial capital of the Northwest Frontier Province.
Sandwiched between the Taliban and the army
Last August, the Pakistani military, under pressure from the United States, launched an operation to go after the Taliban and al-Qaida militants in the Bajaur tribal agency, a crucial passageway for fighters who creep over the mountains to attack U.S. forces inside Afghanistan. After months of fierce fighting, the army has been unable to dislodge the hardcore militants who are either entrenched in mountain strongholds or who hide inside a maze of underground tunnels that run into Afghanistan.
The military campaign against a band of some 500 Taliban militants in Charmang terrorized the local villagers. Most of the 80,000 inhabitants who once lived in Charmang have fled. Many of them were farmers who had dual Pakistani-Afghan nationality and frequently crossed over into Afghanistan to sell their produce or visit family members. They kept homes on both sides of the border.
When the villagers felt sandwiched in by the Taliban on one side and the Pakistani army on the other, they left, in the thousands, for Afghanistan. Pakistani authorities said that it was the first-ever migration of Pakistani refugees into Afghanistan. Others went to live as refugees in internally displaced persons camps elsewhere in Pakistan.
No more school or cricket
Adeel Khan, another 18-year-old high school student from Charmang, said he misses his friends and hates living in the refugee camp, the same one Ali ended up in near Peshawar.
"I used to play football, hockey and cricket at home," Khan said.
"Suddenly there was a war between the government and the Taliban and my family made us leave everything we owned and come here in a hurry. I want to play cricket with my friends and I want to go back to school," he added forlornly.
Khan’s father, Abdul Qadir said he spent seven years in the United Arab Emirates driving a taxi to save enough money to give his five children a good education back home in Charmang.
"I wanted all of them, my sons and my daughters, to become doctors and engineers," Qadir said."Now, I have lost my home and my bread shop in Charmang," he said. "How can I give them an education when I can't even give them two meals a day?"
According to an education official in Khar, the main city of the Bajaur Tribal Agency, there are more than 80,000 students across Bajaur who can no longer go to school. The schools have either been destroyed by the Taliban or occupied by the security forces during the military operations.In North Waziristan, another Taliban-run tribal area along the Afghanistan border, most of the schools are now closed because of the ongoing violence and the fear of the U.S. drone attacks. The Government Post Graduate College in Miranshah, the main city, once boasted 1,300 students who were studying for degrees in medicine and education.
Bayar Khan Wazir attended the college before it closed. "Today, we have no more schools and we have no recreational facilities," Wazir said. "So most of the students will now join the Taliban," he said.
"We have nothing else to do all day. And perhaps there is a certain charm and power to grow a beard, let your hair grow long and pick up a gun," he said.
Wazir went on to say that Waziristan has become synonymous all over the world with militancy, but many don’t know that Pakistan’s best doctors, teachers and academics were once trained there.
‘All of our dreams are shattered now’
The displaced people of Charmang are angry with the Taliban for occupying their lands but more angry with the Pakistani army for destroying their homes during the campaign against the Islamic extremists.
"I had a big house in Charmang," said Qadir, the bread shop owner.
"Now, seven of us have to live like this," he said, pointing to a small white tent in the Kacha Garhi refugee camp.
"I have no more dreams," he said. "All of our dreams are shattered now."
Swat: Interview with Afzal Khan Lala
Mohammad Afzal Khan, ANP leader and the hero of Swat
The 82-year old Mohammad Afzal Khan has emerged as a hero in Swat and beyond, to those who oppose the Taliban ideology. At a time when almost every politician and landlord, known as Khans, has moved out (of Swat) to escape harm at the hands of the militants, Afzal Khan has refused to leave his village, Bara Drushkhela, located in the Taliban stronghold of Matta. He has politely declined requests from relatives, his political colleagues from the Awami National Party (ANP) and well wishers to abandon Swat.The militants have attacked his house a few times. He was injured in a roadside ambush in which his two bodyguards were killed and his nephew and Matta tehsil Nazim Abdul Jabbar Khan were wounded. His two other nephews were killed in another attack by militants, who have repeatedly threatened to eliminate Afzal Khan.
The News on Sunday: President Asif Ali Zardari recently phoned you and praised your courage while the Army chief, General Ashfaq Pervez Kayani, arranged for you to be flown in a military helicopter to the Frontier Constabulary centre at Kanju in Swat for a meeting. What transpired in the President's phone call and your meeting with Kayani? Do you think the military's new operations in Swat are more focused and targeted?Mohammad Afzal Khan: The President offered support in the battle against militants. General Kayani invited me for a meeting to offer consolation and backing and discuss the Swat situation. It was my first meeting with the General and I found him a sober, sincere and determined man. For the first time in the last two years of military operations in Swat have I found the security forces to be on the offensive. In the past, the Taliban were on the offensive and the troops were on the defensive. The three military strikes in Manglawar, Ningolai, Charbagh and Matta in which the army claimed to have killed several militants were focused and intense.
TNS: You have been seeking support of the government and the forces to arm the people and raise village militias to defend their villages against the Taliban. Do you think the authorities would now accept your proposal? Will this initiative succeed or trigger further clashes between the militants and villagers?
MAK: I made this proposal about 10 months ago but nobody in the government responded positively. My plea is that the people of Swat are mostly unarmed and are, therefore, at the mercy of the militants. Besides, the Swatis have lived under authoritarian rulers in the past and become somewhat subdued. The fear of the Taliban who terrorise the population through beheadings and target killings has snuffed the life out of our people. They need support so that their spirit could be revived. Moreover, the army cannot guard every village and street after having carried out military action and defeated the militants. In the absence of an effective police force and lack of the civil armed forces, the local people would be required to defend their towns and villagers and keep the Taliban at bay. For this purpose, the government must arm and equip them to fight the militants.TNS: Many people in Swat and outside the valley were critical of the military until now for not doing enough to defeat the Taliban. What do you think was lacking in the military operation against the militants?
MAK: Once an army officer reportedly said that the military should not take sides in the conflict in Swat. I wondered why such a statement was made. The military has to take sides as the government writ has been challenged by a group of militants who want to set up a parallel administration and impose their will on the people. They are using heavy arms and strongarm methods to extend their writ at a time when the law-enforcement agencies in Swat are paralysed and the civil armed forces are nowhere to be seen. It is a battle between the state and the Taliban. The state in such circumstances must stand with those people who are refusing to bow before Taliban and offering sacrifices while resisting the militants. The military is now changing its tactics and is ready to fight back and stand with the people who are willing to die fighting the Taliban.
TNS: Your name tops the list of the 47 men wanted by the Taliban in Swat. You have been ordered to appear before their Shariat courts. Comment.
MAK: I have done nothing wrong and am at a loss to understand why am I being targeted. I am also very religious. And so is my family. However, we don't accept the Taliban interpretation of Islam.
TNS: Why did your party leaders not consult you before inking a peace deal with Taliban in Swat? Is Asfandyar Wali Khan or NWFP Chief Minister Ameer Haider Hoti in touch with you now on the issue?
MAK: The peace accord was signed in a hurry and the ANP leadership and the provincial government agreed to certain measures that were beyond its powers. Military officials have been complaining that the peace accord emboldened the militants and gave them time to regroup for fighting fresh battles. The peace agreement was doomed when the Taliban started destroying schools and their spokesman, Muslim Khan, claimed responsibility for these attacks. Strangely, the provincial government was defending the agreement and claiming that the militants weren't involved in the attacks on schools. However, I don't want to create difficulties for ANP. In any case, one political party cannot resolve the entire problem. I don't complain that Asfandyar Wali hasn't phoned me because he has been ill. As for the chief minister, I was told he called but was unable to locate me.
PAKISTAN'S ELITE:Out of touch with reality
Poor Pakistani Selling his kidney....
(KIDNEY FOR SALE)
MINDLESS of the stark reality of a severe economic downturn in the country, which has compelled it to go round with a begging bowl, Punjab's newly appointed parliamentary secretaries are fussing about getting new cars to go about their official business. When the PML(N)'s Rana Arshad raised the issue on the floor of the House on Tuesday that though appointed some days back, they had neither been provided with staff nor cars, and Law Minister Rana Sanaullah assured him that old "out of order" vehicles were being disposed of and new ones purchased, Rana Masud, who was in the chair, directed him to attend to it without further delay and report to him within five days. He underlined the point that bureaucrats were given perks and privileges immediately on assuming charge of office. The PML(Q) MPAs' point that when their government had taken a similar decision, the PML(N) had raised a hue and cry was lost in the debate.
A vast majority of people do not have the means to afford an independent means of transport: cars, motorcycles or even cycles, not even old ones. The government has miserably failed to meet their needs of public transport, with the result that the commuters have to wait for hours to hitch a ride on overcrowded buses.
Perks and privileges and lavish lifestyle at the expense of the government, whether by the bureaucracy or the elected representatives, have invariably been the bane of Pakistan. And the essential requirements of the socioeconomic sector - building roads and bridges, dams and powerhouses, schools and colleges, hospitals and clinics, and a host of other works - are relegated to the background. It is a pity that the expectations, which the replacement of Musharraf's military regime with a popularly elected set-up had raised, have not been borne out. It is evident from the debate about the new cars that while privileged classes keep getting special treatment, the man in the street is left to fend to himself.
Obama risks going down in history ........
Obama risks going down in history (the LBJ way)
You aren't really the US president until you've ordered an airstrike on somebody, so Barack Obama is certainly president now: two in his first week in office. But, now that he has been blooded, can we talk a little about this expanded war he's planning to fight in Afghanistan?
Does that sound harsh? Well, so is killing people, and all the more so because Obama must know that these remote-controlled Predator strikes usually kill not just the ''bad guy'', whoever he is, but also the entire family he has taken shelter with. It also annoys Pakistan, whose territory the US violated in carrying out the killings.
It's not a question of whether the intelligence on which the attacks were based was accurate (although sometimes it isn't).
The question is: do these killings serve any useful purpose? And the same question applies to the entire US war in Afghanistan.
Obama may be planning to shut Guantanamo, but the broader concept of a ''war on terror'' is still alive and well in Washington. Most of the people he has appointed to run his defence and foreign policies believe in it, and there is no sign that he himself questions it. Yet even 15 years ago the notion would have been treated with contempt in every military staff college in the country.
That generation of American officers learned two things from their miserable experience in Vietnam. One was that going halfway around the world to fight a conventional military campaign against an ideology (communism then, Islamism now) was a truly stupid idea.
The other was that, no matter how strenuously the other side insists it is motivated by a world-spanning ideology, its real motives are mostly political and quite local (Vietnamese nationalism then, Iraqi and Afghan nationalism now).
Alas, that generation of officers has now retired, and the new generation of strategists, civilian as well as military, has to learn these lessons all over again. They are proving to be slow students, and if Obama follows their advice then Afghanistan may well prove his Vietnam.
The parallel with Vietnam is not all that far-fetched. Modest numbers of American troops have now been in Afghanistan for seven years, mostly in training roles quite similar to those of the US military ''advisers'' whom presidents Eisenhower and Kennedy sent to South Vietnam from 1956-63. The political job of creating a pro-Western, anti-communist state was entrusted to America's man in Saigon, Ngo Dinh Diem, and the South Vietnamese army had the job of fighting the communist rebels, the Viet Cong.
Unfortunately, neither Diem nor the South Vietnamese army had much success, and by the early 1960s the Viet Cong were clearly on the road to victory.
So Kennedy authorised a group of South Vietnamese generals to overthrow Diem (although the US president seemed shocked when they killed him).
And Lyndon Johnson, who succeeded Kennedy soon afterwards, authorised a rapid expansion of the American troop commitment in Vietnam, first to 200,000 by the end of 1965 and ultimately to half a million by 1968. The US took over the war. Then it lost it.
If this sounds eerily familiar, it's because we are now at a similar juncture in America's war in Afghanistan. The United States' man in Kabul, President Hamid Karzai, and the Afghan Army he theoretically commands have failed to quell the insurrection and are visibly losing ground.
So the talk in Washington now is all of replacing Karzai (although it will probably be done via elections, which are easily manipulated in Afghanistan), and the US troop commitment in the country is going up to 60,000. Various American allies, Australia among them, also have troops in Afghanistan, just as they did in Vietnam, but it is the US that is taking over the war.
We already know how this story ends. There is not a lot in common between president John F. Kennedy and president George W. Bush, but they were both ideological crusaders who got the United States mired in foreign wars it could not win and did not need to win.
They then bequeathed those wars to presidents who had ambitious reform agendas in domestic politics and little interest or experience in foreign affairs.
That bequest destroyed Lyndon Johnson, who took the rotten advice of the military and civilian advisers he inherited from Kennedy because there wasn't much else on offer in Washington at the time.
Obama is drifting into the same dangerous waters, and the rotten advice he is getting from strategists who believe in the ''war on terror'' could do for him, too.
He has figured out that Iraq was a foolish and unnecessary war, but has not yet applied the same analysis to Afghanistan.
The two questions he needs to ask himself are first: did Osama bin Laden want the United States to invade Afghanistan in response to 9/11? The answer to that one is: yes, of course he did. And second: of all the tens of thousands of people the US has killed in Afghanistan and Iraq, would a single one have turned up in the United States to do harm if left un-killed? Answer: probably not.
Other people might have turned up in the US with evil intent, but not those guys.
So turning Afghanistan into a second Vietnam is probably the wrong strategy, isn't it?
Gwynne Dyer's latest book, Climate Wars, was published recently in Australia by Scribe.
PUKHTUNKHWA VS PML(N)
Mwaqar
IT is really ridicules to read the statements of PML(N) Leaders from Hazara over the name Pukhtunkhwa ,let me remind PML(n) GROUP THAT NAWAZ SHARIF IS NOT A NATIONAL LEADER AND PML(N) should not forget that for getting ANP support when Luhar was PM, he promised ANP to rename NWFP as PUKHTUNKHWA, These leaders from Punjab should remember that Pakistan is already at the edge of collapse because of stone age barbarians , Taliban, today Pukhtuns blood is spilling in SWAT and brave Army of Pakistan is afraid to kill these monsters of SWAT VALLEY who are denying education of Pukhtun girls, who are destroying our schools, who wants to impose their views on majority of people who wants to live in peace and improve their lives. It is really shameful and tragic that non of these so called politicians of PML(N)never said anything against Taliban activities in SAWT VALLEY but they are worried about the name of PUKHTUNKHWA, I don’t think these so called politici ans have any moral values, today Valley of Swat is burning, ignorant and criminal Taliban are busy killing Pukhtun people who oppose them, Many innocent people have been killed in most inhuman ways for being termed as spy, whoever tries to resist in any manner in this area against the norms imposed by these militants is termed as an agent /spy, there are many reports that identify people beheaded and hanged on trees and poles at the unfortunate Grain chowk now identified as khooni chowk (The bloody crossing).Is it Islam? What these politicians of PML(N) think about these tragic events, what so called religious leaders like FAZAL and QAZI think about it??? its not the people of HAZARA who are opposing name PUKHTUNKHWA, its party (PML(N)of LUHAR brothers who are trying to divide people of this great province.Gen. Ayub Khan was born in the village of Rehana in Haripur District, NWFP into a family of the Tareen tribe, The Tareen are a prominent Pashtun tribe residing in Pakistan and Afghanistan. The tribe have an influence on politics in Haripur District and the Hazara area of the North-West Frontier Province of Pakistan, The principal language of Tareens IS Pashto, Which proves that people of HAZARA are group of Pushtuns even if they speak different language then Pashto. On the other hand anyone who talks about the so called referendum on this issue then they should have referendum whether Pukhtuns wants to continue living with Pakistan or Afghanistan It seems like Politicians of PML(N) are generating a new issue of hate and divide in this province. Lets not make it a political issue. one should not politicize an issue for own interest. I see no reason for denying Pukhtoons the legitimate name of their province on the grounds that this will increase ethnic tension. On the contrary, if anything, it will defuse the existing tension. Lets not forget what happened to East Pakistan when West Pak denied them their right of Bengali language. The problem is Pakistani politicians never learn from history, these politicians needs to understand that Pakistann’ s imposition of Urdu on east Pakistan was a mistake. It seems like some opportunist politicians of PML(N) IN THE province are trying to create political tension over Pukhtunkhwa. People in Pukhtunkhwa wants to be recognized as a nationality in their own right and for this they want their living place to be given their name Pukhtunkhwa. Why can Punjabis have Punjab, Sindhis Sindh , Baloochis Balouchistan , but Pukhtoons can't have Pukhtoonkhwa ???why Pukhtoon are being treated like occupied Palestine who will breakaway at the first chance...? and if do deci d to break off , trust me with all its might, Pakistan can't prevent that. Pakistan couldn't beat Bengalis into submission and it can never force Pakhtoon into submission. Its stupid that some people who consider themselves super patriotic imply that Pakhtoons are any less patriotic than themselves. Let me remind those self declared super Pakistanis that Punjab did not have any option except joining Pakistan. Punjab had to chose between joining Pakistan or cleaning after the Hindus. But we Pukhtoon had a choice to join our brothers in Afghanistan, with whom we share not only our ancestry but our culture, our history, our tradition, and our language, but Pukhtoons decided to stay with Pakistan .
How can someone from Punjab or Sindh or any other part of Pakistan give us a lecture on patriotism..? I think these people are the one who needs a lesson in patriotism101, because by suppressing minorities right and denying them their identity they are weakening Pakistan NOT Pukhtoons.. Its tragic that Pakistani politicians did NOT learn any lesson from history. Bengalis were at the forefront in the struggle for Pakistan but when Pakistan suppressed them and denied them their rights and their identity what happened ..? We all know the end result. By calling Bengalis traitors because they demanded their rights they were converted into traitors. Alas we could learn from history because if we don't , history is doomed to repeat itself. Acceptance of history is a good sign, no wonder, but learning no lesson from it is unforgivable. Pease someone help me to Understand how renaming NWFP is gonna break Pakistan or divide people in this province? and please don't give me the crap about patriotism and Islamic unity. Whats wrong with Pukhtoons having their identity in Pakistan like Punjabis, Sindhis, and Balouchis..? it’s the politicians who are making mess over the name not the people living in this province. Sindh, punjab and Balochistan are border provinces too why they are not called ,east-south,north-east or south west provinces why these provinces are call with identity of race reside in side that territory? We are unanimous on one thing that people from this province are all pathan if all are not Pashtun. So please take back the British name and give us our own name. The usage of Pukhtunkhwa in Pushtu poetry dates back to the middle ages. The word is a combination of two words - that is Pakhtun and Khwa. Pukhtun or Pashtun is a noun while Khwa means side. Culturally there is no doubt that the land was called Pukhtunkhwa in Pushtu literature since 15th century .The word Pukhtunkhwa was also used in the modern poetry by contemporary poets like Qanaldar Momand (1930-2003) long before it was suggested as the nomenclature for the NWFP.
The name NWFP is certainly a misnomer today since it does not satisfy the aspirations of the people of the province. Three of the four provinces the Punjab, Sindh and Balochistan, got their own identity either through their environment or inhabitants. But the NWFP has been named neither after the historical and cultural background of the inhabitants nor derived its name from environment. Since the name (NWFP)does not reflect the true ethnic identity of its inhabitants, therefore a demand for its change is a logical consequence but unfortunately the matter has turned into a controversial issue again by so called politicians.
Those opposing the word Pukhtunkhwa argue that the name will not represent non Pashto speaking population of the province. The argument is unjustified and impractical. There is hardly any country in the world which does not have ethnic minorities. Even in Pakistan ;Punjab, Sindh, and Balochistan have large number of people who do not speak the language their names ostensibly suggest. The 74 percent population of NWFP speaks Pashto as mother language in present day NWFP and the proportion will greatly increase when FATA will ultimately be merged in the province, choosing a proper name for the province is the fundamental right of its residents. It would help strengthen the federation besides removing the sense of deprivation among people of the smallest province of the country.
It is time that politicians belonging to different factions of Muslim League too come out of their mindset and start and objectively treating the demands the smaller provinces. It will help us build a stronger and more vibrant federation. Instead of debating again and again over this issue, politicians are wasting their time, they should either spend their time on development of this province or quit politics. There is no need to challenge the Pukhtunkhwa issue as it has been passed with overwhelming majority in the provincial assembly, members of this assembly should discuss how to solve the problems in this province. Renaming the NWFP province to Pukhtunkhwa has a long political history in Pakistan. Pakhtoons and nationalist groups, which are passionate about naming their inhabited land after their identity as Pukhtoons, have been demanding the change of the province’s name for decades. But a number of political groups and opportunist politicians are not in favor of calling NW FP as Pukhtunkhwa and they are trying to divide people in Pukhtunkhwa. These members of assembly should be discussing creating jobs, hiring police officers, opening new schools, colleges and universities, hospitals and providing clean water and electricity to their voters and keeping province safe, rid Province of violence and terror, generate productive employment for youth, provide education, health care, and bring progress to the doorstep of workers, farmers and small businesses elimination of child labor etc . These are the issues people elected these assembly members to solve.
How Not to Lose Afghanistan
Even if an additional 30,000 American and NATO troops were deployed in southern and eastern Afghanistan, the Taliban problem would not be reduced. It would merely be pushed back over the Pakistan border, destabilizing Pakistan's already volatile North-West Frontier Province, which itself is more populous than Iraq. This amounts to squeezing a balloon on one end to inflate it on the other.
The tribal militias, newly armed with Chinese AK-47s, will not be able to cope with that influx. Even now, the increase in attacks on NATO convoys in Peshawar and the Khyber Pass show how the Afghan front is seriously affected by American policies in Pakistan. Fewer arms from the United States (the Obama administration intends to emphasize civilian over military aid) have diminished the Pakistani military's willingness to support American supply routes, forcing the U.S. military to scramble for new routes through Russia, Uzbekistan and Kyrgyzstan. As was the case under the Musharraf regime, the Pakistan army is more interested in American planes than policies.
Clearly, America cannot resolve the Afghan problem in isolation. South-Central Asia needs independent security institutions, beginning with a joint Afghan-Pakistan force empowered to conduct operations on both sides of the border, as recently proposed by Abdul Rahim Wardak, Afghanistan's defense minister.
At the same time, America will have to accept Afghan and Pakistani negotiations with Taliban commanders, who have emerged from a deep Punjabi and Pashtun social base that cannot be eradicated anytime soon.
Just as needed are provincial reconstruction teams in Pakistan's tribal areas, like those that have been established in parts of Afghanistan. These Pakistani-led teams should be provided with the cash and supplies to install power generators, to give local police officers more pay and to hire thousands of local Pashtun to build roads, hospitals and schools.
This process can begin from the Khyber agency outside Peshawar and spread north and west toward the Afghan border. The original reconstruction teams in Afghanistan also need more support -- which should involve Arab, Turkish and Chinese participation. In other words, long-term stability depends on getting reconstruction right on both sides of the border.
Swat and the Hur uprising
Monday, January 26, 2009
by Ayesha Ibrahim(THE NEWS)
From 1940 to 1947, the British colonial government in India struggled desperately to enforce its writ in a large portion of Sindh, controlled by a group known as the Hurs who had risen in rebellion against the state. The rebellion centred in Rohri, the seat of the Rohri Pir or the Pir of Pagaro, as he is more commonly known, and spread over a considerable area, where the disciples of the Pir lived. Pir Sibghatullah Shah, the Pir at the time, has been viewed variously as a champion of the nationalist movement and as a shrewd politician aiming for a regional fiefdom. Nevertheless, among the Hurs, he inspired what has been called a fanatical devotion and thus, when the Pir was arrested by the British for conspiracy against the government, the Hurs instigated a rebellion that ignited much of Sindh for a decade (continuing in the newly independent state of Pakistan).
This historical episode is similar to the current situation in Swat in some respects. Firstly, a group of people, a sub-set of the local population, rose in revolt against the state; the Hurs in one case and the Taliban in the other. This group managed to gain control over a considerable geographical area and either made allies of the local populace or intimidated the population into acquiescence. Secondly, both rebellions are ostensibly set in a pre-modern framework; the Hurs fought for the kingdom of Pir Pagaro over the region of Sindh (as prophesied by some other Pir) while the Taliban are fighting for the implementation of their version of the ‘shariah’. While these are the ostensible justifications for revolt, the Pir was taking revenge for humiliations wrought upon him by the British and establishing a foothold for himself in the soon to be decolonized subcontinent and the Taliban are obviously waging a political struggle for dominance in the region as revenge for and in reaction to what has been wrought upon them by the US-Pakistan alliance in Afghanistan.
Thirdly, in both cases, the military was called into resolve the conflict, to a large extent, in vain. Martial Law was imposed in a large part of Sindh during the 1940s and, though, the army took extreme measures to destroy any and every bastion of support the Hurs might have (including trying to burn the forests in the area), the Hur reign of terror prevailed in the countryside, in large part due to the local support they continued to command. Within the Hurs there was a body of active perpetrators of violence who sought to challenge the British, while the remaining Hurs, though peaceful, supported the cause of the active Hurs and provided them with food, supplies and information about the activities of the British. In the case of Swat, despite the deployment of military forces, the Taliban continue to wreak havoc and their authority reigns supreme.
The two rebellions are also eerily alike in that in both cases the perpetrators were initially patronized by the state and later came to bite the hand that fed them; the British state had a deliberate policy of cultivating relations with the Pir Pagaro in order to enlist his support in governing the country and the Pakistani state funded and armed (along with the US) the mujahideen who have now morphed into the Taliban. In both cases, also, the state showed signs of backtracking on its previous policy of patronage (the British imprisoned Pir Sibghatullah and the Pakistani government joined the war on terror), which triggered the rebellions. Last but not least, the policy of the state towards both the rebellions was marked by divided opinion over the wisdom of a military operation in unfamiliar territory and there remained, within the administration, considerable support for the opinion that only dialogue of some sort could resolve the dispute. While many among the Hurs were captured, their spirit remained unbroken until the incumbent Pir (succeeding Pir Sibghatullah) ordered them to stop; as his disciples, the Hurs obeyed but perhaps their obedience was also due to a sense that as the Pir had reconciled with the state, the Hurs’ interests would also be protected hereafter. The Pakistani state, too, is vacillating between an attitude of unrelenting aggression to a dialogue-loving position.
What do these similarities suggest? Firstly there appears to be little change in the capacity and posture of the state from colonial times to the present. Just as the colonial state relied on elites (such as the Pir) for effective governance and made little effort to positively influence the lives of the ordinary and thereby had little knowledge or presence in interior Sindh, so, too, has the Pakistani state made little effort to positively impact the lives of those in the northern areas, an extreme case of which is FATA, but it is also apparent in Swat. This lack of political will and the resultant lack of (civilian) capacity in the north-west has allowed the Taliban to gain a foothold.
Secondly, the similarities, along with the history of the rugged north-west, suggest that no resolution of the state of affairs is possible without recourse to both military means and dialogue. While the violence of the Taliban can only be stalled, in the immediate-term, through military means, a long-term solution will require some form of dialogue and negotiation.
The Taliban have obviously acquired a base, have access to supplies, and have made allies or recruits from some of the population and intimidated the rest. To wrest control from this force, without massacring the entire population, is an almost, if not entirely, impossible task. Therefore, despite the justifiable cries for military action in the area, a pragmatic view of the situation suggests that some form of negotiation will be required.
Once some level of peace and stability has been attained, it is the responsibility of the state to pay attention to the area and devote resources, both human and financial, to this troubled region. Only by doing so, can there be any viable hope for national integration and peace.
(THESE ARE THE PEOPLE AND SO CALLED LEADERS WHO KEPT THEIR PEOPLE WITHOUT EDUCATION AND BRAIN WASHED THEM FOR THEIR PERSONAL BENEFITS,IN SWAT THEY TALIBAN WANT TO IMPOSE SO CALLED WAHABI ISM THE ISLAMIC VERSION OF SAUDI ARABIA.
Pir Pagaro the Seventh (Urdu: پیر پگاڑو) (Sindhi: پير پاڳارو) or Pir Pagara is the title given to the leader of Sunni Muslim Sufi order of Hurs in Sindh province of Pakistan. It comes from Persian word Pir (Chief) and Sindhi word Pagara (Chieftain's Turban). The turban that Pir Pagaro's used to adorn was thought to belong to Prophet Muhammad.
Per legend, the first Pir Pagaro was such a high scholar that he won many scholarly debates. As per Sindh's tradition, the defeated scholar would submit his turban. With so many turbans on his head, he was declared Pir Pagaro or Chief with Many Turbans.
The current Pir Pagaro is Shah Mardan Shah II, who became Pir Pagaro in 1954. He and his offspring are widely known to use their influence and name for intimidation, much like the Mafia. People use their connections with pagara as possible threats. His father Pir Syed Sabghatullah Shah Pagaro was given the chair; he was hanged on 20th March, 1943 by the British colonial government after he was found guilty, in a sham trial, of inciting an armed uprising of Hur followers.
The writer is a staff member. Email: ayesha.ibrahim@thenews.com.pk
The original sin
Malik Haroon Rashid(FRONTIER POST ARTICLE)
“If one were to map terrorism and weapons of mass destruction (WMD) today, then all roads would intersect in Pakistan." Says a study entitled "World at Risk" by an American Congressional commission. Former US secretary of state Madeleine Albright came up with the view that, "Pakistan has everything that gives you an international migraine. It has nuclear weapons; it has terrorism, extremists, corruption and is very poor". The report "World at risk" urged US president to take steps for securing Islamabad's biological and nuclear weapons. This is how some sections in the US view Pakistan: most dangerous country on the surface of earth, not only instable but having the potential to destabilize neighbouring region and its Generals with suicidal urge ever ready to go nuclear in the event of war with India. Especially in the wake of Mumbai terror attacks criticism of Pakistan has gained sharp edge. Such criticism and vilification of Pakistan has also become a sort of daily routine in the Western print and electronic media. India, on the other hand, in spite of its state sponsored terrorism and its unfair treatment of Muslims and Christians is being treated more sympathetically. It is rising gradually in Western estimation and is seen as a tragic victim of international terrorism being sponsored by Pakistan. It is true all is not well in Pakistan, its North Western tribal territories are on fire, virtually without government control, a section of its population has embraced Jihadist ideology and act independently of governmental control, waging war against American-led Western troops in Afghanistan or on Pakistani troops back home or going on suicidal mission to India. But constant mantra of Pakistan being a failed state, sponsor of global terrorism or as a "nation itself is a kind of WMD" is most unfair. Views like these don't take into account the core reasons leading to today's terrible mess of terrorism and instability in Pakistan. Instability and insecurity in Pakistan came as long-term consequence of Pakistan's association and partnership with the US for safeguarding and furthering America's own strategic interests in the region. If today forces of chaos, terrorism and instability are sending shock waves across the region then it is the US which committed the original sin of creating same forces. The word Jihad is nowadays associated with all the negative connotations in the West but the same Islamic injunction was systematically invoked by America to motivate and encourage the Muslims fight against the Soviet occupation troops in Afghanistan. It became America's strategic objective to give the Soviets a bleeding nose in Afghanistan and the idea of Jihad against the infidel Soviets came handy in motivating Muslims fight against the Soviets. Guerilla warfare requires sufficient level of commitment and Americans realised very well that invoking Jihad against the godless Soviets could give the Afghan fighters the required level of commitment to engage the Soviets in a protracted war. This is how Jihad was launched with American and Western blessings and Mujahideen were launched into Afghanistan's killing fields from Pakistan's border areas. Today whole of the Western world is behind the US in demanding Pakistan to put a stop to cross border infiltration of Taliban into Afghanistan but the same trend of cross border raids was set with the active encouragements of US in the days of Soviet occupation. Today's Taliban are merely following a guerilla tradition of Islamic Jihadist kind of Soviet days sanctioned by the US. There are some telling historical parallels helping to better understand the idea discussed. Then Soviet-backed Afghan government headed by PDPA was internationally recognised and had itself requested Soviet military assistance or intervention in 1979 to fight rebels who had taken up arms against the government for its Soviet-styled reforms. Once the US began to aid and arm the Mujahideen, the Soviet Union and Afghan government raised the issue of cross border intervention by Pakistan and American-backed Mujahideen, very much in present day Karzai like manner. But such diplomatic protests went largely ignored at that time by the international community. Now with the benefit of hindsight we can see where America went wrong. It is America which didn't show farsightedness at that time, not realising that indoctrinating Muslims with heavy doses of jihad could become dangerous. Defeating the Soviets became America's obsession and the rest was postponed to the later day. The Mujahideen were wrongly credited for causing the Soviet Union to collapse, though they during the struggle couldn't capture a single town on Afghan soil. Puffed up with too high notions of themselves, the Afghan war veterans began to nourish dream of dismantling the remaining infidel super power. Again it was USA which left Afghanistan at its own after Soviet troops withdrawal. America didn't maintain a constructive engagement with Afghanistan, the country fell to civil war and Al Qaeda got a foothold in the area and this is how Taliban - Al Qaeda nexus came into being, destabilizing the entire world. It is Al Qaeda which through its subtle propaganda began to influence and infiltrate the Muslims in the entire world, even in the educated ones living in the Western countries. 9/11, 7/7, Madrid bombings, Bali bombing and all other acts of terrorism had been inspired by al Qaeda ideology. So if one were to apportion blame for present day acts of terrorism, then we should accuse America in the first place for committing this cardinal sin of creating this jinni. Now this jinni is out of the bottle troubling every one. America cultivated Jihad passion among the Muslims, recruited and trained Jihadi fighters from across the world and now the same Jihadis are every where from Morocco to Indonesia, from Britain to Australia. America aimed to teach Soviets a lesson in Afghanistan but it were the Muslim fighters who learnt the greatest lessons that super powers can be defeated through strong faith and jihad. The lesson of Afghan war have ever since been inspiring Jihadi fighters all over the world. But such bare facts are always ignored and spotlight always comes over Pakistan. It is suspected of wrong doing for variety of reasons. Firstly, because the big players of Jihadi ideology are well ensconced in Pakistan's tribal regions, threatening Western world with acts of terrorism and also because Pakistan army is suspected to still retain some closer links to some of the Jihadi outfits for having some sort of leverage in Afghanistan and Indian occupied Kashmir. Further complication comes with Pakistan's nuclear weapons and the relating fear that Pakistan's nuclear arsenal might fall into the hands of Jihadist or Islamic minded generals. This all is the stuff West's nightmares are made of and that is why some people in the West like to consider Pakistan a "suicidal state" or terrorist state or they talk of multiple threats emanating from Pakistan threatening the entire world. These major threats the world has yet to see, but in Pakistan these threats have seen their actual realisation. Pakistan's siding with the West in War on Terror triggered violent Taliban backlash, making Pakistan their legitimist target. For the Taliban America is far away, they indeed engage NATO troops in Afghanistan but Pakistan is their own country, have their sympathizers in every nook and corner and have far more easier targets in Pakistan than any where else in the world. Pakistan's support for the US in Afghanistan hasn't come at a cheap price. It has bled Pakistan white. It is better for the West to realise the crises Pakistan is passing through, a crises foisted on Pakistan due to West's lack of foresight. Half way across the world America came to Pakistan's tribal areas to give the Soviet Union its Vietnam War, and when it left Afghanistan lay in rubbles and second time it came to Afghanistan proper but its presence destabilized Pakistan. It is true America being a friend of Pakistan doesn't want to see anarchy and instability in Pakistan, but censure and condemnation of Pakistan by American and European think tanks and media leaves a bad taste in Pakistan. To understand how much anti-Pakistani bias Western media retains, readers should check ISI chief's interview to German news agency Spiegel and have it compared with Afghan spy chief's interview by the same news agency. Condemnation and criticism of Pakistan comes easy for Indians but Pakistanis get a rude shock if Westerners begin to speak the same Indian language and heap all sorts of blame and criticism over their country. Pakistan is passing rough and tumble time, dogged by crises and challenges. The need today is to help Pakistan get over the crises, not to criticise it for all that goes by the name of terrorism.
In Afghanistan, Terrain Rivals Taliban as Enemy
KHUGA KHEYL, Afghanistan -- It was near sunset when the tire on one of the armored vehicles blew out on the way back through the village of Khuga Kheyl this month. The U.S. Army convoy stopped dead in a narrow, rocky cleft between two small mountains. A gang of Afghan boys ran down a nearby slope toward the convoy as it jerked to a halt near the border with Pakistan.
That morning, Capt. Jay Bessey had warned his platoon not to waste time and to stay tight. There was word that a suicide attacker might try to infiltrate his small base in a remote district in the eastern Afghan province of Nangahar. There was also a rumor that Taliban forces may have planted more than a dozen bombs along the convoy's route near another isolated district close by.
A flat tire an hour before sunset was the last thing Bessey needed. Yet there he sat, waiting for another unit to arrive with a spare. The incident underscored what all U.S. forces operating near the 1,500-mile-long border know: that the tyranny of the terrain is almost as formidable an obstacle to their goals here as the treachery of the Taliban.
The plan had been to meet with district tribal elders, deliver food aid and drop off a few benches and tables at a new school, creating a little local goodwill for U.S. efforts to stabilize the region, then get back to base before dark. Instead, Bessey sat listening to a village elder who had scrambled down the mountain from Khuga Kheyl with cups of tea and a laundry list of demands while the sun set on the convoy.
The mission in Khuga Kheyl was textbook counterinsurgency -- the kind of approach Gen. David H. Petraeus, the head of U.S. Central Command, has been trying to drive home to U.S. troops since he was a field commander in Iraq. There, under Petraeus, U.S. troops reached out to Sunni tribal leaders in the western province of Anbar to form community-based militias that helped reverse the tide of violence. The so-called Anbar Awakening, combined with an increase in U.S. troops, gradually created pockets of security in areas previously dominated by insurgents.
Petraeus, who is now in charge of the wars in both Iraq and Afghanistan, has said he plans to launch a similar approach this year in Afghanistan in a bid to retake the initiative from a resurgent Taliban. For that strategy to succeed, U.S. troops will have to broaden their presence in areas of Afghanistan where development has been slow, security precarious and confidence in the government of Afghan President Hamid Karzai limited.
Many of those areas lie in eastern Afghanistan along the border with Pakistan, which has become a gateway for the insurgency. With U.S. troop levels set to double to about 62,000 in Afghanistan in the coming year, American military officials here say the struggle to win tribal allegiances in remote, isolated places such as Khuga Kheyl will define the success or failure of Petraeus's plan. But in far eastern Afghanistan, where tribal loyalties often trump national interests, that is no easy task.
Rough, often impassable mountain terrain has made it tough to make inroads into border areas where thousands of Pashtun tribesmen teeter between support for Karzai and support for the Taliban. Last year, Afghanistan's eastern border provinces witnessed some of the bloodiest battles between coalition and insurgent forces. Insurgent incursions in the east increased by nearly 45 percent in 2008, according to the U.S. military. And many of the 151 U.S. troops killed last year died in combat in areas bordering Pakistan.
The conditions have made for a tense atmosphere for Bessey's men in the 6th Squadron, 4th Cavalry Regiment, based in Fort Hood, Tex., but he has pushed hard to counter their fears. "I try to tell our guys, 'You know, we're not going to win this thing by killing people,' " Bessey said. "We're not going to win by being the ugly Americans out there."
Bessey, a tall, athletic-looking West Point graduate from Michigan, glanced over at the stalled convoy while he settled in on a pile of rocks and waited for help to arrive. He vigorously worked a plug of tobacco in the corner of his mouth while he listened to Malik Dalawar, the Khuga Kheyl tribal elder, plead his case.
Thick-fisted and balding, with a stubbly white beard, Dalawar took Bessey's measure with a long, hard look. We need guns, he said. At night, there are few NATO forces or Afghan police or troops around to safeguard local villagers. Dalawar said he and his people needed some way to defend themselves against the Taliban and al-Qaeda fighters who regularly sweep into the area from Pakistan. But Bessey was not entirely convinced.
Dalawar, a member of the Mohmand tribe, said he is no fan of the Taliban. But in places such as Khuga Kheyl, the pressure on tribal elders to join the Taliban is intense. Electricity is scarce. Paved roads are nonexistent. And insurgent hideouts are abundant on both sides of the border. Dalawar said insurgent commanders regularly try to entice him to join the fight against coalition forces.
"They tell us to fight alongside them. They say: 'We will give you roads. We will give you electricity.' The Taliban, they tell us: 'Look, the Afghan government has given you nothing. If you fight with us, you can have everything,' " Dalawar said. "When we tell them, 'No, we will not do this,' then they tell us they will take our villages by force if they have to."
The threat in Khuga Kheyl is serious. A day before Bessey's convoy passed through the village, about 600 Afghan Taliban fighters had overrun a Pakistani military base in the Mohmand tribal area just across the border. The assault left 46 Pakistani troops dead. Regional experts and military officials speculated that many of the attackers came from an area not far from Khuga Kheyl.
"I am an elder, so if someone has a gun and I don't, I can't do anything," Dalawar said.
"If the area is secure, then you don't need a weapon," Bessey replied.
Dalawar tried again: "If something happens and I do not have an AK-47, it could be a problem."
"If you have a weapon, it could be a problem for someone else," Bessey said.
In other parts of Afghanistan, the debate over whether to arm local tribal leaders has been largely settled. In southern Afghanistan and in provinces near the capital, Kabul, where the Taliban is strongest, the training and arming of local tribal militias will soon be underway.
Nevertheless, some Afghans have said they fear that arming local militias will lead to abuses and could reignite the same intertribal frictions that sparked a protracted and brutal civil war in Afghanistan in the 1990s.
Lt. Col. Patrick Daniel Jr., commander of the U.S. battalion based in Nangahar province, said many American officers in the field support the idea of allowing responsible Afghan tribal elders to arm themselves. But such an approach carries risks and might not work in every province, Daniel said.
"For a lot of us out here, we recognize that it's much like how we feel about the Second Amendment and the right to bear arms in the States," Daniel said. "But we already have tribal disputes that are resolved by violence, and when you give them more weapons, that could mean those disputes could get resolved with those weapons. So it's a roll of the dice. Still, you can't rule it out . . . because people here need to protect themselves."
When another U.S. convoy arrived with a spare tire, Bessey deferred the decision on Dalawar's request for a few weeks, saying he would bring it up with the incoming U.S. commander in the region. He brushed the mountain dust from his pants and called for his troops to mount up.
Dalawar looked the American soldiers over one more time. He frowned slightly. The sky darkened as the sun dropped behind the mountains. He shook Bessey's hand and said he would be glad to see him again.
