Bharat Rakshak

Omar asks BJP not to hoist flag in Srinagar


Have not we seen Pakistani flags in each and every nukad of India?

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi ... 222368.cms

Pakistan should be expected to enter a watershed period of transformation in 2011, with this dynamic having significant ramifications for the coalition’s conflict against the Taliban, as well as for the strategic balance between the People’s Republic of China (PRC) and India. In essence, Pakistan will be dominated by its geopolitical essence: as the key bridge between the Indian Ocean, Central Asia and the PRC.

At the same time, the visit to Pakistan by Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao on 16 December highlighted the reality that Beijing now feels that the US 'primacy' in Pakistan's strategic posture has effectively begun to erode, and that it is now time for the PRC to be seen for what it is: Pakistan's most stable and significant strategic ally.

The growing move toward a critical mass in the overall Eurasian landmass of a trading (and therefore geostrategic) patterns dominated by the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) states linking the Great Black Sea Basin (GBSB) region and Russia to Western European and Mediterranean markets. In this framework, India will be substantially marginalized and Pakistan will be the 'bridge' used by the PRC to sustain this dynamic, ultimately adding to India's historical focus against Pakistan up to and possibly including moves toward consideration of military options;

The signing on 15 December of the TAPI (Turkmenistan, Afghanistan, Pakistan and India) pipeline agreement by the governments of Turkmenistan, Afghanistan, Pakistan and India was an attempt to begin to redress the difficulty which India, in particular, has had in accessing Central Asian energy resources. Significantly, the gas for the TAPI pipeline is projected to come from south-eastern fields under concessions to Chinese companies, and TAPI is proposed to include a major pipeline from Quetta to Gwadar, in Pakistani Baluchistan- thus feeding the PRC market. Whether the Mutlan-New Delhi portion of the pipeline is ever built is very much an open question, but the PRC's interests will be addressed as a priority. From India's standpoint, the 1,700km pipeline would take gas from Turkmenistan's Daulatabad Field, through Afghanistan, to Multan in Pakistan, and then on to the Indian township of Fazilka.

The reality is that while the US has been Pakistan's most visible strategic partner in an unstable cycle of peaks and troughs since the mid-20th Century, the PRC has been the power which has consistently provided Pakistan with backing. This, both with regard to the growing necessity of the PRC to constrain India into a corner of Eurasia and with regard to the growing ability of the PRC to provide economic and military aid of very real substance to Pakistan, has reached a transformative stage. In other words, the PRC not only has the absolute need to regard Pakistan as its vital bridge to the Indian Ocean and the Middle East and its Great Wall Against India, it finally has the ability to drive this reality through economic and political power;

Moreover, the transformed security situation in Afghanistan, compounded by the speed with which the coalition is moving to "declare victory and go home", will exacerbate cross-border security concerns between Pakistan and Afghanistan and further encourage Afghan refugee flows into Pakistan, exacerbating Pakistan's economic, social and security concerns;

The PRC can be expected to move strongly in 2011 to help boost Pakistan's economic and industrial situation, bearing in mind that until the 2010 floods and the 2010 tribal unrest Pakistan's economic growth was impressive, albeit offset by its high population and urbanization growth rates.

All of these factors - and many more - warrant detailed expansion and show that 2011 will be a watershed year for Pakistan. It may also be a watershed year for India, given that the Indian government itself must come to grips with the reality that failure to break into the new Great Silk Route network of the Eurasian landmass will render China's strategic leadership unbeatable within a short span of years.

As noted, it is significant that the PRC relationship with Pakistan remains critical, and it is this - not the US-Pakistan relationship - which effectively ensures Pakistan's security against India. As if to confirm this, US President Barack Obama indicated on 16 December that the US-Pakistani relationship would deteriorate in 2011 because Washington blames the US failure in Afghanistan on Pakistan's reluctance to invade the Pushtun and Baluchi lands in order to close down Taliban sanctuaries.

Meanwhile, Pakistan is the great impediment to India in gaining overland access to Central Asia and to be a major participant in the revived 'Great Silk Route' wealth of energy and other trade within and across the entire Eurasian landmass. As this writer has noted, India, if it fails to gain land access to Central Asia, will be forced to rely on being an Indian Ocean (and perhaps Pacific) sea power: "Given the rise of the Eurasian landmass and its internal lines of communications, the Indian Ocean itself will become the dynamic ocean of the 21st Century, an inland sea linking Eurasia with the resources and markets of Africa and Australia. How India plays in this game - as a Mahanist sea power or Mackinderish heartland [power] - will be significant."

The immediate outlook for Pakistan, then, is a period of great challenges, and possible turmoil, with the end of yet another round of close US-Pakistan strategic relations, and the real emergence of support and investment from China. This will be a watershed year for Pakistan.

Pakistan has, in recent years, been the country which has had the world's highest level of overall population growth, coupled with the highest level of urban population growth. At the same time, it had, in fact, enjoyed one of the most impressive growths in agricultural output in the world,

Army chief briefs PM on China’s role in POK

May 09, 2011 8:55:54 PM

Rahul Datta/Mohit Kandhari | New Delhi/Jammu

Alarmed at the increasing Pakistan-China nexus, which has seen growing presence of Chinese security forces in Pakistan Occupied Kashmir, Army Chief General VK Singh has taken up the matter with Prime Minister Manmohan Singh.

In a detailed presentation, the Army chief has apprised the Prime Minister of the ground situation and its implications for Indian security. Gen Singh visited Leh a few days ago to take stock of the situation.

Disclosing this here, sources said the 750-km-long LoC is a disputed boundary between India and Pakistan. China, over the past few years, has increased its presence in POK, thereby effectively forming a military nexus with Pakistan and coming close to the LoC and posing a possible threat to Indian security interests.

Given this background, the Army chief visited Leh early last week to take first hand account of the ground situation and review operational preparedness before meeting the Prime Minister.

Sources said Gen Singh urged the political leadership to speed up the process of modernisation of the armed forces, besides improving infrastructure — including roads and airstrips — in the strategically important region of Jammu & Kashmir.

In fact, the first caution was sounded over the increasing Chinese footprint close to the LoC by Northern Command chief Lt General KT Parnaik in a seminar in Jammu last month. Expressing concern over the emerging scenario, he had said, “China is actually present and stationed on the LoC and it facilitates Pakistan armed forces to complement China’s military operations. Its footprints are too close to India and this presence of China in PoK has to be taken seriously.”

The senior Army officer had also made mention of the fact that China had gained a substantial foothold in Gilgit and Baltistan by infrastructure development and its considerably increasing presence, lends strength to China-Pak nexus which is of great security concern to India.

‘China has also strengthened its presence by building sea links and the increased Chinese presence around India is jeopardising the strategic interests of the country,’ Parnaik said while speaking in a seminar on ‘Pakistan-Occupied-Kashmir Internal Dynamics and Externalities’ at University of Jammu.

The Army Commander said China had made inroads around India thus posing substantial challenges not only along the China-Indian border but also along the Line of Control (LoC).

He said ‘a great game is being played by Chinese expansionism and by mushrooming terror networks,’ adding that it was imperative to take control of the situation in Jammu and Kashmir and find a viable solution to internal problems of the State without interference from Pakistan.

The Northern Command chief said ‘unless overt and covert interference of Pakistan is neutralised, no political or economic solution will be implemented.’ He also said Pakistan having ceded trans-Karakoram part of Gilgit and Baltistan to China in 1963, Karakoram highway was built to link Pakistan with China.

India should be assertive and proactive to claim the strategically vital parts of Kashmir 'illegally' occupied by Pakistan where China has increased its footprints leading to fears that Beijing may take over the territory by 2020, according to a report.

The report by New Delhi think tank Institute of Defence Studies and Analysis says China's growing footprint in the region had added another strategic dimension to the discourse on the territory that includes Northern Areas, also called Gilgit Baltistan and Azad Jammu and Kashmir.

"These realities are certain to impinge on India's long-term security interests and therefore it is incumbent upon Indian policy makers to adopt a pro-active approach towards PoK (Pakistan-occupied Kashmir) which is an integral part of India," it says.

The report alleges that the Karakoram Highway (KKH) connecting Pakistan with China through Pakistani Kashmir has been used for the clandestine transfer of nuclear material from Beijing to Islamabad.

"That this has multiple strategic implications for regional security, especially that of India, has been underscored," it states.

The 1,280-km-long highway connects Havelian rail-head near Abbottabad in Pakistan with Kashgar in Xinjiang region of China. It was built in 1978 with Chinese assistance.

Detailing Chinese developmental projects in Pakistani Kashmir, the report says Chinese companies were working on a number of hydel projects, including Neelum-Jhelum, Gomal Zam and the reconstruction of Mangla dam.

The report citing Pakistan media alleges that the joint power projects signed between China and Pakistan during President Asif Ali Zardari's visit in 2009 were 'not transparent' as 'often Chinese companies were awarded contracts without open bidding'.

NEW DELHI: Indian intelligence agencies now have credible evidence of their own that several hundred of the Chinese working in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir are People's Liberation Army engineers. They are in the process of verifying if these Chinese military engineers are engaged in some sort of military construction like bunkers.

The startling confirmation that hundreds of Chinese military engineers are in PoK has come against the stout official denial by China that its military was not present on the Pakistan side of Kashmir. In the past, US intelligence has told India about Chinese military presence in PoK.

The Chinese are involved in hydel projects, realignment of Karakoram highway etc in PoK. Presence of Chinese military engineers in civilian construction activities undertaken by China in foreign countries is "unusual", a source said. "They couldn't be there just for civilian work," he pointed out.

Sources said the inputs about Chinese military presence in PoK was part of an assessment presented by the Indian Army top brass to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, defence minister A K Antony and other senior officials a few weeks ago.

Army leadership is believed to have pointed out the significant gap in the military capabilities of India and China, especially along the Line of Actual Control (LAC) between the two countries. The stark differences in the logistical capabilities such as roads and air links along the border between the two armies were pointed out to the leadership. But most importantly, Army told the political leadership that the Chinese were capable of deploying some three dozen divisions, against India's less than a dozen divisions, along the LAC in case of hostilities.

The Army leadership is believed to have pointed out the massive air force and ground force capabilities Chinese possess in the regions along the Indian border, while urging the government to step up its own efforts to pull up development of infrastructure.

Indian infrastructure development, almost fully stalled for three decades since the 1962 war, was revived only a few years ago. Even those projects — primarily building road links close the border and reviving abandoned airfields — have run into various issues.

On the military front, while the Army is raising two divisions, IAF has deployed Sukhoi-30s closer to the Chinese border. An Army demand for raising a dedicated mountain strike corps for the China border is yet to be approved by the government.

Army leadership pointed out that the PLA was capable of swift mobilization of troops from other parts of the country, and can sustain half-a-million troops along the border for several weeks. All these capabilities, and India's own deficiencies, could lead to Chinese being more assertive, both on border and diplomatic issues, some believe.

This is a smart move that a lot of countries do when they want to make their claims about people, not just territory.

- Include Muzzafarabad/Gilgit/Skardu in TV weather reports

How would you break this "news" (of allocating limited engineering and management seats in hard-to-get into institutions to the children of your enemies) to well-deserving Indian candidates who otherwise could be a boon to your nation in the future?

A very significant development captured in one of the reports in this issue, especially from the point of India, is US having committed to fund the controversial Diamer Bhasha dam. The construction of the said dam has ever since been embroiled in problems owing several pertinent concerning the local population- problems of inundation of agricultural land, submergence of archaeological sites and the construction site being situated in a high risk seismic zone. In July 2010, the World Bank refused to fund the dam citing the territory is claimed by India. A little later, the Asian Development Bank (ADB) declined to provide the finances in 2011.

Energy boost: ADB offers $4.5b for Diamer-Bhasha dam

By Shahbaz Rana Published: May 26, 2011

ISLAMABAD:

The Asian Development Bank (ADB) on Wednesday formally conveyed to Pakistan that the bank will give $4.5 billion for the construction of Diamer-Bhasha Dam to address the issue of water storage capacity and boost hydropower generation capacity.

The formal commitment was given by ADB’s Director General Central West Asian Department Juan Miranda at the conclusion of a two-day visit to Pakistan………………

The Express Tribune

Elections for 41 general seats of the "AJK" (Azad JK, as POK is referred to across the border) legislative assembly are scheduled to be held on Sunday and in the election battleground of internet and newspapers, political leaders and activists are discussing the conduct of "free and fair polls."
There is only one woman candidate out of the 400 in the electoral fray in which around three million voters are expected to exercise their franchise.
The Muslim Conference, the ruling party, is struggling to retain power in the face of the Pakistan Peoples Party and the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz showing a renewed strength. The elections are being massively influenced by the Mirpuris living in Bradford, Birmingham, Nottingham and Southall areas of Britain who are currently running a bitter campaign. Some of them are objecting to the ideology of 'Kashmir banega Pakistan' and have started pages on Facebook to campaign against it.
This election is important for Pakistan in view of the recently-conducted local self-government poll in Jammu and Kashmir [ Images ] in which the people participated overwhelmingly.

Chaudhry Abdul Majeed took oath as the new prime minister of PoK. . . . The defeated candidate, Raja Farooq Haider, strongly criticised “rigging in political process” and demanded of the new government to take stern action against those government officials who took part in the election process and “launched a movement against the PML-N candidates.”

Protests over renewed militant activity have been held in the Neelum Valley region of Pakistani-administered Kashmir, the BBC has learned.

Locals say that Pakistan-based militants are flocking to the area and crossing into Indian-administered Kashmir to launch attacks there.

During a congregation to mark the holy festival of Eid on 31 August, residents of the town of Athmuqam passed a resolution which declared that any attempt to disrupt peace in the area would be resisted by the people.

A week later, two large demonstrations were held in Athmuqam to protest against the influx of militants.

On Tuesday, hundreds of school children held another protest march in the town, submitting a list of demands to officials at a military camp.

Locals told our correspondent that the language and dress of most of the militants coming to the area suggests that they are from the Punjab province of Pakistan.

Is this POK PM the same Chaudhry Abdul Majeed?

Washington: The US State Department has removed “inaccurate” maps of India and Pakistan from its website which did not reflect the correct boundary and geographical locations.

“We have taken the map (of India) off the website. It did contain some inaccuracies which were associated with the boundaries of some geographic features,” State Department spokesperson Victoria Nuland told reporters at a news conference yesterday.

RECOMMENDATIONS
Keeping the above facts in view, the following recommendations are being made:
1. In accordance with the Parliamentary Resolution on Kashmir 1994, India should openly claim its rightful position on PoK in international fora and denounce Pakistan's illegal occupation of the territory by aggression in 1947.

2. India should also bring to the notice of the world the gross human rights violations in PoK and expose the policies of the Pakistani state towards AJK and Gilgit-Baltistan. India should publicize widely the lack of democracy in the political processes underway in PoK to counter Pakistan's false propaganda in the Kashmir valley.

3. The discourse on autonomy in J&K needs to be analysed in the context of what is taking place across the LoC in PoK. In J&K, the raging debate on autonomy and self rule shows that there is freedom of thought and expression and people can openly agree/disagree with the governments they choose. However, this is hardly the case in PoK where the term 'Azadi' does not go beyond the name Azad Kashmir.

4. The Indian government should come out with a 'White Paper' on PoK to convey a clear and explicit message to Pakistan that it is in illegal occupation of the region. Notably, at the international level many people are watching India's moves in the light of rising presence of China and militant activities in PoK.

5. A similar message needs to be conveyed to China which is seeking to fulfil its strategic objectives by involving itself in developmental projects in PoK. China's role in PoK is totally unjustified in line with China's stand that Kashmir is a disputed territory. China should be made to explain as to why it is engaging itself in developmental works in a region, that is claimed by India, without its consent.

6. PoK has a lot of strategic significance for India: it is the gateway to Central Asia through the Wakhan Corridor and at the same time it has rich water resources. Thus, there is greater need for India to take a more proactive approach on PoK, not only because it is a part of its territory but because of the high strategic stakes.

7. There should be more conferences and publication of factual reportsonPoKtorevisit theentireissue.Indianstrategicanalysts should build future scenarios on PoK. For instance, IDSA is in the process of bringing out a compilation of key documents on PoK which could be a ready reckoner for issues relating to PoK.

8. Indian government should provide scholarships to students from PoK and engage the people in PoK including the diaspora especially those based in the West. It may also consider filling up the seats reserved for the people in PoK in the J&K Assembly through representatives from the diaspora.

9. The people of PoK should be regarded as citizens of India and special documents should be issued to them in this regard. They may be allowed to visit India after proper check of their antecedents.

10. India must engage the new emerging political leadership in PoK which is disillusioned with Pakistan's approach towards the people of PoK and demanding genuine representative and popular system of governance for them. India needs to be responsive to the pro-India political actors in PoK and nurture them, rather than adopt a defensive approach towards them.

Baba Jan, a 30-something political activist from Gilgit Baltistan in northeast Kashmir, was jailed by Pakistani police in mid-September for inciting unrest, considered terrorism. From jail, where he was imprisoned along with about 50 other political workers, Mr. Jan claims the real reason for his detention and indefinite extension has to do with his politics: Jan’s Labor Party actively demands greater autonomy and a referendum on independence for Gilgit-Baltistan, which lies in disputed Kashmir. Pakistan doesn’t want that.“We want our assembly to decide whether to join China, Pakistan, or India – but I’d prefer independence,” says Jan. “Why join a country that uses terrorism in the name of Islam? No human rights, no political rights and no free judges. No one wants to stay with this country and that’s why the intelligence agencies hound us.”We don’t control any of our own income generating ministries – tourism, forestry, water and power, gems, or commerce and works,” says Nawaz Khan Naji, founder and president of the Balawaristan National Front.'Autonomy is an illusion'
Autonomy is an illusion, he says, because Gilgit-Baltistan has not been formally recognized as a province in Pakistan’s constitution. It is governed according to a “colonial system” by Islamabad-appointed bureaucrats under a council headed by Pakistani Prime Minister Yusuf Raza Gilani. Naji’s party goes further than the Labour Party and demands outright independence.The territory, known for its towering mountains (including K2) and beautiful lakes, was ceded to Pakistan on Nov. 1, 1947, following a three-month struggle against the Hindu Maharaja of Kashmir who at the time controlled the entire state of Kashmir.But the Pakistani government chose to govern both Gilgit-Baltistan and Azad Jammu and Kashmir (AJK) directly rather than grant them provincial status in the hope that one day a referendum would be carried out across both Pakistani and Indian Kashmir so that the territory could chose to join either Pakistan or India.

Multiple intelligence agents who approached the Monitor during the reporting of this piece were adamant that the separatists are in fact backed by Indian money and garner little support beyond college students and minor leftwing parties.'Dangerous for changing mindsets'But Mr. Naji, the BNF founder, denies that’s the case. “I’m not funded by a foreign hand but the establishment feel I’m dangerous for changing mindsets,” he says. According to Naji, the region’s geo-strategic importance could bring its citizens greater prosperity if it were to cede from Pakistan. “We want to create an Asian Switzerland that is friends to all nations but remains neutral. We can link China to the Gulf and India to Central Asia,” he says, as well as expand tourism and free itself of sectarian violence that Pakistan has brought with it.

No. That was Dr. Abdul Majeed who was killed about 5 years back by the ISI.

India has a long history of ignoring Pakistan-Occupied Kashmir. With China entering the fray, can the country afford to follow this policy of indifference? Utpal Kumar talks to two well-known experts from Gilgit-Baltistan



To anyone not knowing much about him, Senge Hasnan Sering would appear to be an easy-going person with a big smile on his face. The president of the Institute of Gilgit-Baltistan Studies in Washington, DC, he is upright, punctual and greets you with a warm namaskar. But underneath this gentle demeanour is a hurt Sering has been carrying for years. “India could have done more for us,” he says. Prod him a little, and he adds: “Constitutionally and legally, Pakistan-Occupied Kashmir and Gilgit-Baltistan are still being claimed by New Delhi. And this claim has been recognised by the international community. This is the reason why Islamabad hasn’t been able to take the unilateral decision to formally merge this region with Pakistan. The Indian Government should have used this legal sanctity to its advantage.”

At this point, Mumtaz Khan, director of the International Centre of Peace and Democracy in Toronto, steps in. “Yes, the people in the region have close ties with Pakistan. But do they have a choice? It’s India’s policy that forced them to look westward. They knew Delhi won’t be doing anything. If India doesn’t even talk about this region, then how can people of Gilgit-Baltistan say they would be part of this country? Pakistan, for wrong or right reasons, has always been there,” he says.

The hurt is obvious. Ever since Pakistan wilily captured this part of Kashmir in 1947-48, the region hasn’t figured much on India’s political radar. Instead, Delhi seems to have made the sanctity of the LoC an article of faith, though Islamabad continues to breach it at the first given opportunity. Even the media hardly talks about it. Interestingly, while weather reports of PTV talk in detail about Srinagar and Gulmarg, the Indian media keeps a steady silence over Gilgit, Skardu and Muzaffarabad, except when it talks about Pakistan-sponsored terrorist camps being run in the region. Maybe we have taken Jawaharlal Nehru’s “not-a-blade-of-grass” comment too seriously.

This moronic status quo could have continued but for the ominous entry of the dragon. There are reports in Pakistani newspapers that Islamabad has agreed to lease Gilgit-Baltistan to Beijing for 50 years. This has alarmed Delhi, which now realises that the land where not a blade of grass grows is actually the region where most Asiatic or even non-Asiatic empires — including the British and the Soviet — played some sort of Great Game for centuries. With a new player in sight, eyeing not only the resource-rich Persian Gulf but also threatening the interests of India and the US, particularly the former, Delhi seems to be in a fix. It’s, however, on the Kashmir issue that the country appears to be more worried.

With Pakistan allegedly ready to swap its role to take the backseat as China exerts itself as a major player in the Kashmir issue, India can’t afford to miss the Gilgit-Baltistan bus this time. At least that’s what Sering and Khan believe. Over to the two experts on Chinese strategic grandstanding, Indian ruinous restraint, Pakistani duplicitous expediency and the ongoing human rights violation in Pakistan-Occupied Kashmir.

What’s your take on the increased Chinese activities in Gilgit-Baltistan?

China has been involved with the region since the early 1950s and the 1960s. First, it occupied 5,180 sq km of Gilgit-Baltistan which Pakistan gifted it in the 1960s. And then in the 1970s, it started working on infrastructure, building roads through Gilgit-Baltistan into Pakistan’s Karakoram Highway. Since then, there have been trade activities and military movements between China and Pakistan through this region. There were also reports of Pakistani missiles being transported through this highway. So, it has been a strategic route used by Beijing for a long time.

In the past 10 years, however, China has realised the need to exploit the resources of West Asia as well as enhance its military/strategic relationship with the Muslim world. And it’s Gilgit-Baltistan that can provide it a short, safe and quick access to Iran, Afghanistan and Arab countries. No wonder, the Chinese are now talking about spending $16-18 billion on a rail line between Pakistan and China through Gilgit-Baltistan. They have built more than 20 tunnels to quicken the time needed to transport humans as well as goods — both civilian and military — between Pakistan and China. It is expected that when this whole road and rail transportation is completed, it will take less than three days to cover the distance between Beijing and the Persian Gulf, whereas right now it takes about two-three weeks. It will allow Beijing to build a strong economic and military/strategic alliance with the Arab world. Also, China is working on increasing the influence of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) and is offering membership to other countries. Maybe one day it will be extended to Arab countries.

There are reports in Pakistani newspapers that Islamabad has agreed to lease Gilgit-Baltistan to Beijing for 50 years. Is it true? How is it going to impact the region?

Like many others we too have read these reports. Incidentally, it hasn’t been denied by any side, Government or non-Government, military or civilian. This is strange as they could have just denied the report, especially as it has come from a leading American think tank. Also, Pakistan’s military chief Ashfaq Parvez Kayani has recently said that the two countries are starting a strategic programme — the Pakistan-China Strategic Programme for Gilgit-Baltistan — in June this year. Eventually it will enable China to have more military presence in the region.

China does understand that having control over Gilgit-Baltistan is important to safeguard its economic and military interests in east Turkistan and Tibet, besides having more access to the Persian Gulf and Afghanistan. And, of course, this will help tighten noose over India.

Has it something to do with growing rift between America and Pakistan?

Pakistan tries in its own way to play China against the US — and vice versa. But Beijing is pragmatic and believes in pursuing a long-term goal. There are reports that China eventually wants to transform the SCO into an Asian NATO. One also needs to understand that these are the issues of mutual interest for Iran, Pakistan and China. Iran is isolated and the way out of isolation is getting help from China. Beijing wants the Persian Gulf for its strategic and economic growth. As for Pakistan, it is playing the game to extract benefits from the US by using the China card and vice versa. So, Gilgit-Baltistan has today become the focal point of a new ‘Great Game’ being played in the region.

How are the people of POK reacting to the Chinese presence?

We should first understand the perspective of the people of the region, its history and the nature of Pakistan’s control and its use of this territory for terrorism against India. Before 2005, POK was a closed territory. During this time China wasn’t involved with it. But after 2007, Chinese role increased in the area, particularly after negotiations between India and Pakistan during the Musharraf era entered into a more serious phase. China was alarmed by these developments and didn’t want complete breakthrough on the issue. As a result, we witnessed a shift in the Chinese policy vis-à-vis Kashmir as it started issuing visa on a separate sheet of paper. Also, Beijing started calling POK an integral part of Pakistan.

In 2007-08, China jumped onto a reconstruction bandwagon in Gilgit-Baltistan and signed almost 72 projects with Pakistan. Such reconstruction activities, however, are just a Chinese excuse to control the region. China does understand the importance of POK in politico-strategic terms. Now, as the crises have deepened in Pakistan, whether political, economic or strategic, China is alarmed. Tomorrow Pakistan might disintegrate, and China could find India in control of POK, thanks to its historical, constitutional and cultural claims. So, in order to prevent such eventualities, China has registered its presence. If Islamabad disintegrates, Beijing is there to question Delhi’s claims.

There are two schools of opinion in POK: One is nationalist, and the other is pro-Pakistan. Of course, the latter will say what Islamabad will dictate, but the nationalists have a mind of their own. They have sent protest letters to China when it started giving stapled visas to those belonging to Jammu & Kashmir, saying it should do the same for POK. So, the nationalists are quite concerned with the increasing influence of China.

What role do you expect from India?

India has a strong legal case. It should, therefore, bridge the gap between Delhi and the people of POK. Also, it needs to understand that it can’t be ignored. Those who don’t want to be a part with India, they have to talk to India. Those who want to merge with India, they have to talk to India. And even those who want to be independent will have to talk to India. As for Pakistan, it only claims to provide a moral and diplomatic support to the region and its people. That’s what the UN resolution means when it calls Pakistan an outsider. So, this attitude that we have developed in the past 64 years that we will not talk to India or we will only talk through Pakistan won’t work. Pakistan is just a middleman. And it doesn’t want the issue to be resolved.

But to blame people is not right. It’s India’s policy that forced them to look towards Pakistan. They knew that India won’t do anything. If Delhi doesn’t even talk about this region, then how can people of POK say we would be part of India?

Even today many political activists are in jail, but they don’t expect India to stand up for them. This country has to perform its responsibilities — moral, legal, constitutional and even economic. It can give students access to its universities; it can admit patients to its hospitals. India can have trade with Gilgit-Baltistan.

Do you find any change in global perception regarding POK?

To be frank, in the past 10 years whatever changes we have seen at the international level, they are mainly because of China. Otherwise, nobody cared about us. Even India wasn’t bothered about the region.

The fact is that from early times, this region has been strategically important. The valleys between the Karakoram-Hindukush mountains were closely contested by the empires of the Persian Gulf, West Asia, Central Asia, South Asia, China and even Russia. That’s what the British realised: They worked hard to keep the Russians out of it. Khunjerab Pass (in Gilgit), for instance, is today called the Khyber Pass of China, underlining the fact that it is as important for Beijing as Khyber Pass was for the British.

In 2003-2004, for instance, when we talked to Congressmen or think tanks in the US, they would just ask us for a cup of tea and there would be no follow up. The same was the case with Indians. We met so many Indian researchers, professors, politicians, etc, but nothing concrete came out. Thankfully, the attitude has changed in the past five-six years.

What about human rights violations in the region?

Human rights violations are at different levels. At the political level, we don’t have any freedom of political activity, voice or expression. Local people aren’t even allowed to participate in elections. We are ruled by political masters in Islamabad. Intimidation is very much there. The media has been particularly under attack in the last two years. Situation hasn’t been so bad even during Musharraf’s time. It’s no better for political activists: Babajan Hunzai, Manzoor Parwana, Abdul Hamid Khan, among others — they all have been treated shabbily. In many cases, terrorism charges have also been filed against them.

Then there are violations at the cultural level. The identities of the Gilgits, Baltis, Wakhis, Khowars, etc, have existed for thousands of years. They are proud of their culture, their land, their identity. Suddenly, the Wahaabi movement is threatening to uproot the indigenous culture.

Also, there are violations at the economic level. Our natural resources, the decisions over how to exploit them, or how to generate revenue — all these are decided by Islamabad. All our means of production and revenue are controlled by central authorities. Our transit routes are exploited by China and Pakistan. Revenue from the Khunjerab Pass custom check-post goes to Islamabad. Nothing at all is shared with Gilgit-Baltistan.

You have worked for the revival of the local script. Has it made any change?

Our local scripts are fighting a losing battle against the Government-imposed Urdu. We experimented with Persian/Arabic languages, but it didn’t work. When I was in the ninth grade I got in touch with Tibetans who provided money for the project and that’s how we brought up signboards in our local script. If you want to grab attention, you must start with a signboard. That’s what we tried to do. Also, this is what would make Skardu Bazaar different from, say, Peshawar and Karachi.

But since I (Sering) was connected with Tibetans, it became a huge issue. As I worked within the framework of pan-Tibetanism, it annoyed many. I started getting angry letters, saying culture was good but I must not forget that I was a Muslim first. One Prof Fateh Malik, then chairman of the National Language Board, came all the way to Skardu to register his protest, saying I belonged to the Muslim ummah and Urdu — and not my local script — was my present! Also, the fact that I worked with Tibetans annoyed the power that be in Pakistan as it not only challenged their two-nation theory but also could weaken their case in POK and Gilgit-Baltistan.

So, I had to stop my work. And I realised that till the moment there is a political guarantee and a constitutional setup, we can’t save our identity, culture. First, we needed a political identity, a constitutional system to save our culture. So, the real issue — the issue that comes before culture, language — is our politico-administrative identity and our freedom from Pakistan.

How do people in POK see the rise of Imran Khan?

Imran Khan is one of the Taliban without a beard. He is very much the extension of the Pakistan Army. There’s a famous female activist in Pakistan who recently said that the women of that country would fear the day Imran Khan would come to power. Minorities fear the day he would come to power. The disputed areas fear the day he would come to power.

Imran Khan’s emergence is a lesson for the West, which erroneously thinks that if someone drinks or has an open relationship with the opposite sex, he is a liberal. In Pakistan, if you want to find a real liberal, ask him five questions: About India, Kashmir, China, Taliban and America. The person on the extreme left and the right would have the same answers. So, there is no liberal community in Pakistan. Here there is no difference between a Bhutto and a Mullah Omar. They all work for the Army and Islam. They are all same.

At least 12 persons were killed and dozens of others injured in the incidents of violence in Gilgit and Chilas on Tuesday. Gunmen opened fire and killed six passengers in Chilas. According to official sources, the passengers were taken off buses and were then killed. Six buses were also set ablaze. Earlier at least five people were killed and around 50 injured after unidentified persons threw a hand grenade on a protest rally near Gari Bagh in Gilgit. The city was already observing a strike and later a curfew was imposed after it virtually turned into a battleground between rival sects. Firing was reported despite the imposition of a curfew. The rally was called by Ahle Sunnat Wal Jamaat (ASWJ) for release of one of its leader who was detained earlier. According to sources, two motor cyclists lobbed the grenade and fled, leaving dozens injured. Local volunteers amid firing shifted the injured to hospitals where hundreds of people turned up to donate blood. Despite the announcement of a curfew, rival sects continued firing at each other, while the government warned residents to stay inside their houses or they would be shot dead. According to sources, several people were stranded at various locations due to the curfew and constant firing.In a separate incident, assailants killed a man while he was in the lawn of his house in Majini Muhalla. The ISPR stated that the Army has been summoned to Gilgit to control the law and order situation. Eyewitnesses said that the district administration and law enforcement agencies were not present to control the violent situation fear gripped the entire area after the hostility

Our real ‘jugular’ – Nazir Naji’s article about GB

What we have done to Gilgit-Baltistan

Nazir Naji | Pakistan Today

Like today’s politicians and strategic experts do not know how Balochistan came to be a part of Pakistan, they similarly do not know how Gilgit-Baltistan came to be apart of Pakistan. For the sake of recall, Gilgit-Baltistan used to be a part of the Kashmir state that the people freed from Dogra raj. Post-independence, the people of GB voluntarily decided to join the federation of Pakistan and wanted to be given the status of a federating units like the others. But the then rulers of Pakistan, pleading on the basis of the lack of an administrative infrastructure, stated that they would have to be part of the Pakistan federation for the time being without being declared a separate province. They would be given that due status once the requisite administrative infrastructure was in place. Given our national predilection for amnesia, no one remembered this pledge even though the people of GB constantly kept reminding governments and repeatedly asked for recognition of their identity. In 1963, an important part of GB was given under the control of China without asking from the people. Given their allegiance to and love for Pakistan, the local populace accepted this unjust decision. Finally, the incumbent government came through on the historical promise of giving them provincial status.

It is pertinent to mention here that it is the people of GB, after the people of East Pakistan, who fought their war of independence themselves, got their freedom and joined Pakistan of their own volition. Of Pakistan’s current territory, there was widespread disagreement in the then province of NWFP. The Red Shirts movement boycotted the referendum and because of that boycott, the province became a part of Pakistan after the referendum. The Sindh Assembly had passed a resolution in favour of Pakistan but there was no noteworthy expression of desire from the people there. The province became a part of Pakistan according to the plan of partition. The resolution that had been passed in 1938, in fact was passed in the assembly of the province formed after separation from the Bombay presidency. During the elections for this assembly, the issue of Pakistan had never come up. The resolution was passed 1938 whereas the resolution for Pakistan was presented in 1940.

Similarly, the Pakistan movement in Punjab was also restricted to a few days. The elections that took place in Punjab before independence, the Muslim League had not gotten a majority in them. Along with Hindus and Sikh, the party of the Punjabi feudals, the Unionist Party, formed a coalition government and the chief ministership was given to Khizar Hayat Tiwana. During this time, the movement for Pakistan had already gained steam. Thus, the Muslim League also protested against that government in Punjab and registered their participation in the Pakistan movement. Some Muslim Leaguers were arrested. Some feudals also had an R&R session as jailbirds. But this agitation in Punjab wasn’t even a miniscule portion of the entirety of the Pakistan movement and the sacrifices rendered for it. Punjab’s English governor hinted to all the Unionists that since the Pakistan movement was about to achieve its end, it was better for them to join the ML. And as the night fell, all the Unionist became Leaguers and West Punjab became a part of Pakistan. If Punjab had prepared it case to present to the Radcliffe Award, then Ferozepur and Gurdaspur could have become parts of Pakistan. Batala especially would never have gone to India. But the Punjabi Muslim League was barely able to fight its own case properly which is an indication of its seriousness of purpose.

However, returning to the point I was making, it was the people of East Pakistan that had rendered the most sacrifices for the creation of Pakistan and after them, the people of GB who got their territory freed from an oppressor and joined Pakistan. The decision about East Pakistan was also taken by people who had no remarkable contribution to the creation of Pakistan. And now what is being done in GB is also being done by elements who never fought for the cause of Pakistan.

What did we lose after losing East Pakistan? Those who are pushing this country deep into a quagmire in the name of Islam still have no idea about how grave that loss was. The leadership of East Pakistan would never have let Pakistan be embroiled in the Afghan war. The Kashmir problem would possibly have been solved. Just like India, Pakistan would be on the road to rapid development. We would be standing with dignity in the comity of nations. Our society would have been free from the scourge of violence. No OBL would have been ensconced safely in our quarters and no Hafiz Saeed would have had the gall to support foreign terrorists. We have seen all this because we let East Pakistan go. And what is happening in GB now, if I allude even perfunctorily to it, it would scare the daylights out of most.

Consider: What is the geographical location of GB? On the one hand, it joins with KP and on the other with Azad Kashmir. The Karakoram Highway passes through it and that is where our and China’s territories meet. North to that is Wakhan strip which is a part of Afghanistan. But this is the area which directly joins Pakistan to the landmass of Central Asia. China is conducting many great developmental worksin GB. China is going to build a big water reservoir in this area, 80 percent of the expenditure for which China will bear itself. This Chinese reservoir will act like a lifeline for our Daimer-Basha dam. If this reservoir is not built, the Daimer-Basha dam will be but a pipedream. You must also know that the fountainhead of our aquatic lifeline i.e. the River Indus is also situated in GB.

I wrote in my previous column that if any flight from Indian territory to Afghanistan were to take fifteen minutes, it would be from this area. You fly from Occupied Kashmir to GB from where you fly to Wakhan in a matter of minutes. Now look at our relations with India and the US. Look at their capabilities and look at our own and you will clearly know what I am worried about. If we lose control over GB, the one that we never actually established, what would be the consequences for that?

Eighty percent of GB’s people belong to the Fiqh Ja’afria. They are a peaceful people. During Zia-ul-Haq’s reign, the Sipah-e-Sahaba started terrorist activities in the region which have now gained a lot of momentum. Gilgit has been in a curfew for the last three days. Corpses litter the roads and no one dare pick them up. Sectarian hatred is fermenting in South Punjab and our tribal areas and reaching that region. Kashmir is the ‘jugular vein’ without which we have been living for 64 years. But if some enemy gets hold of our jugular vein of GB, we will definitely not have 64 years…

The writer is one of Pakistan’s most widely read columnists.

No related posts.