Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Aug 05, 2011

parsuram · Post by **parsuram** » 19 Sep 2011 07:13

Wonder if any one here has wandered over to Very Grimm Fairy Tails. Wonder if this site is for real. If so, it certainly has some gems.

Guess this belongs more so in the paki thread, so will cross post.

arun · Post by **arun** » 19 Sep 2011 07:20

arun wrote:The Wall Street Journal reports that the Islamic Republic of Pakistan’s foreign policy elite “continue to view India’s engagements in Afghanistan as going beyond development and challenging Islamabad’s interests in the country”:

News Flash! India Still Pakistan’s Bogeyman

The cited USIP report is here:

Pakistan, the United States and the End Game in Afghanistan: Perceptions of Pakistan’s Foreign Policy Elite

Air Vice Marshall (Retired) Shahzad Chaudhry on the above cited report co-authored by the United States Institute of Peace (USIP) and the Jinnah Institute:

On the USIP-JI report, and notions of ‘strategic depth’

And for good order though posted earlier here at BRF the views on the same by yet another former officer of the Military of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, Ejaz Haider

The USIP-JI report and ad hominem critics

r_subramanian · Post by **r_subramanian** » 19 Sep 2011 07:59

Heavy bomb blast in Karachi
Breaking news

A heavy explosion occurred in the posh locality of Defense Housing Authority in Karachi near Darakshan police station early on Monday morning, DawnNews reported.
According to initial reports, the blast occurred outside the residence of SP Crime Investigation Department (CID) Chaudhry Aslam Mehfooz.
...

dawn_link

r_subramanian · Post by **r_subramanian** » 19 Sep 2011 08:01

^
The online edition of The News says '7 people killed in Karachi'

shravan · Post by **shravan** » 19 Sep 2011 08:17

^ SSP whose house was targeted, on the attackers: "I was receiving threats from TTP...These people are worse than Hindus"

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 19 Sep 2011 08:18

shravan wrote:^ SSP whose house was targeted, on the attackers: "I was receiving threats from TTP...These people are worse than Hindus"

Well let's ask South Asia expert Stephen Cohen to take a call on that, He has deep knowledge of these things. In any case Muslims don't kill Muslims. If the TTP are Muslims, no one will be dead in the blast.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 19 Sep 2011 08:24

arun wrote:Air Vice Marshall (Retired) Shahzad Chaudhry on the above cited report co-authored by the United States Institute of Peace (USIP) and the Jinnah Institute:

On the USIP-JI report, and notions of ‘strategic depth’

I could not make head or tail out of what the learned Air Vice Marshall (Retired) is trying to say.

jrjrao · Post by **jrjrao** » 19 Sep 2011 08:30

LA Times op-ed in tomorrow's edition by that familiar George Idiot-e-Which.

Changing the direction of U.S.-Pakistan relations -- Until now, the United States has treated Pakistan as an instrument for fighting or spying on territory around Pakistan. That has to change.

...the ISI is obsessed with preventing America's new favorite friend, India, from gaining inroads there (Afghanistan).

The United States also needs to correct the impression that Pakistani interests and lives mean less than the interests and lives of Indians. When Indians are killed by terrorists linked to Pakistan, the U.S. rightly decries the loss of life and demands that Pakistan bring the perpetrators to justice and curtail the operations of violent extremists. But when Pakistanis and Muslims in Kashmir and other parts of India have been the victims of terrorism, pogrom-like attacks and excessive use of state force, Washington has been relatively quiescent, not wanting to complicate improving relations with India. This demoralizes and often enrages Pakistanis, undermines U.S. credibility and makes it more difficult for progressive Pakistanis to campaign against violent extremist forces in their society.

The U.S. would be wiser to join with progressive Indians and Pakistanis in decorously speaking truth to power when India does not correct injustices that undermine regional stability.

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 19 Sep 2011 08:30

http://news.yahoo.com/scientists-discov ... 27170.html
How many TFTA frog species will now be discovered in the land of the pure?

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 19 Sep 2011 09:07

^^^Re: Pork-ovich's article

Washington could foster Pakistan's economic development, self-regard and confidence in American intentions by removing barriers to Pakistani textile and apparel exports to the United States.

We should really examine whether Pakistani textile exports to the US are suffering because of tariff barriers.

PDF file
http://tcboostproject.com/_resources/re ... veness.pdf

This is a USAID paper "Cost Competitiveness of Pakistan’s Textiles and Apparel Industry" from September 2009.

If you read it, it will appear that in the segments of the textiles that it produces, Pakistan is cost-competitive, as well as delivery-time competitive beating out India, Bangladesh, China, Cambodia, etc., in cost, and second only to China in delivery-time.

So, to me, the problem seems to be that (a) Pakistan does not make certain textiles and (b) Pakistan's instability makes it less preferred as a supplier.

Reducing US tariffs to zero as Porkovich seems to want, and the Porkis demand
( http://tribune.com.pk/story/252601/paki ... -demanded/ ) will not solve (a) & (b).

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 19 Sep 2011 09:09

^^^
Re: Porkovich's

The United States also needs to correct the impression that Pakistani interests and lives mean less than the interests and lives of Indians. When Indians are killed by terrorists linked to Pakistan, the U.S. rightly decries the loss of life and demands that Pakistan bring the perpetrators to justice and curtail the operations of violent extremists. But when Pakistanis and Muslims in Kashmir and other parts of India have been the victims of terrorism, pogrom-like attacks and excessive use of state force, Washington has been relatively quiescent, not wanting to complicate improving relations with India. This demoralizes and often enrages Pakistanis, undermines U.S. credibility and makes it more difficult for progressive Pakistanis to campaign against violent extremist forces in their society.

30,000 Pakistanis have been killed by Pakistani terrorists in the last 10 years. The correct statement should be "When Pakistanis are killed by terrorists linked to Pakistan, the U.S. rightly decries the loss of life and demands that Pakistan bring the perpetrators to justice and curtail the operations of violent extremists. "

PS: signed up at LATimes and commented accordingly.
http://discussions.latimes.com/20/la-oe ... 0?sort=asc

Dipanker · Post by **Dipanker** » 19 Sep 2011 10:20

^ Out of this 30,000 Pakistanis killed, terrorists have on the average killed about 1000 per year for last 4- 5 years, a total of about 5,000. So who killed the rest 25,000 ?

My guess is that it is TSPA who must have killed at least 20,000 of them (civilians) as collateral damage while fighting the TTP.

Anujan · Post by **Anujan** » 19 Sep 2011 11:28

X-post from Book review dhaaga:

Anujan wrote:Reposing a blog post I came across

Among The Believers by Naipaul – A Review (Part 1 of 3)

The latest controversy surrounding VS Naipaul’s statement about women writers re-kindled my interest in his works. I read his book “Among the believers–An Islamic Journey”. It is a travelogue of Naipaul’s travel (in 1979) through Islamic countries. Not Saudi Arabia, but the countries of the “converted peoples”. The countries which are separated from Arabia either through heresy (Iran, with its Shiite beliefs) or through distance — Pakistan, Malaysia and Indonesia.

In these travels Naipaul talks to a cross section of the society: people from drivers, students, guides, government officials to people of power like Ayatollah Khalkhali and Anwar Ibrahim (during his student politics days). Naipaul then synthesizes his experiences into a commentary on the history of the people, their faith, the impact of their faith on their way of life. This book written in the early 80′s offers a perceptive and prescient analysis of the impact of Islam on the politics and society of these countries.

This review is divided into three parts. The first two parts are about Naipaul’s impressions of Islam: Its effect on the culture and attitude of the people and the politics and society of these countries. The third part is about Naipaul’s impressions of Pakistan.Naipaul comes across as a man with a sharp sense of observation and intellect and a sharper tongue. His analysis of the role of Islam in the countries he visits is brutal and honest. The first of the two recurring themes of his work (the second theme in the second review) is:

The Lack of Solutions in Political Islam

Naipaul’s most vehement opinions about Islam have to do with (his) perceived misuse of Islam by a set of aggrieved people and the lack of solutions in Islam to address the very grievances of these people, which made them turn to religion in the first place. For example, in Iran, what started off as a revolution triggered by the injustices of the Shah, quickly took on an Islamic fervor. Naipaul is pessimistic about the ability of this fervor to carry the civilization forward. About Ayatollah Khomeini, Naipaul says

He was the kind of man who, without political doctrine, only with resentments, had made the Iranian revolution
This theme of lack of political solutions in Islam and the adoption of Islam by aggrieved people is their search for solutions (which do not exist in Islam) to their grievances pervades Naipaul’s keen commentary. About the Islamic fervor in the “born again” Muslims in Malaysia, Naipaul observes
The new men of the villages, who feel they have already lost so much, find their path blocked at every turn. Money, development, education have awakened them only to the knowledge that the world is not like their village, that the world is not their own. Their rage—the rage of pastoral people with limited skills, limited money, and a limited grasp of the world—is comprehensive. Now they have a weapon: Islam. It is their way of getting even with the world. It serves their grief, their feeling of inadequacy, their social rage and racial hate. This Islam is more than the old religion of their village. The Islam the missionaries bring is a religion of impending change and triumph; it comes as part of a world movement. In Readings in Islam, a local missionary magazine, it can be read that the West, in the eyes even of its philosophers, is eating itself up with its materialism and greed. The true believer, with his thoughts on the afterlife, lives for higher ideals. For a nonbeliever, with no faith in the afterlife, life is a round of pleasure.
Thus Naipaul attributes the fervor of the “born again” Muslims as their attempt at satiating their rage at the perceived inequities due to their inability to deal with the modern times. He also comments on the use of Islam by the Malays as a tool to look down upon the Chinese–who through their hard work and entrepreneurial skills outstrip the Malays in education and business. Malays perceive the Chinese to be unclean, due to their animist beliefs and pork eating. But of Malays he says
If the Chinese convert to Islam, the Malays would become Buddhists
But Islam has offered no solution to social inequities or injustices in Iran. During Naipaul’s trip, the Kurds were massacred, the communists brutally suppressed. The very acts of suppression and brutality for which the Shah was despised are now justified in the name of Islam. Malays, in their search for equality, have built a framework of race-based discrimination rooted in Islam. Pakistan, in its search for identity and a paradise for Muslims was under military rule with mobs attacking newspapers, jailed journalists and the brutal massacre of the Balochs. The lack of political solution in Islam, Naipaul deems as a intrinsic structural flaw in the religion itself:
Religion, which filled men’s days with rituals and ceremonies of worship, which preached the afterlife, at the same time gave men the sharpest sense of worldly injustice and made that part of religion. This late-twentieth-century Islam appeared to raise political issues. But it had the flaw of its origins—the flaw that ran right through Islamic history: to the political issues it raised it offered no political or practical solution. It offered only the faith. It offered only the Prophet, who would settle everything—but who had ceased to exist. This political Islam was rage, anarchy.
Naipaul further argues that contrary to the contention of the Islamic fundamentalists, there is no scope for Islam prescribing an institutionalized method of cratering to people’s political and social needs while taking their civilization forward. Because:
The Islamic fundamentalist wish is to work back to such a whole, for them a God-given whole, but with the tool of faith alone—belief, religious practices and rituals. It is like a wish—with intellect suppressed or limited, the historical sense falsified—to work back from the abstract to the concrete, and to set up the tribal walls again. It is to seek to re-create something like a tribal or a city-state that—except in theological fantasy—never was. The Koran is not the statute book of a settled golden age; it is the mystical or oracular record of an extended upheaval, widening out from the Prophet to his tribe to Arabia.
Thus, his conclusion is two-fold:
1. Islam was used by aggrieved people who do not know where to look for solutions, and
2. Islam, in an intrinsic and structural way, provides no political solution to these people

This conclusion cannot be dismissed as shallow opinions of a man who is hostile to Islam and ignorant of its key tenets, but rather can be countered (if at all) only by equally keen and perceptive arguments.

Next: Naipaul’s observation of the relationship of Islam with the West.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 19 Sep 2011 11:46

jrjrao wrote:LA Times op-ed in tomorrow's edition by that familiar George Idiot-e-Which.

Changing the direction of U.S.-Pakistan relations
But when Pakistanis and Muslims in Kashmir and other parts of India have been the victims of terrorism, pogrom-like attacks and excessive use of state force, Washington has been relatively quiescent, not wanting to complicate improving relations with India. [/b]

I doubt if Perkovich really applied his mind before writing the above sentence. May be he did. May be his task is to deflect the Pakistani anger against the US and its policies against the Indians.

When Pakistanis are attacked by terrorists, the US has unequivocally condemned that. However, such terrorist attacks have to be stopped, or investigated and the perpetrators punished by the sovereign Government of Pakistan. When the State itself indulges in terrorism (like the killing of Benazir Bhutto or Bugti), or when the State calls the terrorist jihadi elements as 'patriots', or when the Pakistani Army openly hosts a UN-banned terrorist like Prof. Hafeez Sayeed saheb for iftaar, or when the State includes jihad as a motto of the Pakistani Army, or when the Pakistani Army praises the jihadi terrorists as the 'first line of defence for Pakistan', where does the fault lie ?

Then he goes on to add to his utter lack of knowledge on the subject by claiming that Pakistan is 'demoralized and enraged' by the bad treatment meted out to 'Muslims in Kashmir and other parts of India'. Pakistan is not the spokesman for Muslims in India and hence has no locus-standi on this issue. Perkovich must explain who arrogated such a role to Pakistan and why should India accept that even if so. Moreover, Indian Muslims are concerned by the thousands of Muslims of different persuasions like Naqshbandi, Shi'a, Berelvi killed by a virulent strain of Salafi/Wahhabi terrorists. These Salafi and Wahhabi terrorists were nurtured and helped by the US for its own selfish requirements but then allowed to go scot free after their objective was reached. The Pakistani State then used them against India in Kashmir and other parts of India. Therefore, if anyone has a grouse, it is India against the US and its ally Pakistan.

habal · Post by **habal** » 19 Sep 2011 11:54

may be they are predicting more attacks on India and he is already making up cover for pakistan. He has already set up an alibi and has done his equal-equal.

SSridhar, your points can help americans finetune their alibi, but mindset will not change. These people are genocidal and sit in some think-tank devoid of humanity looking at third-world as some alien sub-human race waiting to be annihilated.

JE Menon · Post by **JE Menon** » 19 Sep 2011 13:20

>>Well let's ask South Asia expert Stephen Cohen to take a call on that,

We should have a consensus from Christine Unfair and George Pakivic as well

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 19 Sep 2011 14:25

A_Gupta wrote:^^^Re: Pork-ovich's article

Washington could foster Pakistan's economic development, self-regard and confidence in American intentions by removing barriers to Pakistani textile and apparel exports to the United States.
We should really examine whether Pakistani textile exports to the US are suffering because of tariff barriers. . . . .
So, to me, the problem seems to be that (a) Pakistan does not make certain textiles and (b) Pakistan's instability makes it less preferred as a supplier.

Reducing US tariffs to zero as Porkovich seems to want, and the Porkis demand
( http://tribune.com.pk/story/252601/paki ... -demanded/ ) will not solve (a) & (b).

First of all, the US cannot unilaterally favour Pakistan as the other affected countries could drag it successfully to the WTO. The EU's inability to do the same for Pakistan due to India's objection is a case in point.

We have to realize here that a number of Pakistani textile industrialists invested in Bangladesh recently and that is one reason for the increase in exports from Bangladesh. They have even relocated their machinery lock, stock an barrel from Pakistan.

There are some obvious and glaring oversights in the USAID compilation. While cost of power could have been cheaper in Pakistan (because it is mostly hydropower or Sui-gas based), there is very little availability of power. In recent years (since the compilation of the report in c. 2009 with data up to c. 2008), Pakistan has been forced to increase power tariff tremendously by the IMF as a pre-condition for granting loans. Power may no longer be cheaper even if it were to be available. Crippling power cuts and gas-supply cuts have created huge industrial problems in Pakistan and the only worthwhile industry has been textiles. Besides, production of cotton in the last few years has been affected due to various factors, pest attacks, floods, poor productivity etc and world cotton prices have been abnormally high during the same time due to issues in other cotton-producing countries as well (except India). Pakistan does not produce textile machinery and they don't want to import them from a cheaper and a nearby source such as India. Pakistan continues to produce traditional items, for which competition is growing from other regional countries after abolition of the quota system in c. 2005. Other value-added special textiles such as industrial etc can bring more profit at less competition.

Pakistan's textile exports are not suffering from tariff-barriers of US or EU, but from a set of systemic problems which is due to long neglect of governance, as is everything else in Pakistan. All the money was diverted to the Armed forces at the cost of economic growth. Perkovich is well aware of that but he is offering a tactical solution as the Americans have always done before. A myopic Pakistan bereft of visionary leaders since inception and a band of opportunistic elite RAPEs demand and accept these bread crumbs.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 19 Sep 2011 14:49

habal wrote:SSridhar, your points can help americans finetune their alibi, but mindset will not change. These people are genocidal and sit in some think-tank devoid of humanity looking at third-world as some alien sub-human race waiting to be annihilated.

habal, today the US dreams are crashing all around it and they therefore seek better relationship with us for their own sustenance and security. The haughtiness is giving way to realism, albeit slowly. They also would not concede too much ground to us in the process, we must realize that too. It is up to us to determine how wide and deep we would engage with them. anyway, OT here.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 19 Sep 2011 16:01

jrjrao wrote: This demoralizes and often enrages Pakistanis, undermines U.S. credibility and makes it more difficult for progressive Pakistanis to campaign against violent extremist forces in their society.

Perkovich is an idiot to write this claptrap. He is pushing the rapist excuse on behalf of Pakistan. The rapist says "These women they dress so provocatively that I can't control my penis. It just sort of pulls me towards them. Cover up those women so I can lead a normal life" LOL

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 19 Sep 2011 16:04

^^^ but shiv, it is also supporting evidence for your hypothesis about unkil and india trying to prop up an vestiges of a civil governance entity in that geographic region

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 19 Sep 2011 16:19

Lalmohan wrote:^^^ but shiv, it is also supporting evidence for your hypothesis about unkil and india trying to prop up an vestiges of a civil governance entity in that geographic region

True but unkil and India forgot to tell me to change my views. I am one of those Hindu rapist extremists who needs to be held in check.

CRamS · Post by **CRamS** » 19 Sep 2011 16:46

jrjrao wrote:LA Times op-ed in tomorrow's edition by that familiar George Idiot-e-Which.

Changing the direction of U.S.-Pakistan relations -- Until now, the United States has treated Pakistan as an instrument for fighting or spying on territory around Pakistan. That has to change.

The U.S. would be wiser to join with progressive Indians and Pakistanis in decorously speaking truth to power when India does not correct injustices that undermine regional stability.[/color][/b]

I don't know how prevalent this thinking is in DC, but it is dangerous and poisonous distortion of facts to suit an agenda. What he is refering to above is, make no mistake about it, braying for Narendra Modi's blood in collusion with Indian eunuchs like Mani Shankar Aiyar et. al. I have wondered why this cowardly obsession with Modi with Indian secularists (when in the next breath, they are willing to forget all the terrorist atacks by TSP against India and kiss up with the perpetrators), and the reason is simple: they believe that by this kind of self flagellation, somehow India will occupy the moral high ground and TSP generals will be impressed and hence spare India. It conveniently coincides with US agenda because they can masquerade the torture camps and bay area vacation resorts for Muslim terror suspects and Iraq gang rape by professing to bring justice to Indian Muslims. This is diabolical international real-politick machinations at its crudest. It requires a nationalist, honest, competent media in India to expose this kind of evil narrative, but we all know where DDM's sentiments lie.

ArmenT · Post by **ArmenT** » 19 Sep 2011 17:31

A_Gupta wrote:^^^Re: Pork-ovich's article

Washington could foster Pakistan's economic development, self-regard and confidence in American intentions by removing barriers to Pakistani textile and apparel exports to the United States.
We should really examine whether Pakistani textile exports to the US are suffering because of tariff barriers.
...
...
So, to me, the problem seems to be that (a) Pakistan does not make certain textiles and (b) Pakistan's instability makes it less preferred as a supplier.

Reducing US tariffs to zero as Porkovich seems to want, and the Porkis demand
( http://tribune.com.pk/story/252601/paki ... -demanded/ ) will not solve (a) & (b).

Reducing tariffs to zero is not going to solve the problem. The Pakis have a bigger problem of image to overcome first. Your instability comment is right on the mark. Over the years, they have managed to alienate some buyers because of delays in production (due to frequent power-cuts, strikes, burning of goods containers in harbor etc.), so buyers are somewhat cautious when ordering from them. So even if the US drops tariffs for textile goods from Pakistan to zero, the buyers are not going to come flocking in. As they say, you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink.

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 19 Sep 2011 17:44

^^^ At least Porkovich uses "Muslims in Kashmir and other parts of India". I use for instance, J&K and "rest of India", never "J&K and India"

Cosmo_R · Post by **Cosmo_R** » 19 Sep 2011 17:52

WRT to Perkovich ^^^. The (pro) India terrain at the Carnegie Endowment has been seized by Ashley Tellis who now gets research and grants from pro-Indian sources. GP is creating strategic space by catering to an alternative that is not quite anti India but sufficiently pro Pakistan to get funding from the paki docs et al. These recent pieces are 'proof of concept' articles--"These are examples (mostly done by associates) but if I get real funding, I can rev up and help your agenda ..."

JMT

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 19 Sep 2011 18:24

surely all that is needed is to send some (academic) lifafa's in perko's direction?

abhijitm · Post by **abhijitm** » 19 Sep 2011 19:26

Campaign against blasphemy polio vaccine is finally paid off.
polio terrorism by pakistan

It's cross-border terror of a different kind. India is on high alert against the deadly polio virus coming into the country from Pakistan and the health ministry has asked the Punjab government to mandatorily vaccinate all children aged 0-5 years coming to India from Pakistan.

Pakistan till now has recorded 84 cases of polio of which 83 are of the P1 strain - the most dangerous since it travels faster and infects more people.

India's polio campaign has generated remarkable results this year, recording just one case. In fact, it has now been more than eight months since India reported its only polio case - January 13 in West Bengal. The ministry is worried that an imported case can destroy all the good work. Punjab has been polio free since 2009.

Number of polio cases globally till date in 2011 - 380
Polio cases in endemic countries - 130
Polio cases in non-endemic countries -- 250
Pakistan - 84
Afghanistan - 19
Nigeria - 26
India - 1
China - 7
Chad - 112
Congo - 77

KLNMurthy · Post by **KLNMurthy** » 19 Sep 2011 19:39

A_Gupta wrote:Liberal façade of strategic depth — I —Farhat Taj
http://criticalppp.com/archives/57730

IMO, if anyone can save Pakistan it will be the women. The men, even if not enamoured of fundamentalism, I think can live with it because it gives them the upper hand. Women, IMO, understand that it is all up for them if Pakistan goes any further on the fundamentalist route.

You mean women like shireen mazari or maleeha lodhi or hina rabbani or late benazir bhutto?

Farhat Taj is a relatively rational anti-taliban voice who gets no mileage at all in TSP establishment as is evident from the article. Why use that to make generalizations about potential of RAPE women?

KLNMurthy · Post by **KLNMurthy** » 19 Sep 2011 19:54

SSridhar wrote:
arun wrote:Air Vice Marshall (Retired) Shahzad Chaudhry on the above cited report co-authored by the United States Institute of Peace (USIP) and the Jinnah Institute:

On the USIP-JI report, and notions of ‘strategic depth’
I could not make head or tail out of what the learned Air Vice Marshall (Retired) is trying to say.

He is fighting back with Good English against critics of his Elite report like Farhat Taj and maybe also Kamran Shafi. To a paki form and style is all, substance is nothing.

arun · Post by **arun** » 19 Sep 2011 19:58

SSridhar wrote:Changing the direction of U.S.-Pakistan relations

But when Pakistanis and Muslims in Kashmir and other parts of India have been the victims of terrorism, pogrom-like attacks and excessive use of state force, Washington has been relatively quiescent, not wanting to complicate improving relations with India. [/b]
I doubt if Perkovich really applied his mind before writing the above sentence. May be he did. May be his task is to deflect the Pakistani anger against the US and its policies against the Indians. {Snipped} ..................

George Perkovich and his ilk in the US will try to deflect the malevolent attention of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan India wards, not that the Islamic Republic requires much persuasion to direct its malevolent attention Indiawards.

It is our duty as Indian’s to cause that US attempt to divert the malevolent attention of Pakistan to rebound back on them by pointing out the pogroms and excessive use of force by US forces directed against Muslim in occupied Mohammadden lands such as Iraq and Afghanistan.

What is good for the goose is surely good for the gander

.

BijuShet · Post by **BijuShet** » 19 Sep 2011 20:07

From Tribune news article (posting in full). Donors are finally getting wise about donations made to TSP. No point throwing 350 million down the drain only to repeat this next year.
Donors skittish as UN launches aid appeal

By Abdul Manan / Z Ali - Published: September 18, 2011
A flood-affected woman sits on high ground near the flooded area on the outskirts of Badin. PHOTO:AFP
Even as the United Nations launched a global appeal for $357 million to help flood victims in Sindh and Balochistan, international donors have made it clear to the government that they will not donate a penny to Islamabad unless they receive a clear blueprint for third party audits of where their money is being spent.

This revelation was made by Punjab Governor Abdul Latif Khosa during a press conference at the governor house in Lahore on Sunday.

“They [donors] want a transparent mechanism in which all damages and losses should be evaluated by a reputable third party,” Governor Khosa told reporters.

The $357 million appeal is only to garner initial “life saving assistance to the most affected people” said the UN’s humanitarian coordinator in Pakistan, Timo Pakkala.

(Read: Govt has provided reasonably well, but ability to respond not enough, says UN coordinator)
The reluctance – which borders on outright refusal – to help Pakistan overcome its second devastating floods in successive years is seen as an indicator of a serious lack of global credibility for the administration of President Asif Ali Zardari.

When asked to explain the international community’s skittishness, the governor evaded the question, saying only that “foreign aid should not be made controversial.”

Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani had launched an international appeal for funds which was met with a paltry $4.7 million pledge of donations from China, though Iran has promised another $100 million in aid, the only foreign government so far to come forth with any significant assistance to Pakistan’s flood victims.

While the appeals continue to be made on a daily basis, the government appears to have all but given up on the idea that any foreign government would be willing to help Pakistan. Governor Khosa, returning from a whirlwind tour of the flood-affected areas of Sindh, appeared morose and downtrodden when he said that it was up to the people of Pakistan themselves to help those in need.

The governor announced that the Punjab government would be holding a concert in Lahore, where Rahat Fateh Ali Khan would perform. Tickets would be sold for Rs10,000 a piece. He expected to raise up to Rs100 million from that initiative.

PM’s visit

Meanwhile, Gilani rounded up his two-day visit to the six calamity-hit districts of Sindh with pledges of help for relief for the flood victims and their subsequent rehabilitation. He started off his visit from Nawabshah, Sanghar and Hyderabad on the first day and visited Tharparker, Umerkot and Mirpurkhas districts on Sunday. Besides observing an aerial view of the submerged areas, the PM also met people in the relief camps.

“Each affected family will be given a Rs20,000 grant through Pakistan Cards, and they will also get stipends from Pakistan Baitulmal and Benazir Income Support Programme (BISP),” Gilani said while visiting relief camps in Naukot and Tharparker.

Gilani said that he has directed the army to use helicopters to provide relief, food and health services to people in the marooned areas.

The premier made appeals to independent donors, friendly countries and non-government organisations to take part in the relief and rehabilitation efforts and requested all political parties to come forward and help the affected people.

No discrimination

A significant proportion of the population in Thar and Umerkot districts comprises minority communities, especially Hindus. These marginalised people, according to some reports, were being discriminated against in the distribution of relief goods. Citing such reports, the prime minister directed the officers to monitor and ensure a no-discrimination policy.

“All people are equal before the government and Hindus are our brothers. The government will extend them all facilities given to other affected people,” he assured.

Agriculture

The torrential monsoon rains and the ensuing flooding in canals and saline water drains have destroyed around 1.7 million acres of agricultural land, according to government estimates. But the farmers’ representative organisation puts the losses far beyond the government’s calculation.

Gilani met a delegation of the Sindh Chamber of Agriculture, led by its president Dr Syed Nadeem Qamar, at the Circuit House Hyderabad, and turned down the farmer’s demand to waive loans for land holders cultivating around 50 acres.

“The prime minister said they can’t waive the loans because the growers who suffered from floods last year didn’t either get a write-off either,” Nabi Bux Sathio, who was representing farmers during the meeting, told The Express Tribune.

Estimates

According to the National Disaster Management Authority (NDMA) some six million people in all 23 districts of Sindh have now been affected by the floods with another 824,000 displaced.

Thousands of people are stranded on hillocks and roofs, with the government unable to meet more than 30 per cent of funds needed for emergency rescue and relief efforts, it said in a joint news conference with the UN.

(Read: Thousands trapped in flood-hit Sindh)

The UN said its assessment showed that nearly every district in Sindh had seen flooding, as well as five districts of Balochistan, killing 342 people and injuring 633 others so far.

(With additional input from AFP)

Published in The Express Tribune, September 19th, 2011.

BijuShet · Post by **BijuShet** » 19 Sep 2011 20:19

From Tribune news. Real reasons emerge for TSP pushing for Iran pipeline.
Iran gas pipeline: Pakistan uses US opposition as bargaining chip

By Zafar Bhutta - Published: September 19, 2011
Islamabad presses Washington to grant civilian nuclear deal.
ISLAMABAD: The government has apparently decided to use Washington’s opposition to the Iran-Pakistan gas pipeline as a bargaining chip to persuade the United States to grant Pakistan a civilian nuclear deal similar to the one between the US and India.

At the recently concluded strategic dialogue between the US and Pakistan on energy, the United States had made it clear that it opposed Pakistan’s decision to import gas from Iran, even going so far as to threaten sanctions if Pakistan did not withdraw from the deal.

Sources close to Water and Power Minister Naveed Qamar said that Pakistani officials then used that opposition as an opportunity to press once again for a civilian nuclear power deal. Qamar was leading the Pakistani delegation during the talks held in Islamabad.

“The US did not respond to Pakistan’s demands,” said sources familiar with the discussions, adding that it is not yet clear as to whether or not Pakistan would end up shelving the Iran gas pipeline project if the US provided assistance with nuclear power plants.
...

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 19 Sep 2011 20:25

KLNMurthy wrote:
A_Gupta wrote:Liberal façade of strategic depth — I —Farhat Taj
http://criticalppp.com/archives/57730

IMO, if anyone can save Pakistan it will be the women. The men, even if not enamoured of fundamentalism, I think can live with it because it gives them the upper hand. Women, IMO, understand that it is all up for them if Pakistan goes any further on the fundamentalist route.
You mean women like shireen mazari or maleeha lodhi or hina rabbani or late benazir bhutto?

Farhat Taj is a relatively rational anti-taliban voice who gets no mileage at all in TSP establishment as is evident from the article. Why use that to make generalizations about potential of RAPE women?

Please reread what I wrote. I said "if anyone can save Pakistan" not "when". I didn't say every woman is an anti-Islamist. I do mean that the only place anti-Islamists can come from is from the women. Will they prevail? Most probably not.

BijuShet · Post by **BijuShet** » 19 Sep 2011 20:46

From Tribune news (posting in full). I did not see this posted before.
Pakistan may block Google, Youtube to deny terrorists communication source

By APP / Express - Published: September 17, 2011
Rehman Malik says Google and Youtube ought to help Pakistan government work against terrorists. PHOTO: FILE/APP
ISLAMABAD: Pakistan Interior Minister Rehman Malik has said that if Google and Youtube do not help the Pakistan government, then Pakistan reserves the right to block these services to prevent terrorists from using it.

The Interior Minister who was talking to media men at the FIA headquarters on Saturday urged the internet service providers to extend their help to the government for exterminating the menace of terrorism from the country.

Talking to mediamen here at FIA headquarters, he said the government would be compelled to block certain internet service provider’s sites, if they did not extend cooperation to the government.

Malik said that Taliban and other terrorist organisations were sharing intelligence through internet and curbing these activities was imperative.

Elimination of grey networks

Further steps would be taken to improve the performance of FIA and competent lawyers would be selected for the legal branch, he said.

He said he has directed the FIA to eliminate gray traffic. In future the circle head of FIA and relevant PTA officials would be held responsible for gray traffic in their areas.

Speaking on the occasion Chairman Pakistan Telecommunication Authority (PTA) Dr Mohammad Yaseen said that during the last two years 44 raids have been conducted against gray traffic and 102 persons have been arrested.

PTA had recently blocked private browsing in an attempt to disrupt terrorist communications.

Malik said that evidence showed that terrorists involved in the recent bomb blast in the Mumbai had used internet servers based in the US to communicate.

Agnimitra · Post by **Agnimitra** » 19 Sep 2011 20:47

SSridhar wrote:There are some obvious and glaring oversights in the USAID compilation. While cost of power could have been cheaper in Pakistan (because it is mostly hydropower or Sui-gas based), there is very little availability of power. In recent years (since the compilation of the report in c. 2009 with data up to c. 2008), Pakistan has been forced to increase power tariff tremendously by the IMF as a pre-condition for granting loans. Power may no longer be cheaper even if it were to be available. Crippling power cuts and gas-supply cuts have created huge industrial problems in Pakistan and the only worthwhile industry has been textiles.

Looks like TSP wants to go on a survival diet without IMF's halwa:

Pakistan may bank on survival without IMF

KARACHI - Pakistan may stay clear of International Monetary Fund (IMF) loan programs, including the current standby arrangement worth US$11.3 billion which ends on September 30, and future deals, gambling that its existing resources are sufficient to do without.

[...]

Payments under the latest arrangements were halted last July over the government's inability to implement economic reforms.

The country's exclusion from IMF programs would have its own pros and cons. Critics say a decision to rebuff IMF cash would be a populist move of the sort government usually tend to make in election years.

Pakistani officials are confident the country will need no fresh IMF loan if the current pace of exports and remittances continue till next June, enabling the country to repay its first two installments of the existing IMF loan.

"There is no immediate threat to the balance of payment and our foreign exchange reserves position is comfortable enough," Reuters reported a Pakistani official as saying. "There is no crisis at hand that will call for an immediate action. But we will stay in close contact with the IMF."

The government will need to pay $1.2 billion back to the IMF next year. It has just under $18 billion in foreign exchange reserves.

"There are risks, but we feel that we can handle them," The Express Tribune reported one senior finance ministry official as saying.

The perception that the $11.3 billion bailout program from the IMF has kept Pakistan's economy afloat since 2008 has practically proved wrong after the country survived the fiscal year that ended in June without IMF payments. The suspension of IMF loan even stopped budgetary support to the country from the World Bank and Asian Development Bank (ADB).

"The government's comfortable feeling stems from anticipated $37 billion earnings from a 5% growth in exports and strong workers' remittances during the current fiscal year," according to Dawn newspaper. The officials are confident that the projected $37 billion from exports and remittances are enough to meet the country's foreign exchange requirements with a current account deficit of about 1-2%.

Remittances from overseas Pakistanis jumped 40% to a record $1.3 billion in August against $933.06 million a year earlier, according to the central bank. Remittances rose 25.8% to a record $11.2 billion in the 12 months to June 30 compared from the previous fiscal year.

Some finance officials believe Shaikh should use his personal relationship with David Lipton, a former adviser to US President Barack Obama and newly appointed deputy managing director at the IMF, to seek restoration of the current program, The Express Tribune reported.

"It will be a setback to Pakistan's image and the policymakers will be known as the ones with a non-serious attitude," The Express Tribune reported a high-ranking economic policymaker as saying. Even so, in the past 22 years, the country has sought IMF bailouts 11 times and failed to complete all but one, signed in December 2001, which was completed ahead of schedule.

The increase in remittances helped to raise the saving rate in last fiscal year 2010-11 despite double digit inflation, according to the central bank. The national saving rate increased to 13.8% of gross domestic product (GDP).

Yet, whatever is being saved in financial institutions, critics claim, is being invested in government paper that is non-productive and does not help the economy to perform better.

Domestic public debt has risen to 33% of gross domestic product (GDP) while external public debt stands at 26.6% of GDP.

The average maturity for domestic debt has fallen to 18 months and with interest rates above 12% costs were equivalent to about 35% of federal tax revenue for the fiscal year that ended on June 30, according to an Asian Development Bank report.

Local analysts believe the hugely indebted country will face difficulties early next year when it will have to pay several loans. The government's only option then will be to seek a new IMF program.

Internal or external shocks may also compel the flood-hit country to consider seeking fresh IMF loans. In case of new loan request, the IMF may suggest that surplus cash crops should be kept under the IMF supervision; it may also take a tougher stance for a complete end of power subsidies and a lower fiscal deficit.

The country's decision not to seek a new IMF loan could affect Pakistan's relationship with the the ADB and the World Bank.

"The ADB and the World Bank may not restore their budgetary support loans. But this is not new. Pakistan has learnt to manage the situation without external financial assistance," The Express Tribune reported Finance Minister Shaikh as saying.

The country secured its existing IMF program in 2008 to avert a balance of payment crisis and it has so far received about $7.6 billion from the Fund. It has failed to get the remaining $3.7 billion due to slippages in performance criteria, leading to suspension of the program. The program was extended in December for nine months, but disbursements were not resumed owing to the government's failure to take fiscal measures as demanded by the Fund.

BijuShet · Post by **BijuShet** » 19 Sep 2011 20:52

From Tribune, an opinion piece(posting in full). TFTA TSPian ponders on the dominance of his geo-political vs religious identity.
Muslim first or Pakistani first?

By Khaled Ahmed - Published: September 17, 2011
The writer is a director at the South Asia Free Media Association, Lahore [email protected]

Renowned Islamic orator Zakir Naik was on a TV channel talking to British Pakistanis about their identity. (I heard his entry into the UK has recently been banned.) He said, why get embarrassed when the Brits ask you: are you a Muslim first or British first? His solution to the dilemma concealed in this question was: ask a counter-question, “Are you a human being first or a Briton first?”

Naik said: turn the tables, let the Briton be embarrassed. When asked this question, he will have to say he is a human being first. The situation created by this confusion will spare the Pakistani Briton the dilemma of a clash between his religious identity and his national one. But what Naik said pertained to an issue that raises its head in Pakistan too.

Are we Muslims, Pakistani first or Muslim first? The answer today is Muslims. I once conducted a TV debate in 2006 with an audience, and those who said they were Muslim first, won by a 90 per cent count. Pakistan is an Islamic state and all of us are Muslims; therefore, it is easy to say that we are Muslims first and then Pakistani. The Pakistan Movement should also support this thesis because we claim that Muslims had become a nation before they demanded a state.

But the nation-state poses a problem. What if I ask a Christian Pakistani the same question? The truth is all of them say, they are Pakistani first. Why do they do this? Why are the non-Muslims insisting on being Pakistanis first? The answer is that they want to be treated equally with other Pakistanis. If they emphasised their Christian identity and put it before their Pakistani one, they might be treated unequally.

The nation-state in Europe favours multiple identities and demands that all identities be treated equally. And for that, all those who live in the UK must call themselves Britons first. The question arises: why only should the Muslims as a minority insist that they are Muslims first? It is clear that unlike the Christian minority in Pakistan, they, as a Muslim minority, want to stand apart. What is hidden behind this gesture is a refusal to integrate. And the trick is that they know that the UK will treat them equally under law, even if they don’t integrate.

This is not so in Pakistan. The nation state wanted to gloss over secondary or tertiary identities to create unity. In Pakistan, the first problem that arose was linked to regional identities: Sindhi, Punjabi, Bengali, Baloch, Pakhtun, etc. The state wanted them to be only Pakistanis and said so. When it did not work, it abolished the provinces. Now as far as religious identities are concerned, Pakistan is overwhelmingly Muslim, and most of us don’t care if non-Muslims are treated unequally. If we were like the Brits, we would have said we are Pakistanis first.

The nation-state is no utopia but it is better than any other kind of states. Its nationalism can embrace all the people living in it and all of them can be given the name of the state. Because of inherent racism, the nation-state in Europe has legitimised multiculturalism as a way of national life. (Multiculturalism there is declining now because of problems of integration faced by immigrants.) Zakir Naik must also tell Muslim Brits how to tackle the consequences of non-integration.

In Pakistan, the non-Muslim instinctively wants to integrate as a Pakistani; in the UK the Muslim minority wants to stand apart. There, the majority wants to be British first on the principle of equality; here, the minority non-Muslim is appealing for equality as a Pakistani. The conclusion is simple: the majority community in Pakistan doesn’t much care if the non-Muslims are treated unequally.
Published in The Express Tribune, September 18th, 2011.

BijuShet · Post by **BijuShet** » 19 Sep 2011 20:59

From Tribune, an opinion piece(posting in full).

After the endgame

By Ayesha Siddiqa - Published: September 17, 2011

The writer is author of Military Inc. [email protected]

These days we come across a new narrative that legitimises jihadi outfits in the country. The new narrative insists on lumping all jihadi outfits together, irrespective of their geographical concentration and ideology, highlighting their relief activities as essential for the state and as an engine for secularising the society. The underlying assumption is that jihadis will voluntarily submit themselves to the ‘writ of the state’, especially after the departure of Isaf forces, and agree to live happily ever after.

Such a fairy tale, therefore, supports turning a blind eye to the expansion of the jihadi organisational machinery. Forget about the Haqqani network in the tribal areas, even the Pakistan-based organisations are currently expanding and probably getting ready for the ‘endgame’. The trickiest part of this official strategic schema that was underscored in a report by the Jinnah Institute and the United States Institute of Peace (JI-USIP) is that it does not address the concerns regarding the impact of such machinery on the Pakistani and Afghan societies.

There are two parallel statements being offered simultaneously. First, when quizzed about clamping down the various Pakistan based jihadi groups, the response always is that these are not under state control and so are difficult to defang.

Second, there is a possibility of calming down these jihadi outfits presumably after the endgame is won. In fact, it is assumed that these outfits will naturally calm down and become part of the secularising process of the society through their welfare and other activities. This is an erroneous interpretation since these welfare activities are not meant for potential demobilisation but for communicating with the society. For those, who believe that there is any secularising element in these welfare activities, it must be pointed out that not all people have the heart for war-fighting and so must be integrated with a jihadi outfit’s overall ideological contours through various methods including welfare and relief work. It’s an extremely powerful tool for marketing and maintaining a relationship between the state and the non-state. While the state keeps justifying jihadi presence by highlighting their relief work, the latter are in a dependent relationship with the former because of such crucial facilitation.

The new narrative is problematic since it assumes the collapse of the jihad machinery after the militants integrate into the state’s decision-making. The Haqqani network might find a space in Kabul but what about the other outfits? Are we to assume that all jihadis will after the end of the endgame migrate to Afghanistan and live there forever? Or, are we to think that people like Malik Ishaq, Masood Azhar and others will agree to live a different life, spending their old age telling stories to their children and grand children and entertaining their families?

The new pro-jihadi narrative, in fact, wants people to forget about militancy and primacy of jihad for these outfits. The question being asked is that why not consider these outfits normal by not focusing on their ideology? The issue with this framework is that it tends to deliberately minimise the significance of the theory of jihad and its implication for the state and society since the basic idea of jihad is linked with an orthodox interpretation of a just war in an Islamic state. Since they do not believe in the existing political system and the structure of the state, it is logical for them to pursue war as a means to an end.

Furthermore, turning these jihadi outfits away from war becomes difficult in a socio-political environment that does not encourage a pluralist and inclusive discourse. The close linkage of religion with the politics of the state is dicey, mainly because it is difficult to ensure that all voices will be heard and all nuances given relatively equal space. For those that are overawed by the Iranian experience, it would be worthwhile pointing out that even there the space became limited for those that disagreed including Ali Shariati and Rafsanjani who were then harshly dealt with by the state.

The ideology of jihadi outfits in Pakistan is so deeply connected with peculiar sectarian bias that is bound to create greater violence. How about not lying to ourselves about the greater possibility of these forces turning within in both soft and hard ways after the endgame is won?

Published in The Express Tribune, September 18th, 2011.

SBajwa · Post by **SBajwa** » 19 Sep 2011 21:13

Z Naik is a traitor of the worst kind! If push come to shove he will be the first mouse to abandon the ship.

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 19 Sep 2011 22:07

Why not ask Naik if he is a human being or Muslim first?

SBajwa · Post by **SBajwa** » 19 Sep 2011 22:14

With Z. naik two old indian proverbs come to mind.

1. Jo bhaunkhte hain vo katthe hai (barking dogs seldom bite)
2. Laaton ke bhoot baaton se nahi maante (Can somebody translate this)