QUAID-E-AZAM and HOLY QURAN

On the auspicious occasion of the oncoming birth anniversary of the Quaid-e –Azam, I am paying my humble tribute to the great leader by bringing into limelight his great attachment with and earnest consideration for Quranic injunctions that he so ardently advised Muslims to follow for their personal benefit as well as for the collective good of the Pakistani nation and Muslim Ummah. (Ahmed Subhani)

——————————————————————————————————-

The Quaid  once said that he was not a religious scholar, hence no authority on religious matters; yet views expressed by him on various occasions amply demonstrate, that he had deep in sight into Quranic concepts and teachings. Those who know him closely would vouchsafe that he was a perfectionist to the core and that he would never entertain any claim unless he was convinced of its legitimacy. Reproduced below are excerpts from his speeches to prove this point. This will also dispel the frivolous charge made by certain religious “heavy weights” who allege that since Jinnah was the product of western system of education, he was bereft of the true knowledge of Islam and its teachings:–

“I am not a ‘moulvi” nor do I claim to be an expert in theology. However, I have tried, at my own, to understand Quran and the Islamic laws. In the teachings of this great book there is guidance for each and every aspect of human life, may be it is spiritual, social, political or economical all have been covered by it”

(Address at the Usmania University, Hyderabad, India-1941).  “People criticize me alleging that I am not well acquainted with Islam. I. have studied Quran thoroughly and many a time. And when I declared that Islamic system would be established in Pakistan, It was not a mere slogan” (Tolu-e Islam-February,1959).

“You have requested me for giving you a message .What message can I give? For guidance and light, we all are blessed with Quran’s loftiest message” (Frontier Muslim Students Conference—April, 1943).

During struggle for Pakistan when Muslims were facing great hardships and victimization at the hands of Hindus and their allies ,Quaid comforted them saying that ultimate success would be theirs if they only sought guidance from the Quran:–“ At present, a battle is going on between the Muslims and the Hindus in the political arena. People ask me as to who is going to be the winner?  Only God knows about it. However, as a Muslim I can assure that if we treat the Holy Quran as our final and absolute guide and persevere not forgetting at the same time God’s command that all Muslims are brothers to one another, no earthly power or even their combine, can defeat us” ( Address at a  meeting in Hyderabad ,Deccan—July,1946). “ We have been the victim of a deeply laid and well-planned conspiracy…..We thank Providence for giving us courage and faith to fight these forces of evil. If we take our inspiration and guidance from the Holy Quran, the final victory, I once again say, will be ours.”(Speech at a rally at the University Stadium,Lahore-October,1947).

According to the great Quaid, Holy Quran is the “sheet anchor of Islam and fundamental code of life for Muslims “What is it that keeps the Muslims united, and what is bedrock and sheet anchor of the community. It is Islam. It is the great book Quran that is the sheet anchor of Muslim India.” (Speech at ALL India Muslim League Session, Karachi-26-12-1943). “Every Musalman knows that the injunctions of the Quran, are not confined to religious and moral duties. From the Atlantic to the Ganges, Quran is acknowledged as the fundamental code, not only of theology, but of civil and criminal jurisprudence, and the laws which regulate the actions of mankind are governed by the immutable sanctions of the Will of God. Everyone except those who are ignorant knows that Quran is the general code of Muslims. A religious, social, civil, commercial, military, judicial criminal penal code, it regulates everything…. .And our Prophet has enjoined on us, that every Musalman should possess a copy of the Quran and be his own priest. Therefore, Islam is not merely confined to the spiritual tenets and doctrines or rituals and ceremonies. It is a complete code regulating the whole Muslim society, every department of life, collectively and individually.” ( Eid Message to the Nation—September,1945).

Elaborating the role of the Quran and the Islamic State, the Quaid, in his address to the students of the Usmania University, Deccan in August, 1941, said,” In Islam ultimate obedience belongs to God alone.The only way to follow His guidance is through the Holy Quran. Islam does not preach obedience to a king, parliament, person or any institution. The Islamic Government means rule of the Quran. And how can you establish the rule of Quran without an independent state? In this state, legislation will take place within the boundaries drawn by the Quran”.

This scribe has yet to come across a better description of the role and function of the Quran and an Islamic State than the one given above by the great Quaid.

The Afghan-Pakistan Solution

By Pervez Musharraf – Former President of Pakistan

My recent trip to the United States has been an enriching experience, during which I had a very healthy discourse with the American public and an opportunity to understand their concerns about the war in Afghanistan. One question I was asked almost everywhere I went was, “How can we stop losing?”

The answer is a political surge, in conjunction with the additional troops requested by Gen. Stanley McChrystal. Quitting is not an option.

A military solution alone cannot guarantee success. Armies can only win sometimes, and at best, create an environment for the political process to work. At the end of the day, it is civilians, not soldiers, who have to take charge of their country.

After decades of civil war and anarchy, the Taliban established control over 95% of Afghanistan in 1996. Unfortunately, the Taliban imposed their strict interpretation of Islam on the country. Nevertheless, I proposed to recognize the Taliban regime, in the hope of transforming them from within. Had my strategy been enacted, we might have persuaded the Taliban to deny a safe haven to al Qaeda and avoided the tragic 9/11 attacks.

Another golden opportunity to rescue the Afghan people emerged after the United Nations sanctioned international military operation launched after 9/11. Having liberated Afghanistan from the tyranny of al Qaeda and Taliban, the U.S. had the unequivocal support of the majority of Afghans. The establishment of a truly representative national government which gave proportional representation to all ethnic groups—including the majority Pashtuns—would have brought peace to Afghanistan and ousted al Qaeda once and for all. Unfortunately this did not happen.

The political instability and ethnic imbalance in Afghanistan after 9/11 marginalized the majority Pashtuns and pushed them into the Taliban fold, even though they were not ideological supporters of the Taliban. The blunder of inducting 80,000 troops of Tajiks into the Afghan national army further alienated the Pashtuns.

Meanwhile, Pakistan forcefully tackled the influx of al Qaeda into our tribal areas, capturing over 600 al Qaeda and Afghan Taliban leaders, some of them of very high value. We established 1,000 border checkposts and even offered to mine or fence off the Afghanistan-Pakistan border, but this never came to pass. The Afghan government, led by President Hamid Karzai, had no writ outside of Kabul, and the insufficient ground troops of the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) allowed the Taliban to regroup. The 2004 invasion of Iraq shifted the focus and also contributed to the Taliban gaining ground in Afghanistan.

Al Qaeda terrorists who fled from Afghanistan came to Pakistan and settled initially in South Waziristan. Through successful intelligence and law-enforcement operations, we eliminated al Qaeda from our cities and destroyed their command, communication and propaganda centers. They fled to the adjoining North Waziristan, Bajur and Swat regions.

From 2004 onwards, we witnessed a gradual shift in the terrorist center of gravity. The Taliban started to re-emerge in Afghanistan and gradually gained a dominant role. They developed ties with the Taliban in Pakistan’s tribal areas, especially in North and South Waziristan. With a grand strategy to destabilize the whole region, the Taliban and al Qaeda established links with extremists in Pakistani society on the one hand and with Muslim fundamentalists in India on the other. They pose a grave threat to South Asia and peace in the world.

We now have to deal with a complex situation. Casualties suffered by our soldiers in the line of duty will not go wasted only if we are able to fully secure our next generations from the menace of terrorism. The exit strategy from Afghanistan must not and cannot be time related. It has to ask, “What effect do we want to create on the ground?” We must eliminate al Qaeda, dominate the Taliban militarily, and establish a representative, legitimate government in Afghanistan.

The military must ensure that we deal with insurgents from a position of strength. The dwindling number of al Qaeda elements must be totally eliminated, and the Taliban have to be dominated militarily. We must strengthen border-control measures with all possible means to isolate the militants on the Afghanistan and Pakistan sides.

The Pakistan military must continue to act strongly. Operationally, we must raise substantially more forces from within the tribal groups and equip them with more tanks and guns. On the Afghan side, the U.S. and ISAF troops must be reinforced. All of this must be done in combination with raising additional Afghan National Army troops, with significant Pashtun representation. Exploiting tribal divisions, we should also raise local militias.

On the political front, we need an invigorated dialogue with all groups in Afghanistan, including the Taliban. Afghanistan for centuries has been governed loosely through a social covenant between all the ethnic groups, under a sovereign king. This structure is needed again to bring peace and harmony. We have to reach out to Pashtun tribes and others who do not ideologically align themselves with the Taliban or al Qaeda. I have always said that “all Talibans are Pashtun, but all Pashtuns are not Taliban.” Pakistan and Saudi Arabia can play pivotal roles in facilitating this outreach.

Pakistan and Afghanistan were shortsightedly abandoned to their fate by the West in 1989, in spite of the fact that they were the ones who won a victory for the Free World against the Soviet Union. This abandonment lead to a sense of betrayal amongst the people of the region. For the sake of regional and world peace, let us not repeat the same mistake.

Source: The Wall Street Journal

President Pervez Musharraf launches official Facebook Fan Page

Former President of Pakistan, General Pervez Musharraf has recently launched his official Fan page at the world’s most famous social networking site www.Facebook.com

The official web adress is www.Facebook.com/PervezMusharraf . Given is his video message to his followers and supporters. He would answer the questions posted at the Discussion tab of the Fan page. Cheers for all the fans. \(^.^)/

The official web adress is www.Facebook.com/PervezMusharraf

We would not abandon our benefactor

Tom Hussain, Foreign Correspondent

KARIMABAD, PAKISTAN – Chants rang across a polo ground in the hamlet of Karimabad, the capital of the idyllic valley of Hunza, Pakistan’s northernmost district and the likely setting for the mythical kingdom of Shangri-La.

With elections beckoning on Thursday in Gilgit-Baltistan, a sparsely populated region of former valley kingdoms nestled between Asia’s mighty Himalaya, Karakorum and Hindu Kush mountain ranges, hundreds of ethnic Hunzakut villagers had gathered on November 4 to voice support for their favoured politician.

“We were with you yesterday! We are still with you today!”, they shouted. But Pervez Musharraf, Pakistan’s former president, the man they were calling to, was there only in spirit, his beaming portrait adorning dozens of posters and banners, beckoning to the attentive, well-behaved crowd with his military salute.

Reviled elsewhere in the country after eight years of unpopular military rule, culminating in his resignation in August 2008, he had departed Pakistan in July, ostensibly on a lecture tour of the West, and is now living in virtual exile in London.

He has vowed to return home “when the time is right”, but such bravado masks genuine fears that he could be sent to the gallows if he does – either for the 2006 killing in a military operation of Nawab Akbar Bugti, an insurgent Baloch tribal politician, or for staging the 1999 coup that brought him to power, an act of high treason according to a Supreme Court verdict delivered on July 31.

However, Mr Musharraf may, one day, find a home in Hunza where popular sentiment, as in the rest of Gilgit-Baltistan, is swayed by sectarian, ethnic and clan loyalties.

The region has evolved independently from the Pakistani hinterland, to which it is linked by a single road, the 1,300km Karakorum Highway, a stunning feat of engineering that took Chinese and Pakistani army engineers 12 years to build and was completed only in May 1978.

As an army officer who specialised in military strategy, Mr Musharraf recognised the geopolitical importance of Gilgit-Baltistan, which shares borders with China to the north, India to the east and Afghanistan to the west – something that made it a flashpoint of the “Great Game” in central Asia contested by czarist Russia and the British empire in the late 19th century.

To that end, Mr Musharraf wooed the people of the region with speeches in the native Shina and Burushaski languages, read from Roman scripts, gave legislative powers to the region’s elected assembly and held party-based elections.

He funded development projects, including the region’s first university, new motorways and power plants.

And, perhaps most importantly for the estimated 60,000 residents of Hunza, practically all of who are members of the Ismaili sect, followers of the Aga Khan, and fearful of militant Sunnis, he took on the Taliban.

“He is a man who delivered on the promises he made to us, and we are not so dishonourable that we would abandon our mohsin [benefactor],” said Karim Beg, a 24-year-old shopkeeper of Hyderabad village, speaking among chants of “Long live, President Musharraf!”

That sentiment may yet determine the outcome of the Hunza seat, but the symbolic vindication of a victory by Rai Rehmatullah Beg, the pro-Musharraf candidate, would still be tainted with irony.

Mr Beg is contesting as the nominated candidate of the Quaid faction of the Pakistan Muslim League, a party cobbled together by Mr Musharraf largely with the help of deserters from popular political parties before national elections in 2002.

However, after Mr Musharraf stepped down, the faction split in two, with the larger group, which is contesting the Gilgit-Baltistan election under the Quaid League banner, distancing itself from the former president in an attempt to gain political credibility.

That has not gone down well with voters in Hunza, whose loyalty to the Pakistan Muslim League predates the independence of Pakistan in 1947 because of the involvement of Sir Sultan Mohammed Shah, the then Aga Khan, in politicking to create a separate homeland for the Muslims of British-ruled India.

During the Karimabad rally, local politicians and the audience mocked unnamed politicians, calling them “selfish opportunists”, for abandoning Mr Musharraf with chanted pledges of loyalty for the former president.

Marvi Memon, the member of the federal parliament running the Quaid League campaign for the this week’s elections in Gilgit-Batistan, said the voters’ adverse reaction was a “wake-up call” for politicians who had vilified Mr Musharraf.

“I think this has proved that support for Mr Musharraf continues in many parts of Pakistan,” she said.

“Certain elements were responsible for creating a gulf between our party and Mr Musharraf.

“I am confident that, one day not too far from now, the party will realise it was hoodwinked, and will reunite with Mr Musharraf and emerge as a stronger political force than ever.”
Source: The National

Interview with Pervez Musharraf

Read the Transcript
This text below is a phonetic transcript of a radio story broadcast by PRI’s THE WORLD. It has been created on deadline by a contractor for PRI. The transcript is included here to facilitate internet searches for audio content. Please report any transcribing errors to theworld@pri.org. This transcript may not be in its final form, and it may be updated. Please be aware that the authoritative record of material distributed by PRI’s THE WORLD is the program audio.

MARCO WERMAN: Afghanistan’s neighbor, Pakistan, is in the middle of a major military offensive against the Taliban. The Pakistani army is trying to take control of the militant stronghold of South Waziristan along the Afghan border. Army officials say 16 soldiers have died so far while more than 100 militants have been killed. Pakistan’s former president, General Pervez Musharraf is visiting the US right now and came to our studio. I asked him if the offensive in South Waziristan is the solution to Pakistan’s problems with the Taliban.

PERVEZ MUSHARRAF: It’s not the solution but it’s one part of the solution. I’ve always said that solution lies in a triple directional strategy – military, political, and socio-economic. So the military part is being executed well after having dealt with Swat and [INDISCERNIBLE] they’ve now gone to South Waziristan. So I think it’s good – the using of concentrated force in a peace [INDISCERNIBLE] objective.

WERMAN: And do you think the operation Swat was effective?

MUSHARRAF: Yes I think it was successful.

WERMAN: But recently there were 40 killed in a suicide attack and so it raises the issue, it’s one thing to take a region; it’s another thing to hold it.

MUSHARRAF: Well even if you hold it that doesn’t mean that you can guarantee that no suicide attack will take place. I know that the law enforcement agency, the army’s opening a [INDISCERNIBLE] there. It will be there. So it will be held. But that doesn’t mean that no bullet will be fired by any terrorist. Because if a person is there to carry out a suicide attack it’s really very difficult to avoid it.

WERMAN: There’s been a slow steady drumbeat of Afghan officials along with NATO accusing Pakistan of not doing enough to stem the movement of militants sympathetic to al-Qaeda and the Taliban across the border into Afghanistan. Why has this offensive in South Waziristan taken so long and why didn’t you engage in an equally forceful offensive in the same area?

MUSHARRAF: It was I who moved the two divisions in North and South Waziristan back and I think immediately up to [INDISCERNIBLE]. Who has been catching all these al-Qaeda people? Who did that? It was in my time. Hundreds of them have been caught. So how do you say that we hadn’t operated? They are there since long and they have been operating there.

WERMAN: So why, again, why the need for another offensive? Why this upsurge in violence?

MUSHARRAF: Yeah it’s because all these eight years there has been an upsurge of Taliban activity. A Taliban who were finished after 9/11. They had an upsurge in Afghanistan. [PH] Mula Omar and all his [INDISCERNIBLE] are reestablished in Afghanistan in the same region from where they dominated or they controlled 90 percent of Afghanistan. So after 2004 – 05 there was an upsurge. We saw the downward trend in al-Qaeda because of Pakistan’s actions and an upward trend, swing, in the Taliban support. And therefore now the situation is al-Qaeda is down. Who did this? Obviously Pakistan forces operating in Pakistan, in [INDISCERNIBLE] and mountains. But the Taliban upsurge has come about in Afghanistan and that has a great impact in Pakistan because there are now Pakistani Taliban in South and North Waziristan much stronger links with across the border and they are acting. So this is now a different ballgame all together.

WERMAN: Now as a former military leader – I mean you were a military leader who came to power in a coup. You stepped down as head of the army in 2007. You recognized at the time the merit of a civilian government in Pakistan. Now in Afghanistan yesterday a runoff election was announced to take place on November 7^th. What is at stake for Pakistan with this vote in Afghanistan?

MUSHARRAF: Well I don’t think it directly affects Pakistan.

WERMAN: You don’t?

MUSHARRAF: It does affect Afghanistan.

WERMAN: But what affects Afghanistan, affects Pakistan ultimately.

MUSHARRAF: Well yes indirectly, indirectly. I think one would require if we are to win in Afghanistan we have to have a credible, legitimate government in Afghanistan. And that is not the case. But Pakistan’s interest is in a legitimate, acceptable government to all the ethnic minorities of Afghanistan for the sake of Afghanistan because if we can have better peace in Afghanistan it will be of advantage to Pakistan certainly.

WERMAN: You’ve been quite critical of President Hamid Karzai. What happens, in your opinion, to the region if he is president again? If he wins this runoff election.

MUSHARRAF: Well I think I’ve been critical, yes, because of certain observations that I had in his criticizing Pakistan, in his supporting elements who are instrumental in carrying out terrorism in Baltistan. So there are certain things that I disagree with him. These were my observations and my accusations against him. So I used to criticize him on that. The other thing is that he used to throw the entire blame on Pakistan – that whatever is happening in Afghanistan is because of Pakistan. And I think the world must understand that this is absolutely the opposite. Whatever is happening in Pakistan is because of Afghanistan. The same [INDISCERNIBLE], the same Taliban, resurgence of that force in Afghanistan.

WERMAN: But in fact it’s very hard to say where these militants are coming from. They could be coming form Pakistan as well as Afghansitan. So both countries are in fact … .

MUSHARRAF: No they are coming … . No actually there’s no doubt at all. Absolutely. I have no doubt at all. Taliban under [INDISCERNIBLE] control 90% of Afghanistan. There is support to them in Pakistan. There are safe havens in Pakistan. And there are Taliban elements of Pakistan also. But if anyone thinks that they are all coming from Pakistan this is what the misperception that exists in Untied States and this misperception is fanned by people like President Karzai unfortunately. And this is misleading the world.

WERMAN: Pervez Musharraf, former president of Pakistan. Thank you very much for your time.

MUSHARRAF: Thank you.

WERMAN: Hear more about Pervez Musharraf’s current US visit and about his plans for a return to Pakistan at our website. You’ll also find a link to the former Pakistani leader’s newly launched Facebook page. It’s all at http://www.theworld.org

Copyright ©2009 PRI’s THE WORLD. All rights reserved. No quotes from the materials contained herein may be used in any media without attribution to PRI’s THE WORLD. This transcript may not be reproduced, in whole or in part, without prior written permission. For further information, please email The World’s Permissions Coordinator at theworld@pri.org

Source: The World

Musharraf supports army operation in Waziristan

By Masood Haider
Tuesday, 20 Oct, 2009

NEW YORK: Former president Pervez Musharraf has applauded the military offensive to flush out the Taliban and other militants from South Waziristan, saying that it was ‘very much needed’.

‘I support what the government and army are doing to eliminate the threat of terrorism and extremism,’ he told a select crowd at a dinner hosted by members of the Pakistani-American community at a hotel in the borough of Staten Island on Sunday night.

Most Pakistani media was barred from the event, except two TV channels which, according to sources, had been approved by Mr Musharraf.

The organisers allowed only pre-approved questions to be asked.

Answering a question about his return to Pakistan, he said he would wait and see how the situation evolved in the wake of army operation.

Former chief of the army staff Gen (retd) Musharraf said that growing insurgency, especially the recent spike in suicide bombings, had put Pakistan in a precarious situation.

Moreover, the country’s economy is not picking up and remains in a bad shape.

He said that the only way forward for Pakistan was to have a ‘real functional democracy, with good governance’.

About the situation in Afghanistan, he said Washington had made three mistakes from 1979 to 2009. He repeated a well-known fact that in 1989 the US abandoned some 35,000 battle-hardened Mujahideen after the Soviets had been driven out. These people formed the nucleus of what would become Al Qaeda. Pakistan, which helped the US in creating those fighters, was left high and dry at that stage.

The United States, he added, was also wrong when it refused to recognise the Taliban by opening its mission in Kabul. In doing so, the US threw away a chance to influence them, and paved the way for Al Qaeda to become influential.

The United States also made a mistake by allowing the Northern Alliance, made up of ethnic minorities, to gain influence in the post-Taliban government, instead of making more concessions to the Pashtun majority, he said. The way to resolve the Afghan crisis was to access the Pashtuns and hold dialogue with them.

Source: DAWN

Pakistan’s American Ambassador

Section: Letter to the Editor, PAKISTAN OBSERVER

By Mr. Ahmad Subhani

Dr. Ghayur Ayub’s satirical remarks made in his letter, “The Big Question”, in to-day’s Pakistan Observer are sober as well as hilarious. Mr. Hussain Haqqani’s role enacted so far, gives the impression that he is serving American interests more in Pakistan than serving Pakistan’s interests in America. His meaningful contribution at drafting the Kerry- Lugar Bill, as hinted by Dr. Ayub, is an instance to quote. There is no surprise in it, though. Her leader, Benazir Bhutto, on the eve of her return to Pakistan in December, 2007, from her self- imposed exile abroad, issued a statement to the effect, that she would see to it that the foreign stake holders be afforded access to Dr. Abdul Qadeer Khan and Pak nukes. In today’s news- papers, another PPP stalwart, Mr. Wajid Shamsul Hassan, Pakistan’s High Commissioner in U. K., has advised Pakistanis that the said bill is going to” help democracy in Pakistan”. One is at a loss to understand as to how and which democracy the bill is supposed to promote—Z. A. Bhutto’s, Benazir’s, Nawaz Sharif’s or Zardari’s? This hapless nation is already fed up with a hotchpotch of civilian and dictatorial models enforced in Pakistan in the name of “democracy”. Masses groaning under the crushing burden of ever deepening poverty and deprivation are interested in only and only in a system that guarantees them riddance from their present agony. Unfortunately, none of the so called democratic or dictatorial systems enforced here from time to time, has brought them any succor. False promises and hollow sloganeering, is not going to turn the tide. Rulers must focus their efforts and energies at initiating concrete action, to salvage the devastated economy and improve the horrible law and order situation without which no improvement is possible.

Source: Pakistan Observer

Baluchistan Imbroglio

Section: Letter to the Editor, PAKISTAN OBSERVER

(Mr. Ahmad Subhani)

Knowledgeable Pakistanis will disagree with many a point raised by Syed Khan Baloch in his letter captioned, “Baluchistan Amnesty” (Pakistan Observer of the 20th instant) that Baluchistan is the least developed province of the country, no body denies. However, the fact why it is so, is attributable to two main factors: one, its neglect by the successive governments; two, geographical location of the province —- a vast arid  land located in a far -fetched part of the country, very thinly populated, perennially suffering from scanty rainfall coupled with scarcity of other water resources. The said state of affairs in not making of the last sixty-two years, rather this legacy goes back into distant past. Another important factor that has bedeviled Baluchistan’s progress all these years, is the presence there of feudal system in its worst form that has retarded its development process. Feudal sardars like, Bughtis, Marris, Mengals etc. whose stranglehold over the masses in their areas of influence is complete, in pursuit of their selfish interests, put breaks, even through use of force, to all developmental activities  like building of infrastructure, schools, hospitals etc. that has to  take place in their areas. Their said illegal activities have constantly challenged the authority of the Govt. and undermined writ of the State. That is why, during Z.A. Bhutto’s and Pervez Musharraf’s reign, military action had to be taken against the culprits.

The foregoing explains why Baluchistan has remained a backward region, giving rise to complaints and grievances with regard to the poverty and deprivation of its inhabitants. This situation has been fully exploited by the anti-state elements, particularly by our arch enemy India in collaboration with Afghanistan and others. Some of our feudal bigwigs like, Akber Bughti, in connivance with and duly aided and abetted by our said enemies, took recourse to destroying  national assets like, sui gas installations, bridges, railway tracks, trains and other infrastructure. They even attacked security staff and army personnel. Leaving that aside, the Govt. of Pakistan did realize, though belatedly, that Bachistan urgently needs more attention and resources to achieve its potential. Accordingly, concerted efforts were made during the last eight years or so by the previous Govt. and a number of projects, including major ones like, Gawader port, Coastal Highways, Mirani Dam were constructed. I suggest, that Syed Baluch Khan, may go through  letter, captioned, ”Destabilizing Baluchistan” appearing in the same issue of the Pakistan Observer, wherein a true picture of what has transpired  in that province has been portrayed, quite realistically. The present Govt.is also seized with the matter and hopefully, concrete steps would be taken to accelerate pace of development in the province.

Source: Pakistan Observer

Of myth and reality

By Mr. Ahmad Subhani

Mr. B. A. Malik in his article titled,” Myth and Reality of Pakistan” (P. O. 28-9-2009), has specified certain myths, which according to him, have DEFINED the psychology of the nation since its inception” .Everyone has the right to express his opinion on any issue of his liking. Mr. Malik has done so on certain “ major myths”, as he has put it, in his said write up .I would like to avail this opportunity to offer my point of view on some of his perceptions that I do not find in consonance with the realities on ground.

Democracy: It is not correct to say that, “Pakistan is unfit for democracy because people don’t understand this concept….” On the other hand, you will hardly find people who do not favour a democratic system for Pakistan. However, the bone of contention is which type of democracy suits the genius of its people? West Minister Abbey style democracy which was a legacy of our past British rulers, has failed to click over here. Other varieties of democracy experimented here like basic democracy, mixed or quasi-democracy etc. too has failed to deliver. A number of elections under the afore-said systems held since 1947 also have not produced the desired results .The greatest impediments in the way to establishing a genuine democratic rule in this country, are (1): rampant illiteracy among the populace and (2): the feudal system which has been in vogue here since 1947. The feudal elite having complete hold over great majority of impoverished and ignorant masses, have invariably hampered their right to free franchise. In view of the same, it is being increasingly felt, that what Pakistan needs is a democratic system that is tailored according to its peculiar circumstances and needs.

Constitution v/s Country: I am of the firm opinion that country gets preference over its constitution. Constitution is framed for the country and not the Vice a Versa. It is as simple as that. So if the two are somehow tied up, the country must get the priority. The much maligned, “Doctrine of Necessity”, acts as a rescuer in such Mix Ups.

Media Freedom: It was acknowledged even at international forums, that the media freedom allowed by the previous Govt. was unprecedented in the annals of Pakistan. To term that achievement as “Non Sense” and “dictatorship and press- freedom do not match”, is a slander.

GENERALS: Nobody has claimed that the Pakistani generals Alone are real champions of national interests. It seems as if here the writer’s imagination has run wild. The charge is too flimsy to merit serious consideration.

Ayub’s and Musharraf’s books : on going through the books authored by Ayub Khan and Pervez Musharraf, I failed to find any Worth While distortion therein. Rather, the texts of the books depict a fairly realistic picture of the then prevailing conditions. To call the contents of the books as, “historical distortions with abandon” is a distortion in itself.

Pakistan’s Dismemberment: To deny the stark reality, also so recognized internationally, that India dismembered Pakistan in 1971, no sane person, least of all a patriotic Pakistani, can subscribe to Mr. Malik’s contention, that “India did exploit the opportunity of the century but our own blunders primarily led to this colossal debacle”. I wonder, if he is not unwittingly, legitimizing India’s said despicable act?

Kashmir dispute: Even the big powers namely ,U.S.A., Great Britain , who have all along been siding with India, have after long last , admitted openly that peace in South Asia is not possible without an amicable settlement of the Kashmir dispute. Mr. Malik calls this issue as,”out-dated stereo-type” How strange!

Nuclear Arsenal: That it is a guarantee for Pakistan’s security has been amply proved by the year-long standoff of the million strong Indian and Pakistani armed forces at the Pakistan border in 2001-02. India was hell- bent to invade Pakistan, but it is latter’s nukes that thwarted her nefarious designs. But Mr. Malik has the temerity to say that nuclear arsenal provides no such guarantee.

American Interference: His outright denial of’ continually increasing American interference in Pakistan’s affairs is beyond our humble comprehension. How can he remain ignorant of this widely known development? Finally, he has acclaimed the performance of the incumbent Govt., lawyers, judiciary and others, which I feel, is the result of his misplaced optimism. Frankly speaking, during the last one year and half that the present rulers have been at the helm of affairs, Pakistan has degenerated into its worst ever crises in all spheres of national activity. I don’t want to go into details as all are well aware of it. Suffice it to say, that all economic indicators that were made positive during the previous Government’s reign, have become negative now.

Proverbial begging bowl that was broken by the previous regime is again in the hands of the present Govt.’s emissaries who are trotting around the world seeking more and more alms but which are hard to get by as the credibility of the incumbent Govt. has touched rock bottom. And lately, Pakistan has been relegated to the status of one of the failed States of the world. In the face of all this, Mr Malik’s lambasting the previous “dictatorial” regime (which, in fact, had done a great deal for this country), and offering accolades to the present one that has put to naught all that had been achieved earlier, is something beyond one’s comprehension.

Source: Pakistan Observer

Musharraf: More Troops in Afghanistan

By CHRIS CUOMO, CHRIS STRATHMANN and KATE McCARTHY [ABC News]

Former Pakistani president Gen. Pervez Musharraf said that President Obama should have complied “yesterday” with Gen. Stanley A. McChyrstal’s recommendation to send more U.S. troops to Afghanistan.

“I think you should take it immediately. You should have taken it yesterday,” Musharraf told ABC News in an exclusive interview.

Musharraf made his comments following the leak of McChrystal’s security assessment that called for additional U.S. troops to fight in Afghanistan. In the assessment, McChrystal said more troops alone cannot achieve success “but will enable implementation of the new strategy. Conversely, inadequate resources will likely result in failure.”

In February, Obama authorized an additional 21,000 troops be deployed to Afghanistan and now he must decide if the situation requires even more.

Musharraf said he “absolutely” believes there need to be more troops in Afghanistan.

Sending more troops could also mean an increase in casualties, something Musharraf says the United States should be prepared for.

“We must avoid, as much as possible, casualties. But when soldiers move and armies act, casualties will be there, and we should accept casualties,” Musharraf said.

“We have to win,” the former general said. “And quitting is not an option.”

Musharraf even proposed what he called a “drastic” measure to secure the border between Pakistan and Afghanistan.

“As far as I’m concerned, we should mine it so that people can’t go across,” Musharraf said.

While he acknowledged that mines are a controversial weapon, Musharraf argued that it is an “unusual war.”

Musharraf dismissed Afghanistan’s long history of defeating foreign armies, including the Soviet army in the 1980s.

“There’s always a first time,” Musharraf said.

He argued the United States could succeed where the Soviets failed because “the whole world” was helping insurgents fight the Soviets.

At another point, the former Pakistani general said, “It was you who invaded and came into Afghanistan, so you better face it now and win there.”

When asked what the consequences would be if the United States withdrew from Afghanistan, Musharraf said it would result in destabilizing Afghanistan. He said the country would become the center of all al Qaeda “sanctuaries” and consequently could extend its influence into Pakistan and possibly even India.

Musharraf said he believes Obama has “intentions of improvement” since taking office.

“He’s saying the right things. He wants to focus more on Afghanistan, compared to Iraq, which is the right strategy at this moment,” Musharraf said. “He wants to reach out to the Muslims.”

Musharraf added that “we need to see [results] on ground.

Returning to Pakistan

Musharraf came to power in 1999 following a military coup and resigned in 2008 amid threats of impeachment after he removed a Supreme Court judge from the bench and imposed emergency rule on the country.

The former president said he “will return to Pakistan” despite the possibility of facing trial as soon as he sets foot in the country.

“Well, these are realities which one has to face. But however, I am very sure of one thing — that whatever I have done till now, constitutionally and legally, there is no charge against me,” Musharraf said.

Return to Pakistan

When asked if he would try to return to power, Musharraf would not answer the question directly.

“Well, I give thought to what is happening in Pakistan. And I give thought to what the people of Pakistan are desiring, and I also give thought to whether I can do anything for Pakistan,” Musharraf said. “Collectively, I have to make a decision based on all these three elements.”

The former general, who is currently living in exile in London, is prohibited by law from running for political office until this December, two years after he took off his military uniform.

Should Musharraf decide to return to politics, he likely would face Nawaz Sharif, a political opponent and someone the former president called “abrasive” and confrontational.

“He has never been on good terms with any president of Pakistan, so I don’t know what kind of a mental make-up he has. But the man is abrasive against the other power brokers of Pakistan,” Musharraf said.

The former general even went so far as to call Sharif a “closet Taliban.”

“Even on Pakistan television these days, talk shows are going on saying that he has met Osama bin Laden five times — five times before 9/11 — and he has been financed by Osama bin Laden,” Musharraf said. “Then the other element is that he never speaks against terrorism and extremism.”

But when pressed for proof of Sharif’s meetings with bin Laden, Musharraf said he personally could not offer any.

“No, I can’t do that, but there are certainly there are people who vouch for it, who were present there,” Musharraf said.

Source: ABC News