Posts Tagged ‘ISI’

h1

Musharraf slams Indian media for fabricating anti-Pak‘ propaganda

January 21, 2013

Musharraf slams Indian media for fabricating anti-Pak‘ propaganda

Advertisements
h1

Indian TV show goes off-air after Pervez Musharraf’s back-fire on Indian govt, army

January 20, 2013

Former president Pervez Musharraf on Friday took India’s media to task for fabricating and cooking up false stories against Pakistan’s armed forces.

Speaking on Indian TV channel Times Now, live from London, Musharraf said India was fabricating false stories to put Pakistan’s army and ISI in bad light through its media.When asked by anchor why Pakistan was not acting against Lashkar-e-Taiba, Musharraf questioned as to why India was not doing anything against extremist party Shiv Sena.

“Can Indian government dare to take action against Shiv Sena? Are not they extremists? ,” he shot back at the anchor. Responding to a question about the long march, Musharraf said India had no right to ask about Pakistan’s internal affairs. But he said that Pakistanis want change.“Pakistan army did not mutilate the body of any Indian soldier and it never does so,” he replied to a question commandingly. He said India was deliberately escalating at the Line of Control. Pakistan army, he said, believes in resolving all disputes, including Kashmir, with India.“What kind of democracy you are running? You have kicked out Pakistan’s hockey players and artists,” he questioned?.”If you want to talk about Kargil. But first talk about East Pakistan and Siachen,” he said.

Watch the FULL interview here,

Can’t imagine Pak army being involved in killing of Indian jawans: Musharraf

Watch it on the Youtube, here.

h1

What should be done in Afghanistan

December 19, 2010

Written by Pervez Musharraf – former President of Pakistan

Historical background: Events in Afghanistan took a turn in 1979 with the invasion of the country by the Soviet Union. The Soviets were challenged through a jihad, launched by the Afghans supported by America and Pakistan. The jihad was strongly reinforced by mujahideen, encouraged and brought from all over the Muslim world and also by the Taliban from the madrassas of Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa. It was spearheaded by various religious militant groups and, thus, we saw the introduction of religious militancy in the region which continued for ten long years. The year 1989 saw the defeat of the Soviet Union and its eviction from Afghanistan.

The fruits of this victory all went to the West, with the Cold War ending in the West’s victory, dismemberment of the Soviet Union, liberation of East Europe and the reunification of Germany. Unfortunately, what Afghanistan and Pakistan got after 1989 were a series of three short-sighted blunders leading to complications and perhaps, avoidable turmoil in the region. The rehabilitation and resettlement of the mujahideen brought into Afghanistan was totally ignored.

The first blunder was the abandonment of Afghanistan and Pakistan by the US in 1989. The chaos that followed for the entire decade of the 90s gave birth to al Qaeda and later the Taliban.

The second was the non-recognition of the Taliban government which ruled 90 per cent of Afghanistan after 1997. My idea of the entire world recognising the Taliban government and opening diplomatic missions in Kabul which would be managed from within, was not paid any heed to. Had it been done, maybe we could have saved the Bamiyan Buddha statues and even untangled the Osama bin Laden dispute.

The third blunder was committed after 9/11 when the Taliban, who were all Pashtuns, were defeated with the help of the Northern Alliance composed of three minority ethnic groups (Uzbeks, Hazaras and Tajiks). The Taliban and al Qaeda were dispersed and they ran into the mountains and the cities of Pakistan. Their organisational and command structure was totally dismantled. The military achieved its objective of getting into a dominant position. The logical course of action after this was to change strategy and place a legitimate government in Afghanistan, This implies a government dominated by the Pashtun majority (half of the Afghan population), because historically nobody other than Pashtuns have governed Afghanistan. Not doing this and persisting with a government dominated by a Tajik minority, still in place, was and still is a great blunder.

The Taliban resurgence started in late 2003, mainly, because of the third blunder of not weaning away the Pashtun from the Taliban. My view has always been that all Taliban are Pashtun, but all Pashtun are not Taliban; therefore, we can wean them away from the Taliban. Now, after eight years we are talking of parleys with moderate Taliban, or even Taliban, but from a position of weakness, when we have declared our intention to quit.

The present situation: The terrorist situation has transformed or visibly developed in the region and in the world, in the last few years. Let us see its contours in various countries.

Pakistan faces four menaces from terrorism. Each one requires an in-depth understanding and a different strategy to tackle: The first is al Qaeda which has a presence in the mountains of Fata, though in small numbers, and needs to be evicted. The second is the Taliban presence in Fata, especially in South and North Waziristan, and in Bajaur agency. However, they are our own people and have to be handled with acumen. We need to follow a triple strategy of force accompanied by a political and a socio-economic component. Deals must be struck with the tribal Pashtuns to wean them away from the Taliban and thus isolate the latter, who can then be dealt with militarily. Then there is the Talibanisation in the settled districts of Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa and even beyond. This has to be contained with force. The last is extremism and extremist organisations in some pockets of Pakistani society, which are primarily a fallout of Taliban activity in Afghanistan and mujahideen activity in Indian-held Kashmir.

Moderation has to be brought into society through a five-pronged strategy of stopping misuse of mosques for preaching militancy; banning militant organisations and not allowing them to resurface with different titles; ensuring that the curriculum/ syllabus in schools has no content of religious or sectarian extremism and mainstreaming students in madrassas

There is also the issue of mujahideen activity in Indian-held Kashmir against the Indian Army. This is supported by mujahideen groups in Pakistan and has tremendous public sympathy. Furthermore, extremism is on the rise in Muslim youth in India because of alienation of Muslims due to a sense of deprivation and suppression. The situation becomes more alarming due to the nexus emerging between extremists in India and the mujahideen in Kashmir on one hand, and extremists and the Taliban and al Qaeda in Pakistan and Afghanistan on the other.

The menace deepens with the emergence of al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghrib centered around Algeria and Mali and, in the Arabian peninsula, centred around Yemen and Somalia. The centre of gravity of all this extremism and terrorism, however, lies in Afghanistan and the tribal areas of Pakistan.

The future course: Losing at the centre of gravity means losing everywhere. Quitting from Afghanistan without getting into a dominant military position and placing a legitimate Pashtun-dominated government in Afghanistan could spell disaster for the region and also endanger the world.

So what is the winning strategy? In Afghanistan we are still diluted in space but since we cannot send additional Nato/Isaf forces we must increase the strength of the Afghan National Army. However, the correct ethnic balance must also be ensured. Then, we need to identify Pashtun tribes and tribal Maliks who have no ideological affinity with the Taliban and arm them to create lashkars to fight the Taliban and al Qaeda. With such a strategy in place, the drawdown of troops from the area should be effect-related rather than time-related. The effect that we would want to achieve is to be in a dominant force position and have in place a legitimate Pashtun-dominated government in Kabul.

Source: Published in The Express Tribune, December 15th, 2010

h1

SPIEGEL-INTERVIEW WITH PERVEZ MUSHARRAF

June 7, 2009

In a SPIEGEL interview, former Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf, 65, discusses the dramatic situation in Pakistan, where army troops are fighting Islamist extremists in the Swat Valley, his people’s ambivalent relationship with the United States and his country’s failures in combating the Taliban.

SPIEGEL: Mr. Musharraf, there’s a bon mot that states that ruling Pakistan is like riding a tiger. You were in power for nine years. Are you bored now?

Musharraf: I recently was in Saudi Arabia, China and London giving lectures. I have engaged the famous Walker Agency …

SPIEGEL: … which Bill Clinton, Tony Blair and Gerhard Schröder all work with …

Musharraf: … In Prague, I am giving a lecture on leadership in front of high-level managers at a company which owns Pizza Hut and KFC.

SPIEGEL: Pakistan is in a major state of crisis. Close to 2.5 million people have fled the areas of fighting in the northwest and the Swat Valley. There are attacks almost daily. Is Pakistan on the verge of collapse?

Pervez MusharrafMusharraf: This is wrong. Nothing can happen to Pakistan as long as the armed forces are intact and strong. Anyone who wants to weaken and destabilize Pakistan just has to weaken the army and our intelligence service, ISI, and this is what is happening these days. Lots of articles have been written claiming that Pakistan will be divided, that it will fall apart or become Balkanized. I personally feel there is some kind of conspiracy going on with the goal of weakening our nation.

SPIEGEL: Who do you believe is behind this conspiracy?

Musharraf: I won’t tell you exactly because then you will ask me for evidence. I can only tell you that India, for example, has 16 insurgencies going on and nobody is making a big thing out of it. But the West always focuses on Pakistan as the problem.

SPIEGEL: United States President Barack Obama has promised a new beginning. He wants to chase and fight the Taliban and al-Qaida in Pakistan as well as Afghanistan and has enlargened the territory of operations. What do you think of this new strategy, which he calls AfPak?

Musharraf: I am totally against the term AfPak. I do not support the word itself for two reasons: First, the strategy puts Pakistan on the same level as Afghanistan. We are not. Afghanistan has no government and the country is completely destabilized. Pakistan is not. Second, and this is much more important, is that there is an Indian element in the whole game. We have the Kashmir struggle, without which extremist elements like Lashkar-e-Taiba would not exist.

SPIEGEL: This group is believed to have been responsible for the terrorist attacks in Mumbai. Why should the US strategy also include India?

Musharraf: There are many Indian extremists who have links with extremists in Pakistan. So if the world is serious about combating terrorism, then don’t leave India out. Originally, Richard Holbrooke was supposed to be the US special representative for all three countries, but the strong Indian lobby in America prevented that.

SPIEGEL: Are you disappointed by Obama?

Musharraf: No, he is aiming at the right things. He is showing intentions of improving the dialogue with the Muslim world, which is good. He is right when he says that more forces must be deployed in Afghanistan. There is an intention of increasing funding for Pakistan, which is also good. But he also has to understand the reality in Pakistan and I am not sure he does.

SPIEGEL: And how is the situation?

Musharraf: One of the realities is that the Indian intelligence service RAW is interfering in our country. For example in Balochistan, our largest province bordering Iran and Afghanistan. One of the most brutal insurgents against our forces, Brahamdagh Bugti …

SPIEGEL: … the grandson of Nawab Bugti, a tribal leader who was killed three years ago in a battle with the Pakistani army …

Musharraf: … he is sitting in Kabul, protected by the Afghan government and provided with weapons and money by the Indian intelligence agency RAW. He has his own training camps and sends his fighters to Balochistan where they terrorize people and damage the civil infrastructure. RAW is also interfering in the Swat Valley, I know that. Where do all these Taliban fighters in Swat get their arms and money from? From Afghanistan. The Indian consulates in Jallalabad and Kandahar only exist to be a thorn in the side of Pakistan.

SPIEGEL: Let us talk about the role of the ISI. A short time ago, US newspapers reported that ISI has systematically supported Taliban groups. Is that true?

Musharraf: Intelligence always has access to other networks — this is what Americans did with KGB, this is what ISI also does. You should understand that the army is on board to fight the Taliban and al-Qaida. I have always been against the Taliban. Don’t try to lecture us about how we should handle this tactically. I will give you an example: Siraj Haqqani …

SPIEGEL: … a powerful Taliban commander who is allegedly secretly allied with the ISI.

Musharraf: He is the man who has influence over Baitullah Mehsud, a dangerous terrorist, the fiercest commander in South Waiziristan and the murderer of Benazir Bhutto as we know today. Mehsud kidnapped our ambassador in Kabul and our intelligence used Haqqani’s influence to get him released. Now, that does not mean that Haqqani is supported by us. The intelligence service is using certain enemies against other enemies. And it is better to tackle them one by one than making them all enemies.

SPIEGEL: Are the Americans and the Pakistanis still even pursuing the same goals?

Musharraf: The Americans are hated in the country today. The US drone attacks, which we have been living with for months now, are most unpopular — there is no doubt about it. Regardless whether they are killing terrorists, Taliban or Al-Qaida-figures or not, there are too many civilian victims. The deployment of drones has to be stopped.

SPIEGEL: The US military eliminated several high-ranking al-Qaida figures through drone attacks. What would be a possible alternative?

Musharraf: We have to find a way or method with which the Pakistani army could conduct these attacks itself. There would immediately be much better acceptance amongst the populace and we would cause less collateral damage and there would be fewer civilian victims.

SPIEGEL: If you were still in power, would you order attacks against powerful Taliban leaders?

Musharraf: I would not hesitate one second.

SPIEGEL: Even attacks on Taliban chief Mullah Omar, Osama bin Laden or influential Haqqani?

Musharraf: Certainly. The only thing I was concerned about was apprehending Osama bin Laden and putting him on trial within Pakistan. You need to understand the sensitivities in our country.

SPIEGEL: You yourself have been accused of distinguishing between good and bad Taliban — those fighting against Western and Afghan forces and those who attack the Pakistani army and police.

Musharraf: That is wrong, I fought all of them without distinction. But please understand that every action has political repercussions. You accuse me of not having taken action, but things are not always black and white — sometimes they are gray. I will give you an example, the Red Mosque, where religious militants assembled with their students in July 2007. Why didn’t I attack them earlier? The Red Mosque is located in an area that, politically, is dominated by Jamaat-i-Islami, a party which can bring masses of people to the streets all over Pakistan …

SPIEGEL: … and a party which in former times had been your political partner …

Musharraf: No, they have never been our political partner. Please understand, there are 14 madrasses in Islamabad and Rawalpindi. There would have been social unrest if we had immediately attacked the Red Mosque. We wanted to avoid a bloody tragedy and solve it peacefully. But we didn’t succeed and in the end we had to act. We undertook a military operation that resulted in under 100 deaths. There is currently a parallel case in Karachi. We know there is a madrassa with armed militants inside in a neighborhood called Banoori Town. Shall we go there, collect the weapons and just kill them all? Yes, it can be done. But then we would provoke significant ethnic vilence in Karachi. Therefore, it is not appropriate to do this at this time.

SPIEGEL: Is Pakistan now paying for its earlier failures? Why didn’t you eliminate the Taliban leadership when they came to Pakistan at the end of 2001 — above all the so-called Quetta Shura, the Taliban’s highest decision-making council, in the Pakistani city Quetta?

Musharraf: The Quetta Shura never existed. Do you really think there is an assembly in a kind of a house where they come and discuss things in something like a regular consultation? Mullah Omar never was in Pakistan and he would be mad if he appeared there. He is much safer in Afghanistan.

SPIEGEL: Over the last eight years, Pakistan has received about $10 billion in military aid from the US. Apparently you didn’t spend all that money on the war on terror — some went to secure your eastern border with India. Is that true?

Musharraf: Half of it, $5 billion, was reimbursed to us for services we had already rendered to the US. You have to understand how the Pakistan army operates: The divisions keep moving. If we buy new tanks for $250 million, then they will be deployed in Peshawar as part of the war on terror, but they will also go to the eastern border. But why do you care about that? Why, for heaven’s sake, should I tell you how we spent the money?

SPIEGEL: The American government would surely be interested in knowing.

Musharraf: I also told the Americans that it has nothing to do with them. We are not obligated to give out any details. Maybe I should have said at the time: Ok, you want us to support you, give us $20 billion a year and don’t ask what we are doing with it.

SPIEGEL: Why is it so hard for Pakistan to recognize the war against terror as its own war?

Musharraf: I do agree, they do not accept this war as their war. This has something to do with history. Please understand the reason, and you should blame the US for it. From 1979 to 1989, we fought a war with the US in Afghanistan against the Soviet Union. And we won mainly because of ISI. Otherwise, the Soviet Union could not have been defeated in Afghanistan. But then the US left us all alone with 30,000 mujahedeen brought by them. Even Osama bin Laden was brought by the US, who else? They all came to fight the Soviet Union. So, did anybody in Washington develop a strategy for what to do with these people after 1989? No, nobody helped Pakistan for the next 12 years until 2001. We were left high and dry, with 30,000 mujahedeen holed up, no rehabilitation, no resettlement for them. No assistance was given to Pakistan — instead sanctions were imposed against us. Fourty F-16s, for which we had paid money, were denied to us. Four million Afghan refugees had also come to Pakistan. The mujahedeed coalesced into al-Qaida and our social fabric was being completely destroyed. This is why the people of Pakistan felt used by the Americans, and this is why Pakistanis dislike the US and this war.

SPIEGEL: Even today, you are one of George W. Bush’s last friends. Al-Qaida leaders like Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the mastermind of 9/11, and logistics director Abu el-Subaida, were arrested and then tortured on Pakistani soil. In retrospect, do you consider this to have been an error?

Musharraf: I would not like to comment. I would just like to say that I am completely against torture. People in the West have to understand that we were not fighting a war in Germany or the United Kingdom. Under very unusual circumstances we had to deal with people who were vicious. You should not get into details of how we were fighting, how we were handling the war.

SPIEGEL: Terrorism, military coups, territoral conflicts — since its independence 62 years ago, Pakistan has been in a state of perpetual crisis. But you did come close to solving at least one problem in secret negotiations with India: the conflict in Kashmir. What went wrong in the end?

Musharraf: We were close to an agreement with India. My proposal was the demilitarization of the disputed area, self-governance and a mutual overwatch. The key irritant was the line of control which the Indians wanted to make permanent. I said we should make it irrelevant by opening transit routes. And that is where the situation stands.

SPIEGEL: A few weeks ago, you visited New Delhi and said India and Pakistan have done enough damage to each other and that it is time to find a solution. Do you view yourself as as a future ambassador for peace between the two countries?

Musharraf: If the Pakistan government wants me and if the Indians also trust me, then I can be of some use.

SPIEGEL: Mr. Musharraf, we thank for this interview.

Source: http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,628960,00.html

h1

Blackmail In Balochistan-Exclusive

April 16, 2009

The truth is that the three murdered Pakistani Baloch politicians had become a political liability and a security risk for Brahamdagh Bugti and a threat to his entire infrastructure of terror inside Pakistan. The three had developed a good working relationship with Pakistani security officials during hostage negotiations. Brahamdagh and his handlers knew that the three were in direct contact with Pakistani security officials and could compromise the security of the terrorist activity and the routes of secret funding from across the border and the terrorist hideouts inside Pakistan. The inside story of five days that changed Balochistan, a story of deception, intrigue and espionage.

 

By AHMED QURAISHI

Tuesday, 14 April 2009.

WWW.AHMEDQURAISHI.COM

 

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan—Two distinct sketches are emerging of what happened in Pakistan’s largest province –Balochistan— over the past ten days.

 

Balochistan insurgencyThe three murdered Pakistani Baloch political activists were in contact with Pakistani security and intelligence officials during the negotiations to release John Solecki, an American citizen and U.N. official. The three were also in contact with U.S. diplomats, U.N. officials, and with the kidnappers.  In fact, the three politicians were considered to be part of the political front of the terrorist-insurgent movement that has its logistical, financial, and military bases in Afghanistan, built with generous funding over the past five years after the American occupation of that country.

 

So there is no question that Pakistan’s security agencies were in direct contact with the three politicians.  Before their murder, the terrorists-separatists did not dare publicize their presence and actions and relied on sporadic violence to spread terror and create media impact.  The triple murder changed everything. It gave these separatist and terrorist elements an opportunity for the first time to publicly display their anti-Pakistan activities. In a tribal society like that of the Pakistani Baloch, controlled by a handful of tribal bosses through intimidation, brutality and economic control, the majority succumbed to the terror.

 

But who murdered the three local politicians?

 

The following report is based on firsthand information of what transpired between April 4 and April 9, five days that give the clearest insight yet into the wider battle in and around Pakistan.

 

THE CAPTORS

 

What is beyond doubt is that Mr. Solecki was kidnapped by terrorists trained and financed by Brahamdagh Bugti, a grandson of the late politician-turned-terrorist Akbar Bugti. [Mr. Bugti was a smalltime village thug who murdered his cousins and relatives, stole their lands and exiled them to other parts of Pakistan. He got lucky when huge reservoirs of natural gas were found in the lands under his forced control. Mr. Bugti received a fortune every year from the federal government as ‘royalty’ for selling the gas. For three decades, his village lived in abject poverty as Mr. Bugti refused to allow the government to build schools or allow the poor villagers to improve their lifestyles. Mr. Bugti spent the money on building and maintaining a small army, a chain of underground prisons and on defending himself against his numerous enemies. After the occupation of Afghanistan, it is believed that the Indians and the Americans sold him on the idea that he could launch a war for an independent country. He apparently received strong guarantees that he will be supported and protected by the United States and India in case of an angry Pakistani reaction, which encouraged him to go to extremes. An advanced insurgency infrastructure complete with printed material in Urdu and English, audio and video tapes and propaganda in local dialects was prepared inside Afghanistan and smuggled to Pakistan. Mr. Bugti launched the war in January 2005, with massive supply of weapons and money. He died almost two years later when his own cousins backed by the Pakistani government stormed into his stronghold and seized their lands and forced him to flee to the mountains.]

 

Brahamdagh was last sighted in Kabul. Indian intelligence agents posing as diplomats in the Afghan capital are some of his most frequent visitors.  The Indian diplomacy and intelligence have been keen since 2002 on finding ways to drive a wedge between Washington and Islamabad.   India’s diplomatic actions in this regard are well known but the British and the American media have been silent on growing evidence of Indian covert activities in Afghanistan under an American nod.

 

One of the earliest Indian actions in Afghanistan after 2002 included acting as a spoiler, poisoning the minds of U.S. military commanders on the ground regarding Pakistan. One of the most common tactics has been to identify and penetrate groups of Afghan resistance fighters and then indirectly goad them into attacking the Americans and leaving behind evidence pointing the finger at Pakistan. Similarly, there have been attacks inside Pakistan where evidence was left behind implicating U.S. intelligence operatives to mislead Pakistani investigators. 

 

BRAHAMDAGH’S FRIENDS

 

One line of thinking in the current Pakistani investigation into the murder of the three politicians is that there is a high probability that the Indians initially encouraged Brahamdagh to kidnap Solecki to add new tensions to the frail Pak-American relationship. That was the original plan. The U.S. media would jump on the story as another example of anti-Americanism in Pakistan and embarrass the Pakistani government and military. The upshot for Brahamdagh would be more international news coverage.

 

That was apparently the original plan. What Brahamdagh and his handlers did not expect is that the kidnapping would backfire and blow the cover of the terrorists and their links all the way inside Afghanistan.

 

Immediately after Solecki’s kidnap, the Pakistani authorities wasted no time in reminding the Americans of the information that Pakistan shared at the highest levels with the United States in July 2008 about Indian activities inside Afghanistan.  Adm. Mullen and Deputy Director of the Central Intelligence Agency Stephen R. Kappes were shown irrefutable evidence on how the Indians were using Brahamdagh right under the nose of the U.S. military in Afghanistan.

 

In February 2009, after kidnapping Solecki, Brahamdagh’s men and his backers tried to create the impression that there are many separatist groups backing his cause. The first demand made by the kidnappers was to release Pakistani Baloch women detained by security forces. This turned out to be an outright lie. Prisons in the entire province and other parts of Pakistan were checked and it was confirmed there was not a single Pakistani Baloch woman in jail or detention. No one had registered any case of missing Pakistani Baloch women as the separatist propaganda from Afghanistan alleged.  The elected provincial government of Balochistan, which is considered to be sympathetic to the separatist tribal chiefs including Brahamdagh, was allowed access to all parts of the Pakistani security establishment – civilian and military – to ascertain this fact.  This proved a blessing in disguise. One of the most lethal propaganda tools exploited by Brahamdagh Bugti and his backers was proven false.

 

In the initial days after Solecki’s kidnapping, some of the Baloch tribal chieftains sympathetic to Brahamdagh and his grandfather [and equally corrupt and tyrannical like him] tried to mislead Washington and the U.N. against Pakistan by suggesting that Pakistani intelligence agencies were behind the kidnapping of Solecki.

 

But the Pakistani government moved quickly to turn the tables on the terrorists and their Afghan-based masters.

 

On Feb. 27, 2009, Frontier Corps Chief Maj. Gen. Saleem Nawaz told reporters in Quetta that all the four major separatist groups that release statements to the media don’t even exist. “Organizations like the Balochistan Liberation United Front, the Baloch Liberation Army, the Baloch Republican Party, and the Baloch Republican Army are one and the same. Brahamdagh Bugti is behind these organizations,” he said.  “Brahamdagh is involved in a series of kidnappings, targeted killings, sabotage and attacks on forces and installations in different parts of the province.”

 

None of these groups existed before the Americans came to Afghanistan in 2001.

 

So the writing was clear on the wall for the Pakistanis, the United Nations and the United States that the Indians at some level were involved in kidnapping Mr. Solecki through Brahamdagh Bugti and their recruits inside Pakistan and that individuals based in U.S.-run Afghanistan issued the orders for the kidnap.

 

But did Pakistani intelligence agencies kill the three politicians who helped release Solecki?

 

Why The Three Were Killed

 

The timeline here is very important:

 

  1. 4 April 2009: Mr. Solecki is released by the terrorists after receiving a huge payment worth several million dollars.  
  2. 6-7 April 2009: Mr. Richard Holbrooke receives the biggest cold shoulder any senior U.S. official has received on Pakistani soil since 9/11. 
  3. 9 April 2009: The mutilated bodies of the three politicians are found dumped in a public area.

Pakistani police, security and intelligence organizations are not beginners in their fields. Even if any one of them were to kill the three activists, no one would have dumped the bodies in full public view and certainly never after a high profile hostage negotiation involving the three murdered activists where they also interacted with U.N. and U.S. officials.

 

 

The truth is that the three murdered Paksitani Baloch politicians had become a political liability and a security risk for Brahamdagh Bugti and a threta to his entire infrastructure of terror inside Pakistan. The three had developed a good working relationship with Pakistani security officials during hostage negotiations. Brahamdagh and his handlers knew that the three were in direct contact with Pakistani security officials and could compromise the security of the terrorist activity and the routes of secret funding from across the border and the terrorist hideouts inside Pakistan.

Mounting evidence indicates that Brahamdagh or his handlers in Afghanistan ordered the elimination of the three Baloch politicians. The triple murder has clearly served the interest of the separatists-terrorists and their backers. The Pakistani state has been a net loser.

 

THE AMERICAN CONNECTION

 

After Mr. Holbrooke’s failed visit to Pakistan on April 6 and 7, three things happened in fast succession.

 

One, Britain discovered a “very big” terrorist plot, as a British police officer described it, involving 12 Pakistani students. The British Prime Minister immediately telephoned President Zardari and threw his usual line about Pakistan needing to do more in the war against terror. The interesting part is that the Brits failed to offer any evidence to support the existence of the “very big” terrorist plot. Knowing that the charge won’t stick in the courts, London announced it was arbitrarily deporting the students.

 

At the same time, Indian prime minister made the startling announcement that the Afghan Taliban, who have never operated outside their country, were planning to bomb Indian elections. Again, no evidence whatsoever.

 

Pakistani officials smelled a rat in both of these statements coming from two close allies of the United States.

 

These statements, and the dramatic terrorism in Pakistan’s Balochistan province, came immediately after the dressing down that Mr. Holbrooke received in Pakistan. 

 

Could there be an American connection to the disturbances in Balochistan in addition to the Indian connection? The answer, in my view, is yes. Balochistan has U.S. military bases dating back to 2001. Washington has been opposed to China constructing the Gwadar sea port in the province overlooking the Gulf oil supply lines. And CIA is using Pakistani Balochistan to infiltrate the Iranian province of Sistan-Balochistan and ignite a Sunni rebellion there against Iran’s religious Shia regime.

 

Within hours of the news that the bodies of the three Pakistani politicians were found near the Iran border, and while separatists and terrorists exploited the story to ignite violence and destroy public property, the U.S. Embassy in Islamabad released a press statement that appeared to pour fuel on fire and give the impression that Pakistan was somehow responsible for killing its own three politicians. The statement was also a blatant interference in an internal Pakistani issue where the U.S. diplomats had no business sticking their noses.

 

Encouraged by this unexpected support from the U.S. Embassy, some of the opportunist tribal chiefs in Balochistan who are supporting terrorism were emboldened to demand a U.N. probe, scoring a cheap point against Pakistan and implying that the state was involved in the murders.

 

WHAT PAKISTAN SHOULD DO

 

Feudal chiefs in Pakistan, whether in Balochistan or Punjab, Sindh, and NWFP, have traditionally been protégés of the British colonial rule. While there are bright exceptions of Pakistani nationalism by some of the feudal gentry, the majority damaged the interests of Pakistan over the longer run and has generally shown little commitment or a sense of nationalism and destiny with regards to the homeland.

 

For the short term, Pakistan needs to register murder cases against Brahamdagh Bugti and other terrorists. They should be charged of murdering the poor Pakistani Baloch driver who accompanied Mr. John Solecki’s. The driver was killed in cold blood by Brahamdagh’s terrorists.

 

The issue of Balochistan is part of a wider problem facing a failed Pakistani political system led by failed feudal politicians. This system needs to be changed and de-politicized to focus on economic development and providing opportunities to Pakistani citizens.

 

Ethnic-based provinces need to be abolished and existing districts converted into provinces with their own directly elected governors and local parliaments and development budgets. This way Pakistani politics will be localized and prevented from becoming a source of constant headache and destabilization for the state.

 

This change cannot come through democracy and requires a period of technocratic government backed by the military in the background and tasked with strictly executing a list of urgent political and administrative reforms.

 

The U.S. is clearly working against Pakistan’s vital security and economic interests in the region. Islamabad should declare Washington’s occupation of Afghanistan as illegal and advise the U.S. to desist from using Afghan soil to destabilize neighboring countries. Pakistan needs to immediately distance itself from the messy American agenda in Afghanistan that is fast turning Pakistan into a war zone. Islamabad should also confront the Americans and the Indians with the evidence that both are exporting terrorism into Pakistan and fostering insurgencies using the Afghan soil. Let the world know what the Americans and their Anglo-Indian poodles are doing in the region.

h1

Lawyers’ Movement-The other side of story (Must Read)

March 17, 2009

(By Afaq)

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan – On one hand, terrorism and extremism is getting their roots deep in society, while on the other, the country is suffering a worst form of financial meltdown. On one side, armed forces and intelligence agencies are getting maligned through international campaign, and on the other, an environment is getting set that Pakistan’s nuclear weapons are not in safe hands.

This time when nation needs to be united to face and defeat the challenges, there is a cat and mouse game in play among the political parties and a vast majority is considering Lawyers’ Movement as the only solution to the problems of Pakistan.

When a Long March and sit in (Dharna) for indefinite period was announced by the lawyers’ leaderships, and when a worst form of law and order crisis was emerging on the streets, embarrassing Pakistan in the international community, the government of Pakistan surrendered to the demands of lawyers, and announced the restoration of Mr. Iftikhar Chaudhry. This is a right moment to take another look at the so-called lawyers’ Movement.

This movement is based on the perceptions that Mr. Iftikhar Chaudhry is the symbol of an independent and free judiciary, and that all the mess is created by President Musharraf, who was not happy by him over his suo moto actions, and that the reference against the judge was forwarded by the Prime Minister Shoukat Aziz due to his personal grudges with Chief Justice, over the decision against Steels Mills issue. The reality, through information that is revealed here for the first time, is a little different.

Steels Mills Issue-Unspoken facts:

A day before the judgment of Steels Mills, Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry rang the military secretary of President Musharraf and asked for a sitting with him at Army House to discuss the details of the judgment. President allowed him to come and also did call Attorney General of Pakistan. When all three sat together, President said, “I don’t know the legalities, but all what I would like to say is that you took suo-moto action against the privatisation of Steels Mills. I believe in the dignity and honour of the Supreme Court. So, whatever be the judgment, it must not lower your dignity and honour, but remember government is doing a good job for privatisation. Please don’t try to hamper this process.”

Then both the attorney General and Chief Justice discussed the legalities and came out with a mid way solution. Chief Justice himself told President Musharraf that a good via media is brought out and he is going to give this as a decision the next day. Then Chief justice went to the bench and told that President himself has decided to cancel the privatisation of Steels Mills. So, without any idea of betrayal, 12 member bench of Supreme Court gave exactly the opposite decision to what expected by the government.

In 1985, soon after being established, it was planned to increase the productive capacity of Pakistan Steels Mills Corporation (PSMC) to 2.2 million tons annually to make it economically feasible. Unfortunately, the successive governments did not take personal interests and concerns in this project and finally the debt over Steels Mills reached to 19 billion rupees till year 2000 and the amount required for increasing its productive capability reached more than 200 billion rupees. The biggest challenge after 12th October 1999 coup was to bring Economic stability in the country. Musharraf did manage to convince Shoukat Aziz to resign from City Bank and to come back to Pakistan and serve the homeland. The economic situation was like a nightmare. Foreign reserves were remained only 0.7 billion dollars and sanctions were upon Pakistan due to nuclear explosions. No one was willing to take ‘risk’ of investing in Pakistan. After military coup, the situation was even more difficult. It worried Shoukat Aziz, but he accepted the challenge. He made a win-win policy for economic revival. The core of the policy was deregulation, liberalisation and privatisation. It worked well, and a confidence of investors recovered in Pakistan. Even during those months after 9/11, when Pakistan and Indian armed forces were alert stand by on borders with eye to eye balls contact, investment did not stop coming in Pakistan and Stock Markets shown good trends. Things were going fine and in the positive direction, but the suo moto action by Chief Justice hampered the overall process by shaking the confidence of the investors.

The day when decision came out was surely very shocking for the government. President Musharraf himself had visited China and Saudi Arabia to convince them to invest on PSMC. Finally after many years, his efforts bore fruits and he got able to convince Saudi Arabia based Al Tawairqi Group of Companies to invest in PSMC. In May 2006, an open auction held in Islamabad and Al Tuwairqi Group submitted a winning bid of $362 million for a 75 per cent stake in PSMC. It was being privatized in the profit of $ 13 million (without solding the land of Steels Mills). Due to the opposite decision of Supreme Court, hundred million of dollars which were lying in our banks by Mr. Tuwairqi to invest on PSMC and to establish another steels mills were brought out of Pakistan. Disappointed by the decision, Mr. Tuwairqi told everyone to wind up and went out, as investing in this country is not safe. This was again a great shock for Pakistan’s Economy. Without wasting a single moment, President Musharraf rung up Mr. Tuwairqi and requested him not to change his mind for investing in PSMC. Unfortunately, after having a bitter experience of Supreme Court’s decision, Mr. Tuwairqi excused to invest on PSMC. This was what Mr. Iftikhar Chaudhry did with the Economy of Pakistan, but his ‘media managers’ applaud his decision as his national achievement.

Presidential Reference against Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP):

Print and electronic media in Pakistan is used to remain very active and in search of any thrilling story soon after its independence given by President Musharraf. Mr. Ansar Abbasi (The News) investigated about the Chief justice and found that always a favour was given to his son Dr. Arsalan Chaudhry, directly by the orders of CJP himself, which were mostly not on merit at all. Due to unknown reasons, he did not public this story. However, he slipped his tongue in Geo’s famous ‘Capital Talk’ in early 2007. Kamran Khan, from Geo, also brought Dr. Arsalan on telephone call in early 2007, asking about the news against him. Dr. Arsalan, the son of CJP denied the news and told media that he is going to Court to defend these allegations. CJP anxious about media reports raised this matter to President Musharraf in his meeting with him on 13th February 2007. President instructed the investigation agencies to explore the realities behind these reports. The famous letter from Naeem Bukhari stimulated the issue even more. When the investigation completed, the findings were very shocking for President. They all were going against CJP. It revealed that not even the allegations of media about his son are true but also more serious findings were brought into notice of President Musharraf, including his personal corruption and greed for protocol, for which he was not entitled for. It all worried President. CJP had been used to visit President in his office and house many times, even with his family. There was nothing wrong in the personal terms and relations between the both. President Musharraf, at this moment, however had to decide what to select. Either he had to prefer personal relations or to follow the legal course of actions.

On 7th march 2007, Prime Minister Shoukat Aziz advised him to send the findings to Supreme Judicial Council (SJC) in the form of reference to decide for the fate of CJP. Justice Jehanzeb Rahim of Peshawar High Court also filed a reference against CJP in his letter to President. This was the time, when CJP highly informed about this progress, rung DG MI, Major General Mian Nadeem Ijaz on 7th March 2007, and requested him to get the copy of reference and to hand over it to him. Next day, CJP called Abdullah Yousaf, Chairman CBR in his chamber at Supreme Court to discuss the same issue of reference being filed by Justice Jehanzeb. CJP asked Chairman CBR to favour him by making clarification to President that he was not at fault over the allegations written by Justice Jehanzeb. On the same 8th march, CJP also rang military secretary (MS) of President Musharraf to arrange an urgent meeting with President the next day. Although President was due to leave for Karachi on 9th March, to participate in the Pakistan Navy exercise “Aman 2007”, but MS rescheduled the program and asked CJP to visit by 1130 hours on 9th March at camp office of the President’s secretariat. The same night, CJP rang DG MI to be present in camp office to assist him. On 9th March, during meeting, President informed CJP about all the findings of investigations, and asked for the clarification of his position. President told CJP that he is going to forward the findings to Supreme judicial Council. Realising that the findings are embarrassing for CJP, he gave him a way out as a courtesy move, saying, “If you find the hearings of SJC below your dignity and honour, then you can resign to avoid the case.” CJP said that he would face the allegations in SJC and would defend himself. President then signed the reference and officially it was sent to SJC for hearings.

This was what happened. Unfortunately, the media and political parties developed strange perceptions and vicious hype was created all around the country. No one on media ever read and present the material filed in reference. There were serious allegations against the CJP. Question is whether CJP above law? Should there be no forum for his accountability? Even President is not above law. There is a procedure written clear in constitution regarding his impeachment. The media and the lawyers of CJP escaped themselves out of hearings of SJC, by using the political and media fronts, making false perceptions. By claiming that a ’dictator’ sitting in ‘Army House’ has ‘summoned’ CJP and ‘threat’ him to resign, totally wrong environment developed, which hijacked the minds of public, and a civil disobedience sort of movement sponsored in streets and roads of Pakistan, labelled under ‘lawyers Movement’, powered by political parties and media.

Let us check whether President Musharraf had followed the constitutional path or not.

………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

Article 48

(1) – In the exercise of his functions, the President shall act in accordance with the advice of the Cabinet (or the Prime Minister).

………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

Article 209

(1) There shall be a Supreme Judicial Council of Pakistan, in this Chapter referred to as the Council.

(5) If, on information [from any source, the Council or] the President is of the opinion that a Judge of the Supreme Court or of a High Court,

(a) May be incapable of properly performing the duties of his office be reason of physical or mental incapacity; or

(b) May have been guilty of misconduct,

The President shall direct the Council to [or the Council may, on its own motion] inquire into the matter.

………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

Article 180

At any time when-

(a)The office of Chief justice is vacant; or

(b)The Chief justice of Pakistan is absent or unable to perform the functions of his office due to any other cause,

The President shall appoint [the most senior of the other judges of the Supreme Court] to act as Chief justice of Pakistan.

………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

So, what President Musharraf did was simply the constitutional route followed. There were media allegations about the misconduct of CJP. CJP even himself asked President to make enquiry about them. The investigations were being made. Prime Minister advised Mr. President to send the findings to Supreme Judicial Council. Under article 48 of constitution, President was bound to act upon the advice of Prime Minister. Meanwhile CJP himself asked to visit President at CampOffice of President’s Secretariat. CJP was informed about the findings. He was willing to face the charges in SJC. Under the article 209, it was mandatory for President to send the reference to SJC, which he did.

What was unconstitutional in all that? Is Chief Justice above law? Or constitution can be hijacked by the rallies and public movements.

Unfortunately, what happened next made the social fabric of our society turned towards the worst and more worst. Supreme Judicial Council started hearings. CJP and his lawyers escaped the hearings by few excuses. They claimed that the judges of SJC are biased against CJP, and hence they must be changed. Media started campaign that President has nominated his own judges in SJC which was clearly wrong and false perceptions. The SJC was composed exactly according to the constitution, including the acting Chief Justice, two next most senior judges of High Court and two next most senior judges of Supreme Court. Then highly politicised and vocalised Aitzaz Ahsan, being invited frequently on the media channels used every tactics to provoke the feelings of public against President Musharraf and turning public in favour of CJP. The issue was sub judice and it was the contempt of court to speak about such issues live on TV channels, but everyone utilised the media forum to stimulate the public sentiments towards the movement of civil disobedience. There happened a chaos and anarchy everywhere in Pakistan. President Musharraf said hundreds of times, that whatever be the decision, would be acceptable to the government. Taking this as a weakness of him, the highly politicised lawyers of CJP made such an environment that the hearings of SJC paused and the petition to stop its hearing was brought into the Supreme Court. Finally, after much mess, Supreme Court gave a verdict in the favour of CJP and he was reinstated on 20th July. Everyone applaud it well, not mentioning that Supreme Court had not given any importance to the charges filed under the reference. It was not fair at all, but being a verdict of Supreme Court, President Musharraf welcomed the decision.

Besides the ‘victory’ of reinstating CJP, the track record of so called ‘Lawyers Movement’ is so embarrassing. Let us have a brief over view how this ‘victory’ is being made and how throughout, lawyers have behaved;

1-Lawyers hijacked the accountability of CJP in SJC bypassing the Article 209.

2-Contempt of Court, being made every day by speaking live on TV channels against a sub judice issue.

3-Making allegations on the brother judges of biasness and personal interests just to escape the hearings of SJC.

4-Climbing at and breaking the gates of Supreme Court, just to pressurize the government and creating law and order situation by fighting with security forces and police.

5-President Supreme Court Bar Association Muneer A. Mailk forced the lawyers to join the so called Lawyers’ Movement by starting cancelling the membership of Bar Association of those lawyers who were not joining this brigade.

6-Attack on Khalid Ranjha (Government’s counsel) by lawyers when he was stepping out of hearing of SJC.

7-Attack on the car of Waseem Sajjad (Government’s counsel) by the lawyers when he was on his way to attend SJC hearing.

8-Attacking and beating a journalist ‘Khalil Malik’ by lawyers in the square of Supreme Court, just because he had published some material against the CJP.

9-Attacking and beating Advocate Naeem Bukhari in the quad of Supreme Court by lawyers, just because he exposed the ‘corruption’ of CJP in his letter.

10-When Prime Minister Shoukat Aziz went to submit the nomination papers of President Musharraf in Election Commission for Presidential elections 2007, lawyers surrounded the election commission, and Prime Minister remained under siege by these lawyers’ brigade for hours.

11-Throwing black poisonous acid on the face of Mr. Ahmed Raza Qasuri (Government’s Council) by a lawyer in the premises of Supreme Court. If he had no eye glasses on face, God willing, he might lose his sightedness.

12-Attack of hundreds of lawyers on Sher Afgan Niazi. God saved his life in this horrible incident.

13-Strikes by the lawyers of the courts. Common people suffered by much inconvenience waiting for judges and lawyers to entertain their cases.

14-Long rallies (extending even to 40 hours) by CJP and lawyers turning a sub judice issue to highly politicised campaign.

After few days of apparent silence, the restored CJP again started making personal bravado against President Musharraf, security agencies and intelligence agencies. A long list of suo moto actions were made every day to paralyse the functioning of executive, legislative and law enforcement agencies. Knowing that people and media of Pakistan were supporting the actions of CJP, he did every possible thing to embarrass the government. Suo-moto action against the traffic jam in Karachi is just an example of the attitude of a person who has nothing to care about the ills growing in own judicial system. He did nothing for making improvement in the courts. Cases still are going for 20, 20 years but he did not take any steps for betterment. Once, Geo TV’s famous show “Gumnaam” showed a spy camera video of the case of bribery by one judge, but CJP did not take any action against this judge. On the other hand, the channel was charged by the contempt of court and asked to make open apologies. CJP did not take any notice of any of the illegal activities of lawyers, like beating and attacking on Naeem Bokhari or spraying of acid on Ahmed Raza Qasuri’s face. He did nothing to stop the illegal activities of Qabza mafia or No. 2 drugs etc. He never took suo moto actions against those militants who were threatening the barber shops or Cds shops. He never did care of those extremists who were blasting girls’ schools. Not caring of his own rallies, which even extended over 40 hours, he however did take suo moto actions of traffic jams. Then, he started embarrassing the chiefs of intelligence agencies in courts. Once he said, “Not only you, I would even bring General [Musharraf] in my court.” He released first so called missing person after being reinstated, named Qari Abdul Basit, who was charged of the assassination attempt on General Musharraf. Supreme Court took suo moto action against Red Mosque operation. CJP in open and strong words spoke against President of this operation. Government, law enforcement forces and intelligence agencies were highly demoralised. Supreme Court started hearing the petition against the eligibility of President Musharraf to be a candidate for next term of President. Earlier, Supreme Court rejected the petition but later again started hearing the same like petition. Then, Supreme Court allowed President to be a candidate for Presidency, but bound the election commission not to announce the result. The sword of uncertainty remained hanging over the heads of the nation. After Presidential elections, Supreme Court tried to extend the decision by all possible excuses. It seems a mockery with the nation, that the hearing of petition against president’s eligibility was announced to be pending for even 10 days, just because one of the judges of the bench was going to attend the wedding of his daughter. Not only this, three times, CJP changed the compositions of bench listening the case of eligibility. It all was self evident that Supreme Court was simply planning not to allow President Musharraf to continue holding his office any more. Supreme Court was just delaying the decision against him till 15th November 2007, till the term of National assembly get completed and President Musharraf then had remained by no chance of making any amendment in constitution by the assembly. It all was nerve stressing and alarming for President. He had waited long for the full decision regarding the reinstatement of CJP to be announced by Supreme Court. Supreme Court was bound legally to release full decision in 90 days, but this period also passed without having the issuance of the full decision. Moreover, constitutionally Supreme Court was even not given by the mandate to entertain any petition against the President’s elections.

…………………………………………………………………………………………………

Article 41 (Clause 6)

The validity of election of the President shall not be called in question by or before any court or other authority.

…………………………………………………………………………………………………

Making the clear violation of constitution, Supreme Court was entertaining the petitions against President and was trying much to delay the decision till 15th November. Meanwhile, a bloody campaign of suicide attacks stimulated with so much acceleration in settled districts of Pakistan. Intelligence agencies and law enforcement forces were cornered by Supreme Court and all the fragments of the society. A form of civil war was going to develop in Pakistan. Government was in the state of semi paralysis. The general elections were near in few months. All the self exiled politicians were returning back to Pakistan with having strong lobbies behind in West. Under such state of affairs, ISI reported something very important and alarming. It was about the secret meeting of Aitzaz Ahsan with Mr. Khalil ur Rehman Ramday in the Geneva, Switzerland. This meeting was very meaningful in understanding what Supreme Court was planning to do with Musharraf. The case of eligibility of President was in court. Khalil Ramday was heading the bench. Aitzaz Ahsan was representing himself in court against the eligibility of Musharraf. It was legally very undesirable to set secret meetings between the judge and a lawyer. There were also various indications and reports about the foreign money involved to promote all that lawyers’ campaign. Reportedly this money was going to Aitzaz Ahsan through various channels, mostly including few NGOs and human rights’ activists. There were also the reports of Aitzaz’s undisclosed visits to India during all that campaign. Justice Rana Bhahwandas’ famous statement in very start of all that reference’s episode, “Soon, we would give good news to nation” was also something important to read between the lines.

All of a sudden, suspicions against the role of Pakistan in war against terror were being floated in international media. International community started speaking against Pakistan and starting asking for restoration of Democracy in Pakistan. To promote the dangerous agenda against Pakistan, ‘Newsweek’ magazine came out with a title story, “Most dangerous nation in the world is not Iraq or Afghanistan. It’s Pakistan”. Pakistan’s nuclear status was under a deadly threat. Ground field was well set to announce by world powers that Pakistan’s nuclear weapons are not safe and that terrorists could take control of them. Although IAEA had already announced that chapter of nuclear proliferation is closed for Pakistan, but Benazir Bhutto coined a strange statement that she could allow the access of international agencies to Dr. A.Q. Khan and that she could allow American forces to operate in Pakistan’s tribal areas. On one side, a well planned campaign was going on, and on the other hand Economy of Pakistan started suffering negative trends for the first time in last many years.

President Musharraf tolerated all that but finally when he found that things are slipping away from the hands of Pakistan, and that inaction at that time would lead to total chaos and destruction and the irrecoverable damage to Pakistan, he finally decided to impose the state of emergency on 3rd November 2007. Judges were offered to take oath under new PCO. Many judges accepted this offer and many refused. Those who refused, including Iftikhar Chaudhry, started a new version of Lawyers’ movement.

Let us see what constitution allowed President Musharraf at that time.

…………………………………………………………………………………………………

Article 232 (1)

If the President is satisfied that a grave emergency exists in which the security of Pakistan, or any part thereof, is threatened by war or external aggression, or by internal disturbance beyond the power of a Provincial Government to control, he may issue a Proclamation of Emergency.

Article 236 (2)

The vailidity of any proclamation issued or order made under this part shall not be called in question in any court.

Article 270 AA (3)

All proclamations, President’s orders, Ordinances, Chief Executive’s orders, laws, regulations, enactments, including amendments in the Constitution, notifications, rules, orders or bye-laws enforce immediately before the date on the date which this Article comes into force shall continue in force until altered, repealed or altered by the competent authority.

…………………………………………………………………………………………………

What more to be lost?

We must see what Pakistan has achieved so far and what has been lost after the campaign of lawyers. Unfortunately, it seems that we have lost everything, and achieved nothing. Pakistan’s Economy is out of business now. Pakistan is now on the list of most insecure countries. Pakistan’s institutions are breaking up. Rotten politicians are back on stage. Most corrupt and incompetent leadership is on the charge of government. Pakistan’s armed forces and intelligence services are maligned nationally and internationally. Pakistan’s nuclear status is at stake. What more wrong and what more horrible can be expected.

So far no movement or strong demonstration is made against the extremists and terrorists. Civil society and human rights activists are used to speak against them in very soft words, usually on TV screens, but not on roads. All the focus is to speak against former President, armed forces and intelligence services, which indirectly is meant to strengthen the anti-state elements. The duality of Pakistani media  is well exposed since 2007. First, it was said that General Musharraf is not going to remove his military uniform etc, but he appointed new army chief. Then, was said that he is not going to lift state of emergency, but he lifted it up. Then, was said that general elections would be rigged for favourable results, but the entire world observed that elections were the most free, fair and peaceful. Media broke much news that former President is going to fly away from Pakistan in 48 hours, but all was bogus. Then it was said that President is going to dissolve the assemblies, but even it did not happen. On the other hand, political parties are well naked as well. The same PPP, which supported Lawyers’ Movement with full energy, started speaking against this movement after being elected. Mr. Zardari signed thrice the agreements for restoration of judges, but then refused it. The time, when Lawyers’ Movement was having last breaths, the decision of Supreme Court regarding the disqualification of Sharif brothers, ignited it again. Things are crystal clear. Lawyers used the politicians and later PML-N used the lawyers for their vested interests.

All patriotic Pakistanis must open their eyes and must smell the conspiracy behind. CIA and RAW are fully active and involved behind all that mess. They had set well their assets in media to promote anarchy and disinformation in Pakistan. Media has done nothing in discouraging the extremism and terrorism. Media has promoted the international campaign more than them. The focus and concern is shifted from the issues of national interests. No one cares of the economic fall down. No one asked where the foreign reserve of 16.7 Billion dollars has gone down to 5 billion dollars in few months under democratic government. No one asks for the reason why we are forced to beg IMF. No one asks why Dr. Samar Mubarik had been forced to leave his seat. No one cares of the funds of Nuclear and missile research program being cut by more than 50 %. No one cares from where Baitullah Mehsud of Waziristan is getting satellite information and weapons and suicide jackets. No one is caring of the separatist organisations in Baluchistan. Media is not telling us that for 7 months, the funds of paramilitary and police of NWFP are stopped by the government and that Pakistan armed forces are supplying weapons to them. Media would never tell about the holiday being announced by Chief Minister Balochistan, Aslam Raeesani on 15th August 2008 to synchronise it with Indian Independence Day. Media is not focussing about the drones attacks on tribal areas. What media is speaking for is just about the lawyers’ movement. So that Pakistani nation never get able to think of any other issues, which are far important for the sovereignty of Pakistan.

It’s all a psychological war. Nation must open their eyes. We must not been misguided by the propagandas and perceptions. Our enemies have played a dangerous double game. We must not give them any impression that Pakistan is going through a situation of civil war and disintegration. We must not suffer paralysis through analysis. We must stand for Pakistan armed forces in such state of affairs. Pakistan is not ready for British form of democracy. Pakistan is more important than democracy or constitution. Human rights, civil liberties, democracy and constitution are just the part of nation. Nation is not the part of them. We must safeguard Pakistan. Pakistan comes first.

Mr. Iftikhar Chaudhry is back in his office as a chief justice. PML-N’s pressure tactics win. Army Chief again has shown patience and resolution to avoid playing any role in politics. But game is not ended. It’s just a start. Time not always remain the same. Future would decide about it and about the role of Mr. Iftikhar Chaudhry. There still are many constitutional and legal issues. What would be the fate of those judges who have taken fresh oath under PCO? Would he give the favour to those, who supported him or would he demonstrate the neutrality? Would he take the notice over NRO, when the case against it would re-start in Supreme Court? Would he take actions against those judges who took oath under PCO on 3rd November 2007? Would he like to reform the session courts, high courts and Supreme Court? Above all, would he like to proof that the findings in Presidential reference were not correct and that he is not guilty of anything wrong. What if the disqualification of Sharif brothers remain hold? Would PML-N again start the violent campaign? What about those countries and the guarantees, which made reconciliation just before sit in (Dharna), instead of possible Martial Law.

Let us end this article by the last words of letter of Naeem Bukhari to CJP,

My Lord, we all live in the womb of time and are judged, both by the present and by history. The judgment about you, being rendered in the present, is adverse in the extreme.”

(www.geocities.com/nayyarafaq)

(1) A Proclamation issued under this part may be varied or revoked by a subsequent Proclamation.
(2) The validity of any Proclamation issued or Order made under this Part shall not be called in question in any court.
h1

Transcript of Pervez Musharraf’s talk at a media event in Delhi

March 9, 2009

Arun Poorie: You are here as a messenger of peace. What did you do about it in the nine years when you were in power?

 

Musharraf: Let’s stop the blame game. We need to look at the reality, forget the past and look ahead. I don’t know what I did wrong, but I can tell you I tried my best for peace between India and Pakistan. I was never negative when the opportunity for peace came to me.

 

Arun Poorie: What plans do you have about the future?

 

Musharraf: To me, the core issue is building confidence by greater people-to-people affinity. Once the confidence is there, we should move towards resolving the core issues, and stop meddling with the internal affairs of each other’s country.

 

Arun Poorie: What do you have to say about what happened on 26/11 in Mumbai?

 

Musharraf: Let’s stop the war hysteria. Just a day into the investigations, the Pakistani army and the ISI was blamed for it. I am for a considered and matured response to these issues. As far as the investigations are concerned, the Pakistani government should fully cooperate and the guilty should be punished.

 

Arun Poorie: Are there any terrorist camps in Pakistan?

 

Musharraf: See we have done damage to each other. I am aware of what the Indian embassy is doing in Jalalabad and Kandahar. A terrorist from Kabul has been received by Indian intelligence agencies in India and looked after. I have documents to show this. Let us stop the blame game. India is a big country. You try to do damage to us, we will do damage to you. We should address the trust deficit between the two countries. The ISI does the same thing as the RAW does. There is no distinction.

 

Ravi Shankar Prasad: In the face of the present situation, do you see Taliban taking over Pakistan?

 

Musharraf: Areas in the North West Frontier [Province] where the problem is, account for less then one percent of the population. There is no danger of Taliban taking over Pakistan politically.

 

Arun Poorie: What specific confidence-building measures do you have for the future?

 

Musharraf: We need to look at strategic issues. We will have to address the water issue which would develop into a new conflict between the nations. We have to stick to the Indus Valley treaty.

 

Soli Sorabjee: Will you hand over Dawood Ibrahim to us as a confidence building measure?

 

Musharraf: This is a small issue. I do not know if he is there. I too have a long list of people that India needs to give us. The role of Indian embassy in Afghanistan in Jalalabad and Kandahar is not good either.

 

Individuals are a small issue. We need to look at strategic issues. I do not think handing over Dawood will change anything. I know it will not help in easing tensions between the two nations, if that happens then you will have to hand over Dawood back to Pakistan (laughs).

 

Rahul Kanwal: A conversation of Gen Kayani, the army chief who succeeded you, has been intercepted where he said Taliban is a ‘strategic asset’?

 

Musharraf: This is a lie. He cannot say that. I challenge them to show me the proof. It is a lie.

 

Amar Singh: When our (then) PM Vajpayee travelled to Lahore by bus to Lahore for friendship, Kargil happened. Now you say you are for peace?

 

Musharraf: I would not like to comment on this issue. I have dealt with this matter in my book.

 

Shekhar Gupta: Compare your years in power with that of Ziaul Haq.

 

Musharraf: The comparison cannot be done as the situation and ground realities were very different in both times. You must understand that Pakistan is not the perpetuator of terror but a victim of terror in the last 30 years.

 

Question: How is it to live in Pakistan and not be in charge?

 

Musharraf: It’s good. I am relaxed. The most difficult job was to take decisions in highly complex situations. Now I read about them in the papers.

 

General VP Malik: What are the chances of the army taking over Pakistan again? How can India help Pakistan in its problems?

 

Musharraf: It is the internal matter of Pakistan. The political leadership can deal with the situation. I would not like to comment on that. India can help Pakistan by not maligning Pakistani army and the ISI in the world.

(http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2009%5C03%5C09%5Cstory_9-3-2009_pg7_35)

%d bloggers like this: