The Price

Pakistan, India and the United States

2230 GMT, 011227

Dec 27,2001

Summary

http://www.stratfor.com/home/0112272230.htm

With al Qaeda and Taliban elements fleeing Afghanistan, the United States will continue to grapple with strategic problems concerning its traditional ally, Pakistan. There are significant differences between what President Pervez Musharraf has said he will do to fight terrorism, what he intends to do and what he actually can accomplish. The threat of an imminent Indo-Pakistani war may be just the lever Washington needs to move Islamabad.

Analysis

The United States has been engaged in intense debate regarding the next steps it must take to eradicate al Qaeda. Two main strategies have emerged of late. One argues that there can be no solution to the problem of Islamic attacks on the United States until the regime of Saddam Hussein is eliminated. The other strategy argues that Iraq`s role is secondary, and that the United States` primary mission is to prevent al Qaeda from establishing a command center in some other isolated country, like Yemen or Somalia.

Obviously, the strategies are not incompatible. Equally obviously, at least from STRATFOR`S point of view, the debate misses the point entirely: the next country on the agenda is Pakistan.

When planning for the Afghan campaign began immediately after Sept. 11, it was clear -- at least from a naive standpoint -- that Pakistan, which has an extensive border with Afghanistan and a long-standing strategic relationship with the United States, would be the strategic key to the campaign. The planners` first impulse was to deploy U.S. forces in Pakistan and prosecute the campaign from there. This proved impossible. Instead, U.S. ground forces had to deploy in Uzbekistan and Tajikistan, while air attacks were carried out from carriers in the Arabian Sea and from strategic bombers on Diego Garcia and elsewhere. Clearly, some forces were deployed in Pakistan, but only under tight secrecy.

The need for secrecy is the key to everything. Simply put, the Pakistani government was not in a position to permit a war against the Taliban regime to be waged from its soil. This was not simply because of substantial sympathy for the Taliban in Pakistan, although that existed. Nor is it simply because Pushtuns, the foundation of Taliban power, live on both sides of the Afghan-Pakistani border, although they do.

Rather, it was because the Taliban was ultimately as much a Pakistani phenomenon as it was Afghan. In a sense, the Taliban was a Pakistani construct, designed to conclude -- on terms acceptable to Pakistan -- the civil war that raged in Afghanistan following the Soviet withdrawal. Pakistan feared the ascendance of the Northern Alliance as well as other groups in Afghanistan, and saw in the Taliban a government that was congenial to Pakistan both strategically and ideologically. The ISI, Pakistan`s intelligence service, was in many ways the godfather of the Taliban government.

As the Taliban government provided al Qaeda with a secure operational base, the United States continued to parse the issue of Pakistan and Afghanistan. It is inconceivable that the Taliban would have been able to develop its relationship with al Qaeda without the knowledge of Pakistan`s intelligence services and government, and it is difficult to imagine that they would not have given at least implicit approval. However, the United States was not prepared to frame the issue as an Afghan-Pakistani issue -- only as an Afghan problem fundamentally distinct from Pakistan.

This policy continued after Sept. 11 and throughout the campaign, despite the clear limits Pakistan placed on cooperation with the United States. Washington clearly and rationally wanted to contain the Afghan campaign. It placed sufficient pressure on President Pervez Musharraf to force him to remove senior officials who were too closely aligned with the Taliban, to permit at least some basing of U.S. forces in Pakistan and to publicly commit himself to use Pakistani forces along the frontier to prevent Taliban forces from crossing into Pakistan.

The United States recognized that much of this was cosmetic. Support for the Taliban ran deep in the government and deeper in the country. The U.S. forces based in Pakistan were hardly strategic. Finally, whatever he promised, there were significant differences between what Musharraf said, what he actually intended to do and what he ultimately was able to do.

The United States carefully refrained from pressing the issue, afraid that excessive pressure would topple Musharraf and throw Pakistan either into chaos or into a fundamentalist dictatorship. Or if excessive pressure threatened Musharraf`s survival, he might simply reverse course and turn against the United States. In any case, the United States adopted a minimax policy -- it demanded the most it could get within the limits of what Islamabad could deliver, and it lived with the three differences: what was said, what was actually intended, what could really be delivered.

The manner in which the Afghan war concluded has suddenly rendered this policy untenable. While the Taliban has abandoned the cities, it continues to exist, both in alliances with particular warlords and in its own right. Where it exists most intensely, in fact, is in Pakistan, among Taliban sympathizers as well as among hundreds or thousands of Taliban fighters that have crossed into Pakistan during the past month. A very few have been very publicly apprehended, but most have gone to ground -- some protected by Pakistani forces.

Far more important than the fate of the Taliban is the fate of al Qaeda`s senior commanders, including Osama bin Laden, and of its fighters. It is becoming increasingly obvious that neither the Taliban`s high command nor al Qaeda`s has been captured. The release of a new videotape that appears to have been made in the past few weeks, and perhaps as recently as last week, dealt a blow to speculation that bin Laden and the others were killed at Tora Bora. It was always problematic that bin Laden would have chosen to travel from Kandahar to Tora Bora in the chaos that followed his last known taping. This would be not only dangerous but pointless. It was far more likely that he went directly to Pakistan, where supporters hid him and may still be doing so.

Whether bin Laden is in Pakistan or has traveled elsewhere, it is clear that many of his forces as well as Taliban leaders went to Pakistan and that the vast majority of those remain. In other words, apart from native support for the Taliban and al Qaeda, elements from Afghanistan are now in Pakistan and operating under the protection of, if not the government, certainly elements of the government and powerful political forces.

If we are correct in this, then the problem the United States faces in destroying al Qaeda does not concern Somalia, Yemen or Iraq, but Pakistan. Ideally, the United States would like Musharraf to use his security and military forces to destroy al Qaeda`s forces and hand senior leaders over to the United States. Certainly, this is something that Musharraf has assured the United States he would do. However, it is not clear that he is in a position to deliver on his promise -- it is not clear his orders are being obeyed. Nor, frankly, is it clear that he wishes to see these orders carried out. Certainly, he wants to placate the United States, but there is a huge gap between saying he will act, acting, and acting effectively.

A case in point is the Dec. 13 attack on India`s parliament by gunmen, which the U.S. government says were Islamic militants based in Pakistan. There are two explanations for the attack. The first is that Musharaff knew about plans for the attack and sanctioned it. The second is that he neither knew of nor sanctioned the attack. In a real sense, it doesn`t matter which it was. Either explanation raises serious questions about the course of Afghanistan.

All this creates a strategic crisis for the United States. Its fundamental goal is to defend its own territory against al Qaeda attacks and the global destruction of al Qaeda. In our view, al Qaeda has taken refuge in Pakistan -- historically an ally of the United States, and a country that poses a military challenge on an order of magnitude beyond that posed by Afghanistan. Launching a military campaign in Pakistan is possible but requires much greater resources than in Afghanistan, as well as the destruction of Pakistan`s nuclear capability. Rather than use direct military action, the United States would prefer a more subtle lever.

The attack on India`s parliament provides precisely that lever. Obviously, the shootout was as intolerable for India as a similar attack on Congress would be for the United States. India must react. But even apart from that, India sees itself as having an unprecedented opportunity to deal not only with the Kashmir issue but with the entire issue of the nature and future of Pakistan.

Pakistan`s alliance with the United States has placed severe limits on how far India could go. However, a profound schism is developing between Washington and Islamabad as post-Sept. 11 events evolve. Clearly, both sides are doing everything to avert an open breach -- but equally clearly, if it becomes undeniable that Pakistan is harboring al Qaeda elements, a break becomes inevitable. At that moment, India would have the opening it has awaited for 50 years. The United States would be not be able to refrain from acting against Pakistan, nor could it act efficiently without Indian support and involvement. India was eager to help from the beginning; now the United States would have no choice but to accept that help.

The United States does not want an Indo-Pakistani war, but the threat of such a war is precisely what Washington needs to move Islamabad. For Pakistan, the threat of a war with India in which the United States either stood to one side or actively participated is the worst possible nightmare. By allowing the specter to rise, Washington has given Musharraf an opportunity to become more forthcoming. If he is in control but insincere, he is being shown the abyss and can change course. If he is sincere but not in control, he can show the abyss to Islamic fundamentalists in his government and bring them under control.

The problem is that many of the fundamentalists would actually welcome a war and even defeat by India. Their goal is to radicalize the Islamic world by demonstrating that Christians, Hindus and Jews have formed a vast alliance designed to crush Islam. A combined U.S.-Indian attack would be exactly what would be needed to demonstrate this to the world. The destruction of Pakistan`s nuclear capability -- whether by nuclear or conventional weapons -- would further illustrate the point. It is therefore no accident that Islamic fundamentalists struck India at what would normally be considered the worst possible moment. From their point of view, it was the best possible moment to act.

This indicated that Musharraf may not be able to gain control of the situation, even if he wanted to. Thus, he visited Beijing in late December. China has historically been an enemy of India and an ally of Pakistan. Beijing has been extremely cautious since Sept. 11, but it remembers both the EP-3 spy plane incident and U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld`s redefinition of strategy toward the Pacific and against China prior to Sept. 11. Beijing is happy to see the United States diverted. It would not be happy to see India emerge without a threat on its western flank. Hence, Musharaff had a very cordial visit to Beijing.

At this point, the strategic imperative of defeating al Qaeda begins to intersect with Eurasian geopolitics. It is one thing to take Afghanistan apart, quite another to do the same with Pakistan. Afghanistan`s fate is of little significance to great powers. The fate of Pakistan matters to China, among others. At the same time, if al Qaeda is using Pakistan as a base of operations or even as a transit point and the Pakistani government can`t or won`t do anything decisive and effective about it, this strikes at a fundamental U.S. interest and cannot be tolerated.

The United States is, therefore, in the midst of a veiled crisis over Pakistan. It is an odd crisis in that Washington, fearing the consequences of a public confrontation, is trying very hard to maintain the fiction that Pakistan has been fully cooperating in the battle against al Qaeda, that it is acting effectively against the Taliban and al Qaeda and that its forces would certainly arrest senior al Qaeda leaders if they could catch them. At the same time, the United States is quietly showing Pakistan the abyss in the hopes that the plausible fiction of U.S.-Pakistani relations might thereby become reality.

The problem is that in Pakistan, there are those who prefer an open breach with the United States to accommodation. Even if we assume that Musharraf is not one of these elements, it is not clear that he can control them. If he can`t control them, the United States is faced with an extraordinary dilemma -- to go into Pakistan and get al Qaeda itself. It cannot do this without India, and India will not move unless Pakistan`s nuclear weapons are destroyed. It is not clear that U.S. precision-guided munitions are sufficient for a task that will tolerate no failure.

The rest follows logically.

In Kabul Indians get a bear hug

Agencies/Kabul

Kabul is one place today where an Indian visitor is glad to flaunt his nationality and Pakistanis would hate to be in.

Whether it is government offices or public places, Indians are greeted warmly, sometimes even with a bear hug, by smiling Afghans.

At the Foreign Ministry, the uniformed male receptionist wanted to see the equipment carried by a group of Indian journalists. ``Indians? Indians?`` he asked on being told of their identity. ``No Pakistanis, okay, please go,`` he said, directing the group to the Press office with a back slap and a smile.

``This is one place we are glad to be an Indian,`` commented a scribe. It is not journalists alone who are being greeted with such warmth.

A group of five doctors who have been here for the last three weeks as part of India`s relief effort and have been working at the Indira Gandhi Institute for Child Health, set up with Indian aid in the late 1960s, said they had been overwhelmed by the goodwill and affection shown by parents of their patients.

``Many of them remembered names of Indian doctors who had worked at the hospital before and asked about their welfare,`` A R Basu, a surgeon, said.

The Indian doctors are held in such high regard that often parents come to them with prescriptions given by Afghan doctors. ``But because of professional ethics we try to avoid seeing them,`` said B C Nambiar, an anesthetist.

Hindi film music can be heard in street corners and in taxis, and the only two functioning cinema halls here are screening Bollywood movies. Pirated video cassettes of recent Bollywood releases like the Amitabh Bachchan starrer ``Mohabbatein,`` smuggled in through Pakistan, are available in the markets. If the Afghans are effusive towards Indians, their anger against Pakistanis too is vented loudly. They say the Taliban cadres were largely composed of Pakistanis.

``They raped our country. We hate them,`` said Sanjar, a second-year medical student. ``When they were fleeing after the American bombing started, I asked them why they came. They said they came for jehad since we were not firm in our Islamic belief. I told them to go on to do that in their own country.`` ``Why doesn`t India go to war with Pakistan?`` asked Zia, a taxi driver. ``We don`t want the Taliban to come back.``

Ahmed Wali Masood, Afghan ambassador to Britain and brother of the late Northern Alliance commander Ahmed Shah Masood, had this to say: ``We don`t want help from our neighbours like Pakistan. We have paid a heavy price for that. We want help from India, the US and Britain.``

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

A Neighborhood Challenged

http://www.msnbc.com/news/667486.asp

After dozens of detainments, residents of New York’s immigrant-rich ‘Little Pakistan’ are feeling insecure



By Gretel C. Kovach

NEWSWEEK WEB EXCLUSIVE





Dec. 4 — On a recent Friday evening in New York City’s “Little Pakistan,” the mutton kebab and spicy curries are sitting largely untouched in the restaurant display cases. But that’s nothing new these days.



THE USUALLY-BUSTLING MIDWOOD area of Brooklyn is home to 125,000 or so of the 200,000 Pakistanis living in America, but now it has an empty feel. The community is painfully aware that of the 548 people being held nationwide on immigration charges as part of the investigation into the September 11 attacks on New York and Washington, 208 of them are from Pakistan. The spillover effect is clear here, where some residents are in jail, others have fled back to Pakistan, and still more are holed up in their apartments, afraid of being arrested. Along Coney Island Avenue, men dressed in billowing shalwar kameez robes and white kufi caps and turbans talk about the disappeared. Some say the Immigration and Naturalization Service hauled away hundreds, others say less than 50, but whatever the real figure, everyone without proper immigration documentation is nervous.

“They took my chef,” says Zafar Iqbal, 32, who, together with his brother and uncle, owns the Lazzat side of Gina’s Pizza-Lazzat restaurant. The spot serves up rich Pakistani desserts such as gulab jamun, cottage cheese balls cooked in cardamom syrup. “A lot of people are scared. A lot of people go back to their country. Business is really down,” says Iqbal, looking glumly around at the vacant rows of tables covered in formica, the paper napkins unfurled like dove’s wings in the water glasses, untouched. “Everyone stays in their house. They say to the person with the green card, you go and buy the food.”

Exactly four weeks earlier (“28 days,” says Iqbal, who’s counting) on Nov. 2, the Lazzat cook, Maqsood Ali, 43, was getting out of bed and ready for work when he got a knock on his door. It was agents from the Immigration and Naturalization Service. They weren’t even looking for Ali, but when he couldn’t show proper documentation, he was detained and incarcerated in Paterson, New Jersey, along with 57 other Pakistani and Arab immigration violators. In a call to NEWSWEEK from prison, Ali said he was confident his application for political asylum will be successfully reopened. But it is his wife and six children back in Pakistan that he is worried about. “I feed my family before, so now they are waiting for me,” he says.

Ali moved to the United States 10 years ago because of his involvement with the Pakistan People’s Party, the party of deposed former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto. Ali wanted to secure residency papers before his family could follow, but the family is still separated: nearly a decade later, he has still to meet his youngest son. After working five years at his first cooking job, Ali’s boss agreed to sponsor a green card application that would give him permanent residence in the U.S. But then an argument soured the deal, and Ali found another job at Lazzat. Now that Ali is locked up, his boss Iqbal sends money here and there to keep the household going. But it’s not clear how much longer the Alis can survive like this.

Iqbal is one of the lucky ones: he has a green card and his brother is an American citizen. Iqbal’s three children were born in this country, and he has clearly thrived here—nattily dressed in slacks, western shirt and a gold earring, and answering frequent calls on his cordless phone. He isn’t afraid of being arrested, but his business is suffering. “At this time [3 p.m.], I used to be so busy I couldn’t speak to you,” he says.

Liberty vs. Security: The War at Home

The immigration crackdown has also intensified the post Sept.-11 economic downturn in the Pakistani-American community. That icon of New York City—the Pakistani cabby—is suffering from the scarcity of tourists. And even as Pakistani-Americans mourned their own dead—like Salman Hamdani, a part-time emergency medical technician buried in the World Trade Center—they kept off the streets to avoid harassment. In the weeks after September 11, Pakistanis received death threats and were kicked off airplanes. Freelance journalist Haider Rizvi, 38, stepped out of a Fifth Avenue Pakistani grocery when a man said, “You look like Osama bin Laden.” The man attacked Rizvi, who later regained consciousness in a hospital bruised and missing a front tooth. In Brooklyn, motorists pelted eggs at the Makki Masjid and Muslim Community Center, the main mosque in New York for Pakistanis, and spat on a cabby parked out front. Police were posted outside the mosque after school children were harassed. Just when the worshippers were starting to feel safe again, the immigration arrests began. The unofficial mayor of Little Pakistan, an accountant named Asghar Choudhri, says he has been besieged by pleas for help, and by his count more than 40 people have been detained from Midwood recently. Only three or four have been released. During the evening hours of the month of Ramadan, after the fast is broken, the sidewalks used to be crowded with people, cars were double-parked, and police directed traffic. “Now our women are afraid to come out,” Choudhri says, and the streets are noticeably empty of their brightly colored dubattas(scarves).



The Cover: Secret Trials, How Far Should We Go?

At Makki, estimates of the number of detainees are higher. “Hundreds, I think,” says Farooq Hussain, 30, who was standing outside after afternoon prayers and smelling perfume oil one of the mosque elders had purchased. “One guy, they didn’t even let him withdraw the money from his account before they deported him.”





Despite their fears, it is unlikely that the Pakistani immigrants will give up on New York. They began moving into Brooklyn in bulk in the early 1980s, some fleeing the martial law in Pakistan; others seeking political asylum. Most, however, came for economic reasons. They settled in Midwood, where they could satisfy strict Islamic dietary requirements by shopping at Orthodox Jewish kosher butchers. Today, most of the businesses on Coney Island Avenue between Glenwood and Avenue H are owned by Pakistanis, Bangladeshis or other Muslims.

“Mayor” Choudhri, who also is president of the Pakistani-American Federation, organized a community meeting in mid-November to allay fears and get answers to the question, “Why us?” About 150 invitees packed into the richly decorated banquet hall at Bukhara restaurant with its patterned carpet wall coverings, including U.S. Congressmen Anthony Weiner and Major Owens, as well as representatives from the FBI, INS, U.S. Justice Department and the New York Civil Liberties Union. “Our government, the U.S. government, is against terrorism, and so is the Pakistani community,” says Malik Saleem Akbar, owner of Pak U.S. Travel. “But our people should not be discriminated against. The government has a right to question. They have to seek the security of the citizens. But questioning should be done for everyone, regardless of sect or ethnicity.” Maqsood Ali’s lawyer, Craig Goldsmith, agrees. “It seems outrageous, a clear violation of 14th amendment equal protection law. And to hold people indefinitely is fundamentally wrong. The INS says these people have violated immigration law. But these are general humanitarian rights.”

There were no easy answers, but Midwood residents still felt the meeting was a success, especially since the arrests have slowed. But the experience has left a lasting mark on their love for America. “This thing has divided us [as Americans]. I am really disappointed,” Choudhri says. “I came to this country as a student 35 years ago. I stayed because here there are lots of chances, everyone is somebody. There is equal education, and freedom....Now that dream is shattered,” he says.

Maqsood Ali, incarcerated in America while his family in Pakistan struggles to feed itself, still says he loves this country. “I cried that day [Sept. 11],” says Ali, who marched in the Union Square candlelight vigil alongside Bhutto. “I feel very bad to be in jail, but I have inside satisfaction because I love America. I want my family here. I don’t want my kids to go the wrong way. They are growing up, and I don’t want them to be brainwashed. The religious people have this [brainwashing] happen for everyone over there in Pakistan.”



Choudhri knows of at least one man who left the U.S. after an FBI agent came knocking. But Akbar, the travel agent, says he hasn’t seen a spike in one-way tickets to Pakistan. That’s a good sign, he feels, because immigrants are integral to the country. “Even the illegals are a strong part of the U.S. economy. They were giving back their fair share.” Akbar immigrated to the United States in the 1970s, and he, too, has been successful here. He pauses while counting a stack of cash meant for a plane ticket and says, “The beauty of New York City is that it is a city of immigrants. If you take away the immigrants, the city will not be the same.”

re: Sarwar # 458

Wonderful people — terrible government. Really?

That article could as well be written for India, except for the dominant role of the military.

But I question that vapid, masterbatory mantra - wonderful people, terrible government.

Governments do not materialize from thin air. They are a reflection of the people. Limitations of the government mirror the limitations we have put around ourselves.

When we say - thus far and no further, our governments too say - thus far and no further. Therein lie the limits of our being, and therein lies the inevitable character of our government.

The nice talk of the back-slapping, courtly people doesnt help if these liveried types are walking over rugs under which has been swept all the filth of their societies.

anarayan

“Almost all the western athletes are affiliated to some sort of scientific research institute with doctors, coaches, psychologists and others.”

…i would disagree here….the africans are world class long-distance runners and they don’t exactly have resources falling at their feet but they still manage to beat western athletes …and take a look at the latvian countries…again, not exactly top-class facilities and what-not, but they still managed to take home more medals then all of s.east asia combined…although, to be fair, i think it was a sri-lankan woman who came 3rd in the 100 m….but still, that’s a rarity….

Prem:

``BTW, as many people have already noted, the prefix semi does you a great deal of injustice :)``

....wouldn`t argue there:)....and ty...

re: SPM # 452

LOL...I have made a conscious decision to try to ``respect`` even those believe that pigs do fly. I can tell you it is very hard, because in my day to day life I not suffer fools gladly.

BTW, as many people have already noted, the prefix semi does you a great deal of injustice :)

Prem

Reply #: 454

Prem

Fatimah # 443

That is a real problem. I say it from personal knowedge - missonaries DO travel from the United States in the garb of `secular` workers to India, and I dont see any reason why they wouldn`t do the same to other South Asian countries.``

When otherthan ideology or believes is used to entice or even pollute or poison other societies it should be crime.

If for the sake of feedom & democracy you were tyo allow free flow of information,it should be limited to informations only not attached with welcoming gift .

precious #452, ``….i thought it was one of the many heads of the hydra…or is that giving him/her/it too much credit?…``

no, can`t be. this ``khamakhwa`` makes sense sometimes.

re: prem

``That is a real problem. I say it from personal knowedge - missonaries DO travel from the United States in the garb of `secular` workers to India, and I dont see any reason why they wouldn`t do the same to other South Asian countries.``

there are few things more repugnant than proselytization...i don`t know why some people salivate at the thought of brainwashing someone to join their cult...

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

http://globalresearch.ca/articles/CHO111A.html

http://www.mqm.org/ISI/ISI_State_Within_A_State.htm

The Role of Pakistan`s Military Intelligence (ISI) in the September 11 Attacks



by Michel Chossudovsky

Professor of Economics, University of Ottawa

Centre for Research on Globalisation (CRG), Montréal

Posted at globalresearch.ca 2 November 2001

Summary

Pakistan`s chief spy Lt. General Mahmoud Ahmad ``was in the US when the attacks occurred.`` He arrived in the US on the 4th of September, a full week before the attacks. He had meetings at the State Department ``after`` the attacks on the WTC. But he also had ``a regular visit of consultations`` with his US counterparts at the CIA and the Pentagon during the week prior to September 11.

What was the nature of these routine ``pre-September 11 consultations``? Were they in any way related to the subsequent ``post-September 11 consultations`` pertaining to Pakistan`s decision to cooperate with Washington. Was the planning of war being discussed between Pakistani and US officials?

On the 9th of September while General Ahmad was in the US, the leader of the Northern Alliance Commander Ahmad Shah Masood was assassinated. The Northern Alliance had informed the Bush Administration that the ISI was allegedly implicated in the assassination.

The Bush Administration consciously took the decision in ``the post September 11 consultations`` with Lt. General Mahmoud Ahmad to directly ``cooperate`` with Pakistan`s military intelligence (ISI) despite its links to Osama bin Laden and the Taliban and its alleged role in the assassination of Commander Masood, which coincidentally occurred two days before the terrorist attacks.

Meanwhile, senior Pentagon and State Department officials had been rushed to Islamabad to put the finishing touches on America`s war plans. And on the Sunday prior to the onslaught of the bombing of major cities in Afghanistan (October 7th), Lt. General Mahmoud Ahmad was sacked from his position as head of the ISI in what was described as a routine ``reshuffling.``

In the days following General Ahmad`s dismissal, a report published in the Times of India, revealed the links between Pakistan`s Chief spy Lt. General Mahmoud Ahmad and the presumed ``ring leader`` of the WTC attacks Mohamed Atta. The Times of India article was based on an official intelligence report of the Delhi government that had been transmitted through official channels to Washington. Quoting an Indian government source Agence France Press (AFP) confirms in this regard that: ``The evidence we [the Government of India] have supplied to the US is of a much wider range and depth than just one piece of paper linking a rogue general to some misplaced act of terrorism.``

The revelation of the Times of India article has several implications. The Indian intelligence report not only points to the links between ISI Chief General Ahmad and terrorist ringleader Mohamed Atta, it also indicates that other ISI officials might have had contacts with the terrorists. Moreover, it suggests that the September 11 attacks were not an act of ``individual terrorism`` organised by a separate Al Qaeda cell, but rather they were part of coordinated military-intelligence operation, emanating from Pakistan`s ISI.

The Times of India report also sheds light on the nature of General Ahmad`s ``business activities`` in the US during the week prior to September 11, raising the distinct possibility of ISI contacts with Mohamed Atta in the US ``prior`` to the attacks on the WTC, precisely at the time when General Mahmoud and his delegation were on a so-called ``regular visit of consultations`` with US officials.

In assessing the alleged links between the terrorists and the ISI, it should be understood that Lt. General Ahmad as head of the ISI was a ``US approved appointee``. As head of the ISI since 1999, he was in liaison with his US counterparts in the CIA, the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) and the Pentagon. Also bear in mind that Pakistan`s ISI remained throughout the entire post Cold War era until the present, the launch-pad for CIA covert operations in the Caucasus, Central Asia and the Balkans

The existence of an ``ISI-Osama-Taliban axis`` was a matter of public record. The links between the ISI and agencies of the US government including the CIA are also a matter of public record. The Bush Administration was fully cognizant of Lt. General Ahmad`s role. In other words, rather than waging a campaign against international terrorism, the evidence would suggest that it is indirectly abetting international terrorism, using the Pakistani ISI as a ``go-between``.

The Bush Administration`s links with Pakistan`s ISI --including its ``consultations`` with General Ahmad in the week prior to September 11-- raise the issue of ``complicity``. While Ahmad was talking to US officials at the CIA and the Pentagon, ISI officials were allegedly also in contact with the September 11 terrorists.

In other words, according to the Indian government intelligence report, the perpetrators of the September 11 attacks had links to Pakistan`s ISI, which in turn has links to agencies of the US government. What this suggests is that key individuals within the US military-intelligence establishment might have known about the ISI contacts with the September 11 terrorist ``ring-leader`` Mohamed Atta and failed to act.

Whether this amounts to the complicity of the Bush Administration remains to be firmly established. The least one can expect at this stage is an inquiry. What is crystal clear, however, is that this war is not a ``campaign against international terrorism``. It is a war of conquest with devastating consequences for the future of humanity. And the American people have been consciously and deliberately misled by their government. Whether this amounts to the complicity of the Bush Administration remains to be firmly established.

And the American people have been consciously and deliberately misled by their government.

Ultimately the truth must prevail. The falsehoods behind America`s war against the people of Afghanistan must be unveiled.

CITIZEN OF THE WORLD

Wartime Letters

The fight against terror, from A to Z.

http://www.opinionjournal.com/columnists/tvaradarajan/?id=95001552

BY TUNKU VARADARAJAN

Tuesday, December 4, 2001 12:01 a.m. EST

As anti-Taliban forces overcome the Afghans from the Taliban (as well as the motley, but deadly, assortment of Arabs, Chechens, Pakistanis, Pakistanis and more Pakistanis), it might be a useful juncture at which to jot up a little primer on the war. After all, we seem to be reaching the end of a chapter. The selection of entries, while personal, is not eccentric, and I trust that most readers will find, in this glossary de la guerre, an echo of their own priorities and interests.

A is for Afghanistan, a benighted land whose inhabitants have, over generations, turned warring into a fine art. Kiplingesque noble savages, they usually fight each other, but just occasionally, there will come along foolish foreigners who unite all Afghans in a temporary hatred of The Outsider. A landlocked place in the middle of nowhere, with no natural resources to speak of, the country has, nonetheless, held a bizarre ``strategic`` appeal for empire-builders through the ages--dating back to Alexander the Great, and on down to the British and the Soviets.

B is for President Bush, who, with his declaration of war on terrorism, grew overnight in stature from dubious sapling to giant beanstalk. War has brought out the best in the man, stirring him to rhetorical heights in addresses to the nation and to action that brought to mind (at least to old-timers) the decisiveness of Churchill. Never has a man made Maureen Dowd look quite so silly.

C is cockfighting, a pastime beloved of gentler Afghans (the ones who don`t ride around on horseback fighting over a carcass of a sheep, that is). All forms of fun were pretty much banned by Islamic killjoys for the past six years, so connoisseurs of bloody beaks have a lot of catching up to do. Ditto with kite-flyers and soccer players.

D is for the daisy-cutter, an awe-inspiring bomb that conjures an unlikely bucolic image. It`s a pity the explosive device isn`t called a daffodil-cutter, or we could have amused ourselves adapting Wordsworth:

I wandered lonely as a cloud

That floats on high o`er Afghanistan,

When all at once I saw a crowd,

A host, of turbaned Taliban;

Beside the lake, beneath the trees,

Fluttering and shooting in the breeze.

E is for Enduring Freedom, the sonorous but apt label given to the ``Operation``--that oh-so-slightly clinical euphemism for war--currently under way in Afghanistan (and, we hope, in other places afterwards; see ``H`` below). Parenthetically, what we want to know is, who thinks up these names? Is there a ``label czar`` in the Defense Department?

F is for fatwa, the most emphatic Arabic concept to enter the Western lexicon since the adoption of ``zero.`` We know it means ``religious decree,`` but what we don`t yet understand is who has the right to issue the darn things? Ayatollahs dish them out whenever it takes their fancy, as do numerous mullahs, big and small, around the world. And now, in a chilling vindication of all those Huntingtonian prophecies, there`s a fatwa against an entire civilization--that of the West.

G is for Geraldo, the latest correspondent to drop in Kabul. Read all about him in my next column.

H is for Saddam Hussein, antagonist in the likely next chapter in Operation Enduring Freedom. As evidence emerges--both concrete and circumstantial--of the Iraqi tyrant`s ties to the attacks of Sept. 11, pressure for his armed ouster grows increasingly irresistible. In a world grown robustly Manichean, in which evil is denounced as evil and its practitioners are called to account, Saddam is likely to find that this President Bush is immensely more determined in his disposal of enemies than his father was.

I is for Islam, which, we are told, is what this war is not about. We are at war, instead, with those who would ``pervert Islam,`` ``hijack a noble religion,`` ``stain the name of a great faith,`` etc. We are asked to ignore that--Turkey and Bangladesh excepted--there is no Islamic country that is a democracy. We are asked to ignore the still more damning fact that scarcely any Islamic institutions in the West have come out and condemned Sept. 11 in unequivocal terms.

When Margaret Thatcher points out that she would have liked to hear more Islamic clerics in Britain speak out against terrorism, she is pilloried as ``racist`` and ``divisive`` by the multicultural establishment. And when Silvio Berlusconi, Italy`s prime minister, says that ``we must be aware of the superiority of our civilization, a system that has guaranteed well-being, respect for human rights and--in contrast with Islamic countries--respect for religious and political rights, a system that has as its values understandings of diversity and tolerance,`` he is treated like a pariah by his confreres at the European Union. Go figure.

J is for jihad, which is about the only thing (apart from oil) produced in the Muslim Middle East. Unlike ``crusade,`` its Western conceptual counterpart, jihad has maintained its religious, confessional intensity since the days of the Prophet Mohammed. In societies that are intellectually and materially impoverished, this form of holy war against infidels offers the easiest way out of the depths to which stagnation has consigned Muslim youth.

K is for Kabul, Kandahar and Kunduz, places whose names ring with undeniable romance, and which are now associated, too, with destruction and gore. Afghan toponyms are as handsome as the country`s people--who can deny that names like Mazar-e-Sharif and Herat and Ghazni have a certain poetry, a certain panache?

L is for loya jirga, the centuries-old Afghan practice whereby elders sit around in a large group (or grand council) and decide how many sheep to roast for the week. Actually, that is a slight misrepresentation. They also discuss politics, though scarcely in the sort of quasi- or protodemocratic way that proponents of the council suggest. Still, it is worth convening one of these affairs only because the alternative does not bear thinking--and because of the hilarity that will ensue when Hannity and Colmes try to wrap their tongues around the phrase.

M is for Pakistan`s Gen. Pervez Musharraf, arguably the luckiest man in the world right now. This panjandrum was on a hiding to nothing before Sept. 11; he`d seized power in a coup (so what`s new in Pakistan?), exiled the leaders of the two largest political parties, and packed his curriculum vitae with sponsorships of groups that wage terrorist war on India. Now, he`s a valued ally, a latter-day Ataturk, who has reaped for Pakistan a windfall for his support in the war against terrorism. Forget for the moment that he ferried out from Kunduz some 200 soldiers of the Pakistan army, who were fighting for the Taliban--fighting against us, in other words.

N is for New York, where the war began, where thousands of innocents were slain. New Yorkers are watching the war with special interest. They are invested in Operation Enduring Freedom in a way that few others are. They want justice. Something tells me that they`ll get it.

O is for Osama bin Laden, the most evil man since Hitler, the embodiment of the enemy, the personification of every diabolical force against which we are at war. His death may not end the war against terrorism, not even stanch the flow of terrorism against us; but that is no reason not to desire it fervently, passionately. Let his elimination, however, not spell the end of the war.

P is for Pashtuns, the ethnic group that predominates in the Taliban, and that comprises a plurality of the Afghan population. Pashtuns are some of the most hidebound, unscientific people on earth, their values unchanged for centuries--though the enforcement of those values is today conducted by Kalashnikov, not scimitar. They have unbending codes of honor, which involve, mostly, the oppression of women. They have a profoundly inflated sense of self-worth, which is why it is, for many of them, inconceivable that they be governed by an alliance of such ``inferiors`` as Tajiks, Uzbeks and Hazaras. Perhaps a partition of Afghanistan, one that gives the Pashtuns a homeland of their own in the south (with the possibility, at some stage in the future, of incorporating Pashtun lands in present-day Pakistan) would be the best way out of a cycle of interminable civil war.

Q is for al Qaeda, the deadly, nihilistic organization set up by bin Laden, one that seeks to scorch the earth of the West, to level the buildings of the unbelievers, to bring fire and destruction upon the heads of the infidels. Never in history has the enemy been so shapeless, so elusive. The outfit is thought to have ``sleeper`` cells in the heart of the Western world, all biding their time before striking at our cities, killing our people, razing our buildings and our way of life.

R is for the Russians, to whom we must, this time, give thanks. They (along with India, an unsung ally in the whole campaign) kept the Northern Alliance supplied with arms and other basic necessities in the long years of war that preceded this one. And it was Moscow`s green light that made it possible for Uzbekistan to allow the U.S. to use military facilities in that country. With Islamist terror the new enemy of civilization, look to the Russians for sturdy support. Nazhdrovye!

S is for Saudi Arabia, which, in contrast, has hardly been of any help at all. The ally from hell, Riyadh has obfuscated, dragged its feet, refused to divulge evidence on the Saudis (and they were almost all Saudis) who carried out the Sept. 11 attacks, and generally made pretty sure that we get as little from them as possible. All this while the U.S. protects its regime, and its oilfields, from Saddam. Talk about an atrocious bargain.

T is for the Taliban, the group of ``students``--or Islamic seminarians--who ran Afghanistan with a ferocious brutality for six-plus years. Dour, violent, misogynist and completely without pity, they made their land a living hell for anyone but the most fanatical adherent of their brand of Wahhabi Islam. The movement was funded and armed by Pakistan, and the majority of the ruling Taliban elite were trained in Pakistani madrassas, or Islamic schools. The movement would not have survived a week, let it be known, without the unending supply of fighters (often regular army men or retired soldiers) from Pakistan.

U is the ummah, the Arabic word used to describe the Muslim world, or the global community of the faithful (both individuals and nations). Bin Laden urges the ummah to be at war with the West; vast swaths of the ummah, in fact, see themselves as being at war with the West.

V is for veils, the tragic leitmotif of Afghanistan under the Taliban, the device by which women were rendered--literally--faceless, and powerless , jobless and devoid of dignity.

W is for warlords, that catchall phrase used to describe every petty chieftain in any godforsaken part of the world who wields a gun and answers to no authority other than that of a bigger, meaner chieftain who wields a bigger, meaner means of going ``bang bang you`re dead.`` Afghanistan has a surplus of such characters, all of them unsavory, all of them with no desire other than to lord it over a wedge of territory and to profit from doing so. Warlords inherit their ``office`` from their fathers, which is why you have 15-year-olds at the helm of armies of 10,000 men. All this has always made Afghanistan a very exotic--and very dangerous--place.

X is for those marks on the map, every one a Taliban or al Qaeda stronghold, where U.S. warplanes have been dropping their bombs. Think of each as a notch for justice.

Y is for yammering liberals--of whom Susan Sontag is an example, par excellence--who see this war as one that the West has reaped, and who equate the ways of the civilized world with those of the men with whom we are at war. These are the people who can`t bring themselves to utter the word ``terrorist,`` and who cannot, like the ABC network`s David Westin, bring themselves to say that the Pentagon was not a legitimate target on Sept. 11. (And just to prove that not all yammerers are liberal, there was Ann Coulter, the evangelist.)

Z is for Zahir Shah, the former king of Afghanistan. Ousted in 1973, this charming octogenarian is thought to be the country`s best bet for a unifying figure. There is merit in the contention, for sure. After all, in a land where life expectancy is not much more than 40, a man in his 80s must command a great deal of awe. But is he too gentle, too polished, for this rough-hewn land? And does he have the stomach, after years of exile in Rome, for the rigors of postbellum Kabul? One wonders, and one prays.

Mr. Varadarajan is deputy editorial features editor of The Wall Street Journal. His column appears Tuesdays.

http://www.hrw.org/campaigns/september11/ihlqna.htm

Human Rights Report on Afganistan Operation enduring Freedom

http://www.hrw.org/campaigns/september11/ihlqna.htm

http://www.hrw.org/campaigns/september11/ihlqna.htm

Fatimah # 443

That is a real problem. I say it from personal knowedge - missonaries DO travel from the United States in the garb of `secular` workers to India, and I dont see any reason why they wouldn`t do the same to other South Asian countries.

One can argue the merits or demerits of trying to convert another human being, but this kind of trickery is absolutely wrong, and shameful. It can lead to huge problems, and then the victim countries are blamed for it.

I hate the Taliban from the bottom of my heart but I have no sympathies with these bird-brained missionaries.

re

``Shah

scout:

“any idea who ``khamakhwa`` might be?”

….i thought it was one of the many heads of the hydra…or is that giving him/her/it too much credit?…

Fatimah

“Iam sorry ,if i hurt you like everyone else.Believe i never mean to hurt anybody ,but b/c of my convictions ,i forget courtesy & manners .Hard to remember,when you are restless& anxious to get across you pont of view with difficulty & right word isnt coming easily .

My short comings”

…..alright, who are you and what have you done to the real fatimah, bijli, deepika, shah, aamir et al….?

Prem:

“May be Benazir is telling the truth. May be she has realized the errors of her past ways, as she claimed, for example, recently at Stanford.”

….may be the moon really is made out of cheese, may be pigs really fly, may be the hydra will spout a brain and a coherent sentence along the way….like someone here said, the lady needs help and fast…

Reply #: 79 Romair

[The average F-16 fighter pilot, protecting the all of Lahore`s airspace by himself, risking his life on a daily basis (1/4th of my coursemates in flying died before the age of 30) on many occassions, completely responsible for a US 10-15 million aircraft, is paid the same salary that a secretary in Citibank`s Islamabad branch is paid. I now make more money than all my engineering coursemates combined in the PAF. Not because I am highly paid, but because they are ridiculously low paid.]

All good wishes to you in success for your livelihood and may God preserve you in His ``Hifz`o` Aman`` as everyone else.

No price can be paid for laying down your life for your country. How much would you expect for even sacrificing your little finger for your current employers? Would you even accept 10-15 million dollars of the cost of an F-16 for your little pinky?

That`s not what occured to Cecil Chaudhry in 1965. Neither did it occur to many others in PAF, including Naureen`s husband (fiancee at the time) who shot another Pakistani F-16 down in friendly fire in 1971 while confronting Indian Migs. If you were ever true PAF you`ll remember the episode and prove it by quoting the names. He killed his best friend in friendly fire when the country was at war and still lives in shame. Are you really PAF?

You would have been better-off as a secretary in Citibank as has been your longing in terms of salary. PAF made a mistake in hiring you in the first place.

This is harsh, but called-for in getting the record right. No bull * * * * here from pseudos like this.

Rgds

Romair

I wasn`t referring to the flying abilities of the PAF`s pilots. Their ``win/loss`` record against the Afghan Airforce (including some Russian pilots) speaks for itself as far as that goes. I was referring to the overall ``professionalism`` of the service. For example, the Argentine pilots who flew against the Brits in the Falklands were insanely brave, daring to the point of foolhardiness and in all likelihood better pilots than their Brit counterparts. However, the British Naval Air Arm pilots, while maybe not exactly Top Gun material, were part of a more professional outfit than their opponents and in terms of logistics, overall training, operational planning, strategic competence, etc, were part of a much more ``professional`` outfit.

Same goes for the PAF. The initial PAF raids on IAF bases--attempting to repeat the Israeli success in the 6-Day War--were a complete fiasco. What happened to the operational planning? Analysis? Didn`t any one in the PAF think that the IAF would have hardened hangers for their planes and, unlike the stupid Egyptians, wouldn`t have their planes neatly lined and parked wing tip to wing tip? Figuring out, correctly, what the other guy will do and figuring out how to counter it successfully is what makes an Air Force professional. Washing out 90%+ of your flight cadets simply gives you excellent pilots who go off to fly useless missions.

In 1971, the PAF basically decided to skip fighting the IAF after the first few days of the war and went into hiding.

Look at the IAF losses:
Type of Loss East West Total % age
Ack Ack/Ground Fire 10 26 36 48 %
Air to Air Combat 3 15 18 30 %
Destroyed on Ground - 2 2 2 %
Undetermined (AAC?) - 2 2 1 %
Accidents. 6 11 17 22 %
TOTAL 19 56 75

The Army destroyed almost half of all IAF planes lost, many shot down while strafing ground positions. Now, only air forces that have air superiority engage in large scale ground support operations and its pretty clear that, unlike 1965, the PAF wasn`t providing much of a challenge to the IAF. Why that is, I don`t know. The PAF Chief, when informed that the Indian Navy was steaming in to pound Karachi and that the Navy had requested help, is on record as having said, ``Let the Navy fight its own battles.`` I assume he decided to let the Army fight its own battles as well and to save the PAF`s planes. Granted the Army in 1971 is an almost textbook case of how NOT to fight a war but what happened to the PAF?

People in the PAF say that an Air Force seargent is the intellectual equal of an Army Captain (many Army officers are ex-PAF ORs--Capt. Karnail, the NiH winner in Kargil was from PAF) so, what happened? I`ve heard people say that while PAF pilots are, man for man, better than the IAF`s, the IAF`s logistics, planning capability, etc, the stuff one really needs to fight a modern war, are miles ahead of the PAF`s.

Far too many of the PAF`s ``heroes`` spend more time figuring out how to get seconded to some Arab Air Force, transferred to PIA, get a cushy job in the Shaheen Foundation, or make sure that the Meena Bazaar goes off perfectly so the Mrs. Chief will be happy, then they do in figuring out how to beat the IAF.

I`ve even heard of an officer`s wife, an Air Commodore to be, asking Begum Shamim to have her husband`s name pulled from the approved list and send him to Libya as a Group Captain since that was the rank slot for Libya then!

Sorry Romair, takes a heck of a lot more than hyper-aggressive testosterone freaks to make a force ``professional.``

Regards.

PS: I don`t think the IAF is all that great, just better than the PAF in many respects.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

btw, another curious contrast : India calls a Ramzan ceasefire(non-initiation of actions), everyone else rejects it with contempt including Pakistan, Indian `liberals` call it a cynical exploitation of religious sentiments similar to the throwing Iftar parties in the political circles, and terrorist killings in J&K are stepped up.

US rejects a Ramzan ceasefire but holds Iftar parties, Pakistan remains quiet as a mouse, which Ramzaan?, Indian `liberals` shut the hell up(not to spoil the mood while mentally taking credit for Friedman`s article, for having `arrived`) and Taliban lay down arms and surrender in large numbers.

Daisy-cutters can change ones most deeply-held assertions(don`t mistake them for beliefs) aka nothing succeeds like gunpowder.

re: semipreciousme

``...touba, touba....the very thought...let me re-phrase and say by ``them`` i meant the whole of s.east asia...hope i`ve redeemed myself...:)``

...well ok, but i think the ones you need to redeem yourself with are your countrymen...

http://www.sulekha.com/redirectNh.asp?cid=155922

http://www.sulekha.com/redirectNh.asp?cid=155922

Evangelicals sailing under ``false colours``



Sunday, December 2, 2001 (Washington):

The arrest of US Christian aid workers by the Taliban in Afghanistan has brought to light the ``growing phenomenon`` of ``placement of evangelical Protestant missionaries in Muslim, Buddhist and Hindu countries using visas falsely identifying them as secular workers``, media reports say.

The ordeal of Heather Mercer (24) and Dayna Curry (30) who were jailed by the Taliban in August for showing a video and book about Jesus to an Afghan family in their home, in violation of a law against proselytisation has revealed the increasing instances of evengelicals being posted in non-christian majority countries in the guise of aid workers, the Washington Post reported yesterday.

The missionaries are particularly active in ``10/40`` window, the rectancular area that stretches from latitudes 10 degrees north from West Africa to East Asia, the Post said adding this includes ``most of the world`s 1.2 million Muslims, 800 million Hindus and 350 million Buddhists.``

Despite the risks involved, ``a growing number of missionaries -- most often called aid workers -- are being despatched by Christian groups in the US, Britain, Germany, Australia and other countries to the region where most of the world`s Muslims live,`` the Post reports. This despite evangelical restrictions existing in most of the world`s 49 Muslim majority countries.

China restricts proselytisation to members of State-supported churches. India, where majority are Hindus but which is also the world`s ``second largest Muslim country`` also limits access to foreign missionaries, the Post notes.

The US State Department and the bipartisan Commission on Religious rights set up by Congress insist that the right to convert is a ``human right.`` The State Department makes it a practice of listing every year with disparaging remarks in its annual Report, countries where conversion is not welcome.

The US Government and Congress insist that fundamental freedoms must include not only the right to practise any religion but also to preach and proselytize.

The arrest and jailing of foreigners in non-Christian majority countries is rare despite laws against conversion, says Avery Willis, senior vice president of the Southern Baptist Convention`s International Mission Board.

When violations are detected, foreigners are often told to leave the country permanently. Locals who convert, however, can face severe punishments. ``Some are killed, often by family members who believe they have `lost face` because their parent or sibling has defected to another religion,`` says Willis.

The Southern Baptist Convention has just circularised its members to intensify efforts to convert Muslims in America to Christianity by the end of the Ramzan period.

Mission work in the Window has grown rapidly since the mid-1980s, when their leaders began ``retooling their organisations to move beyond Latin America and Southern Africa into this non-Christian area with great humanitarian needs,`` says J Dudley Woodberry, Professor of Islamic Studies at the Fuller Theological Seminary in Pasedena, California.

``The 10/40 Window`` he pointed out, ``is home to the largest number of `unreached people groups,`` the term mission groups use for ethnic populations that have never heard of the Bible`s New Testament message.

Willi, of the Richmond-based Baptist mission board, says that about 27 per cent of the board`s 5,000 missionaries are stationed in the 10/40 Window -- up from just one per cent 15 years ago.

Most Muslim countries, the Post said, do not issue visas to people who identify themselves as missionaries. ``So, Christian missionaries list their occupation as teacher, doctor, nurse, geologist, urban planner, artist, business person or engineer, according to several missionaries who asked not to be identified.``

``These are, in fact, the occupations they perform in the foreign country. But some believe their commitment to spreading the Gospel compels them to offer Christian testimonies and information to anyone who asks about their faith``, the paper further said.

Still, publishing locations and names of faith-based aid workers is not desired, as bringing attention to them could embarrass or bring disciplinary action against local officials officials ``with whom Christians have a tacit understanding``, says a woman relief worker who served in Pakistan for 6 years. (PTI)

Ras Siddiqi

It will not be to Benazir`s advantage to produce a muddled agreement on Kashmir.

I wonder if you read the great Pakistani economist Shaheed Burki`s recent set of articles in Dawn.

Pakistan can either be India`s Mexico or Canada. India is growing into a continental size economy, as Burki points out. The big question facing Pakistan is the position it wants to occupy vis a vis its giant neighbor.

By fudging the Kashmir issue, it is only Pakistan that will suffer. Recently, an LSE Professor suggested that the Kashmir problem would automatically get solved as India reached its economic and political and military power potential.

Is there any question of Mexico getting California back? In 50 years time, Pakistan asking for Kashmir will be like Mexico begging back Texas or California?

So, the Leadership of Pakistan must compromise immediately and focus on evolving into India`s Canada - Shahid Burki`s advice.

Dr Ali Akbar Poonawala

Jammu India

Shah

I dont know why I am bothering to respond to your utter nonsense.

You have nothing to do with Kashmir. Kashmir is an internal issue of India, as stated over and over by Mr. Vajpayee. You are a foreigner, a Pakistani, so please stop commenting on India`s internal affairs.

Remember there is no Democracy in Pakistan. There is a Dictatorship. What moral right do Pakistanis have to speak of human rights and ``Plebiscites`` when they have been unable to maintain democracy? First prove that Pakistan can be a democratic nation for at least 50 years. Then speak of Plebiscites.

The Kashmiris are Indians and the Govt of India will address their problems through a democratic process. The Kashmiris are as Indian as Punjabis, Haryanvis, Rajasthanis, Tamils, Bengalis, Marathis, Goans, Telegus, Biharis, Gujratis, etc.

There will never be a ``Plebiscite``. The original conditions of a Plebiscite are no longer existent.

There will never be another partition of India on religious grounds. Never.

The People of Kashmir, whether Hindu or Muslim or Buddihst Ladakhi, are far better off under Indian rule. Read Thomas Friedman`s recent article in the New York Times on the Muslims of India and Bangladesh. In the article, the question is posed to Mr Friedman by MJ Akbar ``name the only country where Muslims have enjoyed 50 years of uninterrupted democracy: the answer is India``.

When Pakistan grants Freedom and Liberation to the Pakhtoons and Sindhis and established an independent Pakhtoonistan and Sindhu Desh, then India will establish an independent Kashmir.

No amount of cross border terrorism will force India to yield. It will only increase the resolve to further integrate Kashmir into the Indian Union.

Dr Ali Akbar Poonawala

RSaxena,

``..athletics is most certainly not our forte...``

Not entirely true. There are races, jumps and throws. First two we are behind, but in throws we continue to be in the top 3 in Asia.

Raghubir Singh Bal and his disciples have done OK by India in the Hammer. Shakti Singh is a much feared and well known Shot and Discus man. His throws in the Shot (20 meters) are certainly world class. So is Ajit Bhaduria. 15-20 years ago there were a string of sardars ruling the roost in the throws. Anil Kumar is today the reigning asian discus champ. There`s also a female discus thrower (I forget her name) who`s throwing 65+ meters - which is world class.

I used to throw for my college and since those days I`ve keenly followed on how our national team in doing in the throws.

Genetically speaking, I think there`s nothing to prevent us being world class, with the proper physical and psychological training. Almost all the western athletes are affiliated to some sort of scientific research institute with doctors, coaches, psychologists and others. Also, they are full-time athletes. They are mentally `free` in that the sports body in these countries takes complete care of them. Not so in India...and so motivation for our boys and girls dries up very quickly once they land a bank job or some such. The situation seems unlikely to change in the forseeable future. And then there`s the corruption.

regards,

RE: EST Reply #: 389 poonawala wrote :

``I think Benazir will be willing to compromise on Kashmir which will lead to peace. I heard from informed friends that she is willing to concede LOC as a intertational border. In addition, she would grant Pakistani Occupied Kashmir, indedpendence.``

I believe that the Pakistan Army is willing to do the same (compromise that is) something which will lead to peace. You do not need informed sources for such information.
The problem still seems to be the exact placement of the LOC or if the Kashmiris too will accept it, without which peace will remain elusive.
And let me inform you ``Dr. Poonawala`` that Benazir is Z.A. Bhutto`s daughter, someone who offered such a compromise in Kashmir that international lawyers still have difficulty figuring out what it exactly that he surrendered to Indira at Simla.

Ras

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

RSaxena:

``and btw, be careful using ``our`` ... many of your countrymen get red with anger at being bucketed like that with indians... if i understand, you people eat very different food, look completely different, and speak a strange language called urdu jo hum indians ko bilkul nahi samajh aati :)``

...touba, touba....the very thought...let me re-phrase and say by ``them`` i meant the whole of s.east asia...hope i`ve redeemed myself...:)

Prem #423
``Benazir was at the helms when Pakistan shifted some of its ``assets`` from Afganistan to Kashmir - leading to unprecedented rise in violence in Kashmir towards the end of 1980s.``

I like that term ``assets``.

Anyone noticed this contrast? When ``assets`` were surrounded in Kunduz, a piddly few-thousand-strong Army of the NA absolutely refused to consider safe passage, saying these are not Afghans, they came here to kill Afghans, we will not let them go on any account. No this-and-that about world opinion and all that crap. India on the other hand, has been offering talks to ``assets`` and their owners! How many lives have been lost because of such pussyfooting, I wonder? No wonder these ``assets`` now kill marriage parties and schoolmasters with impunity, these ``assets`` and their owners understand and respect only the language of irresistable force and determination, which India doesnot choose to show. A country must defend its own against outsiders and make it clear that it has the will to do so, I donot see what right we have to call ourselves a country if we cannot do even so much.

Dr. Ali Akbar Poonawalla

Thank you -- I welcome you to Chowk. I look forward to reading your posts. Please enlighten us with your reports from Ground Zero -- they will bring many of the cyber warriors down to earth when they learn about the havoc that the real and imagined animosities are causing.

Reply RSaxena # 431

``...athletics is most certainly not our forte...but then what is?...``

Idli, dosa, hot samosa...

Reply Neptune # 383

“btw... what are you doing in Chowk on a saturday?”

Neptune Dada, I have this addiction, see…

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

re: semipreciousme

``...africans had the whole world beat, not just india...athletics is not our forte....now if they`d only allow cricket into the olympics...``

i meant amongst the group of countries least expected to win medals, even africa has outdone india..athletics is most certainly not our forte...but then what is?...in india, we have a few clever southies who have put india in the global software industry and have turned out some brilliant scientific achievements...but the rest of the country, including the north where i come from, is pretty damn useless...

and btw, be careful using ``our`` ... many of your countrymen get red with anger at being bucketed like that with indians... if i understand, you people eat very different food, look completely different, and speak a strange language called urdu jo hum indians ko bilkul nahi samajh aati :)

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

SHAH

You write

``Dr Poonawalla ,is a mainland person .He has no stake in Kashmirs independence fight.He in fact would like to see Kashmir be part of India b/c then he can stay in Jammu when he is NOT a native of that land``

Remember, Mr Shah, that what makes human beings special is our ability to put ourselves in our neighbor` stead, seeing things from the other`s vantage point.

Firstly, what do you mean by saying I am NOT a native of that land? I was born, brought up and educated in Jammu and Kashmir. I speak both Dogri and Kashmiri fluently, in addition to Hindi and Urdu. I have studied the history of Kashmir deeply. I feel for this land. It is my home. Does this does not make me as much of a native of Kashmir as anyone else. As our American friends are known to say, lets set the record straight, I am a proud citizen of Jammu and Kashmir.

I have every stake in the world in seeing peace come to Kashmir, a land where I have been treating patients my entire professional career. This is my home. I am not a politican in Lahore, Delhi or Islamabad pontificating on the Valley.

I believe that Indian Kashmir is part of India and that Paksitani Kashmir is part of Pakistan. This is a fair, just and equitable soluction to the problem. It is non Kashmiris like you who keep feeding the problem. Let the LOC be declared a PERMANENT border so that, we, the residents of Jammu and Kashmir can get on with our lives and aspirations.

SHAMMI ji

Just one month ago, I treated an 18 year old Gujjar whose right leg was blown off by a mine as he illegally made the border crossing of the LOC. His life is destroyed. His family see him as a burden. And he is convinced that Afghani militants will finish him off as he spent time in an Indian Army hospital recuperating. Evidently, the Pakistanis had told him that he should commite suicide if he fell into the hands of the Indians. I am planning on publishing a series of aricles about the experiences of common Kashmiris. I shall let you know the details of this upcoming publication if you are so interested.

Dr Ali Akbar Poonawala

Dr Ali Akbar Poonawala

Sridhar

Thank you for your kind words welcoming me to Chowk. I am embarrassed by your characterization of me as ``enlightened`` and I am hardly that. I am merely a Doctor doing my duty and in my small way trying to catalog the suffering that I see in the hope that this may influence the Powers that Be to solve the Kashmir problem.

I am not a political man. I am a medic first and last. I am a loyal and proud citizen of India. I also believe in the rights of the Kashmiris. These rights will best be upheld if the Kashmiris are integrtaed into a secular and economically rising India.

Eventually a EC model would be ideal for the Indian Subcontinent.

I look forward to interacting with you Mr Sridhar.

Dr Poonawala.

Re: Shah #425

``...Accountability is just a smokescreen...``

Prove it.

``...Dont you think ONE discharge fromduty is a bit trivial of justice...``

I said that I am aware of atleast one -- there may be more that I do not know.

``...when over 100000 kashmiris have been killed unjustifiablty...``

How many of the above were killed at the hands of the militants? The last quoted figure from Pakistani sources was 70,000 (where did you get the 100K figure from?)

``...The militants also dont get vacation with pay...``

So, a lack of fringe benefits exempt one from being accountable or being brought to justice?

``...If they wanted to live under Indian govt ,then they could migrate to mainland India ,but then there would not be need for insurgency...``

Actually, you would be surprised -- there are more Kashmiris who have left the Valley for other parts of India to escape anarchy and militancy than have left for Pakistan. They could have also gone to Pakistan, but they did not.

``...Dr Poonawalla ,is a mainland person...``

From what I know, he is from J&K, works as a doctor and heals the limbless, wounded, & maimed without regard to whether they are militants or not.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

audio-video-radio # 420

Did that post have something to do with its number - Char sau bees?

re: rsridhar # 411

For Indians, Benazir presents half an enigma - half because it is possible to analyze her motivations, compulsions, and drives, even though, as always in life, different people will reach different conclusions.

It is certainly true that during her rule Benazir, in both word and deed, was more militantly ambitious than the Pakistani military junta itself. During her time, General Babar earned his reputation as the Butcher of Karachi for his mass arrests, torture, and killings of Mohajirs. It was during her time, and this was AFTER the Soviets had left Afghanistan, that the enrollemt of foreigners swelled in Pakistan`s Talibani Madrassas as Benazir`s government frenetically handed out visas to ``right`` kind of cooperative foreigners. It was her government and her agencies that pushed these Talibs into Afghanistan. And if I remember right, there have been claims in the western circles that Benazir had connections with Turabi of Sudan through General Beg (Baig?)and Hamid Gul - the two fine gentlemen she sent to the take part in a conference organized by the Messiah Turabi himself.

More importantly for Indians, Benazir was at the helms when Pakistan shifted some of its ``assets`` from Afganistan to Kashmir - leading to unprecedented rise in violence in Kashmir towards the end of 1980s. What is more, Benazir openly called the Kashmiri ``struggle`` an Islamic Jehad - a term Musharraf continues to use to this day.

Now, Benazir has repeatedly pleaded that she had taken this approach because she was under pressure from the military and the fundamentalists. That is a bit of a stretch given the zest with which she took up the sundry and ambitious ``moral and peaceful`` causes. On the other hand, I have seen some claims in Pakistani press that Benazir ``sacrificed`` the jehad in Indian Punjab by handing over some list of terrorists that ISI had maintained for its internal use.



In any case, what should Indian stance be toward Benazir? As I mentioned, in the past, Benazir has been as implacably anti-Indian as the Pakistani military. She has also been corrupt to the core, having along with her husband, looted the common man, woman, and child of Pakistan of humongous amount of money. Still, she is probably not any worse than any among Pakistan`s long and very illustrious list of generals. Corruption is a function of power, time, and opportunity. Those who believe that many-starred and smartly attired generals have been any less corrupt and made less money than the earthy politicians will also believe that the sun is a Pakistani satellite launched by the original genious of Dr. A. Q. Khan. For that matter, we ourselves have many a corrupt billionaires in India, and have our own satellites bringing us - the poor and unwashed of India - unlimited pride and joy.

May be Benazir is telling the truth. May be she has realized the errors of her past ways, as she claimed, for example, recently at Stanford. We in India should be supportive of her, but to believe that she has somehow turned into a dove and a devi would be the height of naivety.

The road to peace does not lie through naivety but through awareness of the past and steely determination to create a new, better common future.

re: bapu/12-head retard

``Like new breed of coolies for montonous job of programmers ,that like plantatuion work ,white man dont like to do.Code Coolies are indias important areas,just as Trinidad,S.Africa,West Indies,sugar cane plantation work was in early 1900!!!!!!``

...still far better than your breed of islamic terrorist exports whose jobs include flying planes into buildings and carrying out suicide bombings...

...and fret not about slavery, your ancestors were doing the same thing...

Fuzair #74: There have been Christians who have gone higher than Gp. Capt., since Cecil Chaudhry. But I cannot see any minority going higher than AVM. Although, that is a tough call. Since there are only 3-4% religious minorities in Pakistan (the percentage in the military is probably higher). So within this small number, there really haven`t been any minority candidates for the top positions. One PAF Chief was an Ahmedi. So I don`t know how far minorities would go in the PAF now, if there were a good minority Chief level candidate.

In the Air Force, unlike in the Army, it is really the Sqn. Cmdr. who has the important position. Air Force is the only branch, in which only officers fight, and that too a small percentage of the officers. Any officers above the rank of Sqn. Ldr. (except the odd few Wg. Cdrs. who are commanding a sqn.) don`t do much during a war. Most of their work is in peacetime.

So, from actual combat point of view, basically the PAF is nothing more than about 400 Lts., Capts., and Majors in their twenties and mid thirties, protecting all of Pakistan. Personally speaking, there salaries need to be raised ten fold, considering the responsibility these 400 or so people have.

And to the best of my knowledge, there is no discrimination against minorities for Sqn. Cdr. and combat positions. Infact Cecil Chaudhry had the most important post in the PAF (commanding the PAF equivalent of Top Gun) as his last assignment.

I would take all the explanations of the resignations and retirements of officers with a grain of salt. Everyone says they were retired for this reason or that. I could make some excuse also. Sometimes it is correct, but in many cases it is not correct. If Cecil Chaudhry had not gone beyone AVM, one could use religion as a reason. However, other colleagues of his who were Christian did go beyond Gp. Capt.

I don`t like Shamim, nor do I know why Cecil Chaudhry did not get promoted, but I have learnt that often the reason isn`t what it seems to be. Retiring an active fighter pilot because of his religion would greatly demoralize other minority fighter pilots. For example MM Alam was retired by Shamim, but mostly for the right reasons. Then again, it is quite possible that in case of Cecil, his religion may have had something to do with.

Your comments about the PAF in 71 are interesting. It is a fact that the Army fought poorly. But that is nothing new. I have seen the log books, flight plans, aircraft, talked to and worked with, on many occassions, the individuals who flew and maintanined the planes for the PAF in 71. They were basically the same 300 or so pilots flying the same planes (with the additions of Mirages and Chinese aircrafts) against the same enemy in 71 and in 65. I cannot imagine their performance detoriating in six years. Nothing in their log books, and flying skills, suggests that.

Unlike the Army, the Air Force of Pakistan (and India) are support groups. It is usually just two pilots fighting two pilots. There are not too many strategic decisions to be made. Everything is tactical. Infact, nearly the whole war, once it starts, at a tactical level is coordinated by the Sqn. Cmdrs, who were in their mid to early 30s in both 65 and 71. The Chief says go bomb Bombay. After that the 20 and 30 year olds have to figure out how to do it.

Infact, the PAF wasn`t even called into full combat in 71. Most of the pilots waited in West Pakistan, ready to fight, but the war ended in East Pakistan. And the few odd squadrons in East Pakistan, fought well briefly, and were then asked to evacuate.

Having seen the combat training standards of the PAF and those of the US, I have yet to see any Pakistani organization (and few international organizations, including those in Silicon Valley) that has a higher benchmark for passsing grades (academically and in flying) than the Air Force. It is much higher than that of the Pakistan Army or Navy or IT or medical colleges etc. in Pakistan. One can thank Asghar Khan for that. So many of my ex-colleagues are doing extremely well in Silicon Valley. Some of them actually flunked out of the various traning institutions.

But while Ops side of the PAF is excellent, however the management and administration side is quite inefficient and poor.

It is thus hard for me to imagine that the standards were really high in 65, and then dipped in 71 and then became high again after 71. That cannot happen if the same people were involved in all those phases.

PS. I do not agree with your evaluation that during Shamim`s time, the performance standards detoriated. A lot of things detoriated, but the performance standards may have actually increased. This is due to the induction of a lot of next generation equipment into the PAF, like F-16s, new missiles, new radars systems, new joint programs with China etc. All of this equipment led to newer state of the art tactics, like combat in vertical planes/cubes (only possible with aircraft like F-16 which have a higher than 1-1 T/W ratio), dissimilar combat training with aircraft which can fire head on missiles (like Sidewinder 9L, which was unavailable before, etc.), which were impossible in older missile systems. Kamra (I have worked there and I cannot imagine any engineering facility in Pakistan being better) started coming into its own, during those days. It now earns foreign exchange.

All of this probably would have happened regardless of who was the Chief, but the standards definitely did not go down. Just due to the equimpment alone, the PAF was introduced to and became efficient in a whole new set of combat parameters.

The standards are going down now. But that is due to the ridiculously low pay that is given to the military, in comparison to their civilian couterparts. This is more true for the PAF than Army and Navy, because generally those in the PAF would probably do much better than their civilian counterparts in private enterprise. The average F-16 fighter pilot, protecting the all of Lahore`s airspace by himself, risking his life on a daily basis (1/4th of my coursemates in flying died before the age of 30) on many occassions, completely responsible for a US 10-15 million aircraft, is paid the same salary that a secretary in Citibank`s Islamabad branch is paid. I now make more money than all my engineering coursemates combined in the PAF. Not because I am highly paid, but because they are ridiculously low paid.

Re: semipreciousme #406

True, but there is a difference. The militants are accountable to nobody but themselves. The security forces are -- first to the elected J&K state govt., and then to the Lok Sabha. I am aware of at least one case in which an army officer convicted of rape was dishonorably discharged from service, and rightfully so. I have yet to hear of a militant being extradited from Pakistan to India or tried there for any crime. Finally, when there are wide ranging atrocities of the type that you mention occurring regularly, there is usually mass migration (e.g. a few incidents in Bangladesh after the recent elections resulted in at least 2000 people migrating to India within a week; or 1 million+ Albanians fleeing Kosovo; 300,000 Afghans fleeing after American strikes, etc.). How many Kashmiris have fled Kashmir in the last decade? I would be surprised if the number even exceeded 5,000-10,000. Indeed, Dr. Ali Akbar Poonawalla`s post from Jammu indicates that the Gujjars (shepherds) he meets are coerced to become militants. That should tell you something.

shammi saab:

what i meant was that the nationalites of the handful found to have links to al-qaied haven`t been released...as for detaining them futhur on the pre-text of finding more evidence...well..its been 3 months already...

RSaxena:

``hehe...a cop-out?...i admit pak`s had a better cricket team...heck, even starving africans outdo india with their olympic gold in track and field...nary a bronze for india...``

...africans had the whole world beat, not just india...athletics is not our forte....now if they`d only allow cricket into the olympics...

Yahuda Goldsteen

“Arafat is a bad role model and greatest terrorist of all. There are many governments which do not want, in all seriuousness, a solution to Palestine problem. By keeping the problem alive, they can get billions of dollars every year. A case in point, for example, is Egypt which has more than 100 billion dollars in aid since Camp David agreement in 1980.

Pakistan is another basket case. It was not in the interest of Pakistan that Soviets withdrew from Afghanistan. Pakistanis were happy. It was too sad that war ended in 1989 and Pakistani economy collapsed. I believe Musharaf is copying Palestine model that one day, if considerable pressure is applied continuosly, Kashmir may also get recognition as a possible statehood. But both India and Israel will not give it up to pressure. In the end Muslims and their Jehad will be defeated conclusively. The real enemies of world peace is Iraq, Saudi Arab and Pakistan.

Salom. “

…goldstein, not goldsteen and shalom, not salom….sorry for the interruption….back to your…um…anal-ysis…

shammi:

{All in a grim day`s work:

``Jammu, November 30: Five days after having gunned down Gulzar Ahmad Lone, headmaster of a primary school in Rajouri, militants on Thursday night killed Daya Ram (45), Congress block president and a contractor, at Bani in Kathua by slitting his throat...``

http://www.expressindia.com/kashmir/kashmirlive/kl20011201.html}

….shammi saab, i could also come up with numerous articles about the indian army’s atrocities like the gang raping of kashmiri women, wanton killings etc, etc, etc…but it’s like a vicious circle…. where does it get us?…