By Chietigj Bajpaee
Pakistan's election results have challenged the misplaced fear in the international community that Pakistan could fall under the control of Islamic extremists. However, this does not rule out the possibility of Pakistan's descent into an abyss of instability.
"Pakistain" and "instability" go together, kinda like "cheese" and "crackers" or "ham" and "eggs."
Islamic extremism in Pakistan is not a grass-roots phenomenon as it has been in many states in the Middle East and Southeast Asia. Pakistan's founding fathers, led by Mohammad Ali Jinnah, preceded by the Indian sub-continent's British colonial rulers and India's Mughal rulers, laid the foundation for Pakistan to be led by the rule of law and moderate Islam.
Yep.. that Mughal Aurangzeb sure was moderate - Sharia, Jirzya, Destruction of temples, forced conversions, pogroms... and Jinnah sure was secular... creating a country based on Islam... Direct Action day, threatening jihad.. sending tribal raiders into Kashmir...
Nonetheless, successive civilian and military-led governments, the military and intelligence agencies have employed Islamic extremism as a tool of their policies. As such, extremist Islam has emerged as a top-down phenomena.
They got their own state because India's ideological Muslims were a truculent lot, given to rioting, sectarian violence, and murder.
As demonstrated by the poor performance of Pakistan's Islamic parties in last week's parliamentary elections, Pakistan is far from ripe for an Iranian-style Islamic revolution.
We often forget the existence of the sophisticated, intelligent Pakistanis. We're usually reminded when somebody in a turban kills them.
The six-party Muttahida Majlis-e-Amal, which secured over 50 seats in the last Parliament with a strong showing in North-West Frontier Province (NWFP) and Balochistan, secured less than 10 seats in the National Assembly in this election and lost its lead in tribal provinces to sub-national secular parties such as the Awami National Party and the Balochistan National Party (Awami).
Continued on Page 49
This article starring:
Asif Ali-Zardari
BAITULLAH MESHUD
Tehrek-e-Taliban-Pakistan
MAULANA FAZLULLAH
Tehreek-e-Nafaz-e-Shariat-e-Mohammadi
Muttahida Majlis-e-Amal
Tehreek-e-Nafaz-e-Shariat-e-Mohammadi
Tehrek-e-Taliban-Pakistan
Posted by: Fred ||
02/27/2008 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[10 views]
Top|| File under:
By Syed Saleem Shahzad
As Pakistani politicians scramble to form a coalition government following last week's parliamentary elections, there has been a surge in violence in the Swat Valley and in other parts of North-West Frontier Province, and on Monday a senior army officer was assassinated.
The indications are that whoever takes power in Islamabad - be it the Pakistan People's Party or the Pakistan Muslim League of Nawaz Sharif or a combination of both - the real battle will be in Afghanistan between the Taliban and al-Qaeda-led militants and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and its allies.
Army surgeon general Lieutenant General Muhammad Mushtaq Baig and seven other people were killed in a suicide attack in the garrison city of Rawalpindi. It was the most high-profile killing since the death of former premier Benazir Bhutto in the same city last December.
Apart from the Swat Valley, there has been an increase in violence, including bomb blasts, in the North Waziristan tribal area and Bajaur and Manshera agencies, after a brief lull in the runup to the elections. More than a dozen incidents have been reported.
The trigger for this appears to have been planned joint Pakistan-NATO operations in the region against the Taliban and al-Qaeda. The militants aim to open up several fronts in Pakistan to dissuade the military from cooperating with NATO.
This situation is an embarrassment to the security apparatus as it was believed that following recent countrywide operations that uncovered militant cells in Karachi, Rawalpindi, Mianwali, Bannu and Dera Ismail Khan that the problem was being contained.
The regional war
Asia Times Online investigations show that the Taliban's three-pronged plan for their spring offensive comprises cutting off NATO's supply lines running from Pakistan to Afghanistan, recruiting fresh volunteers and, most importantly, the creation of a strategic corridor running from Pakistan all the way to the capital Kabul.
Since being ousted in 2001 and waging annual spring offensives, this is the first time the Taliban have come up with the idea of creating such a corridor.
The long road to Kabul
As things stand, the Taliban have established pockets of resistance all around Kabul, in addition to more settled pockets across the country. The Taliban roam around freely in the eastern province of Wardak, just 30 kilometers from Kabul. But now the Taliban want to connect the dots, as it were, to ensure a quick and steady supply of arms and men to reinforce the pockets sufficiently for attacks on the capital.
It is envisaged that the corridor initially starts in Mohmand Agency and Bajaur Agency in Pakistan and then passes through Kunar and Nooristan provinces all the way to the Taghab Valley in Kapisa province in the northeast about 100 kilometers from the capital.
In 2006, the Taliban seized the strategic Taghab Valley - as well as the Musayab Valley to the south of Kabul - with the goal of an assault on the capital, but because of limited supply lines they were only able to maintain their positions for a few months.
This year, the Taliban aim to retake these positions, while having in place secure supply lines starting in the Pakistani tribal areas to maintain a steady stream of men and resources.
Over the past year, the Taliban have increased the number of their fighters in Mohmand Agency to 18,000 and to between 20,000 to 25,000 in Bajaur Agency. Taliban quarters believe this will provide sufficient strength to ensure operation, which is due to run from April to September.
The counter-strategy
This steady gathering of forces in the two agencies did not go unnoticed by NATO. So, with Pakistani assistance, NATO will increase military operations aimed at nipping the corridor idea in the bud.
American special ground troops have escalated their activities in Kunar and Nooristan provinces and a US base in Kunar, just three kilometers from Bajaur Agency, is now fully operational. Once the operations are in full swing, Pakistan will provide assistance through its air base in Peshawar for attacks on militant bases in the agencies. "The operation has to start in the month of March as the Taliban have to launch their operation in April," a Pakistani security official told Asia Times Online.
However, Pakistan's plans could still be derailed. A powerful lawyers' movement is scheduled to launch protests on March 9 to pressure the new government into ousting President Pervez Musharraf. This would certainly delay any decision on Pakistan taking on the militants in a big way.
The lawyers are agitating for the reinstatement of members of the higher judiciary "who ceased to be judges" after Musharraf imposed emergency rule on November 3. Musharraf also suspended chief justice Iftikhar Chaudhry last March,a move that set off country-wide protests. Al-Qaeda, meanwhile, will be doing its best to fuel these flames to force Pakistan to back off and leave the way clear for the Taliban's corridor.
Syed Saleem Shahzad is Asia Times Online's Pakistan Bureau Chief. He can be reached at saleem_shahzad2002@yahoo.com
Posted by: Fred ||
02/27/2008 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under: Taliban
Co-authored by Robert Malley
Ever since the Israeli corporal Gilad Shalit was abducted by Palestinian militants a little over a week ago, all actors in the current drama in Gaza have been performing according to script.
Not knowing what to do, they are doing what they know. For Hamas the elected Palestinian government that means violence; for Israel, collective punishment; and for the international community well, not much really. None of this will lead anywhere, certainly nowhere good. There is a desperate need for all parties to reassess pragmatically their positions.
The first step is to understand what the crisis is and is not about. Israeli and western analysts swiftly concluded that Hamas's decision to resume armed attacks reflected a deep internal split, that it was dictated by a harder-line Islamist leadership in exile bent on confrontation in order to embarrass a more pragmatic Islamist government obsessed with self-preservation. If tensions within Hamas prompted the violence, then the way to end it was surely to isolate its more radical external wing while pressuring local leaders to make a more decisive break.
This analysis, and the policies to which it has given rise, display unhappy ignorance of how Hamas functions and what its current leadership is about. Differences of opinion do exist, but they are far more complex than any tidy inside/outside split could possibly suggest.
The International Crisis Group, as a conflict prevention organisation, meets very regularly with its leaders, in the occupied territories and elsewhere. We have little patience for Hamas's ideology and nothing but revulsion for its terror tactics. But we listen. Over the past several weeks, we have heard divergent tonalities, distinct priorities and one overriding message: let Hamas govern or watch it fight.
They have a different meaning for the word 'govern' than we in the West do ...
Governing is what Hamas has not been permitted to do. From Fatah, its rival secular movement, to Israel, the Arab world and the west, the strategy since the January 25 Palestinian elections has been roughly similar and wholly transparent: to pressure and isolate the government, squeeze it of funds and count on popular discontent with its non- performance to ensure the Hamas experience in power comes to a rapid end. In this context, the recent attack on the Keren Shalom military base came neither out of nowhere nor out of intra-Hamas divisions. It came, chiefly, from the Islamists' calculation that they should show they had options other than electoral politics and that the consequences of their governmental failure would be borne by all.
It is understandable, in this fraught environment, that Israel may believe that punishing the Palestinian people in violation of international law is all it can do to preserve its deterrent credibility and discourage future abductions. But lead to the soldier's release unharmed? Strengthen Palestinian pragmatists? Restore the ceasefire? By now, through trial and serial errors, one would hope Israeli leaders know better. In the current confrontation, Hamas's support is growing, its ranks are becoming more unified and its detractors are being reduced to silence.
Hamas is growing stronger because Fatah has been corrupted in the minds of the Paleos. Fatah was Arafat's party and while that old goat was alive he could make things work. But today most everyone sees the corruption, the stolen money, the lack of passion, and the simple incompetence that is Fatah. The ineffectual Mahmoud Abbas can't throw a grenade properly, and the Paleos sense that he can deliver neither a state nor the destruction of Israel. That leaves Hamas led by Haniyeh and the rest of his blood-thirsty pals. They aren't really interested in 'governing' so much as they're interested in winning. Winning to them means fulfilling their charter, which means killing all the Jews and taking all the land. The Paleos understand and support this, which is why Hamas is currently popular despite their lack of adminstrative and fiscal skills. That the International Crisis Group doesn't understand this suggests that they don't listen as well as they think they do.
None of this paints a pretty picture but it may suggest a way out. If a deal is to be reached, its rough outlines are predictable: Israel wants quiet, and Hamas wants the ability to govern. Hamas must release the soldier, reinstate the truce and stop all militias firing rockets. Israel must end its Gaza incursion, cease disproportionate military action in the occupied territories and release recently jailed ministers and parliamentarians as well as Palestinian prisoners who have not been charged with an offence. Getting any such agreement will require far more active and assertive third party mediation than has been the case so far.
Why yes it will, because getting either party to agree to the listed points requires said party to commit suicide: if Hamas agrees to control the militas, release the solidier and reinstate the truce, they are in violation of their own charter, which calls for the destruction of Israel. That's always item number one on their agenda. If Israel releases Paelos, stops whacking terrs with guns and leaves Gaza alone it puts itself in the position of playing defense, and it knows that defense with the rest of the world against them (the U.S. too if Barack Obama wins) means their ultimate destruction. Both sides are being asked to do the impossible, which is why they won't do it.
Any resulting tranquillity will be only fleeting if the international boycott of the Palestinian Authority continues. That decision never made much sense in terms of Europe's and America's own stated objective, to induce Hamas's evolution. It makes even less sense now if the goal is to prevent all-out deterioration.
The recent signing of a Fatah-Hamas agreement, the decision to form a national unity government and the designation of Mahmoud Abbas, Palestinian president, as the person in charge of negotiations with Israel do not quite add up to the conditions put forward by the Quartet group of Middle East mediators for treating this government as it did its predecessor. But, insufficient as they may be, these developments do represent some movement. Given the urgency of the current situation, they ought to prompt at least Brussels to rethink its posture and consider expanding its funding mechanism to include Palestinian salaries and the critically important security sector.
The western consensus since the Palestinian elections has been that no one should deal with Hamas unless it fundamentally alters its ideology. That is a perfectly defensible position until you actually want something from the group ending violence, say, or releasing a hostage.
Whether the deal outlined above actually can be reached is anything but sure. But the alternative is known. It has been seen before. And it is hauntingly depressing.
#1
What utter bollocks. The only 'urgency' is that the Israel has comprehesively won the war on terror within its borders (apart from the Kassams). Therefore the Paleos desperately and urgently need their asses saved from their own dismal incompetance.
I continue to be intrigued by the lack of support Hillary Clinton receives from the feminist crowd. The reason, I think, has much to do with the political left, and it's troubling.
The modern feminist movement is a creature of the left, and on the left there's a pecking order. At the top is contempt for the United States. You'll notice the utter lack of response, on the left, to Michelle Obama's disgraceful comment that this is the only time in her adult life that she's been proud of her country. There was no response because the left would agree.
Next in the pecking order, and related to the top slot, is contempt for free enterprise. And next comes race. Gender equality is far down the list. Race simply trumps gender, every time. Show me an exception. Yes, it's true, The New York Times endorsed Clinton in the New York Democratic primary, but that was an aberration, probably reflecting internal personnel issues.
I recall that, during the O.J. Simpson trial, the sister of Simpson's murdered wife asked permission to address a feminist rally about violence against women. She was refused, on the remarkable ground that Simpson's trial wasn't about violence against women, but was about race. That was blatantly false, of course, but it conformed to leftist ideology. Even feminist groups fall in line, just as they fall in line when they refuse to denounce Muslim oppression of women. On the left, the party line endures, and is sacrosanct.
One of the great myths about the left is that it cares about women. Remember the support Bill Clinton received from women's groups, despite his awful record in treating women? He was useful because he favored Roe v. Wade, which is the feminist Book of Genesis.
Another myth is that the left fights fascism. It will fight fascism when convenient, and go along with it if that's convenient. That's because fascisim is part of the Left.
The left had no problem with the Hitler-Stalin pact. It had no problem with it even though the synagogues of Berlin were already burning. Anti-semitism is no problem for the left. If it serves a purpose, it's accommodated.
Another myth is that the left cares about human life. Ask a leftist friend to name two victims of the Cambodian genocide. You'll lose a friend.
The left lives in a world of ideology and myth. Hillary is learning that the sisterhood will support her, but only if the party line is maintained. Race trumps gender. The line is maintained. This year, Hillary didn't qualify.
Posted by: Mike ||
02/27/2008 09:55 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Contempt for the U.S., contempt for free enterprise, race trumps gender, fascism is part of the Left, anti-semitism is no problem for the Left; donk heads are spinning around on their necks and pea soup is coming out of their mouths. Call the exorcist.
It is sad the Democratic Party has fallen to such depths--very anti-American. Hope the voters realize it in time.
#2
The left are like a park, set aside for all of mankind and the critters and the flowers. Along comes Islam. Islam camps out in the park. Islam claims the park as sacred ground and makes the left eat dirt.
Across the street, we look on and giggle. We clean our weapons and wait for park cleaning day.
[/channeling unknown source]
#4
I still can't get the comment by the president of NOW at the time of Billy Jeff's problem with "wimmen" out of my mind. She said that the Republican's were just stirring things up and we should be behind the Prez cuz "he's just a rascal" at heart!
#5
For all the glowing words of the 'Bill of Rights' the 'leadership' and the writers of the Constitution didn't do a whole lot in stopping the post Treaty of Paris purge of Tory Crown Loyalists from the former colonies. Even they understood you don't leave the snakes in the nest. We should have held the leftist apologists to similar standards after the fall of the wall in the early 90s.
Jonah writes today about some of Senator Obama's livelier chums:
'Everything was absolutely ideal on the day I bombed the Pentagon."
This excerpt from William Ayers' memoir appeared in the New York Times on the morning of Sept. 11, 2001 a few hours before Al Qaeda terrorists crashed hijacked planes into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. Ayers, once a leader in the Weather Underground the group that declared "war" on the U.S. government in 1970 told the Times, "I don't regret setting bombs" and "I feel we didn't do enough."
Ayers recently reappeared in the news because Politico.com reported Friday that Barack Obama has loose ties to him.
Jonah wants to know how such people can be regarded as, in Cass Sunstein's words, as "legitimate members of the community." Well, the left is deeply invested in counter-tribalism, as John O'Sullivan calls it. Hence, Michelle Obama's statement that her husband's campaign is the first thing in her four decades plus on this earth that's made her "proud" of America. She has been blessed to live a life that almost anyone else on the planet would envy and she could only have lived it in the United States. But so what? If you accept this counter-tribalism, as the left does, as a kind of harmless alternative lifestyle, it's not that big a leap to indulge violent (if largely ineffective) sedition. In a sense, someone like William Ayers, who acted on his convictions, validates the far larger number of campus radicals who simply leveraged them into cosy lifelong sinecures.
Posted by: Mike ||
02/27/2008 08:10 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
this doesn't explain many of the aging baby boomers continued identification with so many failed beliefs.
For a good majority of them, buying into the liberal myth made them feel cooler, smarter and better than the rest of us. To acknowledge they were wrong, would be to admit not only that they were wrong - but to do so would strip them of their feelings of superiority that their identification with the left gave them.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
