Peshawer—A New Twist

Fatima Rizvi

The massive bomb blast in Peshawer that killed a hundred people and injured hundreds more is a deviation from the TTP (Tehrik Taliban Pakistan) pattern of attacks. The TTP/Al Qaeda has not deliberately targeted civilians and certainly not women and children. They have invariably targeted military personnel, security personnel, intelligence assets, political leaders and government installations and buildings. They have carried out armed attacks and suicide bombings. The Peshawer attack used a vehicle borne explosive device detonated by remote control. It was meant to kill civilians—women and children-to spread fear and destabilize. It may be too early to reach a conclusion but it suits an entity that seeks to destabilize Pakistan and spark ethnic and religious violence. Besides the TTP the focus should shift to those who operate under the shadow of the TTP.

The US presence in Afghanistan and their operations against Pashtuns are the trigger for the Taliban-Al Qaeda nexus and the Afghan resistance against US presence. The Afghan government is dominated by no-Pashtuns and is a close ally of India and the US. India has a big presence in Afghanistan because of Afghan government sponsorship and US silence on the issue. US and India are allies with a Civilian Nuclear Technology Agreement between them and many other areas of cooperation. Pakistanis see the US-Afghan Government-India combine and conclude that India and Afghan Government are colluding in a pro-active policy to destabilize Pakistan. Pashtuns are predominantly in Southern Afghanistan and the western provinces of Pakistan and US policy of military aggression and drone attacks has alienated them. It is within this broader context that we should see the US-Pakistan alliance and the current operations in Waziristan and the terrorism within Pakistan.

Read Complete Article : http://fatimarizvi.newsvine.com/_news/2009/10/29/3441824-peshawer-a-new-twist-

Some Question For Mrs. Clinton And Mr. Qureshi

The GHQ attack effectively derailed the parliamentary debate over Kerry-Lugar bill and gave a breathing space to the isolated pro-US government in Islamabad. It allowed Shah Mahmood Qureshi to do his Munich-style appeasement and sell out the Pakistani nation to Washington. Without the GHQ attack, the government could never have scuttled the expected Parliament resolution against the US aid conditions. The subsequent attacks on Pakistani military personnel were not the usual Taliban-style terrorism.

By DR. SHIREEN MAZARI
The Nation
WWW.AHMEDQURAISHI.COM

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan-There are certain questions that are beginning to come to one’s mind the more one sees targeted attacks against the military in Islamabad.

While soldiers and officials have been targeted by the “Taliban” – which has now become such an all-encompassing category that it defies explanation and allows so many elements to exploit the label for their own ends – primarily in the areas of the ongoing military operations, there is a new pattern that needs to be identified and discerned.

To begin with, is it simply a coincidence that the GHQ was targeted in the immediate aftermath of the army’s press release expressing concerns over the then Kerry Lugar Bill (now Act)?

That attack effectively derailed the debate going on in Parliament and allowed Shah Mahmood Qureshi to do his Munich-style appeasement and sell out the Pakistani nation to Washington. The opposition got diverted and the formulation of a strong resolution got lost somewhere in the terrorism cloud. Soon after the GHQ attack, we saw Brigadier Moin’s targeted killing in Islamabad and on Tuesday (27th October) another Brigadier was targeted outside his home. Now both these attacks were not the usual Taliban-style terrorism and the young motorbike riders did not “look” like the typical Taliban either according to eye witnesses. Then there is the question of how they managed to disappear and remain hidden, even though the police managed to get their pen sketches made.

Linked to these questions is the claim made by the TTP that they had carried out the GHQ attack. This is interesting because the TTP is the only terrorist outfit that is not identified by name in the Kerry Lugar Act. We also know that the TTP’s weapons are coming from Afghanistan and to top it all off, the Pakistani nation and military have been shocked at the US/NATO withdrawal from their check posts along the Afghan side of the border with Pakistan immediately when the Pakistan army began its full-scale action in South Waziristan. Given how the US had been pressuring Pakistan into commencing this action, why would they then decide to vacate their check posts and thereby create an enabling environment for arms flows to the TTP? These are questions that when linked up pinpoint to a questionable US design vis a vis the Pakistan military. The reasons behind this have been elaborated in earlier columns.

However, there is also anther link that needs to be highlighted. That is the shenanigans, in Islamabad, of US diplomats and covert operatives – be they linked to Blackwater, Dyncorps or Inter-Risk. On Tuesday, early morning, four US diplomats were caught with weapons in the vicinity of Margalla police station in sector F-8 – but as always the police were helpless in the face of US pressure and had to let the men go. This is the sixth known case in recent times of US diplomats and undercover operatives being caught with weapons and/or harassing local citizens. One such incident also involved Dutch diplomats. But the question is: what are these diplomats doing carrying weapons to and from their embassy? Whom are they delivering these weapons to and who are they taking these weapons from? When linked to the illicit weapons caches’ of Inter Risk and arms licenses being given to the US embassy without following proper procedures, there is a very real issue about US involvement in questionable covert actions in the Capital and beyond.

This becomes even more tenable when one goes back to the Inter Risk company’s training of at least 200 ex-servicemen for the US, whom the US refused to hand over for questioning to the Pakistani authorities and instead tucked them away in “safe houses. These trained guards were also supposed to have been given some of the illicit weapons.

Finally, returning to the attack on GHQ, the attackers were not random militants but well-trained men also adept in deception, especially their leader, Aqeel alias Dr Usman, who almost got away by mingling with the crowd after the siege had ended – but for a guard who recognised him and hit him from behind.

Given the serious concerns that are only growing over what exactly the US is up to, especially with some journalists like S. F. A. Shah from Peshawar facing life threats from US operatives in that city, it is time the state sought to re-examine the multidimensional terrorist threats emanating from different sources. Only when we are clear about whom we are contending with on different fronts, can we formulate effective policies to fight the threats. It is a dangerous reductionism to simply lay every act of violence and terror at the doorstep of the “Taliban” and Al-Qaeda. Even here, which Taliban group are we talking about? The US has mesmerized the Pakistani state into simplifying everything and thereby glossing over the American game plan in this region, especially vis a vis Pakistan. For this naiveté we are continuing to pay a heavy price, not only in lives lost but in institutions undermined.

Dr. Mazari is the Resident Editor of daily The Nation. She can be reached at callstr@hotmail.com

What Pakistan’s Military Needs To Learn From Israel

A Military Can Do Wonders for an Economy

This is where the Pakistani military blundered and where militaries in ‘start-up’ nations like Israel , Turkey and South Korea managed to achieve. Lesson One: Support creativity and not proxy corrupt elites. Lesson Two: Economy first; democracy second – Editor’s Note – PakNationalists/AhmedQuraishi.com

An NRO Q&A

Why is Israel so economically successful? Dan Senor and Saul Singer go beyond stereotypes and beyond the continuing Mideast conflict to analyze this question in their new book, Start-up Nation: The Story of Israel’s Economic Miracle. Senor, a former Bush-administration official in Iraq, took questions from National Review Online‘s Kathryn Jean Lopez on what Israel’s done right, what stands in her way, and how we can learn a little from our ally.

KATHRYN JEAN LOPEZ: What’s so special about Israel?

DAN SENOR: Israel represents the highest concentration of innovation and entrepreneurship in the world today: the most start-ups per capita; the highest percentage of GDP invested in civilian R&D; more companies on NASDAQ than all of Europe, Korea, Japan, India, and China combined; and the biggest destination for global venture capital per capita. Israel raises 2.5 times as much global venture capital as the U.S., 30 times more than Europe, 80 times more than India, and 350 times more than China – and these numbers are from 2008, when the world was in the midst of an economic meltdown. Israel all but escaped the crisis that ripped through economies everywhere else.

LOPEZ: What makes Israel an economic miracle? What’s most impressive?

DAN SENOR: The jaw-dropping data above would be impressive for any country, but to accomplish all this while under a near-total regional economic boycott, under physical attack, and absorbing millions of refugees in a tiny country with no resources is hard to comprehend.

LOPEZ: What’s the secret of its success?

DAN SENOR: Our book dives into many interacting factors, but one of the most important is the training and battlefield experience that most Israelis receive in the military. The military is where many Israelis learn to lead and manage people, improvise, become mission-oriented, work in teams, and contribute to their country. They tend to come out of their years of service (three for men, two for women) more mature and directed than their peers in other countries. They learn “the value of five minutes,” as one general told us. They even learn something more uniquely Israeli: to speak up – regardless of ranks and hierarchy – if they think things can be done better.

LOPEZ: Where has Israel fallen behind?

DAN SENOR: The non-tech portion of the economy is overconcentrated, overregulated, and overtaxed, and has consequently performed at a mediocre level. If the conditions that have allowed the high-tech sector to flourish were applied to the rest of the economy, Israel could grow even faster. If Israel also were to address the low labor-force-participation rates in certain demographics, we agree with Prime Minister Netanyahu that Israel could become one of the top ten largest economies in the world.

LOPEZ: Has this been an ethical success story?

DAN SENOR: We believe that the free-market system is progressively eliminating the extreme poverty that was the lot of the world throughout history. This process is largely driven by improvements in productivity, which are in part a result of advancements in technology, especially by small, scrappy start-ups. Also, Israel has specialized in life-enhancing and life-saving technologies like medical devices, water conservation, desalination, and irrigation, not to mention the information technology that is making the world smaller. The great thing about innovation is that, unlike physical resources, ideas can be shared and duplicated by all without taking from anyone else.

LOPEZ: Is there something particularly Jewish about Israel’s success?

DAN SENOR: Many people conjecture that there is something specifically Jewish at work. The notion that Jews are “smart” has become deeply embedded in the Western psyche. We saw this ourselves; when we told people we were writing a book about why Israel is so innovative, many reacted by saying, “It’s simple – Jews are smart, so it’s no surprise that Israel is innovative.” But pinning Israel’s success on a stereotype obscures more than it reveals.

For starters, the idea of a unitary Jewishness – whether genetic or cultural – would seem to have little applicability to a nation that, though small, is among the most heterogeneous in the world. Israel’s tiny population is made up of some 70 different nationalities. A Jewish refugee from Iraq and one from Poland or Ethiopia did not share a language, education, culture, or history – at least not for the two previous millennia. As Irish economist David McWilliams explains, “Israel is quite the opposite of a uni-dimensional, Jewish country. . . . It is a monotheistic melting pot of a Diaspora that brought back with it the culture, language, and customs of the four corners of the earth.”

While a common prayer book and a shared legacy of persecution count for something, it was far from clear that this disparate group could form a functioning country at all, let alone one that would excel at – of all things – teamwork and innovation.

Indeed, Israel’s secret seems to lie in something more than just the talent of individuals. There are lots of places with talented people, certainly with many times the number of engineers that Israel has to offer. Singaporean students, for example, lead the world in science and mathematics test scores. Multinationals have set up shop in places like India and Ireland, too. “But we don’t set up our mission-critical work in those countries,” an American executive from eBay told us. “Google, Cisco, Microsoft, Intel, eBay . . . the list goes on. The best-kept secret is that we all live and die by the work of our Israeli teams. It’s much more than just outsourcing call centers to India or setting up IT services in Ireland. What we do in Israel is unlike what we do anywhere else in the world.”

LOPEZ: What’s the Buffett test?

DAN SENOR: Without spoiling the surprise, let’s just say that Warren Buffett – the apostle of risk aversion – bought his first company overseas in 2006 while Hezbollah’s katusha rockets were landing near the company’s factories. This was his $4 billion acquisition of the manufacturing company Iscar, and the deal was being closed in the midst of the Lebanon War. Buffett didn’t blink. He went through with the deal. Even up against such geopolitical and security volatility, he bet on the Israelis, and in the book, we describe the test he used to justify that bet. It’s key to understanding why so many investors and multinational companies (Cisco has bought nine Israeli companies and is looking to buy more) are willing to take the risk to do business in Israel.

LOPEZ: Can we have an economic miracle too?

DAN SENOR: Yes! America has untapped “Israeli” potential in the tens of thousands of returning veterans whose leadership experience is not appreciated by the American corporate world.

U.S. vets coming out of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars are better prepared than ever for the business world, whether building start-ups or helping lead larger companies through the current turbulent period. Yet the capacity of U.S. corporate recruiters and executives to make sense of combat experience and its value in the business world is limited. As Israeli entrepreneur Jon Medved explained, most American businesspeople simply do not know how to read a military résumé.

U.S. military career adviser Al Chase told us that a number of the vets he’s worked with have walked a business interviewer through all their leadership experiences from the battlefield, including case studies in high-stakes decisionmaking and management of large numbers of people and equipment in a war zone, and at the end of it the interviewer has said something along the lines of, “That’s very interesting, but have you ever had a real job?”

In Israel, it is the opposite. While Israeli businesses still look for private-sector experience, military service provides the critical standardized metric for employers – all of whom know what it means to be an officer or to have served in an elite unit. Our book explores ways in which the U.S. might close the cultural gap between the business world and the military communities in the U.S.

LOPEZ: Can economic miracles lead to peace?

DAN SENOR: Israel’s economic success has been a key component in convincing the Arab world that its existence is permanent in the region, which is the threshold incentive for the Arab world to end its attempts to destroy Israel. The moment the Arab world is ready for peace, the opportunities for economic cooperation are great, and Israel could play a pivotal role in helping regional economies advance.

LOPEZ: If Israel is so smart, why can’t it seem to fully outsmart its enemies?

DAN SENOR: Well, on the one hand, you have to be pretty deft and tenacious to be surrounded by enemies who’ve been at war with you since the dawn of your existence and still function like the Israelis do each day. On the other hand, it is remarkable that the Arab world has been attacking Israel incessantly yet has managed to paint Israel as the aggressor.

LOPEZ: Could Iran easily end all this success?

DAN SENOR: No, but if Iran goes nuclear, the possibilities for regional peace shrink to nil, and this is a great opportunity lost for Israel and the Arabs alike.

LOPEZ: What is the biggest threat facing Israel?

DAN SENOR: The threat of radical Islamists backed by an Iranian nuclear umbrella, but this is a threat that would cast a pall over global security and prosperity, not just Israel.

LOPEZ: What makes you two economists all of a sudden, by the way?

DAN SENOR: Aha, you have discovered that this is not a book about economics, really, but culture, history, and chutzpah. We came at this story with the tools of policy analysis, investment experience, and journalism, and tried to tell it for non-economists like ourselves.

LOPEZ: It’s hard not to notice the prominent “A Council on Foreign Relations Book.” When did Israel buy the Trilateral Commission?

DAN SENOR: You’ll have to read the book to find out; but we’re not sure that even we will be able to validate that conspiracy theory.

- Kathryn Jean Lopez is editor-at-large of National Review Online .

Can Mrs. Clinton Control CIA In Afghanistan?

There is a reason why her first visit to Pakistan turned into a big firefighting mission. In less than two years, even Pakistan’s elite turned suspicious of US intentions. Forget Hillary’s empty accusations that Pakistan is protecting al-Qaeda, the truth is that Washington has played a double game with Pakistan. Afghanistan today is a hub for anti-Pakistan activities and a source for the supply of weapons to terrorists in Pakistan [and Iran, and China]. The charm offensive aside: Can Mrs. Clinton and President Obama control CIA activities in Afghanistan? Who is setting America’s Afghan agenda?

She came, she charmed, she failed to convince.

By AHMED QURAISHI
WWW.AHMEDQURAISHI.COM

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan-Two years ago, when isolated reports in the Pakistani media accused the United States of playing a double game in Afghanistan, most commentators dismissed them as conspiracy theories and kneejerk anti-Americanism.

Today those reports dominate the mainstream Pakistani media. The distrust is so serious that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton had to turn her first official visit to Pakistan into a firefighting mission, kicking off a charm offensive to win over skeptic Pakistanis.

Her campaign has included Facebook advertisements targeting young Pakistanis, town-hall type meetings, and group television interviews with anchors meant to maximize her on-air exposure.

Before she even landed in Pakistan, Clinton had instructed US diplomats in Islamabad to get tough with the Pakistani media. At one point, the American ambassador wrote a secret letter to a large Pakistani newspaper accusing one of its columnists, a critic of US policies, of endangering American lives. She gave no evidence of how a policy critique endangered anyone’s life. The columnist was dropped after ten years of working for the paper. The US embassy in Pakistan is very powerful thanks to a pro-US Pakistani government that sees Washington as a hedge against the powerful Pakistani military.

Not that Mrs. Clinton and the US diplomats are alone in countering critics of US policies here. Pakistan’s ambassador to Washington Husain Haqqani, a former journalist who is widely derided as ‘Washington’s ambassador in the Pakistan embassy’, is known to have put his media management expertise in the service of defending his government’s ultra close ties with Washington, although his planted image-enhancement stories find little buyers among Pakistanis.

Mrs. Clinton’s visit was so carefully choreographed that US diplomats launched a strict vetting process to determine which Pakistani television anchors should be allowed to participate in a ‘pool interview’. The point was to exclude anyone critical of US policies ['anti-American' to US diplomats]. This sharply contrasts with the statements Clinton has been giving here, like this one she gave to the television anchors, ” It is especially critical that we do more of what you’re doing today with your colleagues so that I have a chance to answer the questions that are on the minds of the people of Pakistan.”

But when time came for the real questions, she dodged them. So much for a successful public diplomacy.

Despite all this vetting, one anchor, Talat Hussain from Aaj News, managed to throw a couple of ‘real’ questions that unsettled Secretary Clinton. Visibly embarrassed, she kept repeating the line, ‘No one can say Pakistani media is not free after this’ and she kept repeating it until the end of the show.

At one point, media officials in the provincial capital Lahore wrote to higher-ups complaining against US diplomats who manipulated which Pakistani journalists should be allowed to interact with Clinton. “She came here to interact with Pakistanis. US diplomats don’t get to decide which Pakistani media can attend her public events and which one cannot,” a senior Punjab provincial official told me from Lahore.

This kind of media management is normally the prerogative of the host government and not the guest. In another press interaction with a few journalists in Lahore, Mrs. Clinton sat down with a handful of predominantly pro-American media personalities, including one widely known to be a paid consultant for the US Department of Defense, who normally advises on Pakistani affairs and is famous for saying everything that American policymakers want to hear.

Mrs. Clinton was received by a junior Foreign Office diplomat while for some reason Foreign Minister Qureshi stayed away

So much for Mrs. Clinton’s public diplomacy mission, almost every Pakistani journalist known for well reasoned and calibrated critique of US policies was excluded from any interaction with the US Secretary of State. Which says a lot about Washington’s tolerance level for criticism despite the high-sounding lectures on democracy that Mrs. Clinton delivered in Pakistan.

How fake in real sense this public diplomacy trip was can be gauged from the following: Mrs. Clinton’s first day in Pakistan was full of warm imagery and rhetoric: how she and her husband love Pakistanis, how she and President Obama enjoy Pakistani food, how honest and straightforward she is, and how sincere United States is in its friendship with Pakistan.

But when it came to substance, she was full of hot air. For example, during the ‘pool interview’ with seven television anchors, she curtly ignored a question about the increasing incidents of arrests of US special operations officers inside Pakistani cities carrying diplomatic passports and illegal weapons. You would think she might want to address this point considering that this and similar stories are stoking Pakistani public’s anger. But no, she didn’t.

Merely two days before her arrival, four US ‘diplomats’ were arrested somewhere in the Pakistani capital dressed as Afghan Taliban, carrying illegal and unlicensed weapons, and in possession of pictures of sensitive buildings. They were released on the intervention of the Interior Ministry, headed by a close aide of President Zardari. The Ministry is openly accused in the media of not only covering for the US embassy’s illegal actions but also of licensing the operations of private US security firms across Pakistan on an unprecedented scale not seen or known even during the reign of the former pro-US president Musharraf. Interestingly, the Pakistani intelligence agencies have been kept out of the loop by both the US embassy and the Ministry. This alone has generated tremendous ill will within the Pakistani public opinion against Washington.

Last month, a Pakistani journalist published official documents leaked from within the Interior Ministry that positively showed US Ambassador Anne Patterson colluding with the Ministry to ‘legalize’ a cache of weapons that came from an unknown source [most probably from Afghanistan]. The cache was handed over to an American security firm that was later stopped from operating in Pakistan.

Mrs. Clinton had a simple answer when a journalist asked her about such incidents. “I don’t know about this,” is what she said to someone asking her about the latest incident involving four US ‘diplomats’.

These are some of the issues that the mainstream US media hides from the American public. No wonder most Americans don’t know how bad their government and intelligence mess in Afghanistan is. US citizens are unaware, for example, about the strong Pakistani apprehensions that Washington – or some powerful lobbies there – decidedly brought in anti-Pakistan forces into the government in Kabul, and then set them loose on a course of collision with Pakistan, including recruiting, financing and training terrorists to incite an ethnic insurgency in Balochistan exploiting local grievances. For most of the past eight years, the US Ambassador in Kabul was an anti-Pakistan diplomat who spent more of his Afghan assignment finding ways and means to target Pakistan.

Pakistanis also have strong evidence that some Americans allowed India to set up a vast intelligence network there, hidden beneath several development projects. This network is involved in pumping money and weapons to terrorists inside Pakistan. [On Oct. 28, Pakistani police arrested five members of a banned militant outfit and seized about 150 kilos of explosives of Indian origin , automatic rifles and suicide vests from them].

The above cannot happen in US-occupied and controlled Afghanistan without US knowledge. Or, to be precise, without the knowledge of at least one influential US actor: the intelligence community. CIA and possibly other US spy agencies that come under the Department of Defense are involved in fostering terrorism not just in Pakistan but also inside Iran and western China.

In Pakistan, elements in CIA aided by the Indians and Karzai’s spy groups have played a role in setting up and feeding insurgencies across western Pakistan between 2004 and 2008. This was done during the Bush-Cheney administration as punishment for Pakistan for not completely submitting to the US project in Afghanistan. Washington then suspected that Musharraf was double dealing. US did not want Pakistan to have any independent foreign policy or ideas on Afghanistan, Kashmir and India other than what Washington was planning.

The spate of recent suicide bombings in Pakistan, killing some 200 Pakistanis in less than a month, is not the work of mountain hillbillies in South Waziristan on the Pak-Afghan border but the work of trained operatives who receive support, intelligence and training from organized military groups.

We know our own citizens are involved in this terrorism, but the small terror army in South Waziristan is not getting its money and weapons from inside Pakistan. Rehman Malik’s Interior Ministry and the military’s spy agencies have credible, strong and detailed information about how a US-controlled Afghanistan is being used for anti-Pakistan covet warfare. BLA and TTP terrorists have a safe haven there. Terrorist Abdullah Mehsud was killed in 2007 slipping back from Afghanistan through Balochistan [and not the tribal belt] after meeting his backers. We know why the Chinese working on different projects in Pakistani were targeted here.

American officials like Hillary Clinton avoid commenting on these issues. The question she dodged from a Pakistani journalist on armed US ‘diplomats’ was a sign that we increasingly recognizing from watching US diplomats work in Iraq and Afghanistan. US diplomats are averse to commenting on possible clandestine activities of CIA and or people from the US military in the host country.

For years, US officials have been praising Pakistan for helping eliminate Al Qaeda and complaining about lack of Pakistani cooperation in pursuing the Afghan Taliban. That was Bush administration’s refrain. Under Mr. Obama, his diplomats in Islamabad took turns this month in threatening war against Pakistan and in confirming the presence of Mullah Omar and Bin Laden inside Pakistan, without evidence of course, since US statements are enough. In return we, Pakistanis, are not allowed to make similar conjecture about the presence of bin Laden in Afghanistan, where the US military can’t control the country eight years later.

Mrs. Clinton has added a twist to this American-Afghan saga. One of her rather bold statements in Pakistan is so fantastic I must quote it as it was reported by the Associated Press: “I find it hard to believe that nobody in your government knows where they [Al Qaeda] are and couldn’t get them if they really wanted to,” Clinton said in an interview with Pakistani journalists in Lahore. “Maybe that’s the case. Maybe they’re not gettable. I don’t know.”

Amazing to see her determination to question the role of Pakistan when she has no evidence on anything that she is saying.

While the isolated pro-US Pakistani government is understandably reluctant to confront Washington on this eight-year-old charade, the Pakistani public opinion, the media, opposition parties and the powerful military have all had it. Washington is good at messing things up and even better at pinning the blame on others. For some reason, Mrs. Clinton and her administration won’t admit that they messed up Afghanistan big time and that rogue elements within the US military and intelligence played a big role in this. [The New York Times has reported that one of Afghanistan's biggest drug barons, a brother of the US-backed Afghan president, has been on CIA's payroll for years. Criminals and warlords in the Afghan government are allies of CIA and the US military. The US spy agency is also involved in fomenting trouble inside Pakistan, Iran and western China using the Afghan base. CIA is not always good at what it does, that's why many Pakistanis have ended up knowing some of the truth. Late but better than never.]

Can Mrs. Clinton and President Obama control CIA and the increasingly independent-minded US military in Afghanistan? The answer to this question will determine if peace returns to our region any time soon.

Pakistan’s Civil Society Still Needs U.S. Support

Jamsheed K. Choksy

As part of the recently signed Kerry-Lugar Bill authorizing $7.5 billion in economic assistance for Pakistan over the next five years, the U.S. Agency for International Development and the U.S. State Department will be expected to “assist efforts to enhance civilian control and stable constitutional government” in Pakistan, as outlined in the draft metrics for evaluating progress in Pakistan presented by the Obama administration to Congress in September. The goal is to enhance Pakistan’s local capacity for sustainable communal and economic growth so that counterinsurgency (COIN) efforts can be successful. Rebuilding civil society will be even more important as a bulwark against militancy once the Pakistani military’s current offensive against the Taliban in South Waziristan ends.

Yet, simultaneously, a major reorientation in U.S. policy toward Pakistan is underway, with the planning, administration, and staffing of reconstruction projects being handed over to the government of Pakistan and to private Pakistani organizations. U.S. officials hope this will both reduce Pakistanis’ negative reactions to foreign aid, and safeguard American civilians by removing them from the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) and the North West Frontier Province (NWFP).

There is no doubt that both social reconstruction and enhanced security is desperately needed in the FATA and NWFP, where local populations still face intimidation from armed Islamic terrorists. Economic opportunities have declined, leaving approximately 60 percent of the FATA’s 5 million inhabitants and 20 percent of the NWFP’s 17.5 million residents below the poverty level. Literacy has fallen to 17.4 percent in the FATA and 49 percent in the NWFP, because militants have destroyed secular schools.

What remains uncertain is whether local Pakistani organizations have the expertise and capacity to implement development efficiently, especially after the current fighting ends.

Indeed, Pakistani and foreign aid workers as well as officials of the FATA and NWFP are concerned by the possibility of unregulated and poorly directed funding. They are convinced that on-site U.S. guidance is necessary in addition to financial assistance. A senior USAID economist stated that lack of American involvement would “seriously compromise” reconstruction efforts. It seems that the U.S. is tossing Pakistan’s government a proverbial bone — control over billions of dollars of aid-related funds in exchange for advancing American counterinsurgency priorities in the country.

Is the trade-off worthwhile?

The increasing absence of USAID personnel and subcontractors is bemoaned by Pashtuns as a “terrible success” for the Taliban and al-Qaida, for it gives the impression that the militants have run the Americans out of town. So despite the security risks, the U.S. needs to demonstrate to skeptical Pakistanis that bilateral partnerships are based upon engagement at the local level, rather than upon directions from afar. As important, U.S. agencies must utilize official Pakistani security resources plus locally provided residential and administrative areas, rather than creating neocolonial expatriate enclaves.

But contrary to those who tout only the dangers, USAID and its subcontractors have demonstrated some success at ensuring that civil society development projects benefit both Pakistan and the U.S.

Over 100,000 micro-enterprises (.pdf) were established in the NWFP by USAID to ensure economic independence from militants. Skilled and unskilled workers in the NWFP and FATA who receive civil society-related employment have commented that they do not object to salaries being paid through U.S.-funded projects. Rather, they value being able to “feed, clothe, and shelter” their families “without shedding blood.”

As importantly, where missteps have occurred, American aid workers with on-site experience have worked with Pakistani officials to correct them. So, for example, the U.S. currently does not brand aid to the FATA and NWFP, in the belief that this protects staff and beneficiaries from terrorist retaliation. However, since many local residents surmise correctly that the aid delivered by the government of Pakistan originates with USAID, the attempt to limit visibility has contributed to baseless suspicion of American attempts to colonize Pakistan. Local Pakistani and American representatives are working to correct this, realizing that far from fanning suspicion, transparency will mitigate the rumor-fueled resistance to foreign assistance that has been building within Pakistan recently.

Another error is the routine refusal by U.S. administrations to requests for educational development by Pakistani Muslim clerics, for fear of assets falling into Taliban and al-Qaida hands. Local officials and American contractors realize that Washington’s fears are misguided and misplaced. Their field experience indicates that extending clearly labeled aid to carefully chosen madrasas would highlight how American resources are utilized in partnership with the Pakistani government and Muslim institutions, in ways that not only are not anti-Muslim but that benefit mainstream Islam and Pakistan.

Most important, because the government and people of Pakistan are finally accepting the challenges of counteracting militancy, it is vital that the U.S. administration respect local sovereignty. The slightest involvement of American troops and security contractors from private organizations would undercut Pakistanis’ fierce sense of nationalism, and so facilitate the spread of anti-American sentiments by Islamic militants.

If the Pakistani government and peace-seeking citizens are slowly winning the battle for the hearts and minds of FATA and NWFP’s residents, it is through the reconstruction of civil society and not through warfare alone. And U.S. assistance for incorporating the FATA and NWFP back into Pakistani civil society has been the key to the recent successes.

Sustaining positive outcomes, however, requires cautious policy, tactful engagement, and constant consultation — not just between senior officials but also with those actually working in the NWFP and FATA. Militaries can win battles, but only society can ensure stability. Given the aid allocation over the next five years, an American withdrawal from direct engagement in Pakistan’s societal development will squander a unique opportunity to get things right.

Jamsheed K. Choksy is professor of Central Eurasian, Indian, Iranian, Islamic, and International studies and former director of the Middle Eastern Studies Program at Indiana University. He also is a member of the National Council on the Humanities at the U.S. National Endowment for the Humanities. He has conducted research in Pakistan since 1984. The views expressed are his own.

Pakistan’s Civil Society Still Needs U.S. Support

Jamsheed K. Choksy

As part of the recently signed Kerry-Lugar Bill authorizing $7.5 billion in economic assistance for Pakistan over the next five years, the U.S. Agency for International Development and the U.S. State Department will be expected to “assist efforts to enhance civilian control and stable constitutional government” in Pakistan, as outlined in the draft metrics for evaluating progress in Pakistan presented by the Obama administration to Congress in September. The goal is to enhance Pakistan’s local capacity for sustainable communal and economic growth so that counterinsurgency (COIN) efforts can be successful. Rebuilding civil society will be even more important as a bulwark against militancy once the Pakistani military’s current offensive against the Taliban in South Waziristan ends.

Yet, simultaneously, a major reorientation in U.S. policy toward Pakistan is underway, with the planning, administration, and staffing of reconstruction projects being handed over to the government of Pakistan and to private Pakistani organizations. U.S. officials hope this will both reduce Pakistanis’ negative reactions to foreign aid, and safeguard American civilians by removing them from the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) and the North West Frontier Province (NWFP).

There is no doubt that both social reconstruction and enhanced security is desperately needed in the FATA and NWFP, where local populations still face intimidation from armed Islamic terrorists. Economic opportunities have declined, leaving approximately 60 percent of the FATA’s 5 million inhabitants and 20 percent of the NWFP’s 17.5 million residents below the poverty level. Literacy has fallen to 17.4 percent in the FATA and 49 percent in the NWFP, because militants have destroyed secular schools.

What remains uncertain is whether local Pakistani organizations have the expertise and capacity to implement development efficiently, especially after the current fighting ends.

Indeed, Pakistani and foreign aid workers as well as officials of the FATA and NWFP are concerned by the possibility of unregulated and poorly directed funding. They are convinced that on-site U.S. guidance is necessary in addition to financial assistance. A senior USAID economist stated that lack of American involvement would “seriously compromise” reconstruction efforts. It seems that the U.S. is tossing Pakistan’s government a proverbial bone — control over billions of dollars of aid-related funds in exchange for advancing American counterinsurgency priorities in the country.

Is the trade-off worthwhile?

The increasing absence of USAID personnel and subcontractors is bemoaned by Pashtuns as a “terrible success” for the Taliban and al-Qaida, for it gives the impression that the militants have run the Americans out of town. So despite the security risks, the U.S. needs to demonstrate to skeptical Pakistanis that bilateral partnerships are based upon engagement at the local level, rather than upon directions from afar. As important, U.S. agencies must utilize official Pakistani security resources plus locally provided residential and administrative areas, rather than creating neocolonial expatriate enclaves.

But contrary to those who tout only the dangers, USAID and its subcontractors have demonstrated some success at ensuring that civil society development projects benefit both Pakistan and the U.S.

Over 100,000 micro-enterprises (.pdf) were established in the NWFP by USAID to ensure economic independence from militants. Skilled and unskilled workers in the NWFP and FATA who receive civil society-related employment have commented that they do not object to salaries being paid through U.S.-funded projects. Rather, they value being able to “feed, clothe, and shelter” their families “without shedding blood.”

As importantly, where missteps have occurred, American aid workers with on-site experience have worked with Pakistani officials to correct them. So, for example, the U.S. currently does not brand aid to the FATA and NWFP, in the belief that this protects staff and beneficiaries from terrorist retaliation. However, since many local residents surmise correctly that the aid delivered by the government of Pakistan originates with USAID, the attempt to limit visibility has contributed to baseless suspicion of American attempts to colonize Pakistan. Local Pakistani and American representatives are working to correct this, realizing that far from fanning suspicion, transparency will mitigate the rumor-fueled resistance to foreign assistance that has been building within Pakistan recently.

Another error is the routine refusal by U.S. administrations to requests for educational development by Pakistani Muslim clerics, for fear of assets falling into Taliban and al-Qaida hands. Local officials and American contractors realize that Washington’s fears are misguided and misplaced. Their field experience indicates that extending clearly labeled aid to carefully chosen madrasas would highlight how American resources are utilized in partnership with the Pakistani government and Muslim institutions, in ways that not only are not anti-Muslim but that benefit mainstream Islam and Pakistan.

Most important, because the government and people of Pakistan are finally accepting the challenges of counteracting militancy, it is vital that the U.S. administration respect local sovereignty. The slightest involvement of American troops and security contractors from private organizations would undercut Pakistanis’ fierce sense of nationalism, and so facilitate the spread of anti-American sentiments by Islamic militants.

If the Pakistani government and peace-seeking citizens are slowly winning the battle for the hearts and minds of FATA and NWFP’s residents, it is through the reconstruction of civil society and not through warfare alone. And U.S. assistance for incorporating the FATA and NWFP back into Pakistani civil society has been the key to the recent successes.

Sustaining positive outcomes, however, requires cautious policy, tactful engagement, and constant consultation — not just between senior officials but also with those actually working in the NWFP and FATA. Militaries can win battles, but only society can ensure stability. Given the aid allocation over the next five years, an American withdrawal from direct engagement in Pakistan’s societal development will squander a unique opportunity to get things right.

Jamsheed K. Choksy is professor of Central Eurasian, Indian, Iranian, Islamic, and International studies and former director of the Middle Eastern Studies Program at Indiana University. He also is a member of the National Council on the Humanities at the U.S. National Endowment for the Humanities. He has conducted research in Pakistan since 1984. The views expressed are his own.

Turkish PM says West treating Iran unfairly

LONDON (AFP) – Turkey’s prime minister accused Western powers of treating Iran unfairly over its peaceful nuclear program, in an interview Monday in which he referred to the Iranian president as a friend.

Speaking to The Guardian newspaper, Recep Tayyip Erdogan downplayed Western concerns that Iran wants to build nuclear weapons as “gossip”, and implied that the accusers were guilty of hypocrisy.

“There is a style of approach which is not very fair because those (who accuse Iran of pursuing nuclear weapons) have very strong nuclear infrastructures and they don’t deny that,” he said.

“The permanent members of the UN Security Council all have nuclear arsenals and then there are countries which are not members of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) which also have nuclear weapons.

“So although Iran doesn’t have a weapon, those who say Iran shouldn’t have them are those countries which do.”

Erdogan also said a military strike against Iranian nuclear installations would be “crazy”, according to the newspaper.

“If the idea is to devastate Iran or somehow erase it altogether I don’t think that would be right,” he added.

“On the one hand you say you want global peace, on the other hand you are going to have such a destructive approach to a state which has 10,000 years of history. It is not correct.”

Turkey, a NATO member, has in recent years improved ties with Iran, its eastern neighbor, and sought to help resolve the nuclear dispute.

Erdogan said of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad: “There is no doubt he is our friend. We have kept very good relations and we have had no difficulty at all.”

Centre to retain security forces to combat Maoists

Press Trust Of India
Kolkata

The Centre has assured the West Bengal government that it will not withdraw the 1,700 personnel of central security forces from the three Maoist-hit districts of West Midnapore, Bankura and Purulia, even though Assembly elections in adjoining Jharkhand is round the corner.

The assurance was given by Union Home Minister P Chidambaram to West Bengal Chief Minister Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee when the latter met him in Delhi recently, Bhattacharjee was quoted as having told a Left Front meeting in Kolkata on Monday.

A CPI state leader, who preferred anonymity, said that the chief minister gave a briefing of his meeting with Chidambaram and expressed his government’s firm determination to take on the Maoist challenge. He was also keen to find out the whereabouts of the two policemen missing since July 30.

He said that the chief minister dwelt at length on steps to fortify all 20 police stations in West Midnapore district, alert security forces and agencies about an impending Maoist attacks and augmenting police force and check-posts in the vulnerable areas.

“Efforts will be made to face the Maoists through encounters,” he is said to have told the Front meeting.

Bhattacharjee said it was evident from Chidambaram’s assertion that the Centre would like to combat the Maoists effectively, the CPI leader said.

‘Pakistan pledges to capture Jundullah terrorists and extradite them to Iran’

Tehran Times Political Desk

TEHRAN — Iranian Interior Minister Mostafa Mohammad Najjar has said that Pakistani officials have promised to cooperate with Iran and to take the measures necessary to capture the members of the Rigi terrorist group and extradite them to Iran.

Pakistan and Iran are both victims of terrorism and should cooperate in efforts to establish security in the region, he told reporters in Tehran on Monday.

The Jundullah terrorist group, which is also known as the Rigi group because it is led by Abdul-Malek Rigi, has claimed responsibility for an attack that killed over 40 people, including five senior commanders of the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps, in the southeastern province of Sistan-Baluchestan on October 18.

Militants of the Jundullah ring regularly cross over into Iran from their hideouts in neighboring Pakistan to attack civilians and police officers.

Najjar said that during his visit to Pakistan he informed Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari, Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani, and Interior Minister Rehman Malik about the Iranian nation’s expectations of Pakistan.

He also stated that Tehran and Islamabad have drafted a security agreement on cooperation in dealing with problems such as human trafficking, illicit drug trafficking, and arms trafficking on their borders, as well as money laundering and cyber crime

Iran must learn Manners

Asif Chauhdary

Knees are based under the belly by default and can never come before tummy. Trying it by someone would only bring desperation and humiliation and nothing else. Pakistan has a neighbour who is trying to put knees before belly so ever since the over thrown of Reza Shah Pehlvi. As it is no more a secret that we are talking of Iran, hence it is also essential to mention that the reasons for this vindictive and grudging attitude are known by a hair’s breadth to Pakistan. The rise of Islamic revolution brought no goodwill messages for Pakistan. Though as far as Pakistan is concerned, it always stretched out a brotherly hand towards Iran, may that was about the revolutionaries coming into power or Iran-Iraq war. Besides this Pakistan never meddled into the Iranian politics or its internal affairs, nevertheless, Iran invariably showed a lost sleep about Pakistan’s affairs, contrary to it.

If Iran could find the reasons for showing its disquiet over sectarian issue in Pakistan then the same rationales were valid for Pakistan to protest over the Sunnis plight in Iran but Pakistan while indifferent to whichever government was in power always displayed sensibleness. Pakistan never objected to the founding of Iranian cultural centers (Khana-e-Farhang) throughout Pakistan and that too in a number more than it required. Pakistan always had reasons to believe that why the Iranians have more than one cultural centers of this kind in the cities having Shia population in majority but Pakistan always demonstrated patience. It’s no more a secret that what these cultural centers (Khana-e-Farhang) have been up to in Pakistan but Pakistan has never blamed Iran for any involvement.

Recently the Indians have handed over a newly constructed 218-km Zaranj-Delaram highway to the Afghan government which is of strategic importance. What interest India had in constructing the road that will connect Kandhar to the Iran border is a question that Iran and Afghanistan are in a better position to answer, but Pakistan never showed any nervousness on it despite the fact that highway is defiantly likely to influence Pakistan’s strategic interests in the region.

The IPI gas pipeline project was approved to meet the Indian requirements but who doesn’t know that it was the India who backed out from the agreement at the eleventh hour which annoyed Iran also but at the end of the day Iran had no grievances against India while Pakistan has been asked to sit in the corner, wait and see.

Like Pak-Afghan border, the residents of Pak-Iran border are also living astride the international boundary. While Pakistan on Pak-Afghan border despite having great security problems never thought of erecting the wall and instead augmented the security, but Iran on Pak-Afghan border has constructed a700 kilometer long, 3 feet thick and 10 feet high concrete wall by using extra strong steel rods, alongside its border with Pakistan from Taftan to Mand, although the Baloch community of border village Sorap of western Mekran region have shown their fears about being politically and socially divided. The people were forced by the Iranian authorities to vacate the town in a stipulated time period, but Pakistan’s official stance, that Iran has the right to erect border fencing in its territory, is very much on record.

Pak-Iran relations have seen some frequent highs and lows during last three decades. Late President General Zia ul Haq apart from visiting himself once had been sending the goodwill missions to stamp out the Iranian qualms quite off and on but unfortunately no one could satisfy the pre-fixed mind Iranians. If any common man here in Pakistan is asked he would definitely call the Iranians as Pakistan’s brothers. Pakistani president late Field Marshal Ayub Khan gifted 60 Square KM area to Iran to save their Oil drainage on Pakistan side. Reza Shah Pehlvi reciprocated the gesture and started providing Pakistan subside oil in return. However, contrary to that no wonder if one hear the story of marching by the Iranian Passdarans on Pakistani flag in the presence of Pakistani diplomats as guests invited to witness the parade.

The recent Iranian elections were a unique example of rigging by Ahmadinejad gang where Pakistan had a great opportunity to create trouble for a brother country had the latter been an enemy as it is thought by the Iranians but remained indifferent to the issue until it resolved.

Iran must put his own house in order before leveling any accusation against Pakistan in the most ill-mannered and undiplomatic way as it doesn’t speak high of an Iranian leader whose own loyalties and credibility is doubted amongst his own countrymen. Before pointing any accusing finger towards Pakistan he needs to satisfy the world body about the strong Argentinean criticism on President Ahmadinejad’s decision to put forward Ahmad Vahidi as defense minister in his new 21-member cabinet. No one has forgotten that Vahidi is wanted by Argentina in connection with a 1994 bombing in Buenos Aires which leveled a seven-floor Argentinean building, killing 85 people and wounded 300. It was the worst terrorist attack in Argentina.

Pakistan bagged all the blames for helping Iran in nuclear proliferation but surprisingly it is Pakistan which in return is targeted by the western and USA authorities whereas the Iranian government is simply getting just the verbal warnings by them which provides enough reasons to believe that a conspiracy to tight noose around Pakistan’s neck is being executed discreetly and no wonder if Iran is also a party to it. It is high time for the Iranians to learn the diplomatic norms. Pakistan has always displayed tolerence and maturity. The recent example is of releasing 14 guards from Iranian Passdran-e-Inqilab, who entered Pakistan unlawfully.

Both the countries are not having that tensed relations that they can’t even talk to clarify each others misgivings, only if India has priority over Pakistan for Iran. It is high time for Iran to remember one thing that, genetically knees are based under the belly by default and can never come before tummy. Trying it by someone would only bring desperation and humiliation to one and nothing else.

The Day When Kashmir Was Occupied

Mahazi Islami

62 years ago on this day (October 27, 1947) India landed its army at Srinagar airport to occupy Kashmir. The disaster would have happened, but could have not continued, if the political foot soldiers, like the one mentioned below, had not been first cultivated by the Indian state. While narrating the events of 1947 in his autobiography ‘My Life and Times‘(1992: Allied Publishers, New Delhi, India, p39)The late Syed Mir Qasim, once a puppet chief minister of Kashmir, and himself a front-ranking foot soldier, writes:

“…As they [Indian Army] landed at the airport some of them killed a few Muslims. This shocked and infuriated the local people who were there to welcome the Indian army as their savior. The shocked people thought of carrying their dead ones to Jamia Mosque in a procession. This could have created an uncontrollable situation and turned the people’s anger against India instead of the invaders and perhaps could have given a different direction to the history of Kashmir. No Kashmiri leader, including Sheikh Abdullah, could possibly stem this uprising. But Khawaja Ghulam Mohiuddin Qarra intervened and managed to stop the procession at Lal Chowk. He talked the mob out of its procession plan so convincingly that one of them stood up to shout that his son was among those dead, but he would sacrifice another son if Khawja Qara so demanded. The mob was pacified…”

The two foot soldiers, one who is talking and the other who is being talked about, both are no more. Gone from this world after breathing in their allocated volume of Oxygen. However, the misery their actions, as well as of those like them, brought still persists. We have to take on the burden, do what best we can to end the misery, and secure the future of coming generations.

Maoists’ strategy to counter Cobra battalion

Ramashankar/Alok Kumar, Hindustan Times

Is the CPI (Maoist) planning to counter the operation to be launched by the newly established central para-military force, Commando Battalion for Resolute Action (CoBRA), in Bihar on the lines of Lalgarh in West Bengal?

If the statement of a self proclaimed zonal commander of the outfit is to be believed, a women brigade has been raised with recruits drawn from Dumaria, Bankebazar and Imamganj blocks under Sherghati sub-division of Gaya district.

The members have been prepared to offer stiff resistance to the CoBRA personnel, who are likely to be engaged in operations against Naxalites in Bihar by the end of October or at the beginning of November this year. “We have changed our strategy following the Union Government’s decision to deploy CoBRA personnel in four worst Naxal affected states,” said the Maoist leader. He said the members of the woman brigade have been trained to handle sophisticated weapons.

Under the changed strategy, the Maoists would put the trained woman commandos in front. Though use of women by Maoists in combat situations is nothing new in Bihar, this will perhaps be the first time, that they will be used as a cover for the hardened naxalite squads to take on the might of the COBRA personnel. They will mainly be used in holding operations, while the main squads prepare ambushes.

Besides, the members of the People’s Liberation of Guerilla Army (PLGA), made up of actvists and sympathisers with coyuntrymade weapons placed as frontal squad of the outfit, would also be there to challenge the security personnel. Theirs remain a delaying action role, welldefined for over six years now.

Sources said that the members of the woman brigade were being imparted training at different training camps set up in hilly terrains and forests on the Bihar-Jharkhand-UP-Chattisgarh borders. The Maoists reportedly held public meetings at two places and demonstarted their new recruits’ firepower, including at one of such assemblies in Thohi forests under Dumaria police station on Tuesday. Several squads totalling a hundred women particpated in the exercises. The meetings denounced the ‘latest actions’ of Congress Pesident Sonia Gandhi, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and the Union Home Minister, P Chidambaram.

Sources in the intelligence agencies admitted that the Maoists have changed their strategy after the Union Government’s decision to deploy CoBRA personnel in four worst naxal affected states, including Bihar and Jharkhand.

India, China and Russia agree to enhance cooperation

Sandeep Dikshit

External Affairs Minister S.M. Krishna with Chinese Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi (right) and Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov prior to the trilateral meeting in Bangalore on Tuesday. Photo: Bhagya Prakash K

China did not raise the issue of Dalai Lama visiting Arunachal Pradesh next month but complained about India’s move to cancel business visas and convert them to employment visas during a 90-minute meeting between Foreign Minister S.M. Krishna and his Chinese counterpart Yang Jiechi here on Tuesday.

On the complaint about the cancellation of business visas that has affected many of its workers, India explained that it was a uniform policy being applied to all foreign nationals. “There was no change in the visa regime. Only the misuse of the business visa was stopped. Visas henceforth would be uniform employment visas,” Mr. Yang was told by his Indian interlocutors.

China condemned the Mumbai attacks and the repeat bombing of the Indian embassy in Kabul after India gave a detailed briefing and “exposed” the masterminds, said highly placed sources. China also said such killing of innocent civilians “also affected them.”

Both sides also dwelt on trade issues and explored ideas to step up its volume in a manner that addressed Indian concerns about the massive imbalance.

To improve communication

India and China also resolved to step up communication to avoid differences that had recently cropped up over disputed areas and the proposed visit of Tibetan spiritual leader Dalai Lama to Arunachal Pradesh. No official word was available about the meeting between Mr. Krishna and Mr. Yang barring a brief statement read out by the former. The reason why the meeting took up so much of time was because Mr. Yang’s observations in Chinese had to be translated into English.

The two leaders decided to step up dialogue to build trust at several levels including more frequent high-level exchanges, media, cultural and people-to-people interaction and even more defence exchanges.

Mr. Krishna described the meeting as “warm” and the exchange of views on “all aspects” of bilateral relations “fruitful.”

The Foreign Ministers welcomed the positive outcome of the meeting between the two Prime Ministers last weekend and discussed measures to improve relations including celebrating the 60th anniversary of establishment of diplomatic ties between the two countries in a “befitting manner.” Mr. Krishna accepted Mr. Yang’s invitation to visit China next year and the date will be worked out.

“I am satisfied with my talks with the Chinese Foreign Minister. We both see this as part of the process to build trust and understanding at the political level,” he said.

Afghan blasphemy protest continues

* UN mission in Kabul appeals for calm ahead of November 7 run-off elections

KABUL: Afghan police on Monday opened fire and turned a water cannon on demonstrators angry about allegations that Western troops torched a copy of the holy Quran, wounding at least three people, officials and witnesses said.

Clashes erupted as police tried to prevent around 300 students, most of them men, from marching on parliament, the city’s criminal investigation police chief, Sayed Abdul Ghafar Sayedzada, told AFP.

The UN mission in Kabul responded with an appeal for calm with a run-off presidential election less than a fortnight away.

“Police fired at the crowd, one bullet hit me. I was closing my shop at the time,” Sherullah, an 18-year-old man who suffered a bullet wound to his hip, said from his hospital bed. “They (policemen) were just firing. They were firing at the people,” he said.

Sayedzada denied that police fired towards the crowd, saying they only aimed their guns in the air. They also used water cannon, the police chief added.

But a doctor at the emergency ward of Ibn Sina hospital said that at least three men suffering from “bullet wounds” had been admitted for treatment. More than 15 police were also wounded in clashes between the angry mob and security forces, Interior Ministry spokesman Zemarai Bashary said.

An AFP reporter at the scene saw about three dozen people, mainly young students, herded into a police vehicle and taken away.

“We were demonstrating, we wanted to protest… but the police came and started beating us,” a young man, refusing to give his name, said from the back of a police vehicle. Another man, one side of his face covered in blood, said, “They beat us up, they fired at the people.” In a similar protest in Kabul on Sunday, demonstrators torched an effigy of US President Barack Obama and attacked police. Police responded by firing into the air to disperse the crowd.

The protests come amid a growing tide of resentment towards the presence of around 100,000 Western troops in Afghanistan trying to tame a raging Taliban insurgency.

Appeal: The demonstrations have added to tension in the build-up to a run-off election between Karzai and his former foreign minister Abdullah Abdullah on November 7. “We want to appeal for calm. We recognise that emotions are high but this issue needs to be resolved by talking not by resorting to violence,” Dan McNorton, a spokesman for the UN mission in Kabul, told AFP. “There is nothing to indicate the demonstrations are politically motivated but we do need to recognise the constitutional right of people to demonstrate peacefully.” afp

Maoists unleash more terror; blow up two schools in Jharkhand

Giridih (Jharkhand)

Maoists blew up two schools in the district in the wee hours today. The ultras packed explosives inside Upgraded Haridih School and Upgraded Dharpahari School, damaging the structures, police said in Giridih.

There was no loss of life in the incident. Police personnel have set out on foot to reach the place of the bombing to avoid landmines.

Maoists usually trigger blasts in schools which the security forces have used as shelters during their anti-naxal operations.