PML-N and The Truth: Why So Anti-Army?

By Ahsan Waheed
ZoneAsia-Pk

The aftermath of the OBL debacle resulted in a blame game at almost all levels of state infrastructure in Pakistan. Neither civil government officials not members of the military establishment were spared – by each other, or by the Pakistani media and the speculation-ridden conspiracy-driven people of Pakistan.

The ten hour long in-camera parliamentary session was one of a kind in the political history of this country – where both General Ashfaq Kiyani and General Pasha (DG ISI) were present. General Kiyani, throughout the session, seemed to be much of a silent observer; it was General Pasha, the Director General of the ISI, who beared the brunt of all the barrage of criticism thrown at him. At one point, when he offered his resignation, parliamentarians initiated a ruckus and shouted in the august house that the resignation should be accepted. While many argue that the military establishment of Pakistan is not subservient to the parliament or civil administration, it should also e or outside the legislature – have no respect for the military institutions of the country. This disrespect had obviously crossed all bounds after May 02, as has become obvious to everyone.

According to certain media reports, the most acerbic remarks were given by Ch Nisar of PML-N. He criticized the Army and their role in the politics of the country. He did not stop anywhere, not even where the matters could result in projecting a repulsive image of Pakistan being a terrorist state – where the army was possibly playing a double game by pleasing both the US and the Taliban. Ch Nisar’s rampant opposition for the sake of opposition severely damaged Pakistan’s intelligence sharing mechanism with the US – CIA Director Leon Panetta stated as matter of fact to the DG ISI that when his own country’s opposition leader couldn’t trust him, how could the CIA.

Such criticism needs to be seen in the light of how the whole situation has been outplayed after OBL’s death, and not just the difficulties faced by Pakistan’s institutions because of political ineptitude in general. No doubt that the army gets a major chunk of the budget; such a magnanimous budget endowment means that the army should be doing their job of defending the country and not dabble in the political processes of running the country. It is also important to point out that our role in the War on Terror has been to support the United States; it has only become evident since 2007 that Pakistan is actually a front in the War on Terror, after terrorists themselves declared Pakistan and Pakistanis as legitimate targets, and proceeded to conduct daily attacks ever since then.

Ch Nisar’s brother, Ch Ibtisar, was a high-ranking Pakistan Army official who became Chief of General Staff as well as Defence Secretary – most famously, he refused to sign Gen Musharraf’s removal orders and Gen Butt’s appointment orders, which led to uncertainty that was capitalized on by Musharraf’s corps commanders and helped in the 1999 coup – or Musharraf’s “countercoup” as he himself calls it. When the PPP and PML-N were “allies” before the judiciary issue forced them to part ways, it was assumed that Ch Nisar would be given the post of Defence Minister – obviously that did not happen, because maybe Ch Nisar was not as cultured as his brother.

Ch Nisar, being a representative of the people and a senior leader of the PML-N, should take a look into his party’s history as well. The PML-N was originally the PML reincarnated by Gen Zia – the architect of the Afghan jihad and the first head of state to use Islamic terrorism as national policy – so that he could have a dummy parliament that could rubberstamp his Ordinances into law. Incidentally one of Zia’s ministers is also currently Pakistan’s Prime Minister. Nawaz Sharif – one of Zia’s favorites – took the advantage of a rift between party leader Junejo and president Zia to carve out his own PML, and he attached his own name to it so that nobody could take it away from him. After this, Nawaz took it upon himself as a personal mission to counter Benazir Bhutto and Pakistan’s liberals – at Zia’s death anniversary, Nawaz Sharif swore on his tomb that he would carry forward “Zia ul Haq Shaheed’s Mission”. Again, incidentally, a lot of religious extremists, takfiris, Wahabbi fundamentalists, and traditionalist conservatives in Pakistan are also pursuing Zia ul Haq’s distorted and macabre mission.

Up till certain years ago, it was alleged that links exist between Al Qaeda and the funding of PML-N – especially in the 1997 elections. Gen Musharraf was quick to remind the international community about this throughout the last decade, in order to dissuade world leaders from considering Sharif a valid political contender. However, with immense Saudi backing, and despite the financial malfeasance and daylight robbery the Sharif brothers conducted in Saudi Arabia – while they were the Kingdom’s guests and protectees – the Sharifs were given a new political lifeline after a deal was reached to allow former PM Benazir Bhutto to come back to the country. The judiciary decreed that it was also Nawaz Sharif’s fundamental right to return to his country – that is when everything hit the fan. By this time, Nawaz Sharif had a huge bone to pick with the Army, who had propped him up in the first place. Sharif could act like a reborn Bhutto who had escaped the military gallows and would come back as a revolutionary leader of the masses who is strictly against military intervention in politics – only because it packed up his government the last time it happened. Evidently, Sharif’s politics are not defined by national interest or public progress, but only by his personal sentiments and his prevalent feelings about the country, its institutions and its general political scenario. Of course, if President Zardari does not open the Hudaibiya Paper Mills cases and other scams, Nawaz Sharif will “silently” trumpet the Swiss cases issue, the NRO and other incidents of corruption that put the PPP in the docket. That is why Nawaz is aware that people call him a “friendly opposition”; while he hates the label, he should be glad that he’s not the “King’s opposition” and live with what the people call him – that is his reality.

The closeness of the PML-N to religious extremists and even terror elements like the SSP (Sipah e Sahaba Pakistan), Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT, now the JuD, or Jamaat-ud-Dawa, led by Hafiz Saeed), and Lashkar-e-Jhangvi (LeJ) are well known. In fact, Nawaz Sharif was only recently attending talks and rallies with Hafiz Saeed, the leader of the JuD and India’s enemy number one. India blames Hafiz Saeed and his JuD for the 26/11 attacks. Nawaz Sharif, while claiming that Pakistan’s India-centric military focus should be altered, immediately jumped into Hafiz Saeed’s lap: this was done within days of each other, leading the people of Pakistan to believe that the N in PML-N stands for “neurotic”.

When the ISI indicated last year that some areas in Southern Punjab had become a breeding ground for terrorism, the PML-N refused their intelligence inputs and assessments outright, refuting the argument by saying that terrorists do not belong to any religion or ethnicity, and trying to pin Punjab as the centre of terrorism is a ‘plot’ against the people of the province. Of course, the PML-N – running the Punjab province more dictatorially than Musharraf’s henchmen the Chaudhry brothers – believes ignore and avoid is the best policies, especially when it comes to critical matters of national importance. South Punjab is a hub of extremism and marginalization, which has become more evident after last year’s floods, and the state is completely absent, while madrassas and religious charities have mushroomed. Of course, after giving them the benefit of the doubt, it still remains to be investigated whether terrorists and suicide bombers are being recruited from poor helpless families of South Punjab, or not. The PML-N, since it is indebted to the vote bank of religious extremists and banned political parties, will never let the provincial government, federal government, or even the army, take action in South Punjab.

And so, terrorism and extremism will fester in Pakistan, while Nawaz Sharif dreams of becoming Prime Minister for the third time. He may even become President. After all, the Charter of Democracy is used again and again to imply that the PPP and PML-N are going to take turns ruling Pakistan and administering its federal government. How democratic!

Obama Won’t Release bin Laden Photos

The public won’t see pictures of the dead Osama bin Laden after all. Just a day after CIA Director Leon Panetta said the photos would be released, President Obama told 60 Minutes that he has decided not to do so. “It is important for us to make sure that very graphic photos of somebody who was shot in the head are not floating around as an incitement to additional violence as a propaganda tool,” Obama said. “That’s not who we are… We don’t trot out this stuff as trophies.” The president also said bin Laden was “deserving of the justice that he received” and that Defense Secretary Bob Gates and Hillary Clinton agreed with him not to release the photos. Several politicians who have seen the photos-including Rep. Mike Rogers (R-MI) and Sen. Scott Brown (R-MA)-said they should not be released. But others have demanded they be shown in order to put to rest any doubts that bin Laden had really been killed.

Pakistan wants to cut CIA drone strikes, personnel

The Pakistani government would like the CIA’s aggressive drone campaign “suspended” and only resumed under “new rules” and “formalized terms,” according to a Pakistani military official familiar with discussions between the two nations.
Only then, in the instances where there was “compelling evidence” that a militant “high value target” had been located and that the operation was jointly coordinated between Pakistan and the United States, would the Pakistani government sanction a drone strike in the future, the official said.

The Pakistani official pointed out that there have been more than 100 reported CIA drone strikes in Pakistan in 2010 — a record number — yet almost no one killed in these strikes were “high value targets,” such as leaders in al-Qaeda or allied militant groups. Instead, the official said, the vast majority of the victims of the strikes have been militant foot soldiers or civilians.

According to an independent count of the drone strikes maintained by the New America Foundation, there were 118 U.S. drone strikes in Pakistan in 2010 killing somewhere between 600 and 1,000 people.

Only a dozen of the victims of the 2010 drone strikes in Pakistan were described as militant leaders in reliable, independent press accounts.

The Pakistani official says that the fact that drone strikes are overwhelmingly not killing militant leaders is “infuriating the masses” in Pakistan.

Indeed, public opinion polling shows that nine out of 10 Pakistanis have an unfavorable view of the drone strikes.

Relations between the CIA and Pakistan’s military intelligence agency, known by its initials ISI, became “strained” says the Pakistani official, following the incident when CIA contractor Raymond Davis shot and killed two men in Lahore, Pakistan, in late January.

On March 17 — the day after Davis had been released from a Pakistani jail following the payment of more than $2 million in “blood money” to the two victims’ families — a CIA drone strike killed as many as 45 people in Pakistan’s tribal areas.

After the attack, Gen. Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, the powerful army chief of staff and effectively the key driver of Pakistan’s foreign policy, made a rare public rebuke of the drone strike, saying that “peaceful citizens” were “carelessly and callously targeted” and that the strike was “unjustified and intolerable.”

According to the Pakistani official, the March 17 drone strike “pissed off everybody” and was seen as an example of the “extreme arrogance” of the U.S. government, and helped precipitate the visit to Washington on Monday of Gen.l Ahmad Shuja Pasha, the head of ISI, for talks with CIA Director Leon Panetta.

In addition to a significant reduction in the drone program, the Pakistani government also wants CIA “covert operations” in Pakistan that are unsanctioned by the host government to cease, citing Davis as an example of such a rouge operator.

The Pakistani official said “we haven’t discussed specific numbers” of CIA personnel we would like to leave Pakistan — where the agency maintains one of its largest overseas stations — but the official said they do know that Davis did not act alone, and there are “too many others” like him in the country.

Iran, Israel and Netanyahu

By George F. Will

JERUSALEM: When Israel declared independence in 1948, it had to use mostly small arms to repel attacks by six Arab armies. Today, however, Israel feels, and is, more menaced than it was then or has been since. Hence the potentially world-shaking decision that will be made here, probably within two years.

To understand the man who will make it, begin with Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu’s belief that stopping Iran’s nuclear weapons program is integral to stopping the worldwide campaign to reverse 1948. It is, he says, a campaign to “put the Jew back to the status of a being that couldn’t defend himself — a perfect victim.”

Today’s Middle East, he says, reflects two developments. One is the rise of Iran and militant Islam since the 1979 revolution, which led to al-Qaeda, Hamas and Hezbollah. The other development is the multiplying threat of missile warfare.

Now Israel faces a third threat, the campaign to delegitimize it in order to extinguish its capacity for self-defense. After two uniquely perilous millennia for Jews, the creation of Israel meant, Netanyahu says, “the capacity for self-defense restored to the Jewish people.” But note, he says, the reflexive worldwide chorus of condemnation when Israel responded with force to rocket barrages from Gaza and from southern Lebanon. There is, he believes, a crystallizing consensus that “Israel is not allowed to exercise self-defense.”

From 1948 through 1973, he says, enemies tried to “eliminate Israel by conventional warfare.” Having failed, they tried to demoralize and paralyze Israel with suicide bombers and other terrorism. “We put up a fence,” Netanyahu says. “Now they have rockets that go over the fence.” Israel’s military, which has stressed offense as a solution to the nation’s lack of strategic depth, now stresses missile defense.

That, however, cannot cope with Hamas’s tens of thousands of rockets in Gaza and Hezbollah’s up to 60,000 in southern Lebanon. There, U.N. Resolution 1701, promulgated after the 2006 war, has been predictably farcical. This was supposed to inhibit the arming of Hezbollah and prevent its operations south of the Litani River. Since 2006, Hezbollah’s rocket arsenal has tripled and its operations mock Resolution 1701. Hezbollah, learning from Hamas, now places rockets near schools and hospitals, certain that Israel’s next response to indiscriminate aggression will turn the world media into a force multiplier for the aggressors.

Any Israeli self-defense anywhere is automatically judged “disproportionate.” Israel knows this as it watches Iran.

Last year was Barack Obama’s wasted year of “engaging” Iran. This led to sanctions that are unlikely to ever become sufficiently potent. With Russia, China and Turkey being uncooperative, Iran is hardly “isolated.” The Iranian democracy movement probably cannot quickly achieve regime change. It took Solidarity 10 years to do so against a Polish regime less brutally repressive than Iran’s.

Hillary Clinton’s words about extending a “defense umbrella over the region” imply, to Israelis, fatalism about a nuclear Iran. As for deterrence working against a nuclear-armed regime steeped in an ideology of martyrdom, remember that in 1980, Ayatollah Khomeini said:

“We do not worship Iran, we worship Allah. For patriotism is another name for paganism. I say let this land burn. I say let this land go up in smoke, provided Islam emerges triumphant in the rest of the world.”

You say, that was long ago? Israel says, this is now:

Iran’s supreme leader, Ali Khamenei, says that Israel is the “enemy of God.” Tehran, proclaiming that the Holocaust never happened and vowing to complete it, sent an ambassador to Poland who in 2006 wanted to measure the ovens at Auschwitz to prove them inadequate for genocide. Iran’s former president, Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, who is considered a “moderate” by people for whom believing is seeing, calls Israel a “one-bomb country.”

If Iran were to “wipe the Zionist entity off the map,” as it vows to do, it would, Netanyahu believes, achieve a regional “dominance not seen since Alexander.” Netanyahu does not say that Israel will, if necessary, act alone to prevent this. Or does he?

He says that CIA Director Leon Panetta is “about right” in saying Iran can be a nuclear power in two years. He says that 1948 meant this: “For the first time in 2,000 years, a sovereign Jewish people could defend itself against attack.” And he says: “The tragic history of the powerlessness of our people explains why the Jewish people need a sovereign power of self-defense.” If Israel strikes Iran, the world will not be able to say it was not warned.

Taseer asks world to learn from Pak success in combating terrorism

WASHINGTON, May 18 (APP) - Pakistan on Tuesday rejected suggestions of the United States pressure on it to “do more” in fighting militants, with Governor of Punjab province asserting that instead the world should learn from Islamabad’s successful anti-terror campaigns. Governor Salman Taseer said Pakistan wants a relationship based on mutual respect with the United States and reiterated that Pakistani nation is fighting its own war against militants.

“We have shown the way we can handle it much better,” Taseer said in a talk at the Middle East Institute, citing military campaigns in Swat and tribal areas bordering Afghanistan.

Taseer was commenting on reports that National Security Advisor James Jones and CIA Director Leon Panetta are in Islamabad to press Pakistan to “do more.”