Featured Post

SalaamOne NetWork

SalaamOne سلام   is   a nonprofit e-Forum to promote peace among humanity, through understanding and tolerance of religions, cul...

Showing posts with label South Asia. Show all posts
Showing posts with label South Asia. Show all posts

Islamic state moving to south Asia?

A military campaign against militant groups has growing popular support in Pakistan
The militant group Islamic State has its heartland in Iraq and Syria, but recent reports suggest it is now intent on building a presence in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

IS has even named a regional leader for South Asia - a former Pakistani Taliban commander, Saeed Khan.

Afghanistan and Pakistan are already beset with militancy, and there are fears that IS involvement could escalate an already volatile situation.

Should we be worried?

Militants in southern Afghanistan continue to be mostly loyal to Taliban leader Mullah Omar. There is little evidence of any prominent Afghan groups joining IS, except a disaffected commander in the Helmand region.

Graffiti in support of Islamic State has been seen in parts of Pakistan
In Pakistan, the army exercises almost total control. At times, it has seemed like the state was experiencing trouble from the Taliban. But that has been mainly because, as most analysts believe, the army has been using militants to achieve its own strategic aims in Afghanistan and India.

There is evidence that groups marginalised by the military offensive in North Waziristan have been toying with the idea of joining IS to re-energise their local presence.

As a result, pro-IS slogans have been chalked on walls, black IS flags have appeared, and some pamphlets have been distributed in various parts of Pakistan.

At least one official note by the provincial government of Balochistan in the south-west said some local sectarian groups were recruiting fighters on behalf of IS.

But so far only Saeed Khan and his group have announced allegiance to IS.

Who is Saeed Khan?

Between 2009 and 2014, he served as Pakistani Taliban commander for his native Orakzai tribal district in the north-west, before he pledged allegiance to IS in a video released last October.

His clout has been limited to Orakzai, and his elevation to regional IS leader comes while he is on the run, looking for reported hideouts in north-eastern Afghanistan.

Said to be in mid-40s, Saeed Khan studied religion at seminaries in the Mamozai area of Orakzai and in the neighbouring province of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (then North West Frontier Province).

After 9/11, he fought the coalition forces in Afghanistan and came under the influence of then Pakistani Taliban leader Baitullah Mehsud.

Saeed Khan was a protege of Baitullah Mehsud
Photo by: left
Saeed Khan took charge of Orakzai in August 2009 when Baitullah Mehsud was killed in a drone strike and Orakzai chief Hakimullah Mehsud replaced him as overall leader.

Saeed Khan is said to have had differences with Hakimullah Mehsud, who was killed in another drone strike in 2013. He also opposed the elevation of Mullah Fazlullah, Hakimullah Mehsud's successor.

This was probably the reason he quit the Taliban and joined IS.

Have other militants reacted?

Ayman al-Zawahiri announced the formation of al-Qaeda in the Indian Sub-Continent just two months after IS chief Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi declared himself Caliph in June 2014.

Weeks later it launched a major attack on the Pakistani naval installations in Karachi. Many believe al-Qaeda did it to prevent IS from eroding its influence with potential recruiting channels and rich Middle Eastern donors.

A school massacre in Peshawar might have been indirectly caused by Islamic State
There is also speculation that Mullah Fazlullah's group carried out the massacre of school children in Peshawar last month to match the brutality of IS before the IS regional chief Saeed Khan could launch his own maiden attack in the region.

Does IS have any links with South Asia?

Since the late 1990s, all leaders of militant groups in the region have remained loyal to the head of the Afghan Taliban, Mullah Mohammad Omar.

This includes IS founder Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, who spent several years in Afghanistan before he began fighting in Iraq.

IS founder Abu Musab al-Zarqawi had Afghan links
The IS leaders who have followed him have had little or no experience of Afghanistan and Pakistan, and no personal links.

Their only link to the region is the local and foreign fighters who have been flocking to Syria and Iraq from Afghanistan during the last few of years.

Can they really make an impression?

A crucial factor remains the Pakistani army - it is believed to be the main force that sustains Islamist militant networks in the region, a suggestion that is officially denied.

Pakistan's army remains the real power in the region
Afghan militant groups also continue to depend on Pakistani support and supplies, according to analysts.

But Pakistan's army has also demonstrated its ability to eliminate militant sanctuaries at will, like it did in Swat in 2009, or in North Waziristan last year.

Most analysts believe IS cannot make inroads into the region unless the Pakistani military allows it.

http://m.bbc.com/news/world-asia-31022576

As Afghan Pullout Looms, U.S. Urged to Rethink Pakistan Ties

Neither the police nor the paramilitary forces have been unable to control targeted killings of aid workers in Karachi. Credit: Adil Siddiqi/IPS
With the 2014 deadline for a U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan in sight, analysts here are urging Washington policymakers to drop the term ‘Af-Pak’ and recognise the importance of Pakistan beyond its implications for Afghanistan.

U.S.-Pakistan relations have for too long focused on the Afghan security question, according to a new report from the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), a Washington think tank. Such a focus, CFR researchers warn, neglects the high strategic importance Islamabad has for the United States in the region.

“Pakistan’s internal security is not something the U.S. can confront directly.” -- Daniel S. Markey
“U.S. policy in Pakistan has consistently been linked to Afghanistan and has fallen under the broader heading of Af-Pak – a label that has never been very popular in Pakistan and one that has also been seen as degrading,” Daniel S. Markey, a senior fellow at the CFR and author of the new report, told IPS.

“But as the U.S. is drawing down in Afghanistan and in many ways signalling a reduced commitment there, [it] ought to rethink its Pakistan strategy.”

A revised approach to Pakistan would also advance U.S. interests in Asia, Markey’s analysis suggests, particularly in light of President Barack Obama’s efforts to refocus U.S. policy on Asia.

Any new approach would need to have two main strategies, the report suggests. First, Washington will have to seriously engage with the security threats that it currently faces in Pakistan, including threats from terrorist organisations but also from Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal and its delicate relationship with India.

The second and perhaps more groundbreaking strategy would see the United States pushing Pakistan into closer economic integration with regional economic powers, particularly India and China.

The first strategy, however, comes with its limits.

“Pakistan’s internal security is not something the U.S. can confront directly,” Markey said. “It’s Pakistan’s problem, and one that will require Pakistan’s political leadership directly.”

At the same time, the author notes that Washington can provide some assistance, such as equipment and training. This is a strategy Washington has used in the past, including in its assistance to Islamabad while fighting the Taliban.

Growing mistrust

Besides being difficult in practice, the limited role the United States can play inside Pakistan is also a consequence of the deep mistrust Pakistanis harbour towards Washington.

One of the recommendations highlighted by the report emphasises how U.S. assistance to Islamabad should be conditioned on a show of Pakistan’s true commitment to fighting terrorism.

“U.S. military aid to Pakistan should not be linked primarily to the Afghanistan war,” the report argues. “It should instead be conditioned on Pakistan’s effort to address internal security threats… and on Pakistan’s overall commitment to countering violent extremism on its soil.”

Indeed, the problem of mistrust may be one of the biggest hurdles the U.S. will have to overcome in order to achieve its long-term interests in the region.

“One of the reasons the U.S. doesn’t have much leverage inside Pakistan is that there’s a lot of mistrust and hostility between the two sides, particularly when it comes to the security establishment,” Michael Kugelman, senior programme associate for South Asia at the Wilson Centre, a think tank here, told IPS.

This mistrust, Kugelman notes, is the result of divergent views between Washington and Islamabad when it comes to defining a threat and how to respond to one.

According to analysts, the United States sees all militant groups as potential threats, urging for tough action regardless of the groups’ targets. But for the Pakistani leadership, the differences matter.

“Pakistanis tend to see some militant groups as more dangerous than others, especially those that target the government,” Kugelman said.

“The U.S. will need to lower its expectations and stop setting these very high goals of getting the Pakistani government to crackdown on all militants. That’s just not going to happen.”

Regional economics

Markey’s report also calls for the United States to look at Pakistan from an economic perspective, particularly in light of its relationship with India and China.

“U.S. diplomats and trade officials should negotiate a preferential U.S. trade access deal for India, Afghanistan and Pakistan, conditioned on reduced barriers to intraregional trade,” the report notes.

However, this does not mean that the U.S. should get involved in a mediation of the multiple disagreements that currently exist between India and Pakistan, Markey said.

“Rather, the U.S. should encourage both sides to realise the incentives of more bilateral integration,” he noted. “There is no other way in which Pakistan can find prosperity unless they link it to a more regional perspective.”

According to recent statistics, India-Pakistan trade today is slightly tilted towards India, with New Delhi providing more goods to Islamabad than vice-versa. Much of this is due to Pakistan’s limited home-grown resources when it comes to manufacturing and resource-extraction.

The Washington-based Centre for Global Development (CGD), a think tank, on Wednesday noted that the U.S. government could do more to improve Pakistan’s economy, including by supporting the efforts of the International Monetary Fund, World Bank and Asian Development Bank “to promote … Pakistani reform efforts”.

India and Pakistan have already begun working towards a normalisation of their trade relationship, with Pakistan currently a few steps away from eliminating a list that forbids it from trading certain goods with New Delhi.

Yet Kugelman again cautions against Washington playing too overt a role in its push for trade normalisation.

“Very quietly, subtly and away from the cameras, Washington can push them both to take a final step and ensure that the two can finally establish a MFN relationship,” he said, referring to the ‘most favoured nation’ status that countries assign to each other when they normalise trade in a mutually beneficial agreement.

Meanwhile, the U.S. government continues to evaluate its exit strategy from the 12-year-old Afghan conflict, as well as Washington’s evolving strategic vision in Central Asia following the withdrawal. This strategy, and its impact, is being examined intently in both Washington and Islamabad.

“Both sides are at the very least trying to make their way through the endgame in the war in Afghanistan,” the CFR’s Markey said, noting that Pakistani authorities have begun “to worry about what will happen once the U.S. leaves Afghanistan.”
By By Ramy Srour
http://www.ipsnews.net/2014/01/afghan-pullout-looms-u-s-urged-rethink-pakistan-ties/
Read Urdu translation: http://e.dunya.com.pk/detail.php?date=2014-01-26&edition=LHR&id=851211_11386214

Free-eBooks: http://goo.gl/2xpiv
Peace-Forum Video Channel: http://goo.gl/GLh75

Bringing Solutions to the Table in Afghanistan

By Ayesha Siddiqa
If you are a journalist or a political commentator, you are certain to get frantic calls from friends and family inquiring whether there will be a war between Pakistan and the US. The recent increase in tension between Pakistan and the US is unprecedented as both allies appear poised to come to blows with each other – or at least this is the common perception on the streets of Pakistan. There is concern in the country’s policy-making circles as well; they are considering a whole range of possibilities from an increase in American drone attacks to additional surgical strikes inside Pakistan, such as the one on Osama Bin Laden’s compound on May 2. There are fears too of American boots on the ground, which will naturally be viewed as a clear violation of Pakistan’s sovereignty.

Minister for Foreign Affairs of Pakistan HinaRabbani Khar (second from right) speaks at the APC held in Islamabad in September. Photo: AFP / Press Information Department
Nothing seems impossible considering the rising American rage over Pakistan’s alleged cooperation with the Haqqani network and the ISI’s alleged involvement in the attack on the American embassy in Kabul. Recently, Admiral Mike Mullen, who always regarded himself as a friend of General Ashfaq Pervez Kayani, a few days prior to his retirement as chairman of the US joint chiefs of staff, went on record to accuse Pakistan of collusion with the Haqqanis. Although other American policy-makers were subsequently more cautious, Mullen’s comments, which he made while testifying before the Senate Committee in Washington, resonated on Capitol Hill. Needless to say, these comments did not do much for either American or Pakistani interests; rather, they brought the two sides to what looks like a collision course.
The Americans claim to have evidence of Pakistan’s involvement in the attack on the US embassy in Afghanistan, a charge that was denied by the ISI chief, General Ahmed Shuja Pasha, during his briefing to the All-Parties Conference on September 29. Earlier, Major General Athar Abbas, the ISPR chief, had stated that Pakistan’s ISI had nothing more than some contacts with the Haqqani network, but then so did numerous other agencies.
The entire focus of the bilateral dispute seems to be the Haqqani network, which is a group of the Taliban that have shown tremendous capacity to attack the US forces inside Afghanistan with impunity. The network comprises Sirajuddin Haqqani, son of the Afghan veteran warlord Jalaluddin Haqqani, Mullah Nazeer and Hafiz Gulbahadur. Although these warlords hail from Afghanistan, they have, over they years, managed to operate from Pakistan’s tribal areas and use it for re-grouping purposes or what a friend terms “rest and recreation.” The Haqqani network remains an “old irritant” in Washington circles. Prior to the Swat military operation, the US had been insisting that the Pakistan army target the Haqqani network, which appeared to control the areas bordering Afghanistan. But the Pakistan army always maintained that it would not antagonise any group that did not attack the Pakistani state. Additionally, Islamabad was peeved that the US was very selective and that it did not target those forces in Afghanistan that hurt the Pakistani state despite the evidence provided by Pakistan.
However, when a known enemy like Baitullah Mehsud was killed in a drone attack, Pakistan was not comfortable with the US policy of drone strikes. Some analysts are of the view that drone attacks pose a major threat to the Taliban, and one wonders if the Pakistani state’s main concern is collateral damage caused to innocent victims or the safety of Taliban groups that are considered friendly by the army and the ISI. In any case, numerous military analysts who are also linked with the ISI and the military, such as Brig. (retd) Asad Munir and Lt General (retd) Asad Durrani, consider the Taliban as representing almost 90% Pashtun interests. A similar claim is also made for the Haqqani network, which is viewed by the Pakistani state as representing Taliban interests. This perspective came out very clearly in a recent report published by Pakistan’s Jinnah Institute and America’s United States Institute for Peace (USIP). The analysis in the report, which was based on the point of view of 53 analysts, most of whom are known to sympathise with the state perspective, equate Taliban interests with Pashtun interests. This report is important since it indirectly presents the Pakistani military establishment’s perspective. Prime Minister Yusuf Raza Gilani endorsed this standpoint by announcing that Islamabad will talk to the Haqqani network as well.
The present friction is a consequence of the initiative on both sides (the US and Pakistan) to influence the Afghan endgame to their respective advantage. Privately, retired and serving military officers and strategic experts, who are now in abundance in Islamabad, admit that the ISI supports the Haqqani network due to its ability to launch military operations inside Afghanistan. These attacks are meant to bring the situation to a point where the US agrees to include Haqqani in the negotiations, the same way that Washington is talking to Mullah Omar. Lately, there were also reports that some of the military operations carried out in the last three to four months in South Waziristan were to allow room for the Haqqani network to operate in the South and engage with the Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP). According to this plan, a friendly tribal force would manage to eliminate or neutralise an unfriendly tribal army more effectively.
There is no doubt that the Haqqani network keeps moving across the border, but its use of Pakistani territory as a staging post has never really been a secret. There are three Taliban groups: the Sirajuddin Haqqani group represents a Pakistan-friendly force as does the Quetta Shura but the TTP is considered inimical to Pakistan’s interests. For the moment, the Pakistani military is keen to put all its eggs in the Haqqani basket, in the hope that the Haqqanis inclusion in any future dispensation in Kabul would ensure a Pakistan-friendly government in Afghanistan.
But pursuing this game is not as easy as it sounds. First and foremost, there is the issue of American perception and reaction to the plan. The US has continued to launch drone attacks in North Waziristan to put pressure on the Taliban, in order to be able to negotiate with them from a position of strength. Although the Pakistani media has decreased its reporting of drone attacks after May 2, there has never been a lull in these attacks. If the US intends to up the ante, it could only do so by conducting a May 2 kind of a strike, but that is not possible without the availability of specific and actionable intelligence. Besides, there is always the risk of Pakistan responding to a surgical strike, which the army claims it would resort to the next time round. A Pakistani response would bring the army in direct confrontation with the US, which both sides might try to end to their own advantage. The political costs of such an adventure would be high for both sides and would not bring any real strategic benefits. The US must understand that the possibility of a military defeat may not, at this stage, convince Pakistan to take on the Haqqani network.
The greater risk Pakistan faces is that of economic sanctions. The Pakistani establishment is trying hard to find alternative economic sources such as China, or by increasing trade options. But none of these have the potential to offset the damage if the US were to rally the world to punish Pakistan economically. From this perspective, the All-Parties Conference convened by Prime Minister Gilani to deal with the situation failed to do a satisfactory job. While the APC was high on expression of national anger, it did not really look at the various scenarios that Pakistan may have to encounter. Also, the meeting did not highlight the fact that there is little that Pakistan can do in terms of convincing the US to accommodate the Haqqani network. However, the APC uproar has somewhat eased Washington’s pressure on Pakistan. They have toned down their accusations, even though a large number of American policy-makers are not convinced of Pakistan’s innocence vis-à-vis the Taliban.
Another problem with the APC was its inability to emphasise the need for an alternative agenda to counter radicalism, terrorism and Talibanisation in Pakistan, and in the region. GHQ Rawalpindi, as sources suggest, feels that after the American exit from Afghanistan, violence in Pakistan and the region in general will dissipate as the Afghan Taliban, including the Quetta Shura and the Haqqani Network, will move back into Afghanistan. The Pakistani groups, on the other hand, such as the Lashkar-e-Taiba or various other Deobandi groups, will either take their activities to the tribal areas or keep moving between Afghanistan and the tribal areas. It is generally believed that in either case, Pakistan will see less violence. A friendly government in Kabul will ensure peace in Pakistan. But this formula does not necessarily guarantee Pakistan’s security or solve its radicalisation problem. Furthermore, with so many factions in Afghanistan, there is a risk of Pakistan getting sucked into the Afghan quagmire. After all, if you rush to get to the head of the table, there is also the risk of being the first to face the music. Supporting the Taliban and similar groups is a strategy fraught with huge security risks for Pakistan’s stability in the future.
The current showboating between Pakistan and the US does not serve the interests of either. The best option for Afghanistan would be for all players in the region to come together to ensure the country’s immediate securityand find a solution to its future problems. Besides America’s dependence on Pakistan to keep its supply lines to Afghanistan open, there are strategic reasons for Washington to keep talking to Islamabad. But as the US gets into the election cycle and its enthusiasm for staying on in Afghanistan wears out, chances are that the hawkish elements in Washington may increase the pressure on Pakistan. This is the time for various forces involved in Afghanistan and in the region to move with caution and show sense and sensibility, without which they will not be able to bring a solution to the table.
http://www.newslinemagazine.com/2011/10/bringing-solutions-to-the-table-in-afghanistan/

Will India Accept Modi?


In the mid-1980s when Indian television was bland, but less insulting to the intellect than it is now, and viewers were not spoilt for choice since the only channel broadcast was the state-run Doordarshan, many Indians came across this saying: “Those who forget history are condemned to repeat it.” It was like a statutory warning in a mini-series called Tamas (Darkness), created by one of the most accomplished art-house filmmakers of that time, Govind Nihalani.

It is an improvised version of the original, “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to fulfill it,” an aphorism coined by George Santayana, a Spanish-American philosopher and writer who died in 1952. Every episode of Tamas would start with this universalised expression, reminding us not to prolong the burden of history with more mistakes.

Tamas is the story of a poor lower-caste couple caught in the vortex of the partition of the Indian subcontinent and the dark days of 1947 – when the two new nations were badly singed by Muslim-Hindu-Sikh communal riots. Tamas is based on a book by Brisham Sahni, who also went through the throes of Partition, was uprooted from West Punjab and came to live in India as a refugee.

The story of Partition has been heard in every Indian and Pakistani home after 1947. My parents would tell us about the travails of my grandparents, who were uprooted from East Pakistan (now Bangladesh). The poignant stories of Saadat Hasan Manto that I read provided a similar historical flashback and were a touching reflection of that time. So when Tamas was telecast by Doordarshan in India, it provided food for thought to our generation, left a deep impact, moved us emotionally and warned us against the dangers of stirring the communal cauldron.

But, time and again, we in secular India failed to take those warnings seriously. In 1984, we saw the anti-Sikh riots that followed Indira Gandhi’s assassination and, soon after that, we were shocked by the Babri Masjid massacre in 1992 where ensuing riots across India and Pakistan killed over 2,000 people. And, in 2002, we wrote another shameful chapter in the annals of communal hatred – this time in the state of Gujarat, in the wake of the Godhra train burning. After 59 Hindu religious volunteers (known as Kar Sevaks) were burnt alive, riots ensued in Gujarat.

Unfortunately, Muslims bore the brunt of these horrific riots that were said to be patronised by some of the leaders of the ruling Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and its ideological cousins. At the time, the BJP government in the western state was then, and also now with additional strength, led by chief minister Narendra Modi, who is said to have turned a blind eye to these riots that took a heavy toll on the Muslims of Gujarat.

Nine years later, Narendra Modi has become one of the most successful chief ministers of India. He has turned Gujarat into a showpiece of India’s development and progress, attracting investments like never before and curtailing discrimination against Muslims by pursuing a policy to allow them to develop and prosper – a fact that they acknowledge at every public forum.

Despite all this, he may still continue to pay the price for 2002, especially now, when an apparent Supreme Court reprieve to Modi in the riot cases has emboldened him to eye a prominent national role.

Modi is a strong contender as a prime ministerial candidate in the BJP ranks for the next general elections in 2014. Importantly, the buzz around his projection as the future prime minister of India receives strong endorsement from the USA, which had so far continued to deny him a visa, following the 2002 riots.

But now, a Congressional think-tank in the USA hails Modi as a role model for development in India. A report on India published by the Congressional Research Service (CRS), which works exclusively for the US Congress to provide policy and legal analysis to committees and members of both the House of Representatives and the Senate regardless of party affiliation, predicts that Modi’s bid to run for election may pitch him as a strong prime ministerial candidate in India’s 2014 election. The report also forecasts that BJP’s Narendra Modi may be pitted against Rahul Gandhi of the Indian National Congress in the next elections. Incidentally, the report is not as charitable to Gandhi as it is to Modi.

To redeem his political image Narendra Modi took a leaf out of the modus operandi of Gandhian social activist Anna Hazare and decided to sit for a token three-day fast to spread the message of communal harmony. On September 17, the day he turned 61, Modi began his fast at the Gujarat University exhibition hall, termed the ‘Sadbhavna Mission’ (Communal Harmony Mission), to appease religious communities in India. He broke his fast by drinking juice given to him by the clerics of three major religious faiths – Hindu, Muslim and Christian.

Party leaders like the BJP patriarch, L.K. Advani, as well as Arun Jaitley, showered praises on Modi. He also garnered support from those outside his own party, the chief ministers of India’s two key states: Tamil Nadu’s J Jayalalithaa, who spearheads the southern outfit the All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (AIADMK), and Punjab’s Parkash Singh Badal, who belongs to the Shiromani Akali Dal party. BJP’s bid for power is also dependent on the support of its coalition partners in the National Democratic Alliance (NDA), which includes parties largely supported by Indian Muslims.

But protest over Modi’s posturing came first from the Janata Dal (United) leader, Nitish Kumar, also a game-changer in current Indian politics having turned around Bihar, the country’s most lawless state. The party’s spokesperson Shivanand Tiwari berated his eligibility to lead a country of 1.21 billion people when he failed to perform his rajdharma (duty as a leader) in Gujarat.

Modi also faces strong resistance from several civil society groups in Gujarat. Actor-dancer and known anti-Modi social activist, Mallika Sarabhai, naming specific people and law firms, revealed that the chief minister tried to bribe her lawyer to gather information on the activists’ legal strategies in the riot cases that are filed against him in the Supreme Court.

With the odds stacked against him, the big question is: if the BJP returns to power, will Modi, a new brand in Indian politics, ever become the prime minister of India?

Suhel Seth, a social and political commentator, believes that after the Gujarat blemish, people have moved on, and so will Modi, elaborating that he is not the only politician in India accused of communalism – after all the Indian National Congress was the main architect of the anti-Sikh riots in 1984.

While a debate rages on about Modi’s acceptance as a national leader, the political reality of 2014 will have the last word. And that is still many, many, months away.
By By Sujoy Dhar. http://www.newslinemagazine.com/2011/10/will-india-accept-modi/



The man responsible for the Godhra tragedy was Narendra Modi, chief minister of Gujrat, who exploited burning of the S-6 to retain his power which otherwise he was sure to lose. And the man mostly responsible for the ...
There was a short debate on the Gujarat government's action against two senior police officers who have redeemed the honour of the force to some extent by exposing Modi's complicity. One of them, Sanjiv Bhatt was first ...
This is exactly the position maintained all along by Mr Modi and the BJP — and opposed by the Congress, the Left parties and many 'secular' and liberal-minded sections of society…. The BJP is naturally jubilant at ...

Discrimination against Muslims: A question that India needs to answer


I owe it to Barkha Dutt who brought out in a recent programme of hers how 21 Muslim youth from Hyderabad were wrongly implicated in the Mecca Masjid blast. That was not all. They were subjected to third degree torture, which was done to force them to admit to a crime which they had not committed. The government failed to find any evidence against them and said sheepishly that they were arrested on wrong grounds.
This only confirms how the police in India picks up young Muslims whenever there is a blast. Most in the majority community are so biased that they accept the official version readily. The truth is out only when the authorities failed to prove the charges. In this case, they remained in jail for five years. In fact, the credit goes to the court which acquitted them.
The National Commission for Minorities (NCM) has recommended a compensation of Rs 300,000 each. The victims have justifiably expressed cynicism over the NCM’s decision. How can money erase the stigma which they will carry for the rest of their lives? The Muslim youth have gone on record to say: every time there is a festival or trouble in the city, the police come looking for us. We are falsely implicated in the first place and even after acquittal we carry the stone of anti-national around our necks. Dr Junaid, who runs a clinic at Hafizbanagar in the old city of Hyderabad regrets that the “payment of a few lakhs cannot make up for the sufferings we underwent because of our religion.”
Naturally, Muslims wonder whether secularism means anything when it comes to punishing Hindus. What happens to equality guaranteed by the constitution of India?
This is the question which India has to answer. Take the case of Gujarat. Even 10 years after the killings, there is no real punishment. How does the Muslim community put faith in the polity? Thetamasha that chief minister Narendra Modi puts up every now and then does not impress anyone about the sudden rekindling of faith in communal harmony. He is not even sorry.
When this incident came to light, parliament was in session. No member mentioned it either in the Lok Sabha or in the Rajya Sabha. There was a short debate on the Gujarat government’s action against two senior police officers who have redeemed the honour of the force to some extent by exposing Modi’s complicity. One of them, Sanjiv Bhatt was first suspended and now prosecuted for having filed public interest litigation (PIL) in the Supreme Court against Modi’s involvement in the state riots. Bhatt’s conscience stirred him after some years and he submitted an affidavit to say what he had seen. The other officer, Rahul Sharma, DIG, was given notice for passing on telephone call records of certain BJP leaders to the Special Investigation Team (SIT) appointed by the Supreme Court.
Strange, the SIT has been dissolved without the Indian public knowing the contents of its report. The Supreme Court has also sent the case back to the trial court for hearing. The judgment is faulty but the worst part is that the court has not commented on what the two officers disclosed. At least their submissions should have been noted because they dared the state government.
No doubt, small mercies, but Home Minister P Chidambaram has at least said that the centre had the option of protecting the officers who belonged to the all India Police Service under the supervision of the central government. As expected, the BJP jumped at Chidambaram’s throat. How can a step to protect the officers be taken as interference in the state affairs? Understandably, the BJP is trying to save Modi. But the party should realise that he would be punished, however late.
By Kuldip NayarPublished in The Express Tribune:
http://tribune.com.pk/story/267404/a-question-that-india-needs-to-answer/

More: 

An image makeover for Narendra Modi, The Muslim Killer: 




The Police in Modi government arbitrarily picked up people and put them under POTA. I cannot forget the cries of a woman in public hearing in Hyderabad whose three sons were arrested in the so-called Godhra conspiracy case and who were ...

This is exactly the position maintained all along by Mr Modi and the BJP — and opposed by the Congress, the Left parties and many 'secular' and liberal-minded sections of society…. The BJP is naturally jubilant at Tuesday's verdict… ...

An image makeover for Narendra Modi, The Muslim Killer

Mr Modi is a polarising figure, Is India's most controversial and divisive politician emerging as a prime ministerial candidate? Supporters of Narendra Modi, chief minister of Gujarat, believe so. For evidence, they point to his much-hyped three-day, tax-payer-funded hunger strike in an air-conditioned hall for social and religious harmony over the weekend, which ends on Monday. The fast, they believe, enabled him to reach out to the Muslim minority, who bore the brunt of widespread religious riots in the state - following the torching of a passenger train carrying Hindu pilgrims in 2002.

Mr Modi is getting other backers as well. The latest US Congressional Research Service report on India says he is one the likeliest candidates for prime ministership in his Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). (The US, by the way denied Mr Modi a visa under a law barring entry for foreign government officials found to be complicit in severe violations of religious freedom.)

No politician in India draws such extreme reactions as Mr Modi does.

His supporters have much to crow about. Under Mr Modi's stewardship, Gujarat has been enjoying double-digit growth in recent years. Helped by good connectivity, regular electricity, efficient ports and a laissez faire bureaucracy, its humming factories churn out 16% of India's industrial production, and 22% of its exports. Even farm growth is touching double digits. Mr Modi is a man of grandiose ambitions - he plans to set up India's biggest solar energy park and build the world's tallest statue and make Gujarat a hub of international finance. Suitably impressed, The Economist magazine recently called Gujarat 'India's Guangdong', going on to declare that its manufacturing-driven, jobs-intensive economy could be a "vision of India's future".

'Partisan'
Mr Modi's critics insist that he did not do enough to bring the riots under control in 2002. More than 1,000 people, mostly Muslims, were killed in the violence, which remains a blot on the chief minister's record. His opponents say he indirectly egged on Hindu mobs who were believed to have led most of the attacks. He denies this. In April, a senior police officer in a sworn statement to the Supreme Court alleged that Mr Modi deliberately allowed the rioting. There have been reports that official records relating to the riots were destroyed "in line with regulations". In 2008, responding to allegations that Mr Modi's government was doing little to bring those responsible to justice, the Supreme Court set up a panel to investigate the riots. Opponents point out that Mr Modi has never apologised for the riots.

But, as commentator Swapan Dasgupta writes, "the more he is vilified and painted as the blood-sucking inheritors of Dracula's mantle, the more he seems to grow from strength to strength". Mr Modi's majoritarian politics and efficient administration, many say, has definitely helped him win two elections on the trot, and he looks a clear favourite to win next year's state polls as well. A win would make him Gujarat's longest running chief minister, with 12 uninterrupted years in power.

But will that be enough to catapult Mr Modi to the national stage, and make him a promising prime ministerial candidate for BJP? Especially when his party is struggling to throw up a credible, nationally accepted leader?

The 60-year-old Mr Modi is still not kosher for most political parties. He still does not appeal to the moderates and Muslims. The emerging Indian middle class may love him for his no-nonsense efficiency, but their votes alone can never win him an election.

In trying to rebrand himself as a formidable national leader and trying to get an image makeover, Mr Modi, many analysts believe, is walking a tightrope. An adverse judicial judgement on his government's role during the riots could irreparably damage his national political ambitions.

Many believe, Mr Modi has shown good political timing in projecting himself at a time when his party needs a national leader. But he has also betrayed a limited political imagination, they say, by going on a copycat hunger strike during a time when India may be already tiring of fasts as an instrument of coercion and political statement.

By Soutik Biswas, Delhi correspondent of BBC:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-south-asia-14971095


Bin Laden Operation: A Bluff !

WebpageTranslator

CIA HANDLERS GIVE BIN LADEN “THUMBS UP”…

“BIN LADEN NEVER WENT ROGUE…”

“Quite obviously, meetings go on 24 hours a day, deciding what “new evidence” to concoct to add to the video tapes, personal diary and pornography claimed to have been found already. Has no one ever heard the time honored adage, ‘less is more?’”

by Gordon Duff, Senior Editor

http://www.veteranstoday.com/2011/05/15/gordon-duff-bin-laden-operation-discredits-u-s-armed-forces/

The frozen body of Osama bin Laden, very real “currency,” would not have been spent on less.

Nothing could be worse than the story released by the Obama administration. Their claim is that 25 Navy Seals were flown into Pakistan to murder an unarmed and unguarded man whose identity is now in doubt. Legal experts around the world universally characterize the operation, if it actually happened at all, as a criminal act and those involved as subject to prosecution. This issue is unlikely to gain much attention, however, as the majority of people who had not concluded that Osama bin Laden had died in 2001 as reported are now reconsidering their position.
Is President Obama having it both ways, claiming revenge for 9/11 by ordering the murder of someone never named in connection with 9/11 in any way and putting the killing in question by, not only destroying all evidence, but by releasing contradictory and easily discredited versions of the event? Is Obama, as many have long suspected, “channeling” George “W” Bush, the master bungler of all time?
Either way, there is one victim for certain and that is the members of the military services of the United States who will be judged, not by the real facts but rather the political mechanations of the increasingly bizarre stories released to the press on a daily basis. Each new story released shows signs of poor operational judgement where “salting” the “crime scene” with evidence has obviously gotten out of hand, an obvious problem when 46,000 “secret agents” were given 15 years to hunt down and capture a man believed dead for 10 of those 15 years.
Worse yet, senior CIA officials from the Reagan/Bush I era claim bin Laden was and always continued to be “rock solid” as an American intelligence agent until his death, or at least one of his deaths.
Even worse still, eyewitness accounts reported in Pakistan indicate that the bin Laden mission was scrapped after a helicopter crash.  The version given, but yet unconfirmed, has Americans leaving only with their dead, abandoning their wreckage and never having entered what is claimed to have been the bin Laden “compound.”
Quite obviously, meetings go on 24 hours a day, deciding what “new evidence” to concoct to add to the video tapes, personal diary and pornography claimed to have been found already. Has no one ever heard the time honored adage, “less is more?”

TORA BORA COMPLEX (US DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE GRAPHIC) NEVER LOCATED
This is a classic case of “too many cooks spoil the pot.”
Wild stories about 40 minute firefights and “Osama bin Laden” standing on a bed with an AK 47 on full-auto while using his wife as a human shield made the SEAL team involved look like clowns. The SEALS are among the best trained and most effective elite fighting forces in the world. Last year, I met with Hershel Davis, known as “Father of the Seals,” to discuss his distinguished career and his experiences while operating inside Pakistan.
One thing is clear. SEALS were chosen because of their history of secrecy. The entire “bin Laden/Abbottabad” operation is a fiction. The ploy was to use Navy SEALS to trade on their reputation and heroism in order to “sell” a cover story to serve a long series of agenda’s.
The real end result for members of America’s armed forces is to have them cast as bullies, liars and murderers. What we have is a replay of the Delta Force’s operation at Tora Bora, a theatrical construct with a wild story intended on providing a rationale for a decade of war, begun, sustained and ultimately lost based on a fairy tale.
The original “Tora Bora follies,” Osama bin Laden and his entourage leaving his massive luxurious underground complex in a fleet of white GMC Yukon XLs with the aid of local warlords while the Delta Force was “called back for consultation” is as believable as the mysterious funeral of the imaginary Osama bin Laden, an old man seen on video watching television whose biometric signature in no way remotely resembles the facial recognition patterns of the real Osama bin Laden. Bin Laden, the real bin Laden, worked for years with the CIA and was photographed many times.
Veterans Today contributor and senior defense analyst, Brigadier General Asif Haroon Raja made the following observations:
Hardly a week has lapsed since the shattering news of helicopter assault by US SEALs leading to Osama bin Laden’s death and already several branches have sprouted from the trunk of the original story.
Too many doubts are being expressed about the authenticity of the claims made by rejoicing US leaders. As the clouds of skepticism are getting thicker, euphoria of US leadership is correspondingly getting deflated.
Or it was a hoax to cash upon the ghost of Osama? Or was it to stir up uprising in Pakistan similar to the ones in Arab countries and then make it a pretext to take actions as in case of Libya?
Even if we blindly accept the one-sided US story, how come Osama being a trained fighter with no dearth of chivalry chose to live in a house which had no protection? Like the minefield being of no value unless covered with fire, high walls of the house are of no consequence without inner protective shield.
Since the house was devoid of arsenal and he had not put up token resistance even with his personal weapon, it means Osama had given up militancy and was leading a quiet and peaceful life with his family. Was it fair to kill an unarmed man?
Pretext of his burial at sea is unconvincing since the Afghans are not inclined to the idea of shrines. Osama was wanted since 2001 dead or alive. How come, when the golden trophy was seized, it was disposed off in indecent haste rather than displaying it in all the 50 states of USA? The US has yet to furnish proofs that Osama was killed. No photograph of his dead body within the Abbottabad house or before and during his burial at sea has been displayed.

SELLING THE WAR ON TERROR

Since 9/11 with Rudy Giuliani’s tireless hounding of the limelight, “heroics by proxy,” honoring heroes has been a shameful form of exploitation of the sacrifice and honor of others for political and financial gain. No war in history has made so many billionaires while fighting an enemy that has proven to be 99% fabrication. As conspiracy theory gives way to hard evidence, the demolition of the towers at the World Trade Center has become fact.

DUKAKIS PHOTO CATASTROPHE
Years later when 345 New York firefighters have died of radiation sickness with thousands more sick or dying from illnesses purposefully misdiagnosed or attributed to spurious and unspecified “toxic” sources, the sinister hand of exploitation isn’t hard to see. 3000 died on 9/11, not from terror attacks but proven controlled demolition. 6000 more Americans have died to avenge their deaths while several hundred thousand, Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan 85% civilians, 100% victims of an illegal war of aggression, have died so far with more each day.
The sick from Ground Zero fight “tooth and nail” for medical care and compensation while tens of thousands of troops once considered heroes have been drummed out the military, wounded, sick, “used up,” many with no benefits or medical care. 18 kill themselves each day.
Another memorable sight on 9/11 was Secretary Rumsfeld on the pristine Pentagon lawn, theoretical location of 100 tons of aircraft wreckage, seats, bodies, luggage, wings, tail section, all invisible to the naked eye. Soon after, Rumsfeld would mention the missile that hit the Pentagon. He would say it once and the press would forgive that mistaken moment of honesty.
During the 1988 election, Democratic candidate Mike Dukakis was attacked continually for being photographed wearing wearing an Army helmet, riding in a tank. Similarly, President George “W” Bush, whose truncated military career, now classified a “national secret,” includes allegation of failed drug tests and desertion, appeared in another infamous photo, the famed “Mission Accomplished” fiasco claiming victory in a war that is still going on nearly a decade later. Bush’s photo in fighter pilot garb is considered a “Chickenhawk classic.
Worse still were the carefully staged “terror alerts” and phony bin Laden tapes released at critical times to influence elections or the passage of questionable legislation.
Between 2002 and 2008, Vice President Cheney, a man who shunned military service through numerous deferments was seen on television by the US Armed Forces an average of 35 times per day, primarily standing beside decorated soldiers. (AFN and Pentagon Channel)
The clearest accomplishments of the War on Terror have been clearly defined:
  • $3 trillion has disappeared from the defense budget, funds missing and unaccounted for
  • $5 million a year in opium production in Afghanistan as of 2001 is now $80 billion in heroin production, 93% of the world’s supply
  • At least 25% of the crude oil pumped from Iraq between 2003 and 2008 was never paid for

STRANGE CIA TWISTS – INTERVIEW WITH EMIL LEE WANTA 5/15/2011

Emil Lee Wanta, the White House official designated to repatriate Stinger missiles still in Afghanistan and Pakistan after the Soviet withdrawal, first met “Tim Osman,” the CIA code name for Osama bin Laden in 1989. Wanta, along with William Casey and Bill Colby (CIA Directors) made up the ISA (Intelligence Support Agency), a group tasked with eliminating rogue intelligence operations, CIA and other, that had sprung up resulting from operations in Central America and the Af-Pak theatre.
Iran-Contra was one of those operations, there were others, many others. It is obvious that the ISA was less than successful. Many Reagan era insiders were convicted of crimes including, eventually, Emil Lee Wanta.

REDACTED WANTA MEMO
Wanta was originally named by Reagan as Inspector General of the Department of Defense, eventually slated to take over as Defense Secretary from Casper Weinberger (later convicted during Iran Contra and pardoned). That appointment was blocked by Secretary of State George Schultz.
Wanta, then working out of Vienna, was approached by Osama bin Laden, the CIA’s prime intermediary with both Saudi Arabia and resupply operations in Afghanistan, with replacing Stinger missiles claimed to have been expended in combat with both Soviet forces and those of the Afghan government. Wanta describes his meeting with “Tim Osman,” Osama bin Laden’s “working identity,” along with James Chi, the then station chief in Islamabad.
Stinger missiles had been found for sale in the Peshawar arms bazaar, offered to any and all takers. The first order of business was to recover these weapons before they fell into the hands of real terrorists, those not in the employ of the CIA.
Wanta and Chi put out a “buy order” and repurchased several missiles for cash. They then met with bin Laden. They confronted bin Laden with the fact that some of the missiles they recovered bore the serial numbers of units listed by bin Laden as “expended.” Bin Laden then indicated that the remainder of the Stingers were stored in Peshawar.

MISSION ACCOMPLISHED?
Bin Laden was very specific on how he was to be paid and more specific on how unpleasant things would get if money wasn’t forthcoming.
Payment was arranged directly to bin Laden who had the missiles loaded on trucks. Bin Laden is described as in traditional garb, shod in sandals and very unkempt. Meetings were held in English.
The bin Laden Stinger inventory, 116 missiles, were flown into Frankfurt, Germany and turned over to Customs and Treasury there. Secretary of State Schultz complained that the use of Germany in this transaction violated the prerogative of Secretary of State and filed a formal complaint.
Wanta reports that bin Laden was considered the CIA’s most trusted and reliable asset. That relationship continued, part of the complex interaction between the Bush family, the bin Laden family and their son, Osama bin Laden. At no time was Osama bin Laden ever considered “rogue.”
At no time was Osama bin Laden considered out of favor with either his own family or the Bush family to which he was closely aligned.
Osama bin Laden is confirmed to have received medical care, including kidney dialysis, on several occasions as late as 2000, at US military facilities in the Gulf.
There had been reports of Osama bin Laden being involved in a CIA operation involving China as late as September 2001. I was told there were no active operations against China. The intelligence relationship with China was being managed, according to sources, directly by George H.W. Bush and the Chinese representative Henry Kok (Kok Howe Kwong). Slightly differing versions of meetings in Singapore including Bush, Kok, CIA Counsel Jan Morton Heger and others over disbursement of very substantial assets in Rubles make no mention of a Saudi financial interest in with the CIA in this area.
Were the Saudi’s to have been involved, Osama bin Laden would have represented their government, according to reliable sources.
CIA sources claim Osama bin Laden, “Tim Osman” to them, was no longer operational after late 2001. It is their understanding that he died of kidney failure and his body was recovered and put in freezer storage. When questioned about other possible diseases, they insist that he was under treatment for kidney disease only.

Related Posts: