Featured Post

SalaamOne NetWork

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

NATO attack on Pakistan: A blatant aggression: Analysis


By Ikram Sehgal: A defence and political analyst.
[Cry wolf is an expression that means "raise a false alarm", derived from the fable The Boy Who Cried Wolf]



The compulsions for survival have driven our leaders over the past decade to allow the US-Pakistan relationship to gradually degenerate into a master-slave relationship. Pakistan is now subjected to various insults across the board periodically; in the past year the vilification of the Pakistan Army and the ISI by key US public officials has become a regular affair. To add injury to the never-ending insults, 24 of our soldiers were brutally murdered by the strafing of four US helicopter gunships; most of them died in the first attack while asleep. While the borders may not be well marked, the map reference coordinates of our position at Salala – two kilometres well inside Pakistan – were well defined; the US and Nato violated standard operating procedures (SOPs) governing coordination with Pakistan. 

Universal perception holds that this was a calculated act of provocation for our perceived support for the Taliban. Or was it more than that; the pre-meditated murder being carried out with a more sinister motive? The reaction in the drawing rooms of the elite matched the outrage in the streets, the near universal cry being “enough is enough”. PM Gilani rode the crest of the public anger with his “no further business as usual” stance.

To quote M K Bhadrakumar from a recent article, “Pakistan’s doublespeak (about drones) may be ending. Future US drone operations may have to be conducted factoring in the possibility that Pakistan might regard them as violations of its air space.” What he went on to say was more meaningful, “Washington may have seriously erred if the intention on Friday night was to draw out the Pakistani military into a retaliatory mode and then to hit it with a sledgehammer and make it crawl on its knees pleading mercy.”

The perfunctory “regret” aside, there is not even a hint of an apology; but then, which master has ever apologised to a slave? To its credit, the Defence Cabinet Committee (DCC) did not turn the other cheek as usual. Instead, it decided to (1) close Nato’s supply through Pakistani territory immediately (2) demand the US vacate Shamsi airbase (meant for drone operations) within 15 days and (3) “revisit and undertake a complete review” of all “programmes, activities and cooperative arrangements” with the US, Nato and the International Security Assistance Force (Isaf), including in “diplomatic, political and intelligence” areas. The Federal Cabinet went one up in deciding not to participate in the Bonn Conference that is to be held in early December.

The 140,000 (97,000 US and 43,000 Nato) Isaf troops depend on fuel, food and equipment coming from outside landlocked Afghanistan. Spokesman Lt Gen Keeley insisted that their operations will not be affected because “Isaf uses a vast supply and distribution network to ensure coalition forces remain well-stocked.” Less than half is funnelled through the so-called Northern Distribution Network (NDN) encompassing Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan and Tajikistan. Many knowledgeable logistical experts maintain that contrary to Isaf claims the NDN is not adequate for supplies in the longer-term, particularly because heavy equipment, stores and aviation fuel come through Pakistan. Speaking on NBC News, respected US defence analyst retired US General Barry McCaffrey warned that the coalition effort in Afghanistan was “one step short of a strategic crisis. I do not believe we can continue operations at this rate, so we’ve got to talk to them, we’ve got to pay them, we’ve got to apologise for this strike. We have no option, literally.”

To quote my article “Terms of Endearment” published on September 29, 2011, “Our civilian and military sacrifices compare at a ratio of almost 10:1 to all Afghan civilian and coalition forces put together. Is it an amazing coincidence that every time the PPP coalition is in danger of a meltdown, the army and the ISI are put on the block by the US to relieve the existential threat to this inept and corrupt Pakistani government?” This incongruous thought becomes stronger two months later; was the Salala strike meant to bail out Zardari because of the Haqqani memo and or the NRO? Was the helicopter attack meant only as a warning shot, misfiring when a missile hit a billet full of soldiers sleeping off duty, and the high casualty figures raised a storm? 

Nevertheless the Nato strike did shift attention from both the memo and the NRO. Unfortunately for Zardari, Husain Haqqani is not present in Washington DC to give events the usual spin about “the danger to democracy”. It would be nice if the president and supreme commander came out personally with a strong statement condemning this murderous attack instead of oblique references through his spokesman. It may not altogether eliminate the pervasive suspicion about his inclinations and motives but it would go some way in partially dispelling the prevailing notion of all this being meant to distract the focus from him.

Teetering perilously on a fail-safe line as a much-vilified partner in the US-led war, continuing without a defined “terms of engagement”, is impossible. Former governor Huntsman (and a Republican presidential candidate) correctly termed our relationship as being one of a “transactional” nature. “Out-of-the-box” thinking must provide for a genuinely productive and meaningful relationship in the future. 

People like Sandy Berger and Bruce Reidel have brushed off the Pakistani reaction as being without substance, confidently predicting we will be back “on line” within days – the dangers of our “crying wolf” once too often! The acid test of our political (and military) leaders will be to put national interest before personal salvation. Effective in his own quiet way, Kayani must comprehend the consequences of his remaining a perennial “silent soldier”. While he could possibly have considered fading from the scene as an option (the first year of his three-year extension expired coincidentally on November 27), he has responsibilities not only to the soldiers dying under his command but also to the people of this country.

With the entire Republican slate of US presidential candidates baying for our blood, I wrote two months ago, “The US Congress would do this country the greatest favour if it passes the Bill to cut off aid to Pakistan; this government can than declare freedom! First, we should re-affirm our commitment to continue fighting the war on terror, but on our own terms. Second, we must pull out as many troops as we can from Fata and mobilise the tribal militias as in the past. Third, we must not take any further aid of any kind, economic or military, saddled with conditions. Fourth, we must charge transit fees (and the wear and tear to our infrastructure) at internationally acceptable rates for all goods passing through Pakistani territory.” The Nato containers and oil tankers stuck in Pakistani territory must be allowed through as they present a security threat but no more should be offloaded from ships till we have a suitable agreement for payment of adequate transit fees in place.

To preserve sanity in a future relationship, sometimes a divorce is necessary. Pakistan must disengage from the war in Afghanistan while continuing its own war against terrorism within Pakistan. If the US wants to shed the blood of its young soldiers, propping up someone like Karzai for the next 50 years – that is its call.

Email: isehgal@pathfinder9.com


~~~~~~~~~~~~
A senior Pakistani army official has said a NATO cross-border air attack that killed 24 soldiers was a deliberate, blatant act of aggression, hardening Pakistan's stance on an incident that could hurt efforts to stabilize Afghanistan.
Islamabad decided on Tuesday not to attend a major conference on the post-2014 future of Afghanistan in Germany next week, an angry riposte to the attack that threatens to set back peace efforts in Pakistan's troubled neighbor.

Continuing Pakistan's angry tone, Major General Ishfaq Nadeem, director general of military operations, said NATO forces were alerted they were attacking Pakistani posts, but helicopters kept firing. His comments, from a briefing to editors, were carried in local newspapers on Wednesday that characterized the attack as blatant aggression.

"Detailed information of the posts was already with ISAF (International Security Assistance Force), including map references, and it was impossible that they did not know these to be our posts," The News quoted Nadeem as saying at the briefing held at army headquarters on Tuesday.

NATO helicopters and fighter jets attacked two military border posts in northwest Pakistan on Saturday in the worst incident of its kind since Islamabad allied itself with Washington in 2001 in the war on militancy.

Fury over the attack is growing, with another protest in the city of Lahore and more tough editorials in newspapers.

The helicopters appeared near the post around 15 to 20 minutes past midnight, opened fire, then left about 45 minutes later, Nadeem was quoted as saying. They reappeared at 0115 local time and attacked again for another hour, he said.

Nadeem said that, minutes before the first attack, a U.S. sergeant on duty at a communications centre in Afghanistan told a Pakistani major that NATO special forces were receiving indirect fire from a location 15 km (9 miles) from the posts.

The Pakistanis said they needed time to check and asked for coordinates. Seven minutes later, the sergeant called back and said "your Volcano post has been hit," Nadeem quoted the sergeant as saying.

Nadeem concluded that confirmed NATO knew the locations of the Pakistani posts before attacking, said The News.

REINVIGORATED MILITARY

The NATO attack shifted attention away from Pakistan's widely questioned performance against militants who cross its border to attack U.S.-led NATO forces in Afghanistan, and has given the military a chance to reassert itself.

Islamabad's decision to boycott next week's meeting in Bonn will deprive the talks of a key player that could nudge Taliban militants into a peace process as NATO combat troops prepare to leave Afghanistan by the end of 2014.

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said on Wednesday Pakistan's decision to boycott the conference was "regrettable" but hoped to secure Islamabad's cooperation in future.

"Nothing will be gained by turning our backs on mutually beneficial cooperation," Clinton told reporters in South Korea.

The army, which has ruled Pakistan for more than half of its history and sets security and foreign policy, faced strong criticism from both the Pakistani public and its ally, the United States, after the raid that killed Osama bin Laden.

The al Qaeda leader had apparently been living in a Pakistani garrison town for years before U.S. special forces found and killed him in a unilateral raid in May.

Pakistanis criticized the military for failing to protect their sovereignty, and angry U.S. officials wondered whether some members of military intelligence had sheltered him. Pakistan's government and military said they had no idea bin Laden was in the country.

The army seems to have regained its confidence, and won the support of the public and the government in a country where anti-American sentiment runs high even on rare occasions when relations with Washington are healthy.

More than 1,000 students from a hardline Pakistani religious party protested in Lahore, yelling "Death to NATO" and "Death to America."

"If NATO and America do something like this again, we are going to turn Pakistan into their graveyard," said 23-year-old university student Zahoor Ahmad.

History student Mudassir Durrani said: "This attack is a slap in the faces of the Pakistanis who support America. It is time for secular and religious forces to come together to fight America."

NATO hopes an investigation it promised will defuse the crisis and that confidence-building measures can repair ties.

But the military is firmly focused on NATO, and analysts say it is likely to take advantage of the widespread anger to press its interests in any future peace talks on Afghanistan.

The army is well aware that many Pakistanis believe the war on militancy their country joined has only served U.S. interests while thousands of Pakistani soldiers have died fighting.

"If the military and government are not in sync with the public opinion, they are seen as the bad guys, they are seen as the lackeys of the Americans," said Mahmud Durrani, a former national security chief and ambassador to Washington.

"The leadership has no choice but to condemn it (NATO). The anger in the public is phenomenal."

Exactly what happened at the posts along an unruly and poorly defined border is still unclear.

A Western official and an Afghan security official who requested anonymity said NATO troops were responding to fire from across the border. Pakistan says the attack was unprovoked.

Both explanations are possibly correct: that a retaliatory attack by NATO troops took a tragic, mistaken turn in harsh terrain where differentiating friend from foe can be difficult.

Nadeem was adamant that all communications channels had informed NATO that it was attacking Pakistani positions. "They continued regardless, with impunity," The News quoted him as saying.

(Additional reporting by Chris Allbritton in ISLAMABAD and Mubasher Bukhari in LAHORE; Writing by Michael Georgy; Editing by Paul Tait) http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/11/30/us-pakistan-nato-idUSTRE7AT0JZ20111130

A new Middle East?


ALMOST a year has gone by since citizens of various Arab nations rose up against long-entrenched dictatorial regimes but their frustration has not been assuaged. Tunisia, the birthplace of the Arab Spring, is the only nation which has seen an orderly transition to democracy with the election of a constituent assembly. Elsewhere there is tumult. Yemen`s President Ali Abdullah Saleh has signed a deal, promising to step down after three decades in power but there is reason to be cautious. He has backtracked on promises to hand over power several times. Mr Saleh`s stubbornness has brought his impoverished nation to the brink of civil war with hundreds killed since the protests began. Yemeni activists also question why the deal gives Mr Saleh immunity from prosecution. Meanwhile, Cairo`s Tahrir Square is once again rife with protests. Dozens have been killed as the authorities have violently put down demonstrations. The protesters want a quicker transition to democracy and are suspicious of the military`s intentions to tinker with the constitution. Field Marshal Hussein Tantawi, head of Egypt`s ruling military council, has made overtures to the protesters yet many Egyptians feel the generals have no intention of handing over power.

Arab Spring Sour: 'Egypt revolt one long military ...


Egypt's ruling military council has accepted the resignation of the Cabinet and agreed to form the national ...


The Gulf is also in flux. In Bahrain, the head of a government-appointed commission has said the sheikhdom`s forces “used torture and excessive force against demonstrators” to smother the strategic nation`s forgotten revolution. This has strengthened the opposition and human rights observers` claims that the Bahraini state discriminates against and is brutal towards its own people. The state now needs to back up claims it will punish those involved in abuses. The commission has also established there is no proof of Iranian involvement in fomenting protests, a strong indicator that the movement is homegrown. In Kuwait, several opposition activists were arrested recently after protesters stormed parliament and clashed with police last week. The opposition has called for the prime minister`s dismissal and parliament`s dissolution in the wake of a corruption scandal reportedly involving the premier — a royal — and several legislators.

Major questions remain about the direction of the Arab Spring. In nations where dictators have fallen (Egypt and Libya) it remains to be seen whether the people`s democratic aspirations will be thwarted by a new set of autocrats. Yemen`s and Syria`s future is also uncertain given the tribal and sectarian divisions within those societies. As for the Gulf monarchies, they will put up the toughest resistance to change. One thing appears certain: much ground still needs to be covered before the Arab masses can reach their goal of establishing representative governments that ensure full social, political and economic rights.
http://www.columnspk.com/a-new-middle-east-editorial-by-dawn/

Arabs have historically revolted every decade against rulers and the west has counter-revolted most attempts.
The spirit of 1968 flows through Arab Spring and Occupy movement - as its counter-current attempts to suppress uprising.
The Syrian people are being sacrificed at the altar of US imperialism, says author.

European Muslims- Problems & Opportunities [Urdu] یورپ کے مسلمان : مسائل اور مواقع

 مغرب میں مقیم مسلمانوں کے مسائل:یورپ میں مسلمانوں کو متعدد مسائل کا سامنا ہے اور ان کے حل کے لیے منظم کوششوں اور واضح لائحۂ عمل کی ضرورت ہے۔ یہی وہ طریقہ ہے جس سے ہم اپنے ہدف حاصل کرسکتے ہیں۔... .... Read morel >>>hhttp://goo.gl/XR6OG

Zionist West versus Islam



  1. Thumbnail
3:29Noam Chomsky on The "Clash of Civilizations"158,188views
  2. 5
  3. Thumbnail
10:23Edward Said, "The Myth of the Clash of Civilizations" 184,183views
  4. 7Thumbnail
10:32Edward Said, "The Myth of the Clash of Civilizations" 231,361views
Henry Kissinger New World Order: Video 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
OIC seeks to devise legal mechanisms for the implementation of resolution 16/18 Meeting of Experts to discuss the fight against religious discrimination in Washington.

The much awaited clash of civilizations is now right before us; the perpetrators are none other than who had sponsored this book. By Raja G Mujtaba

Islam bashing has become part of a well organised move in the West. This is nothing new, such acts are spread over the entire history of Islam. The notorious crusades were initiated in by Pope Urban 2nd in 1096 when the Church was losing its hold on Christians, this ploy was used by them to bring the Christians back under the yoke of the Church.  As a reaction to these invasions, a warrior in the person of Sultan Salahuddin Ayubi, a Kurd emerged and fought out these crusades against Islam.
Now on 9/11, Bush assumed the role of Pope Urban 2nd and declared it a crusade in his State of the Union address against Islam after the 9/11 event. The magnitude of this false flag has been so intense that its ripples are being felt even now. Its splinter effects have spread across not only the US but Western Europe as well. Burning of Holy Quran by Pastor Terry Jones in Florida was the most glaring act. Other than this, there have been numerous attacks on Mosques and Muslims in the entire length and breadth of the US. As if this was not enough, caricatures of Holy Prophet Muhammad (S A W) were perpetrated in Europe. Dutch MP, Geert Wilders launched a very aggressive campaign against Islam when he addressed the British Parliament. First it was absolutely wrong on the part of the British to allow such a speech and then it was even worse when he was allowed to get away with it.
Operation Desert Storm under General Colin Powel was the first stage of “War against Islam” it was orchestrated first by instigating Saddam Hussain to invade Iran that was going through a process of revolution and then Kuwait to create a fear and terror in the minds of the Gulf Cooperation Council states on the Persian Gulf. When Iraq was fighting Iran, I was adviser to Kuwait Air Force & Air Defence for its automation. I was observing that daily night flights were taking place to provide arms and ammunition to Iraq. Although it was not in my assignment to advise them on this but sensing what was to come for Kuwait after Saddam fails to defeat Iran was not being accepted by the Kuwaiti authorities. They thought that Iraq would be able to defeat Iran hence Kuwait would be on the side of the victor and then it was the Arab nationalism that had been inculcated by Col Lawrence that became a strong factor to support Iraq. The US and her allies played a smart move, through Iran-Iraq war, US was avenging her humiliation at the hands of the Iranian students who had occupied the US Embassy and taken over four hundred hostages in Tehran.
Before all this, the US had built huge bases in Saudi Arabia much beyond the Saudi needs but at their expense. It was a great game of chess being played at the expense of the Arab Kings and Sheikhs to extract their wealth and take control of their oil and political body. Soon after the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait, the UN Security Council was moved, media hype was created and the troops began to arrive in Saudi Arabia and other Gulf States to ‘liberate’ Kuwait. Iraq’s military might was destroyed, No-Fly Zones were established, oil exports were taken over. Iraq was completely cut off and no trade was taking place, hospital ran out of medicines, stores had no stock even of essentials where baby food was not to be seen; this was such a cruel act on the part of the US and her allies that almost a million babies and people died for want of food and medicines. When Madeline Albright was confronted with this astronomical figure of deaths, she said that this was a price worth it.
Such venomous acts are doing no service to humanity at large and the countries in particular on whose lands such campaigns are being held. Every country no matter how big or small it maybe has a strong Muslim population. Reaction of such population is but natural thus it brings chaos and destruction in the country where such acts are allowed in the name of the basic freedoms of speech and expression. Freedom of expression etc. are good but not at the cost of religious sentiments of other communities. Such freedom only disrupts peace and harmony not only in the country of occurrence but it runs polarization and deep wedge between such communities around the world.
Ever since 9/11, the world is being pushed deeper and deeper into a state of war. Many Muslim countries have been attacked and numerous are being planned to be attacked. Reasons to do are always engineered and the blame is fixed on the target country. Since 9/11, Afghanistan, Iraq and Pakistan are under constant state of destabilization. Libya was the last country to have been attacked. A country that was living in peace and refusing to accept the American hegemony has been put to anarchy. Now Yemen, Syria and Iran are under focus. Several attempts have been made on Pakistan but without success. Also there is a well coordinated move taking place in Africa where Nigeria, Sudan, Somalia etc. are being threatened. It is not to be forgotten that Arab kingdoms in the Arabian Peninsula are also under threat. The sword of destabilization and anarchy is hanging on their necks also.
This is a very crucial time in the history of Muslims, and there is no body or any coordinated effort to face the threats and challenges. Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) that was formed a few decades back became a center of hope and inspiration for the Muslims but soon it became apparent that it has been plagued by the termites planted by the West. Now, as Mahathir Muhammad said it’s not OIC but Oh IC. This can be well gauged from its impotence and lack of assertion on any issue inflicting the Muslim world. It has not been able to resolve any conflicts within the Muslim world. The expected diplomatic role of this body has been a complete disappointment.
Now to check Islam bashing or spread of Islamophobia that’s being created by the neo-cons and the Zionists is merely a lip service. The press release of the OIC secretariat is placed below for the benefit of the readers to assess for them how pathetic the state is.
“Informed sources at the General Secretariat of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) disclosed on Thursday, 17 November 2011 that a meeting of experts will be held in Washington DC on 12 December 2011 and will last three days to discuss ways and means to implement  resolution 16/18 on “Combating intolerance, negative stereotyping and stigmatization of, and discrimination, incitement to violence, and violence against persons based on religion or belief” which was issued by the United Nations Human Rights Council last March, and prepared by the OIC in collaboration with the United States of America. The resolution, which received large support in the HRC, aims to combat religious discrimination, all what may lead to hatred and violence, and combating the phenomenon of Islamophobia spreading in the West. OIC member states and other countries are expected to participate in the said meeting.
The sources said that Washington meeting, which will be held at the level of experts, will endeavor to lay down legal mechanisms for the implementation of resolution 16/18 in order to pave the way for creating national legislations in the UN Member States that can reduce religious discrimination and incitement to religious hatred and violence.
The sources also noted that the meeting will also attempt to overcome the obstacles that prevent the implementation of the resolution, such as understanding the principle of freedom of expression, which is considered sacred by Western countries, while the OIC will endeavor to formulate frameworks for implementation of the resolution that ensure non insulting or defamation of religions or religious sanctities that lead to hostility and discrimination in many Western countries.
In the meantime, the UN Third Committee adopted by consensus resolution 16/18 last Tuesday. The OIC sources considered such achievement an additional success for the resolution. The sources added that countries such as Australia, Brazil and Thailand have confirmed their absolute support for the resolution during the meeting and have become additional co-sponsors for the resolution.
The OIC Permanent Representative to the UN, Ambassador Ufuk Gokcen gave an elaborate presentation on the resolution at an interfaith meeting held recently in Marrakech, Morocco. The participating countries expressed their full support for the resolution which was secured earlier during the meeting that was co-chaired by the OIC Secretary General Professor Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu and US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in Istanbul last July.”
Enough killings have taken place under the garb of ‘War On Terror,’ the number runs into millions, this is no coincidence but a well thought out agenda of the Zionists and the Neo-Cons. This was executed by Bush-Blair and Company. They have committed crime against humanity for which they need to be charged and tried in a neutral court of justice. This court should have representations from the Muslim world also. Without bringing these criminals to justice world would never see peace. If not, then the way the Muslim countries are being victimized and attacked a new Salahuddin Ayubi will arise and put everything to rest.
http://www.opinion-maker.org/2011/11/zionist-west-versus-islam/


Conspiracy Theories- NWO:
http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL18EDA5DBC7810DC4


Please visit: http://aftabkhan.blog.com