Tuesday, March 31, 2009

Baitullah claims responsibility for Manawan attack By Alamgir Bhittani Tuesday, 31 Mar, 2009 | 09:30 PM PST |


TANK: Tahrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) Chief Baitullah Mehsud on Tuesday claimed responsibility for the attack on the police training academy in Manwan and said his militant group will ‘expedite such assaults.’

Mehsud contacted correspondents by phone from an undisclosed location and said that his group had carried out attack on Monday morning.

‘We accept responsibility for the assault on the training centre in Manawan,’ said the head of the banned TTP.

He added that President Zardari was ‘following US policies and allowing drone attacks’ and vowed that the Taliban movement will expedite similar activities unless missile attacks are halted.

Usually, Mehsud’s spokesman Maulvi Omar speaks to the media and issues statements on his behalf, but this time Mehsud spoke to the media and claimed responsibility for the brazen attack.

The militant chief also owned up to carrying out a suicide attack at a Police Special Branch in Islamabad on March 23 and a roadside bomb explosion in Bannu on Monday. Seven people including five soldiers were killed in the explosion. However, he denied any involvement in the bombing at a mosque in Khyber tribal region in which 57 people were killed.

Mehsud said that these attacks have been carried out in reaction to the increase in number of drone attacks inside Pakistani territory,

The US State Department put Baitullah Mehsud on its most wanted list on March 25 and announced a $5mn bounty for capturing him.

Baitullah Mehsud is the second Pakistani be have been put on a wanted list by the US government after Mir Aimal Kasi, an inhabitant of Balochistan province.

Earlier the TTP chief was declared absconder by local courts in the assassination of former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto.

Mehsud said he was not bothered about the reward on his head, saying ‘martyrdom is my mission and it will be a great honour if I achieve it.’

‘The enemies should not ignore might of the Taliban and they will suffer in Washington when we target the White House,’ he warned. He claimed the Taliban have the ability to carry out attacks in the US capital.

Mehsud vowed to continue attacks against NATO forces in Afghanistan, for which, Taliban groups in North and South Waziristan had formed joint Shoora committees to continue their struggle in Afghanistan.

When asked if his men were behind the attack on Sri Lankan cricket team in Lahore, the TTP chief did not give a clear reply.

‘I have yet to establish contact with the people and they (the people) not reached their destination,’ he said.

Staff correspondent Zulfiqar Ali contributed to this report from Peshawar.

Sunday, March 29, 2009

Obama rules out sending US troops inside Pakistan Sunday, 29 Mar, 2009 | 08:23 PM PST |


WASHINGTON: US President Barack Obama said on Sunday he will consult with Pakistan’s leaders before going after terrorist hideouts in the country.

The US President said he also wants Pakistan to be more accountable, but has ruled out deploying US troops there. In Obama’s words, his Afghanistan strategy ‘does not change the recognition of Pakistan as a sovereign government.’

In an interview with CBS television’s ‘Face the Nation,’ the president discussed the tenuous security situation in that region. He said, ‘Unless we get a handle on it now, we’re gonna be in trouble.’

Obama added that his new strategy is ‘not going to be an open-ended commitment of infinite resources’ from the United States.

In a wide-ranging interview, Obama sought to counter the notion that Afghanistan has become his war. He emphasised that it started on George W. Bush’s watch.

‘I think it’s America’s war. And it’s the same war that we initiated after 9/11 as a consequence of those attacks,’ Obama said. ‘The focus over the last seven years I think has been lost.’

Obama taped the interview Friday, the same day he launched the fresh effort to defeat al-Qaida terrorists in Pakistan and Afghanistan, widening a war that began after terrorists struck the US on Sept. 11, 2001. He set new benchmarks and ordered 4,000 more troops to the war zone as well as hundreds of civilians and increased aid. The plan does not include an exit timeline.

Defense Secretary Robert Gates, in an interview on ‘Fox News Sunday,’ said the short-term objectives for US forces in Afghanistan have narrowed under Obama’s new strategy even as a flourishing democracy in Afghanistan remains a long-term goal.

‘I think what we need to focus on and focus our efforts is making headway and reversing the Taliban’s momentum and strengthening the Afghan army and police, and really going after al-Qaida, as the president said,’ Gates said.

Pakistan has urged Obama to halt the strikes. But Gates has signaled to Congress that the US would continue to go after al-Qaida inside Pakistan, and senior Obama administration officials have called the strikes effective.

Without directly referring to the strikes, Obama said: ‘If we have a high-value target within our sights, after consulting with Pakistan, we’re going after them. But our main thrust has to be to help Pakistan defeat these extremists.’

Asked if he meant he would put US troops on the ground in Pakistan, Obama said: ‘No.’

He noted that Pakistan is a sovereign nation and said: ‘We need to work with them and through them to deal with al-Qaida. But we have to hold them much more accountable.’

‘What we wanna do is say to the Pakistani people: You are our friends, you are our allies. We are going to give you the tools to defeat al-Qaeda and to root out these safe havens. But we also expect some accountability. And we expect that you understand the severity and the nature of the threat,’ Obama added.

In the interview, Obama said he won’t assume that more troops will result in an improved situation. ‘There may be a point of diminishing returns in terms of troop levels. We’ve gotta also make sure that our civilian efforts, our diplomatic efforts and our development efforts, are just as robustly encouraged.’

Obama agreed that things are worse than ever in Afghanistan, and then sought to clarify his point.

‘They’re not worse than they were when the Taliban was in charge and al Qaida was operating with impunity,’ Obama said. But, he added, ‘We have seen a deterioration over the last several years.’

‘This is gonna be hard,’ Obama said. ‘I’m under no illusions. If it was easy, it would have already been completed.’ He also stressed the need to be flexible. ‘We will continue to monitor and adjust our strategies to make sure that we’re not just going down blind alleys.’

20 dead, 25 hurt in Lahore police training school attack Updated at: 0955 PST, Monday, March 30, 2009


LAHORE: At least 20 people have been killed and 25 injured when gunmen attack police training center in Manawan near Wagah border on Monday.

Attackers take positions inside police training center. They are wearing police uniforms and carrying backpacks and guns.

Rangers and police take positions around police training center. Army has also deployed to aid police. Emergency enforced in the hospitals. Police helicopters hover training center.

The bodies and injured have been shifted to different hospitals. According to DIG Mumtaz Sukhara, the exact number of attackers yet to be known. Police have directed people to stay away from training center, however, large number of people present outside training center to support security forces. They are chanting slogans in favour of Punjab police and Pakistan Army.

Earlier, a series of at least five blasts were heard at the training centre at Manawan, and the explosions were followed by an exchange of fire between the attackers and policemen that is still underway.

The officials said about 850 trainee policemen were present within at the facility.Reports said the gunmen lobbed several grenades as they launched their attack and then fired indiscriminately.

Lessons from history By Javed Hussain Monday, 30 Mar, 2009 | 08:51 AM PST |


WHEN the last army chief staged a coup in October 1999, he was generally welcomed by the people because they had become disillusioned with the kind of governance that the deposed government was providing.

Their hopes were raised and they waited patiently in expectation of a better future. But as the years rolled on their hopes began to diminish as the army chief had begun to be seen as being too self-absorbed to care for the people.

Their worst fears were confirmed when he took, purely out of self-interest, the first of three ill-advised decisions — acting against the chief justice on March 9, 2007. On this fateful day, began the fall of the dictator. The other two decisions, staging a coup against the judiciary on Nov 3, 2007, and promulgating the National Reconciliation Ordinance to perpetuate his rule, also backfired as he was roundly rejected by the people on Feb 18 last year, and then forced to resign.

He fell because like others before him, he too had surrounded himself with people who lacked probity. They felt no qualms about becoming turncoats and carrying tainted reputations. Being past masters at the art of sycophancy, they extolled his virtues to the skies and deluded him into believing that he was actually the repository of all wisdom. Having been led up the garden path he suddenly found himself on the edge of the precipice, and fell. Soon after this these very people started finding faults in him. He had refused to learn from history.

Volumes have been written on Pakistan’s crisis of leadership. Here it would suffice to say that leadership is not a position. Just because a person has been elected, selected, appointed or self-appointed, doesn’t mean that he or she is a good leader too.

Authenticity is an essential characteristic of good leaders. They are a living example and serve as role models. They unleash energy and enthusiasm by creating a vision that people find inspiring, and create an environment of commitment and performance. They learn from the past to improve the future. They have integrity; they mean what they say, speak the truth and act honestly. They give the people a sense of history and hope. If one such leader had blessed Pakistan, its history would have been embellished by stories of success, not of failure.

History repeats itself because men repeat mistakes. The incumbent president is repeating the mistakes made by his predecessor — for which he was duly punished on March 16 this year. He too has surrounded himself with people who place their own interests above those of the country, who are incapable of high thinking, and who lack the ability to grasp the wider implications of a situation, problem and action. Their sole motive is to gain and retain power at any cost in order to flourish at the expense of the taxpayer and the state — all in the name of democracy. They have thus turned politics into a game of high stakes. Yet he continues to rely on them.

It is people like these who have dominated the political scene for almost all the years of Pakistan’s life. They talk of democracy, yet, practice dictatorship. They reject provincial autonomy, yet neglect the smaller provinces. They talk of supremacy of parliament, yet treat it with disdain. They talk of their commitment to the independence of the judiciary, yet fill it up with loyalists. They talk of supremacy of the constitution, yet demean it. They talk of the rule of the law, yet apply it selectively. Their assassinated chairperson of the party had signed the charter of democracy, yet they backed out of it. They promised in the full glare of publicity to restore the deposed judges, yet reneged on it.

It is people like these who have exercised a pernicious influence on the president, and let him down, not the ones who have been marginalised in the party because they dissented. It is because of people like these that there are undertones within the party that he is fast becoming a liability, and that unless he does something dramatic to restore the image of the party, and quickly too, it would be wiped out in the next elections, whenever they are held. The powers that be, here and abroad, agree. The sad fact is that what the third and fourth army dictators tried to do and failed in their long years of rule, the co-chairman of the party has done in one year — damaged the party immeasurably.

This is a decisive moment in the history of the PPP. The party’s fortunes are at their lowest level after the recent defeat. But it may yet get a reprieve from the people if the president becomes his own man and summons the courage to take bold decisions in order to pre-empt the crises that are staring him in the face and looming large in everyone’s mind by dispensing with the likes of Taseers, Maliks, Naeks, Khosas, Wahabs, Awans etc, by ending governor’s rule in Punjab, by restoring the constitution to its original form, and by implementing the Charter of Democracy.

If he can do this and more, like abolishing the feudal system by carrying out authentic land reforms that would liberate millions of Pakistanis groaning under its impact, he would be hailed as a hero, and in the process, his critics would be left with egg all over their faces.

But if he continues to rely on the small minds that surround him, and play partisan politics, he too would fall, never to rise again. These people would then begin to find faults in him. The awakening of the people from the deep slumber they had fallen into is an opportunity for him to use to his own advantage. He must learn from history.

Will Younus Khan succeed? Posted by Moderator in Cricket on 02 20th, 2009 | 97 responses


The Pakistan Cricket Board management has inducted a new captain in the shape of Younus Khan after the dismal performance of the national team against Sri Lanka. Younus’s aggressive style of leadership in stark contrast with that of former skipper Shoaib Malik, who was more laid back in his approach. Coach Intikhab Alam, who was previously in favour of Malik, has now voiced support for the new captain.

Will Younus be able to infuse new spirit in the much de-motivated side? And do you think his captaincy will be a long-term appointment or another short-lived stint?

Attack on police academy leaves 8 dead, 150 injured Monday, 30 Mar, 2009 | 08:42 AM PST |


LAHORE: Terrorists used machine guns and grenades to launch a savage attack on a police training academy in Manawaal, leaving 8 dead and 150 injured according to private television channels.

The incident took place between 7 and 8 am on Monday morning, as trainees were participating in their morning parade. Eyewitness accounts estimate some ten attackers carried out the attack, and at least eight explosions have been heard so far.

The police remain locked in gun-battles with the attackers who remain hidden inside various buildings at the site, as emergency services are scrambling to evacuate the wounded to nearby hospitals.

Wednesday, March 25, 2009

What does the IPL move mean for Pakistani cricket?

The first season of the Indian Premier League was a huge hit among Pakistani cricket fans. The spicy combination of Twenty20 cricket and Bollywood proved irresistible to people of all ages on both sides of the border. The negligible time difference...

Sitaras, tamghas, hilals and nishans: what do they mean? Posted by Huma in Featured Articles, Pakistan on 03 25th, 2009 | 8 responses

Dawn.com’s Huma Yusuf looks at the Pakistan Day awards ceremony and wonders what it means for Pakistan today.

Another Pakistan Day, another awards ceremony. On Monday, President Asif Ali Zardari gathered “outstanding” Pakistanis – both military personnel and civilians – around him at the Aiwan-i-Sadr to confer all manner of stars and medals. Often, the announcement of civilian awardees sparks controversy as the chattering and politicking classes can’t help but wonder whether nepotism, favouritism, cronyism – or any other nefarious –ism – facilitated the selection. This year, however, the awards have raised different questions about the society we all inhabit.

Firstly, one can’t help but remember that President Zardari recently muddied the award waters by bestowing some of our nation’s highest honours on US administration officials. In January, then US Vice President-elect Joe Biden was granted the Hilal-e-Pakistan for strengthening democracy (read: pumping Pakistan with even more non-military aid). At about the same time, then US Assistant Secretary of State Richard Boucher snagged the highest civil award, the Hilal-e-Quaid-e-Azam, for “deepening bilateral cooperation” and promoting peace, stability and prosperity. Pakistanis were outraged, particularly by Boucher’s acknowledgement. Many quipped that he was being awarded for enabling the NRO, sanctioning Predator attacks in FATA, and generally arm-twisting the Pakistani leadership.

And so it is that in Zardari’s tenure as president, civilian awards were doled out to US dignitaries before Pakistani citizens. That choice has tainted awards-giving, and the question at the back of everyone’s mind when Zardari bestows a medal is: what’s he getting out of it?

Of course, Zardari’s bad judgement should in no way detract from the wonderful achievements of Pakistanis who have done their nation proud and earned rightful recognition through government awards. Indeed, we should be inspired by the innovation, research, dedication and professional commitment that thrive here against all odds.

While we’re admiring award recipients, though, we should take a moment to reflect on what their achievements mean for our society at large. Under normal circumstances, the awards a nation bestows upon its brightest and best reflect that nation’s values and cultural aspirations. The work of those who receive national awards should tread a nation’s path to progress; their efforts should serve the national agenda; their research should illuminate questions of national concern. In Pakistan, however, the achievements of civilian awardees increasingly betray a disconnect with the society in which they are achieved. In other words, the Pakistan Day awards ceremony was yet another reminder that the Pakistan we currently inhabit is drifting further and further away from the Pakistan that was meant to be.

What are we to make of Habib Jalib’s posthumous Nishan-i-Imtiaz in a country where poets have seen the insides of more jail cells than publishing houses because they dare to critique dictators and power-hungry civilian leaders through verse? (Ironically, those who critique the government are often rewarded with sitaras and tamghas, but only well after they’re six feet under.)

How can we take former chief editor of Dawn Ahmad Ali Khan’s posthumous Hilal-i-Imtiaz seriously in a country where the recently passed ‘Prevention of Electronic Crimes Ordinance’ further stifles media freedom by making the character assassination of a member of state punishable by imprisonment?

How should award recipients Ali Moeen Nawazish and Greg Mortenson feel on receiving a Pride of Performance award and Sitara-i-Pakistan, respectively? Nawazish set a world record by securing 21 A grades in his A Level exams, while Mortenson earned international acclaim for setting up 78 schools that educated 28,000 children – including 18,000 girls – in Pakistan’s northern and tribal areas. What do their achievements mean in the face of a government that let Taliban militants destroy 130 girls’ schools in Swat before intervening?

Similarly, what do we make of actor Shafi Mohammed Shah’s Sitara-e-Imtiaz and singer Humera Channa’s Tamgha-e-Imtiaz in a country where CD and DVD shops are regularly blown up and burnt, and where, with the government’s support, the TNSM has outlawed all entertainment and media sales in Malakand.

The list of civilian award recipients is long and impressive. But the discordant notes that their achievements strike in the context of contemporary Pakistani society are alarming. If things continue like this, what will tomorrow’s citizens collect stars and medals for?

US offers cash rewards for Baitullah Mehsud By Anwar Iqbal Thursday, 26 Mar, 2009 | 12:22 AM PST |


WASHINGTON: The United States on Wednesday offered $ 5 million each for information leading to Baitullah Mehsud and for Sirajuddin Haqqani and $1 million for Abu Yahya al-Libi.

The offer, announced two days before the unveiling of the new US strategy for Afghanistan and Pakistan, indicates hardening of Washington’s stance against the militants hiding along the Pak-Afghan border.

But reports attributed to senior US officials also indicate a willingness to include ‘reconcilable’ militants in the new peace process to be announced by President Barak Obama on Friday.

While the United States has previously offered large cash rewards for terrorism suspects in the past as well, until recently they regarded Mehsud mainly as a threat to Pakistan.

Previous US drone attacks had avoided targeting Mehsud’s hideouts but this changed earlier this month when US drones also began to target Mehsud and his men.

The change reflects a US desire to work closely with Pakistan for eradicating all extremists, whether they target Pakistan or the United States.

On Wednesday afternoon, the US Department of State issued three brief statements, saying that it’s offering lucrative cash awards for information about the three suspects under its Rewards for Justice Programme. The programme offers cash rewards for information leading to the arrest, and/or conviction of dangerous criminals.

The State Department identified Baitullah Mehsud as the senior leader of the Taliban Movement of Pakistan. The statement noted that Mehsud is regarded as a key al Qaeda facilitator in South Waziristan. ‘Pakistani authorities believe that the January 2007 suicide attack against the Marriott Hotel in Islamabad was staged by militants loyal to Mehsud,’ the statement said.

‘Press reports also have linked Mehsud to the assassination of former Pakistani Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto and the deaths of other innocent civilians,’ the State Department noted.

The US government pointed out that Mehsud has also stated his intention to attack the United States. He has conducted cross-border attacks against US forces in Afghanistan, and poses a clear threat to American persons and interests in the region.

‘The United States is determined to bring Baitullah Mehsud to justice. We encourage anyone with information on Mehsud’s location to contact the nearest US embassy or consulate, any US military commander, or the Rewards for Justice staff,’ the department said.

Another statement, announced a reward of up to $5 million for information leading to the location, arrest, and/or conviction of Sirajuddin Haqqani. Sirajuddin Haqqani is a senior leader of ‘the Haqqani terrorist network’ founded by his father Jalaladin Haqqani. He maintains close ties to al Qaeda.

During an interview with an American news organisation, Haqqani admitted planning the Jan. 14, 2008 attack against the Serena Hotel in Kabul that killed six people, including American citizen Thor David Hesla.

Haqqani also admitted planning the April 2008 assassination attempt on Afghan President Hamid Karzai. He has coordinated and participated in cross-border attacks against US and Coalition forces in Afghanistan.

‘Sirajuddin Haqqani is believed to be located in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas of Pakistan,’ the State Department said.

The US government also authorised a reward of up to $1 million for information leading to Abu Yahya al-Libi, a prominent member of al Qaeda.

The State Department identified al-Libi as an Islamic scholar and a Libyan citizen who was captured by authorities in 2002 and imprisoned at Bagram Air Force Base in Afghanistan.

Al-Libi escaped in July 2005, and has since appeared in a number of propaganda videos, using his religious training to influence people and legitimise the actions of al Qaeda.

The State Department noted that al-Libi was a key motivator in the global jihadi movement and his messages ‘convey a clear threat to US persons or property worldwide.’ Al-Libi is believed to be in hiding in Afghanistan or Pakistan.

Since its inception in 1984, the Rewards for Justice Programme has paid more than $80 million to more than 50 persons who provided credible information that has resulted in the capture or death of terrorists or prevented acts of international terrorism.

Justice Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry restored as Chief Justice of Pakistan


The crisis that had the potentiality of turning into catastrophe has been averted. Justice Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry has been re-instated.

Prime Minister Syed Yousuf Raza Gilani announced reinstatement of the deposed Chief Justice and other judges.

“I restore the deposed chief justice and others according to the promise made by me and the President,” Gilani said in a televised address to the nation. The announcement, in light of the directive of President Asif Ali Zardari, met the main demand of the political parties and the lawyers’ community.

He said, “A notification to this effect is being issued now.” He said Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry would replace Justice Abdul Hameed Dogar, who retires on March 21.

Gilani pledged to “continue the politics of reconciliation.” The deposed Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry was removed from service by former President Pervez Musharraf on March 9, 2007, sparking a wave of protest that led to his resignation from his office on August 18, 2008.

The crisis that had the potentiality of turning into catastrophe has been averted. Justice Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry has been re-instated.

However, to put things in its correct perspective, it must be said that the combined efforts of the lawyers, the elite citizens, the media, the political parties of various denominations and most importantly, the solidarity exhibited by the nation, has achieved the improbable.

A new beginning has been made. It is time to review and revise our national policies to insure that we no longer continue stumbling down a path of decline. The system is fundamentally flawed and it requires the combined efforts of all branches of govt. and the people of all walks to focus their attention to fix the problem at the earliest. The convergence of nation into a missionary zeal must be kept alive. Having accomplished the first priority they should now focus their attention towards national reconstruction, consolidation and growth.

All parochial and provincial notions must be jettisoned and it is time for national unity and ironing out of shallow and superficial differences.

Your comments on this historic development are welcome!

Monday, March 23, 2009

In his own words Posted by Moderator in Entertainment, Featured Articles on 02 17th, 2009 | 108 responses


Mohammad Hanif was born in Okara in the 1960s. In his twenties, he joined the Pakistan Air Force Academy before dropping out to pursue a career in journalism. Since then, he has been a playwright, novelist, and journalist. He has worked for The Washington Post, Newsline, India Today, and BBC’s Urdu service.

In his most recent work - A Case of Exploding Mangoes - Mr Hanif brings his biting wit to bear on the infamous Zia years of Pakistani history. In the novel, he documents the mass discontent which swept Pakistani society and the seething hatred many harbored for General Ziaul Haq.

In this conversation, Dawn.com’s Huma Yusuf hopes to pick the novelist’s brain on contemporary topics, such as the menace of spreading militancy, the implementation of the Nizam-e-Adal Ordinance, and the unflagging media industry.

Blast outside Islamabad police station kills one By Munawer Azeem Tuesday, 24 Mar, 2009 | 01:02 AM PST |


ISLAMABAD: A police constable was killed and four other people were injured in a suicide blast at the gate of police’s Special Branch headquarters near G-7 Markez on Monday.

The boom resounded through a vast area, sparking panic in the city. It was the fist such attack in the federal capital in four months.

Interior Affairs Adviser Rehman Malik said it was a suicide attack carried out by one of the terrorists who had sneaked into the capital before the lawyers’ long march.

‘We had very authentic information that 15 to 20 Uzbek suicide bombers had been sent by Baitullah Mehsud after a meeting of Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP),’ he said during a visit to a hospital shortly after the blast.

The explosion damaged the Special Branch building, a mosque and some vehicles. The incident took place a few minutes after scores of people had left the mosque after Isha.

Witnesses said constable Faysal Jan who was manning the main gate of the building intercepted the attacker when he tried to forcibly enter the premises.

’Aroused by the bomber’s evasive movements, Jan rushed towards him and took him into a tight embrace,’ they said, adding that the ensuing explosion blew him up, but saved many lives because his body took the brunt of the blast.

A Special Branch clerk who was working in a room near the gate and three other people were injured.

An assistant sub-inspector of Special Branch, Munir, told Dawn that the blast took place at 8:35pm when some people were offering prayers in the mosque and he was coming out. He saw the constable running towards the bomber and asking him to stop for checking. However, the attacker blew himself up when the constable overpowered him.

Limbs of the constable and the attacker lay scattered within a radius of 200 metres. Parts of the bomber’s face and head were found on the rooftop of the mosque and in bushes in the parking area. They were sent to a laboratory for reconstruction.

The attacker had a trimmed beard, long hair and seemed to be 23 to 25 years old. A leg was also found.

According to police, preliminary investigation suggested that a locally made bomb weighing between four and six kilograms had been used. There were some reports that an accomplice of the bomber had been arrested while fleeing after the blast.

Rehman Malik, the interior affairs adviser, said: ‘I salute this brave policeman for such an act of gallantry.’

He said security in Islamabad was on high alert because the government had been tipped off about the attack.

In reply to a question, the adviser said: ‘No effective mechanism has so far been developed anywhere in the world to pre-empt a suicide bombing.’

Mr Malik said those responsible would be dealt with an iron hand. ‘We shall clear Pakistan of them all.’ Mr Malik said he had constituted a team to probe the incident.

Sources said the Special Branch was on the ‘hit list’ of terrorists and it had been receiving threats since the Lal Masjid operation of July 2007.

Saturday, March 21, 2009

The Media and the Mai


Last Sunday, as the Long March heated up and tear-gas shells and stones littered the entrance to the Lahore High Court, news broke of Mukhtar Mai’s marriage to Nasir Abbas Gabol, a police constable who was assigned to protect her. The news unleashed a media firestorm that says more about international perceptions of Pakistan and the fallacy of objective journalism than it does about Mai’s matrimonial circumstances.

Many quirks about the way Mai’s wedding was reported are worth noting. Local and international papers alike continue to identify Mai as a ‘gang-rape victim’ even while celebrating her successes as a women’s rights activist who fought her rapists in court and established the first girls’ school in Meerwala as well as several women’s centres. The Urdu-language press in Pakistan emphasized the fact that Mai had married a police constable in headlines and photo captions. Given the tainted reputations of low-level police officers in this country, dwelling on his profession can be read as a way to suggest that rape victims get what they deserve.

Meanwhile, the international press largely twisted coverage of Mai’s marriage to make it seem like the ultimate good news story. Indeed, as civilian-police clashes erupted in Lahore, Mai’s news made for the perfect ‘happy ending’ narrative that no one at that time thought the Long March would deliver. Juxtaposed with the ‘failed state’ doom and gloom being prompted by the showdown between the government and protestors, Mai’s wedding delivered foreign desk editors the positivity needed to balance their coverage of Pakistan. As a result, the internet is now brimming with reports of Mai’s nuptials that are contradictory and confused.

The New York Times tried to keep things upbeat by describing Mai as a stigma-shattering crusader who had become a giggling bundle of joy on the occasion of her wedding. This is the first quote from her in the story:

Indian troops exchange fire along LoC


ISLAMABAD: Indian troops resorted to unprovoked firing along the Line of Control (LoC) in Pando sector, near Chakothi, on Friday night, military sources said.

‘It was a small arms fire which was instantly responded to by Pakistan Army by returning fire in Uri sector,’ the sources told Dawn.

They said a protest had been lodged with India at sector commanders’ level. The unprovoked firing continued for hours, but there was no loss of life.

The army rejected as baseless an Indian allegation that Pakistan was the first to fire at Indian army positions across the LoC.

It was the first incident of its kind after the violation of Pakistan’s airspace by Indian planes in the aftermath of the Mumbai carnage.

‘The firing started from the Indian side at around 10 pm (on Friday) and intermittent firing continued for several hours,’ a Pakistan military official said.

The Indian army claimed that an Indian soldier was injured on Saturday when Pakistani troops fired at Indian army positions across the LoC.

The firing lasted five hours, ending on Saturday morning, the spokesman said.


ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court of Pakistan has issued the detailed verdict on the ineligibility case of Sharif brothers.

The government has already filed four review petitions against the verdict.

The detailed decision states that there is no difference in SC judges because all the judges have taken oath under the same Constitution. It said the petitioners tried to divide the judges on the basis of PCO and non-PCO judges with an aim to sink the ship of judiciary.

It described what it called the attempt of the petitioners to cause a rift in judiciary as a grave insult of to judiciary which, it said, cannot be forgiven at any cost.

The decision further stated that there is no room in the law for formation of a new bench. The petitioners lost the opportunity to challenge the status of Tikka Iqbal case, it added

Friday, March 20, 2009

Embedded in the Long March
Dawn Blog gives special coverage of the protests, public reactions and stories from the sidelines.

The official, who spoke on condition that he not be named because President Barack Obama has yet to unveil his fresh strategy on Afghanistan, said non-military assistance could rise to three times the current roughly $450 million a year.

Military aid, now running at $300 million a year, could also rise, although by a lesser amount, the official added, saying that conditions could be attached to the defense funds but not to the development money.

The steps aim to win greater Pakistani cooperation to address what is seen as a major weakness of the current US approach in Afghanistan: the existence of safe havens in Pakistan from which insurgents launch attacks in Afghanistan.

If it boosts development aid to Pakistan, the White House would embrace an approach laid out by Vice President Joe Biden when he was chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and by the panel's senior Republican, Senator Richard Lugar.

Legislation backed by the two, and by the panel's new chairman, Democratic Senator John Kerry, called for giving an extra $1.5 billion a year in non-military aid to Pakistan over five years, amounting to a total of $7.5 billion.

‘The basic approach to Pakistan is the one that comes out of the ... legislation, and that is that the first thing that you have got to do with Pakistan is convince Pakistanis that you are there with them for the long term and that you don't just love them for their terrorists,’ said the official.

‘The approach in the legislation was to increase the non-military assistance dramatically to help build a more stable modern Pakistani society and government and then provide military assistance that helps them fight terrorism,’ he said.

He said the military aid was likely to come with conditions to ensure it would be used against insurgents, but said this was ‘very complicated because you don't want to end up cutting off your nose to spite your face.’

‘You might call it a bargain, rather than conditions: If you are committed to transforming your army into a capable counter-insurgency force, these are the kind of things we can do for you,’ the official said, saying assistance could include helicopters or night vision goggles.

Britain's ambassador to the United States, Sir Nigel Sheinwald, said Washington could help Islamabad ‘bear down on the rise in extremism’ in Pakistan by providing more aid.

‘If there is a more broadly based program of assistance from this country to Pakistan, focusing on the building up of infrastructure and on economic development as well as on military assistance, I think that will help,’ he told Reuters.

‘I feel like the real war on terror is not in Iraq, and it's not in Afghanistan,’ said David Kilcullen, an expert on guerrilla warfare and the author of ‘The Accidental Guerrilla,’ a study of counter-insurgency. ‘It's in Pakistan.’

‘The real conceptual issue, the real strategic decision that has to be made is: what the hell are we going to do about Pakistan? How are we going to support them? How are we going to stabilise them?’ he said.

The official, who spoke on condition that he not be named because President Barack Obama has yet to unveil his fresh strategy on Afghanistan, said non-military assistance could rise to three times the current roughly $450 million a year.

Military aid, now running at $300 million a year, could also rise, although by a lesser amount, the official added, saying that conditions could be attached to the defense funds but not to the development money.

The steps aim to win greater Pakistani cooperation to address what is seen as a major weakness of the current US approach in Afghanistan: the existence of safe havens in Pakistan from which insurgents launch attacks in Afghanistan.

If it boosts development aid to Pakistan, the White House would embrace an approach laid out by Vice President Joe Biden when he was chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and by the panel's senior Republican, Senator Richard Lugar.

Legislation backed by the two, and by the panel's new chairman, Democratic Senator John Kerry, called for giving an extra $1.5 billion a year in non-military aid to Pakistan over five years, amounting to a total of $7.5 billion.

‘The basic approach to Pakistan is the one that comes out of the ... legislation, and that is that the first thing that you have got to do with Pakistan is convince Pakistanis that you are there with them for the long term and that you don't just love them for their terrorists,’ said the official.

‘The approach in the legislation was to increase the non-military assistance dramatically to help build a more stable modern Pakistani society and government and then provide military assistance that helps them fight terrorism,’ he said.

He said the military aid was likely to come with conditions to ensure it would be used against insurgents, but said this was ‘very complicated because you don't want to end up cutting off your nose to spite your face.’

‘You might call it a bargain, rather than conditions: If you are committed to transforming your army into a capable counter-insurgency force, these are the kind of things we can do for you,’ the official said, saying assistance could include helicopters or night vision goggles.

Britain's ambassador to the United States, Sir Nigel Sheinwald, said Washington could help Islamabad ‘bear down on the rise in extremism’ in Pakistan by providing more aid.

‘If there is a more broadly based program of assistance from this country to Pakistan, focusing on the building up of infrastructure and on economic development as well as on military assistance, I think that will help,’ he told Reuters.

‘I feel like the real war on terror is not in Iraq, and it's not in Afghanistan,’ said David Kilcullen, an expert on guerrilla warfare and the author of ‘The Accidental Guerrilla,’ a study of counter-insurgency. ‘It's in Pakistan.’

‘The real conceptual issue, the real strategic decision that has to be made is: what the hell are we going to do about Pakistan? How are we going to support them? How are we going to stabilise them?’ he said.