India preconditions talks with Pakistan

By Khalid Iqbal

Alongside effective implementation of National Action Plan on counter terrorism, Operations Zarb-e-Azb and Khyber II have produced visible and measureable results. Pakistan’s effort towards counter terrorism is being recognized by all countries of the World. However, some writers and analysts continue to live in yester years and keep repeating beaten lines about Pakistan’s counter terrorism effort. Two such articles have recently appeared in the media; these have hurled some silly accusations on the methodology of combating terrorism and on civil military relations.

The Daily Signal carried an article “Pakistan’s Selective Fight against Terrorism Threatens US Security Goals in South Asia” on March 27. Lisa Curtis and Hma Sattar have erratically commented: “Pakistan’s selective approach to fighting terrorism continues to undermine US national security objectives in the region. If Pakistan is indeed serious about combatting terrorism, it must come down hard on all terrorist groups and break all links with terrorists operating in Afghanistan and India. US policy must insist on this outcome”. HuffPost Politics also carried a similar theme on April 01 under the caption: “Securing Afghanistan Means Relying on Difficult US Partner — Pakistan’s Army”. In this piece, Akbar Shahid Ahmed and Ali Watkins commented that “Pakistan watchers say Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, who gained power in May 2013 in the country’s first-ever democratic transition, has seen his authority steadily eroded by a charismatic leader who shares his name but is no relation: army chief General Raheel Sharif… The media, opposition political parties, Parliament, and the intelligentsia are trying to resist the gradual military takeover but they are weak and ineffectual.” These article appear to be a part of campaign to tarnish the image of Pakistan for facilitating strategic objectives of some other countries. No wonders on the heels of such article came the first resolution of the national Executive of Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). Preconditioning dialogue with Pakistan to terrorism free environment.
Since Prime Minister Narendra Modi came to power, analyst were watching as to who would call the shots in Indian foreign policy—parliament or the BJP hardliners. Now with BJP’s adoption of resolution on foreign policy the situation has become clear; it is the hardliners in the BJP who would remote control India’s policy, and more so it’s China and Pakistan policy. Now the party wants Modi to walk its elections days’ talk.

BJP’s National Executive endorsed five pillars of foreign policy or “Panchamrit” of dignity, dialogue, security, shared prosperity and culture—most of these are subjective and vague, unquantifiable and hence unmeasurable. BJP’s foreign policy framework calls for peaceful and cooperative relations with Pakistan in fighting terrorism. The BJP is “committed to building peaceful and friendly relations with Pakistan, predicated on an end to terrorism.” Meeting of National Executive also (mischievously) praised the government of Narendra Modi for “firmly and appropriately responding to the provocations on the border (read LoC and Working Boundary) allegedly by Pakistani troops”. 

Pakistan and India have remained engaged in the past under the framework of Composite Dialogue—a structured dialogue covering all issues. Pakistan is committed to a result-oriented, sustainable and meaningful dialogue with India to address all issues of mutual concern including the core issue of Jammu and Kashmir. India’s new trend of focusing on the issue of terrorism only is a dangerous strategy; it implies that India no longer wants to have a meaningful dialogue with Pakistan. Stressing that “terrorism and talks cannot go together”, the BJP resolution said India’s engagement with Pakistan would be based on strategic interests. 

On Pakistan, the resolution further said, “We have laid out a clear policy for building peaceful and friendly relations with Pakistan, predicated on an end to terrorism… There can’t be any duplicity towards a problem that has become a regional crisis and is fast becoming an international nightmare…All outstanding issues with Pakistan can be resolved through bilateral dialogue in an atmosphere free from terror and violence.” 

Upcoming Indian trajectory is clear: no matter what Pakistan does to stem terrorism, Pakistan’s effort to end terrorism would have to meet Indian evaluation; and naturally it won’t. Hence no dialogue. And to talk to India, Pakistan must forget about Hurryiat Conference leadership, Kashmir and water issues; also stop talking about bringing to book the perpetrators of bombing of Pakistani train Samjhauta express. In the early hours of February 19, 2007, sixty-eight people, mostly Pakistani civilians were killed and scores more injured in a terrorist attack on this train. India’s National Investigation Agency had concluded that Swami Aseemanand was the mastermind behind the blasts. Aseemanand’s confessional statement points towards involvement of government agencies and serving military officers in this incident. 

Interestingly, one of the Indian home ministry official, had submitted an affidavit in Indian court stating that Mumbai attack and an earlier attack on Indian parliament were false flag operations planned and conducted by Indian intelligence agencies to garner support for enacting tougher anti-terror laws. Later, under duress, he withdrew the affidavit. 

This is Indian government’s track record on prevention of terrorism. Notwithstanding this, in a follow up to the BJP’s resolution, Modi in his interview to Hindustan Times said: “We remain open to bilateral dialogue with Pakistan on all outstanding issues in an environment free from terrorism and violence…The Simla Agreement and Lahore Declaration have to be the basis for going forward…Peace can only thrive when the climate is right”. Modi also spoke on his pro-active engagement with India’s South Asian neighbours, sparking fears that an attitude of apathy would send these nations into China’s arms. “We want SAARC to flourish….The dividends are visible in the quantum leap in relations with Nepal, Bhutan, Bangladesh, and Sri Lanka. But peace cannot co-exist with terrorism, can it?” he concluded. India had actively taken sides during recent elections in Sri Lanka for installing a pliant government. 

Now it will be interesting to take a look at the Simla Agreement and Lahore Declaration and see what way forward these documents suggest; and also observe how India has been flouting these two agreements. Simla Agreement states that: “…Government of India and the Government of Pakistan have agreed as follows: (i) That the principles and purposes of the Charter of the United Nations shall govern the relations between the two countries. (ii) That the two countries are resolved to settle their differences by peaceful means…Pending the final settlement of any of the problems between the two countries, neither side shall unilaterally alter the situation…” India violated the agreement and invaded Siachen in 1984. 

Likewise, Lahore declaration states that: “The Prime Ministers of the Republic of India and the Islamic Republic of Pakistan … Committed to the principles and purposes of the Charter of the United Nations, and the universally accepted principles of peaceful coexistence;…that the resolution of all outstanding issues, including Jammu and Kashmir is essential for this purpose…” Now, once again India wants to unilaterally change the status quo in Kashmir by raising Israeli style settlements for Kashmiri pundits. 

During his recent visit to Pakistan Indian foreign secretary delivered a letter from Narendra Modi to Nawaz Sharif. It was a stern warning that either Pakistan should fall in line, and grant transit rights and trade concessions to India, or India would gang up with remaining members of SAARC and proceed ahead by sidelining Pakistan. This is how India views SAARC, a tool to intimidate Pakistan. 

Preconditioning the dialogue with favourable environment is a non-starter. Dialogues are initiated to make the environment favourable. Apparently India has taken a decision to freeze dialogue with Pakistan for a decade or so—barring occasional photo-ops to divert international pressures. Keeping in view the prevailing Indian mindset, Pakistan should not go overboard in commencing dialogue with India, unless India rationalizes its overall approach toward. 

Imaginary pressures facing Pakistan

By Muhammad Jamil

As if there was nothing left in his arsenal to lambast Pakistan military, Ahmed Rashid resorted to reviewing the books written by authors of his clan. He wrote a lengthy ‘treatise’ comprising more than 3,800 words punctuated with brief excerpts from books written by Aqil Shah, Ayesha Jalal, Mohsin Hamid and Nissid Hajari. They are on the same page so far as matter of putting military on the mat is concerned. In the very first para, Ahmed Rashid comes out with the sweeping statement: “No one should be surprised to read that in Pakistan the army has taken charge, established military courts, derailed democracy, brought television and other media under military control. Nor should one be surprised to learn that foreign policy and national security were being directly run by the army.”

No one would agree with his assessment, especially with regard to ‘derailed democracy’, as at the present an elected government is in place; and the parliament is functioning. A few months ago, when an impression was conveyed that establishment was behind PTI and PAT sit-ins at Constitutional Avenue, a joint session of the Parliament was convened and all parties vowed to protect democracy. This instance is enough to rebut his charges. Referring to terror attack on Army Public School in which 140 students were killed, he wrote that military took the charge, as Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif was still inclined to hold negotiations with the terrorists. But why not to accept the eidetic reality that both civil and military leaderships are on the same page in this regard?
The author tries to accuse the great leaders of creating false alarm, as over time founders of the nation have been proven right after break up of Pakistan in 1971 with India’s backing and training of Mukti Bahini guerillas. Many books have been written, and even those Indian characters that were involved in training Mukti Bahini guerillas and invading former East Pakistan have proudly acknowledged their involvement. 

To blame Pakistan and its army for creating and supporting various militant groups is not entirely true, as the US and the West are to blame in equal measure. The fact remains that the US and the West have been creating Frankenstein monsters of imperialism that later posed a serious threat to them as well as to the world at large. After Soviet forces landed in Afghanistan, the US and the West supported the jihadi groups and warlords to resist and to oust the Soviet forces from Afghanistan. When 9/11 events took place, Afghanistan was being dominated by the people who were earlier lauded as freedom fighters. The US and the West had supported the terrorist activities of Osama bin Laden who was their find and was projected as a legend that left luxurious life to fight the infidels. 

Since the publishing of Aqil Shah’s book, there have been many developments. America has appreciated Pakistan’s sacrifices in war on terror, and believes that Pakistan is conducting military operation without any distinction between good Taliban and bad Taliban. George Santayana had said: “History is a pack of lies about events that never happened told by people who weren’t there”. However, there is no dearth of oblique angle-vision writers who distort the history by giving a spin to the facts. Ahmed Rashid and other authors have often been creating doubts about the safety of Pakistani nukes, but the US and the West admit that Pakistani nukes are safe. In May 2011, then NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen had said he was confident Pakistan’s nuclear weapons were safe. 

Challenges for the Muslim ummah

By S M Hali

The parliamentary leaders of Pakistan for once have seen through the stratagem of involving the military might of the Muslim ummah in a protracted war, which would weaken them and cause substantive damage

The Muslim ummah (people) is passing through some of its most trying moments in history. A few issues are self-created while the detractors of Islam have seized the opportunity provided by the fissures within the Islamic bloc to serve their own agenda. The dust was yet to settle in the aftermath of the Arab Spring that another Arab nation, Yemen, is up in flames. In the backdrop of the forced expulsion of Yemeni President Abd-Rabu Mansour Hadi and the seizure of power by armed Houthi (Zaidi) rebels, a joint aerial operation, codenamed Decisive Storm, is being conducted by Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Bahrain, Qatar, Kuwait and Jordan among others. The air operations in Yemen have been provided the fig leaf of endorsement by the Arab League but not the United Nations. Some prominent Muslim powers have refrained from joining the coalition against Yemen while a few are sitting on the fence contemplating a decision. It is being projected that Turkey is considering providing logistic support to the Arab coalition. Opinion makers are also recommending that Pakistan should dispatch its forces to support the coalition effort into Yemen. 

Some facts and figures merit deliberation. Yemen has an area of 5,27,829 square kilometres and a population of 2,38,33,000. Out of this population, about 40 percent are Houthis. The terrain of Yemen is mountainous with patches of desert but it enjoys tremendous strategic importance because of the location of its coastline. The war-ravaged country is considered akin to Afghanistan because of the nature of the conflict and warrior instincts of its populace. The country has been facing internal strife since 1926. The root cause of the clashes has been socio-political, which is now being presented as sectarian mainly because of the perceived Iranian support to Houthis. 

During the 1962 republican revolution of Yemen, the insurgency was supported by 70,000 troops from Egypt. In this conflict, reportedly, the Houthis were secretly supplied weapons by Israel to fight against the Egyptians. Since then, the religious-political movement of the Houthis took on a violent shape while the warring group has rallied under the title of Ansarullah. This turmoil created space for local, regional and extra regional forces to exploit the situation and weaken Islamic countries. History is replete with examples where mineral rich Middle Eastern powers have been weakened by fortune seeking international forces through economic sanctions, civil strife and military attacks. The only country that had, so far, remained relatively stable is the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. 

Pakistan has always played a key role in unifying the Muslim world. Saudi Arabia is a brotherly country and the people of Pakistan hold it in high esteem. Pakistanis are ready to sacrifice their resources for the safety, security and integrality of the Kingdom. At the same time, they do not wish for Saudi Arabia to get weakened in a protracted war with grave consequences. Having faced similar turmoil within its own territorial boundaries, Pakistan does not want the Saudis to go down the same rabbit hole. 

The Muslim ummah stood like innocent bystanders witnessing the destruction and weakening of Iran and Iraq through the subterfuge of world powers. Pakistan’s approach on the contrary to resolve the crisis in Yemen is based on attaining political objectives through peaceful means. The parliament of Pakistan, which has deliberated on the issue at length, through its collective wisdom, has concluded that Pakistan should refrain from jumping into the fray by sending its military resources of fighter aircraft, military personnel and warships. Simultaneously, Pakistan’s parliament does not preclude military support to the Kingdom if its sovereignty or territorial integrity is threatened. The parliamentary leaders of Pakistan for once have seen through the stratagem of involving the military might of the Muslim ummah in a protracted war, which would weaken them and cause substantive damage. US forces learnt the hard lesson of suffering attrition at the hands of guerrilla forces in Vietnam and later in Afghanistan and Iraq. The Arab forces and any other allies getting involved will get sucked into the endless war in Yemen. 

Another lesson is clear: non-state actors cannot survive without the support of external forces with their own personal agenda. The Houthis, supported by regional and extra regional powers, are exploiting their armed rebellion by projecting it as a Sunni-Shia conflict, whereas the conflict is politically motivated. Pakistan’s support to Saudi Arabia is unequivocal, unflinching and traditional. It must be understood that efforts by certain quarters to create a wedge and discontent in Pakistani society on the issue of sending forces or supporting Saudi Arabia by projecting the conflict on sectarian lines are bound to fail. Pakistan and the Muslim ummah must endeavour to make serious efforts in engaging the conflicting sides and resolving the situation through diplomacy and dialogue rather than letting external forces create more challenges for them. 

Declare India the Terrorist State

By Sajjad Shaukat

Since the US started global war against terrorism, after the 9/11 tragedy, various political experts have opined that terrorism comes in a variety of forms such as religious terrorism, secular terrorism, cross-border terrorism etc.

Bruce Hoffman, in his book ‘Inside Terrorism’ writes: “For the religious terrorist, violence is the foremost divine duty executed in direct response to some demand or imperative…the secular terrorist sense leads to a sanctioning of almost limitless violence against a virtually open-ended category of targets.”

State terrorism refers to terrorist acts by governmental agents or forces, which involves the use of state resources to achieve ideological or political goals as part of state’s foreign policy.

Judging in these terms, India has broken all the records of violence by applying terror-related tactics in relation to its internal and external policies, and its genesis is ideology of Hindutva (Hindu nationalism). In fact, Hinduvta agenda enabled BJP hardliner, Narendra Modi to get a land sliding triumph in the Indian elections 2014 and become the prime minister of India. During the election campaign, Hindu majority was mobilized on anti-Pakistan and ‘hate Muslim’ slogans. Hence, Modi regime is giving impetus to Hindu chauvinism.

Although New Delhi has been destabilizing all regional states through its well-planned and deliberated strategy, however, its major focus has always been towards Pakistan.

In this regard, Indian Defence Minister, Manohar Parrikar, while using the Hindi phrase “kante se kanta nikalna’ (removing a thorn with a thorn) assertively said, on May 23, this year, “We have to neutralise terrorists through terrorists only…why does my soldier have to do it…the issue could not be discussed beyond this…there are certain things that I obviously cannot discuss here.”

Showing grave concerns, Pakistan’s Foreign Office, prime Minister’s advisor on national security and foreign affairs, Sartaj Aziz Defence Minister Khawaja Asif, Interior Minister Chaudhry Nisar Ali Khan and other political leaders remarked, “The Indian defence minister’s open statement has proved that India is sponsoring terrorism in Pakistan—and Indian secret agency RAW is playing this nefarious role—it is also against others in the region and beyond.”

In fact, Indian defence minister’s statement cannot be seen in isolation, it is part of inter-related developments against Pakistan, China and Afghanistan. In this respect, Indian External Affairs Minister, Sushma Swaraj has recognized, on June 1, this year that India strongly opposes $46 billion China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) project.

In her reply, on June 2, Sartaj Aziz clarified that the CPEC project will bring stability in the whole region—even China has clearly stated that this project is not against any other country.

Meanwhile, apart from previous terror attacks, a new wave of RAW-arranged assaults is noteworthy. On May 13, 2015, 45 persons were killed, after gunmen brutally opened fire on a bus of the Ismaili community in Karachi. Ahmed Marwat, a spokesman for Jundullah which is the affiliated group of the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), claimed responsibility for the bus attack. On April 11, gunmen killed 20 laborers at a dam construction site in the Turbat district of Baluchistan. On May 29, 20 people were killed when unknown militants opened fire at the kidnapped passengers in Mastung area of Balochistan—after abduction of two buses. New Delhi’s the main aim behind such terror-activities is to create hurdles in completion of the CPEC,

as Pakistan’s economic development irks its eyes. Besides other related projects, the establishment of CPEC between deep Gwadar seaport of Balochistan and the historic Silk Road city in western regions-Xinjiang of China will connect Gilgit-Baltistan through Khunjerab Pass.

Notably, RAW has well-established its network in Afghanistan, and with the tactical assistance of anti-Pakistan secret agencies, it is fully backing cross-border incursions including terror-activities in Balochistan province and other regions of Pakistan so as to destabilize the latter. It has continuously been assisting the Baloch anti-Pakistan groups like BLA, Jundullah and TTP including their affiliated outfits with logistic support—the militants kidnapped and killed many innocent people and the security personnel in the province and other areas of Pakistan through suicide attacks, bomb blasts, targeted killings and sectarian violence to create lawlessness in the country. They also abducted and killed many Chinese and Iranian nationals in Pakistan.

It is of particular attention, that Indian former Army Chief Gen. VK Singh openly admitted that during his tenure, he supervised special army unit, Tactical Support Division (TSD) on the instructions of the then defence minister to sponsor subversive in Pakistan, particularly Balochistan.

During the recent visit of the US Secretary of State John Kerry to New Delhi, Indian Prime Minister Modi was humbled in the meeting when American team showed some hard evidence of TTP chief Mullah Fazalullah and RAW nexus in Afghanistan to influx terror in Pakistan.

It is worth-mentioning that unlike the Indian-backed Afghan President Hamid Karzai, President Ashraf Ghani realized that Afghanistan and Pakistan are facing similar challenges of terrorism and will combat this threat collectively. During the visit of Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif and army chief General Raheel Sharif to Kabul, on May 18, this year, the two countries signed the security agreement—Pakistan’s ISI and Afghanistan’s National Directorate of Security (NDS) to share intelligence and conduct coordinated operations against terrorists. Now, frequent visits of Pak-Afghan civil and military leaders to each other’s country also irritate New Delhi.

It is notable that theoretically, Indian Constitution safeguards the rights of minorities, but in practice, ideology of Hindutva prevails. Hindu politics and culture, dominated by the fundamentalist parties such as BJP, RSS VHP, Bajrang Dal and Shiv Sena including other extremist outfits have been propagating Hindutva. Provocative utterances of their extremist leaders and the BJP rulers have resulted into unending violence against the Muslims, Christians Sikhs, and Dalits, while creating war-like situation between Pakistan and India, as Indian unprovoked shelling across Line of Control and Working Boundary displays.

In this connection, destruction of the Babri Masjid (mosque) in 1992, massacre of 2500 Muslims in the in the BJP-ruled Indian state of Gujarat in 2002 and those of more than 2002 Muslims during the communal riots of 2008 in Uttar Pradesh—participation of Indian high officials and leaders of the VHP, BJP and Bajrang Dal in the incidents including attacks on churches might also be cited as instance. Similarly, under the BJP regime, forced conversions of Muslims and Christians into Hindus might also be noted as example.

On April 30, in its annual report 2015, the US Commission on International Religious Freedom said, “Since the [last year’s] election, religious minority communities have been subject to derogatory comments by politicians linked to the ruling party BJP and numerous violent attacks and forced conversions by Hindu nationalist groups, such as RSS and VHP.”

It is mentionable that on January 20, 2013, Indian External Affairs Minister Salman Khurshid and Home minister Sushil Kumar Shinde confessed the nexus between BJP and the RSS, disclosing that organized training camps run by these fundamentalist parties were promoting Hindu terrorism. They also disclosed that these parties were behind the Samjhauta Express, Meccca Masjid and Malegaon blasts including Gujarat and Babri Masjid incidents. Earlier, New Delhi was accusing Pakistan’s primary intelligence agency, ISI for blasts in Malegaon and other cities.

While, on July 19, 2013, the Indian former home ministry and ex-investigating officer Satish Verma revealed that terror-attacks in Mumbai in November 26, 2008 and assault on Indian Parliament in January 12, 2001 were carried out by the Indian government to strengthen anti-terrorism laws. But, Indian top officials and media had blamed Islamabad and a Pakistan-based group Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) for those attacks.

In the recent past, Indian agencies orchestrated a boat drama to defame Pakistan, allegedly reporting that a Pakistani fishing boat as a Pakistan-based outfit LeT was intercepted by Indian Coast Guards, off the coast of Porebandar, Gujarat. And Indian Coast Guard crew set the boat on fire and it exploded. But, its reality exposed Indian terrorism, because, some Indian high officials admitted that there was no such boat which came from Pakistan.

As regards Hindutva terror, besides other brutal tactics, it is also employed in the occupied Kashmir. In this context, various human rights groups have reported thousands of unmarked mass graves in the Indian controlled Kashmir. Especially, in August, 2011, Indian Jammu and Kashmir State Human Rights Commission (SHRC) officially acknowledged in its report that innocent civilians killed in the two-decade conflict have been buried in unmarked graves. Notably, foreign sources have said that unnamed graves include those innocent persons, killed by the Indian military and para-military troops in the fake encounters including those who were tortured to death by RAW.

Nonetheless, India is also manipulating the so-called statement of the ISIL or ISIS which said on May 23 that it can buy nuclear device from Pakistan within a year. Most alarming point is that RAW can itself supply nuclear bomb to this militant group to use against America, Israel or any western country so as to cause World War 111 in wake of global war against terrorism.

We can conclude that it is the right hour that the US-led western countries must declare India the terrorist state, as it is carving out a disastrous strategy, and it would never help in rooting out terrorism which is an international issue, threatening all states.

Sajjad Shaukat writes on international affairs and is author of the book: US vs Islamic Militants, Invisible Balance of Power: Dangerous Shift in International Relations

Email: sajjad_logic@yahoo.com

India and Sub-nationalists are Hand in Glove

By Sajjad Shaukat

Pakistan is a peace loving country and has been subjected to worse kind of terrorism. All amicable efforts to negotiate with the terrorist outfits have failed. In fact, Indian covert and overt activities against the federation of Pakistan had led to the separation of the former East Pakistan in 1971. Now, India has been promoting sub-nationalism in Baluchistan, Khyber Paktunkhwa, Sindh and even among the Karachiates (Mohajirs). New Delhi has been exploiting sub-nationalist elements locally and abroad as proxies against Pakistan.

These sub-nationalist parties have never protested against the killing of innocent women, children and men at the hands of their militant groups. Has ever, journalist community questioned them about this aspect? These terrorist groups abduct, kidnap and then kill innocent Balochs, Sindhis and Punjabis to strengthen their case of missing persons and extra-judicial killings to distort the image of Pakistan and its security agencies abroad.

To affect the flourishing relations of Pakistan and China, Baloch secessionists have been directed to step up their activities on China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC). Indian secret agency RAW has created a heavily funded China-Pakistan specific desk to sabotage growing Pak-China- Afghanistan relations.

Since April 20, 2015 when Islamabad and Beijing signed 51 agreements for cooperation in various fields, related to CPEC project, India which is hand in glove with the sub-nationalists has accelerated terror-attacks inside Pakistan to discourage this project.

In this regard, on May 13, this year, at least 45 people were killed when gunmen brutally opened fire on a bus of the Ismaili community in Karachi. Ahmed Marwat, a spokesman for Jundullah which is the affiliated group of the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), claimed responsibility for the bus attack. Without any doubt, Karachi bus incident is a handy work of RAW to sabotage the CPEC by showing that if Pakistan government is not able to provide security to its citizens, how it can protect CPEC. Ismailis belong to Hunza (Gilgit/Baltistan) or have a spiritual linkage with this area, are Pakistanis. The CPEC would also originate from the same region. Besides, on April 11, this year, gunmen killed 20 laborers at a dam construction site in the Turbat district of Baluchistan. On May 29, 20 people were killed when unknown militants opened fire at the kidnapped passengers in Mastung area of Balochistan—after abduction of two buses.

India knows that the establishment of CPEC between deep Gwadar seaport of Balochistan and the historic Silk Road city in western regions-Xinjiang of China will connect Gilgit-Baltistan through Khunjerab Pass. Beijing would also build an international airport at Gwadar, while the roads infrastructure in Gwadar would link the communication network of rest of the country to facilitate transportation of goods. As New Delhi has been opposing this Pak-China project which will make Pakistan an economic power, hence, it has been destabilizing Pakistan by creating unrest in the Balochistan province.

Undoubtedly, some foreign anti-Pakistan forces, especially RAW are making efforts to weaken Pakistan, and especially Balochistan by promoting acrimonious sense of dissent, political volatility, sectarian violence, deteriorating law and order situation and arousing sentiments of separatism. India is leading terrorist activities in the Balochistan by using the soil of Afghanistan, harbouring and financing terrorists and projecting them as freedom fighters. 

In this respect, Dr Allah Nazar is a terrorist hailing from Awaran, Balochistan. He is being directly supported by Indian RAW to commit heinous crimes against humanity, requiring state reaction to safeguard the life and property of its citizens. Killing men, women and children, attacks on women university students, armed forces, members of the law-enforcing agencies and blowing up of electric pylons as well as gas pipelines are part of the anti-Pakistan scheme. In a sane society, how such acts could be counted as deeds of a liberation movement.

While, in May, 2013, a day before Chinese Premier Li Keqiang arrived in Islamabad; Chinese engineers being driven through Clifton Block-1 in Karachi escaped a major bomb attack. As regards anti-China diplomacy, Afghanistan has become a hub from where external secret agencies like RAW and Israeli Mossad have been assisting subversive activities in other parts of Pakistan—particularly in Balochistan through their affiliated militant groups like TTP, BLA, BLF etc. including Jundullah at the cost of Pakistan, China and Iran. In the past few years, they abducted and killed many Chinese and Iranian nationals in Pakistan, and claimed responsibility for their terror-acts.  

It is notable that Indian former Army Chief Gen. VK Singh openly admitted that during his tenure, he supervised special army unit, Tactical Support Division (TSD) on the instructions of the then defence minister to sponsor subversive in Pakistan, particularly Balochistan.

Although New Delhi has been destabilizing all regional states through its well-planned and deliberated strategy, however, its major focus has always been towards Pakistan.

In this connection, Indian Defence Minister, Manohar Parrikar, while using the Hindi phrase “kante se kanta nikalna’ (removing a thorn with a thorn) assertively said, on May 23, this year, “We have to neutralise terrorists through terrorists only…why does my soldier have to do it…the issue could not be discussed beyond this…there are certain things that I obviously cannot discuss here.”

The Indian defence minister’s open statement has proved that India is sponsoring terrorism in Pakistan, and RAW is playing this nefarious role.

It is mentionable that unlike the Indian-backed Afghan President Hamid Karzai, President Ashraf Ghani realized that Afghanistan and Pakistan are facing similar challenges of terrorism and will combat this threat collectively. During the visit of Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif and army chief General Raheel Sharif to Kabul, on May 18, this year, the two countries signed the security agreement—Pakistan’s ISI and Afghanistan’s National Directorate of Security (NDS) to share intelligence and conduct coordinated operations against terrorists. Now, frequent visits of Pak-Afghan civil and military leaders to each other’s country also irritate New Delhi.

However, besides terror-assaults in various regions of Pakistan, simultaneously, sub-nationalist political parties have been activated to cry foul against CPEC and Chinese investment in Pakistan. For the purpose, SANA, WSI, WSC and other sub-nationalist organizations are directed to spit venomous propaganda against Pakistan by alleging so-called human rights abuses, killing of sub-nationalist elements in Balochistan, Sindh etc.

While, being a democratic country, Pakistan has never attempted any action against the sub-nationalists parties; however, the country has showed undaunted resolution to check militancy of all kinds.

In this context, Pakistan’s law-enforcing agencies in Balochistan have been carrying out action against terrorists like Allah Nazar, Marris and Bugtis who created “no go areas” and challenged the writ of the government.

Nevertheless, India which is hand in glove with the sub-nationalists continues exploiting these elements so as to weaken the federation of Pakistan.

Sajjad Shaukat writes on international affairs and is author of the book: US vs Islamic Militants, Invisible Balance of Power: Dangerous Shift in International Relations

Email: sajjad_logic@yahoo.com

Easier to be Critical than Correct

By Asghar Khan

Our thought process - whether creative and progressive or conventional and hidebound - has had its eternal enemies in the form of prejudices, pre-conceived notions, personal likes and dislikes which obstruct it from achieving clarity. This tendency of human mind to commit itself, wittingly or otherwise, to its inherent dispositions not only renders the human thought confused, intimidated and indecisive but at times even leads it astray. This relationship of mind with its negative dispositions and its consequence on the thought process was first lucidly brought to light by a famous English philosopher Francis Bacon (1561-1626) who described it as weakness of mind falling into the trap of its idols (idols of mind - or false images of mind) which prevent the mind from thinking clearly and correctly.

While an over-whelming majority of thinkers have been fairly disposed towards clear thinking, there has been quiet a sizable number who fell for their idols of mind and incorporated cognitive bias in their writings. The work of such thinkers is characterized by constant repetition, contempt, destructive intimidation, vindictiveness and sycophancy.

A recent addition to this coveted club of biased thinkers and writers has been the internationally respected and widely quoted Hussain Haqqani - Pakistan’s former envoy to United States - a known critic of Pakistani establishment. It may sound little strange that a prolific writer - with mighty books on mighty themes - a well-articulated journalist-turned-analyst and a sharp diplomat like Haqqani, who accomplished so much in so little time, now seems to have run out of new and genuine ideas in fields that concerns him. A close study of his comprehensive work clearly points to the fact that he has been merely reproducing old ideas, time and again, and has become fixated with writing against Pakistan Army with the sole aim of holding it responsible for everything bad happening in Pakistan. Major recurrent themes of his work include accusing Pakistan Army of; un-necessarily perceiving India as an existential threat to Pakistan and promoting religion and jihad as a counter-policy to neutralize that threat, playing double with major world players in sustaining the jihadist policy through proxies, undermining the establishment of a strong and viable democratic setup in the country through covert maneuvers in political realm and calling the shots in framing domestic and foreign policies.  

It’s a fact that a combined effect of various multiple factors shape up an action or reaction of an individual or institution. While a dispassionate analyst of Pakistan’s history might hold Pakistan Army responsible for few drastic acts, there are fair chances that he might as well highlight the other State actors, social and personal behaviours and attitudes to be equally, if not fully, responsible for the woes which Hussain Haqqani has been exclusively attributing to Pakistan Army. Un-democratic behaviour of the so-called democratic political parties, inept and self-serving political leadership, political instability, inefficient bureaucracy and rampant and unfettered corruption are few of the numerous contributing factors inevitably compelling the Army – the only organized institution – to lead the country to stability to the exclusion of others. Overlooking such contributing factors in the overall scheme of things would make an analyst biased even if he is Hussain Haqqani. It would be just like complaining about contaminated food for food poisoning and excluding the other factors like water, cutlery and personal hygiene to be the valid reason of the physical agony. Events in countries like Turkey and Myanmar, where the establishment were strong, have recently shown that any establishment will, naturally, concede grounds to civilian political authority if it attains maturity, responsibility and stands accountable.

Regarding Hussain Haqqani and his cognitive bias, Indian media was delirious with delight when it widely quoted some of his views which he recently presented in his lectures and interviews. Through a careful blend of his same old themes and recent developments in the region, he maintained that the meeting of Pakistani High Commissioner to India with Kashmiri leaders, prior to the start of scheduled secretary level talks between Pakistan and India, was a Pakistani diplomatic faux pas as it gave a cause of concern to the newly elected Indian government to postpone the scheduled talks. For an analyst of Haqqani's calibre, it should not have been difficult to hunt for other contributing factors for Indian postponement of talks with Pakistan. Meetings of Pakistani diplomats with Kashmiri leaders before the Indo-Pakistan talks were a longstanding practice and hence India should not have objected. It was the result of BJP's anti-Pakistan rhetoric during its election campaign as it had promised to take a tougher stance against Pakistan and was under domestic pressure to do so. Moreover, Indian Prime Minister, Narendra Modi, might have deemed it fit to postpone the talks first and to reinitiate it later to gain an upper hand in the process.

Haqqani has, also, vouched for a 'decisive shift' in Pakistan's Kashmir policy - from, what he called, an ideological obsession to a more pragmatic approach - on the account that Pakistan has lost whatever international support it had on Kashmir. Well, if gaining and losing international support is what it takes to resolve a conflict then humanity is for sure stepping into an abyss of despair as recently a growing number of analysts agree that non-settlement of as grave issues as Kashmir and Palestine are providing ideological grounds for ongoing global phenomenon i.e terrorism. The world is yet to wake up and realize that Kashmir is a nuclear flashpoint between India and Pakistan and should be resolved for the sake of humanity.

Coming back to the pragmatic approach on Kashmir, how would Hussain Haqqani categorize General Perveiz Musharraf's most practical roadmap for resolving the Kashmir conflict? - Pragmatic or rigid? It was Pakistan which had offered India another pragmatic approach to move forward on forging good neighbourly relations when it suggested India to first take on Sir Creek and Siachen issues before Kashmir as both the issues have fewer intricacies and more common grounds for both countries to resolve. However, India never seriously responded to Pakistan.

It was somewhat amusing to note that Haqqani maintains that Indian presence in Afghanistan was not necessarily against Pakistan as India has been engaged in development of infrastructure in the war-torn country. This assertion of his contradicts the consensus of all quarters in Pakistan that India has not only been supporting the Baloch insurgents but has also been  conniving with the Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) to destabilize the country. Reports suggest that Pakistani side had even shared some hard evidences with Afghan government in this regard.

Last but not the least, Haqqani has criticized the decision of United States to sell defence equipment, worth $ 952 million,  to Pakistan to augment its fight against terrorism at home, on the grounds that the development might further the arms race in South Asia. He seemed concerned that the US-made equipment might be used by Pakistan military not only against India but against domestic enemies as well – a reference to Baloch insurgents. He even attributed the current and the previous, decades old, American military aide to Pakistan as one of the reasons behind Pakistan’s delusion of seeking an un-attainable military parity with India. While an objective analysis of the current conventional weapons held by Pakistan would have clearly revealed to United States that the purchase requested by Pakistan was justified in its fight against terrorists, the Indian defence budget of $ 41.1 billion for the fiscal year 2015-16 to modernize and expand its armed forces and a history of its intimidations and armed conflicts with its neighbours, leave little room to give any credence to Haqqani's view that Pakistan should not seek military parity with India.

Haqqani’s cynical view about the current defence purchase of Pakistan must consider that most of the new Indian defence budget allocations are for Indian military's projection of its power in the neighbourhood. India does not face any immediate threat from any of its neighbours beyond border and water disputes. It is the ambiguously framed Indian strategic doctrine which worries its neighbours. Hence, maintaining a credible minimum deterrence, in nuclear and conventional weapons, vis-à-vis Indian military buildup in the region is essential for Pakistan.

The state of mind that Hussain Haqqani has been in for a long time reflects an attitude that one need not to be a cook to criticize cooking. Adopting such an attitude, it becomes easier for a person to be critical than correct. This has damaged him to an extent that when he was Pakistan's Ambassador in United States, people back home really wondered whether he was our Ambassador or the Ambassador of the host country.

The freedom to criticize is necessary in a vibrant democracy but when it turns into a biased attitude it becomes destructive intimidation always vouching for some sanction. While a constructive criticism binds up a nation’s wounds, biased criticism opens it up for the whole world. It’s up to Hussain Haqqani to decide whether he intends to return to his erstwhile reputation of being a fair analyst or he plans to remain an irksome critic of affairs in Pakistan.     

India’s Operation Blue Star Revisited

By Sajjad Shaukat

                                        

Operation Blue Star was an Indian military operation which occurred between 3–8 June 1984, ordered by Prime Minister Indira Gandhi to control over the Harmandir Sahib (Golden Temple) complex, the holiest shrine of the Sikhs in Amritsar, Punjab, and to arrest Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale and his armed followers from the complex buildings. Bhindranwale had earlier taken residence in Harmandir Sahib and made it his headquarters in April 1980. Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale was the only leader who had boldly been fighting for the genuine rights of the Sikhs.

Indian Army led by General Kuldip Singh Brar, supported by troops and armoured vehicles broke all records of the state terrorism and extra-judicial killings through that barbaric operation.

However, at that time, there were only 251 Sikhs inside the complex to protect the Harmandir Sahib, and to resist the well-trained Indian army, equipped with sophisticated weaponry. In those days, majority of the Sikhs were coming to the temple-complex to celebrate Martyr Day of Guru Arjan Dev Ji.

Then the Indian regime used tanks and destroyed the Akaal Takhat Sahib which is right in front of the Harmandir Sahib. On June 6, when all Sikh fighters were martyred along with Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale, Indian troops entered the temple-complex with their shoes by deliberately ignoring the holiness of the place, showing utter indecency. When the Indian Army felt that only 251 men had prevented them from entering the Harmandir Sahib for so many days, they started killing innocent Sikhs who had come there to visit the temple. The only purpose was to hide their humiliation.

In this regard, in their book, “The Sikh Struggle”, Ramnarain Kumar and George Sieberer writes, “The army killed every Sikh who could be found inside the temple-complex. They were hauled out of rooms, brought to corridors on the circumference of the temple and with their hands tied behind their back, were shot in cold blood. Among the victims were many old men, women and children.” However, all visitors were locked up in rooms for two days without any food, water, or electricity and were starved to death. Besides, the Harmandir Sahib remained under the army control for many months.”

The brutality of the ‘Operation Blue Star’ was not confined to the Harmandir Sahib. Indian armed forces simultaneously attacked 40 other historical gurdwaras all over East Punjab.

When Sikhs in other states came to know about the desecration of the Harmandir Sahib and massacre of their brethren, they quickly left for Punjab. New Delhi tried to stop them before they could reach Punjab. Many Sikhs were assassinated on the way and many others were arrested.

According to an estimate, about 50,000 Sikhs were killed within a few days. The whole Amritsar city was sealed and was burnt. A number of tourists either were murdered or arrested. Shops belonging to Sikhs were looted and their houses were set ablaze by Hindu mobs. In most of the cases, Sikh women were molested and some persons of their community were also burnt.

Another tragic dimension of the operation is that historical Sikh artifacts—all the literature written by the gurus was also set ablaze by the Indian army. But New Delhi fabricated a false story by claiming that it was burnt, while bombing the Harmandir Sahib.

In the same year of November, two dedicated Sikhs named Beant Singh and Satwant Singh who were posted at Premier Indira Gandhi’s residence in New Delhi, assassinated her. Then Hindu riots erupted in the capital and other cities in which more then 15,000 Sikhs were murdered in broad daylight by the supporters of Indira Gandhi while police watched silently so as to provide the Hindus with free hand to massacre Sikhs.

However, the attack on the Harmandir Sahib and genocide of Sikhs only accelerated the liberation movement for Khalistan as Bhindrenwale became a folk hero.

Meanwhile, after ‘Operation Blue Star’ and the Sikh genocide, Sikhs’ struggle for independence continued, but the Indian government made every effort to crush the same with the state machinery. To maintain its control over the Harmandir Sahib, another attack was launched on the Temple in 1987, called ‘Operation Black Thunder’. This time only Sikh resistance which was natural outcome of the tragedy was the main target. In that respect, quite a number of people of their community were killed and dead bodies lay inside the sacred place for many days. According to a report, many trucks were loaded with dead bodies and all were burned with kerosene oil. Afterwards, ‘Operation Woodrose’ and ‘Operation Black Thunder-II’ were conducted against the Sikh community, which also assassinated them extra-judicially.

After these barbaric operations, Sikhs organised themselves into an armed power in order to fight the Indian state terrorism. Many Sikhs left India to escape religious persecution. Sikhs have spread out all over the world to keep the movement of Khalistan alive. In this respect, their struggle is still going on.

We may conclude in the words of, a renowned scholar, Dr. Sangat Singh who writes in his book, “The Sikhs in History”, remarks, “The Indian government has killed over 1 million to 1.2 million Sikhs. Since 1947, Indian government has also killed 50,000 Christians and 100,000 Muslims. The only way to stop this state terrorism is to create a Khalistan state, where Sikhs and other religious people can enjoy their freedom.”

Sajjad Shaukat writes on international affairs and is author of the book: US vs Islamic Militants, Invisible Balance of Power: Dangerous Shift in International Relations

Email: sajjad_logic@yahoo.com