M WAQAR..... "A man's ethical behavior should be based effectually on sympathy, education, and social ties; no religious basis is necessary.Man would indeed be in a poor way if he had to be restrained by fear of punishment and hope of reward after death." --Albert Einstein !!! NEWS,ARTICLES,EDITORIALS,MUSIC... Ze chi pe mayeen yum da agha pukhtunistan de.....(Liberal,Progressive,Secular World.)''Secularism is not against religion; it is the message of humanity.'' تل ده وی پثتونستآن
Monday, September 22, 2014
Child who survived the terrorism of ISIS relates tale of his ordeal
Qatar arming extremist groups - Funding terrorists is not what friends do

It cannot be right that a state such as Qatar can support extremist Islamic groups while enjoying a lucrative partnership with the West.Enough is enough. One British hostage has been killed by the savage Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (Isil) and we now know of two more being held captive. Getting them back is, of course, a complex task fraught with moral dilemma. Britain is committed not to pay ransoms. The refusal to do so sends a clear message to political gangsters that kidnapping UK citizens and trying to extort money in return for their release is a waste of time. The UK’s stance is a principled one but, obviously, the actions of terrorists can still end in violent tragedy. The Government has to do all it can to make sure that such kidnappings do not happen in the first place. Finally, politicians are starting to ask who is financing the people who do these terrible things. Vernon Coaker, the shadow defence secretary, has called on ministers to press states in the Arab region to cease sending funds to the “brutal” jihadists. “These are dangerous people and we have to defeat them and one of the ways to do that is to cut off their source of funding,” Mr Coaker told this newspaper. Indeed, an investigation for The Telegraph discovered that while oil-rich Qatar denies ever financing Isil, it did become the main patron for an extremist group fighting in Syria called Ahrar al-Sham and that Qatari weapons and money may have reached the Syrian al-Qaeda affiliate. Meanwhile, Western diplomats believe that Qatar supplied arms to the Islamist coalition that captured Tripoli in Libya last month. And Qatar is a longstanding backer of Hamas, the radical Palestinian movement in Gaza. In 2012, Hamas’s political leaders moved their headquarters from Damascus in Syria to Doha, the Qatari capital. Stephen Barclay, a Tory MP, has suggested that British diplomats might be unwilling to confront the Qataris for fear of frightening away their cash investments in the UK. But speak up they must. Security and the safety of British citizens is priceless – and it cannot be right that a state such as Qatar can, on the one hand, support radical groups and, on the other, enjoy such a lucrative partnership with the West. It should be compelled to do the right thing. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/qatar/11110430/Funding-terrorists-is-not-what-friends-do.html
FIFA executive: Qatar should not host the 2022 World Cup

Executive warns that even managing temperatures in the stadium would be insufficient as the cup 'does not take place only there'Qatar should not host the 2022 World Cup because of the scorching temperatures in the Gulf country, FIFA Executive Committee member Theo Zwanziger said on Monday. "I personally think that in the end the 2022 World Cup will not take place in Qatar," the German told Sport Bild on Monday. "Medics say that they cannot accept responsibility with a World Cup taking place under these conditions," said the former German football (DFB) chief, who is now a member of the world football's governing body FIFA that awarded the tournament to Qatar in 2010. Although Qatar has insisted that a summer World Cup is viable thanks to cooling technologies it is developing for stadiums, training areas and fan zones, there is still widespread concern over the health of the players and visiting supporters. "They may be able to cool the stadiums but a World Cup does not take place only there," Zwanziger said. FIFA is also looking into shifting the tournament to a European winter date to avoid the scorching summer where temperatures routinely rise over 40 Celsius. Asian Football Confederation (AFC) president Sheikh Salman Bin Ebrahim Al Khalifa chaired a meeting to discuss the matter earlier this month with the options of January/February 2022 and November/December 2022 being offered as alternatives to June/July. However, talk of a potential change away from the usual June-July dates has resulted in plenty of opposition from domestic leagues around the world, worried the schedule switch would severely disrupt them. FIFA President Sepp Blatter said in May that awarding the World Cup to Qatar was a "mistake" and the tournament would probably have to be held in the European winter. "The Qatar technical report indicated clearly that it is too hot in summer, but the executive committee with quite a big majority decided all the same that the tournament would be in Qatar," he added. Both FIFA and Qatar World Cup organisers have come under the spot light for corruption allegations since they were awarded the tournament back in 2010. An expose by The Sunday Times newspaper revealed that millions had been paid to FIFA decission makers by a Qatari official, an allegation the Qatari's deny. Qatar has also been harshly criticised for the conditions provided for migrant workers' in the tiny but wealthy Gulf state. Several commentators on social media have referenced human rights violations in Qatar as a more significant reason for the country not to be allowed to host the World Cup. - See more at: http://www.middleeasteye.net/news/fifa-executive-qatar-will-not-host-2022-world-cup-1590603379#sthash.WWanQXGV.dpuf
How the Islamic State Took Turkey Hostage
The 49 Turkish diplomats captured by the jihadist group in Mosul may now be free, but Ankara still has many reasons to think twice about confronting the extremists on its border. Is Turkey part of the broad coalition against the Islamic State (IS) that President Barack Obama has been trying to fashion, or not? There is certainly reason to think it would be interested in the effort: Turkey shares a long land border with Syria, many of the moderate Syrian opposition leaders have long been based in Turkey, and the Turkish government has been at the forefront of the opposition to the Assad regime, along with many of the other states in the anti-IS coalition. Turkey, however, did not join the 10 Arab countries that signed on to help build a coalition against IS at a meeting in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, this past week, and has made it clear that it will not partake in military operations against IS. It is willing to provide humanitarian aid, and will in all likelihood offer clandestine support to U.S. efforts. The primary reason the Turks give for their reticence was their concern for the fate of 49 Turkish diplomatic and security personnel who were seized by IS when the group overran the Iraqi city of Mosul; they were released on Sept. 20. The hostage crisis was emblematic of all that has gone wrong for Turkey in Syria: Although warned of the impending fall of Iraq's second-largest city, the Turks terribly miscalculated in thinking that IS would not harm Turkish personnel, given how critical Ankara's support for the anti-Assad effort had been. The end of the hostage crisis in Mosul, however, does not necessarily mean Turkey has a free hand to confront IS. Ankara still faces a second quasi-hostage crisis that gives Turkish leaders reason to think twice about joining Obama's coalition. South of Turkey's border with Syria, a squadron of Turkish soldiers guards an ancient tomb which is said to belong to Suleyman Shah, the first Ottoman sultan's grandfather. It was ceded by the French occupying power to the new Turkish state in 1921. The tomb had to be moved closer to Turkey in 1975 following the damming of the Euphrates and the creation of Lake Assad; the new location, in Syria's Aleppo province, is some 20 miles from the Turkish border. Since then, a contingent of Turkish troops has been stationed there, rotating through regularly with supplies. Were the jihadists to decide to overrun the Turkish enclave, they could probably do it easily, although it would certainly prompt a Turkish military reaction. Either way, the situation is a delicate if not impossible one for Ankara, as the only way to resupply this small contingent of troops is by reaching some sort of understanding with the jihadist group. The last known resupply operation occurred near the end of April, when IS did not enjoy the dominance it does today. While the details of the hostage deal are still unclear, Ankara has had interlocutors with IS -- from Arab tribes to former Iraqi Vice President Tariq al-Hashimi, who sought refuge in Turkey -- who could have been instrumental in reaching it. Such a deal, however, may include a promise of continued non-involvement in the campaign against the jihadist group, with the soldiers stationed at Suleyman Shah serving as an insurance policy for the jihadists. Turkey's other problem has been the emergence of a jihadist support infrastructure within its own territory. Former U.S. ambassador to Turkey Francis Ricciardone recently told journalists that Ankara had been working with groups that the United States considers "beyond the pale," including the al Qaeda-affiliated al-Nusra Front. Earlier this year, Turkish police also stopped a truck reportedly belonging to the Humanitarian Relief Foundation (IHH), an NGO close to the ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP) that made its name organizing the ill-fated 2010 flotilla to Gaza, for allegedly carrying weapons to fighters in Syria. Turkish Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoglu has denied that Ankara has worked with al-Nusra Front, while IHH denies that it had anything to do with the stopped truck. Aid, munitions, and fighters have been smuggled across the border at will, sometimes via ambulance. The resulting infrastructure -- consisting of groups of sympathizers or enablers, networks of safe houses, transportation and smuggling channels, and medical support -- is now autonomous of the government. Estimates vary, but Turkish media reports have suggested that as many as 1,000 Turks have joined IS. According to opinion polls, only 70 percent of Turks view IS as a terrorist group. In a country of 75 million, the 30 percent who do not share such a view represent an important potential recruiting pool for the jihadist group. For some time, the Obama administration had been pushing former prime minister and now President Recep Tayyip Erdogan to clamp down on supporting jihadists in Syria. After the fall of Mosul and the mobilization against IS, pressure on Turkey has been ramped up. The United States has not asked to use its mammoth Incirlik Air Base in southern Turkey for military operations against IS, knowing full well that Ankara would turn them down. The use of Incirlik would make it much easier and cheaper for the United States to conduct operations, instead of routing them out of the air base in Doha or the carriers in the Persian Gulf and the Mediterranean. But the truth is, the United States does not need that base to achieve its limited objectives. Instead, Washington wants to work more closely with Ankara without making much of a fuss. However, the dismantling of the infrastructure in Turkey that supports jihadists of all stripes, and the oil-smuggling routes benefiting IS, must come first. Erdogan bristles at any criticism from the American press, accusing it of engaging in slander and malicious propaganda. But he is in a difficult situation, much of it of his own doing. To be fair, the 560-mile Turkish-Syrian border is difficult to seal completely; people in that region have for decades made a living off smuggling. The bigger problem, however, is that the Turkish government has little faith in the United States. This is partially ideological, but also based on experience. After all, the bungled management of post-invasion Iraq does not inspire confidence in Washington's ability to steward this new effort. Between the hostages IS has captured and the important residual support it commands in Turkey, the jihadist group has managed to significantly restrict Erdogan's room to maneuver. The natural policy for Turkey now is to sit on the sidelines -- but as the fight against IS escalates, Turkey could find itself under increasing pressure to be drawn in. Will this resemble 2003? Then, the Turkish parliament, despite the Ankara government's efforts in support, voted down a resolution that would have allowed American troops to cross into Iraq through Turkish territory. That decision cast a shadow on Turkish-American relations as the United States struggled to control post-Saddam Iraq. Turkey's dilemma, in short, is that it has lost the initiative to IS; while it has rescued its hostages, it still remains hostage to IS.BY HENRI J. BARKEY
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2014/09/21/islamic_state_turkey_hostage
U.S. - Climate protesters march on Wall Street, block street near NYSE
By Sebastien Malo

Russia's Putin looking at cooperation to fight Islamic State: agency

President Obama to Rally Coalition Against Islamic State at UN
This week, the Obama administration will continue efforts to build a broad international coalition against Islamic State militants, also known as ISIL and ISIS, that have seized territory in Iraq and Syria. President Barack Obama will address the U.N. General Assembly and lead a special session of the Security Council to rally support for the campaign against the Sunni radicals. Fighting intensified between Kurdish forces and Islamic State militants in northern Iraq, as U.S. and French warplanes delivered air strikes. Meanwhile, bombs killed dozens in Baghdad, where Shi’ites demonstrated against any redeployment of U.S. forces in Iraq. President Obama has repeatedly ruled out U.S. ground troops in combat roles, saying Iraqis and Syrians backed by the international community will lead the charge. “Over 40 countries have offered to help the broad campaign against ISIL so far, from training and equipment to humanitarian relief to flying combat missions. And this week at the United Nations, I will continue to rally the world against this threat,” said Obama. America’s U.N. ambassador, Samantha Power, previewed the president’s appearance. “President Obama will come on Wednesday and will convene a very unusual head-of-state summit on the issue of foreign terrorist fighters, to try to stop the financing to terrorists in places like Iraq and Syria, to counter violent extremism, to involve civil society in delegitimizing the messages that ISIL is putting forward,” said Power, speaking on ABC’s This Week program. No nation has pledged to join the United States in an air campaign over Syria. But Power remains confident. “I will make a prediction that we will not do the airstrikes alone if the president decides to do the air strikes [in Syria],” said Power. Last week, both houses of Congress approved the training and equipping of moderate Syrian rebels. Although the measure had ample bipartisan support in both chambers, there were dissenters, among them Republican Senator Rand Paul. “From [Saddam] Hussein to [Bashar al-] Assad to [Muammar] Gadhafi, it is the same history. Intervention topples the secular dictator. Chaos ensues and radical jihadists emerge. The pattern has been repeated time and time again. And yet what we have here is a failure to understand, a failure to reflect on the outcome of our involvement in Arab civil wars," said Paul. Lawmakers voted before adjourning for what is expected to be an extended recess until midterm elections in November.By Michael Bowman
Bilawal Bhutto - Democratic Pakistan vital for global peace
Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) Chairman Bilawal Bhutto Zardari on Sunday said democratic Pakistan could play vital role in global peace. In his message on occasion of International Day of Peace, Bilawal said that all stakeholders must play role for strengthening the democracy. He said that it was hoped that world powers would not support opportunists and anarchists. “All world powers must play their role for maintaining global peace.” Each year the International Day of Peace is observed around the world on September 21. The United Nations General Assembly has declared this as a day devoted to strengthening the ideals of peace, both within and among all nations and people.http://mediacellppp.wordpress.com/
Afghanistan : Broad Support for Abdullah Abdullah As Possible Chief Executive


Prepare For Change in How Afghanistan Is Run
After a nearly four-month long saga, Afghanistan has a president-elect. Ashraf Ahmadzai Ghani, an economist and former Afghan finance minister, will be the thirteenth president of Afghanistan, succeeding Hamid Karzai. “The Independent Election Commission of Afghanistan declares Dr Ashraf Ghani Ahmadzai as the president of Afghanistan,” declared Ahmad Yousur Nuristani, chief of Afghanistan’s Independent Election Commission (IEC), in a long-awaited announcement. Abdullah Abdullah, runner-up in the run-off presidential election that took place on June 14, will instead nominate a Chief Executive Officer (CEO) with powers resembling those of a prime minister as per a unity government deal negotiated with assistance from the United States. This CEO will take office as an executive prime minister within two years. Ghani will take be sworn into office on September 29, 2014. Abdullah’s CEO nominee will also be nominated alongside Ghani. Abdullah and Ghani were mired in a seemingly intractable dispute over vote rigging during the June run-off election, the unity government deal, and a host of other issues. The two rivals signed and finalized a power-sharing deal on Sunday that ended this stand-off, granting some much-needed clarity to Afghanistan’s political future. Since the unity government deal will change the administrative structure of the Afghan government considerably, a loya jirga (grand legislative assembly) will be held within two years to amend Afghanistan’s constitution, formally creating a prime ministerial position. Under the current constitution of Afghanistan, which was ratified in 2004, the president of the country wields considerable power over government affairs. It remains unknown how the addition of a second-fiddle CEO role will affect governance in Afghanistan in implementation. Scholars Srinjoy Bose and Niamat Ibrahimi have noted some of the reasons why the John Kerry-brokered national unity government deal is risky. In particular, they note that the unity government is a “band-aid solution to a more long-term problem” in Afghan politics. The unity government may lead to instability as Ghani and Abdullah fail to make good on promises to elite supporters. Additionally, “a national unity government may undermine the effectiveness of state institutions and result in policy paralysis at a time when Afghanistan needs smaller, but more effective governance.” In practice, Ghani, as president, will have power over strategic decisions in Afghanistan’s governance. Under the changes to be made to Afghanistan’s constitution, the country will gain a Council of Ministers, a body charged with managing the more administrative aspects of running the country. Abdullah’s CEO nominee, once appointed, would then chair this council. One of the issues that led to the two rivals coming together with a deal was Abdullah’s demand that he be allowed to appoint senior leaders on an equal level with Ghani. Ghani conceded this in the end. On paper, it appears as if the highest levels of Afghanistan’s government will feature individuals from both camps. The agreement between the two men states that the ”the two teams will be equally represented at the leadership level.” Additionally, while the electoral crisis did not result in fragmentation at the ethnic level, power-sharing between Ghani, an ethnic Pashtun who hails from the south of the country, and Abdullah, an ethnic Tajik who comes for the northern regions of the country, could create an uneasy equilibrium where ethnic competition for political influence undermines national unity. In order to prevent this, the two men must make efforts to avoid polarizing political grand-standing in Kabul. Beyond ethnic issues, differences in policy preferences between senior ministers — some of whom will be appointed by Ghani and some by Abdullah — could result in gridlock in Afghanistan’s executive branch. The unity government arrangement, most critically, prevents Abdullah’s camp from walking away from this election with a sense of having been robbed of the presidency (and thus facing political disenfranchisement in Afghanistan’s highly centralized political system). This would have been particularly unacceptable to Abdullah’s supporters in this year’s election given that similar sentiments persisted after Abdullah yielded the presidency to Karzai in 2009 after similar controversy over the election. The benefits of the unity government deal, thus, outweigh the uncertain but potentially serious costs for the moment. Despite the risks, the conclusion of this deal will lead to U.S. and NATO leaders breathing a sigh of relief as they prepare to depart Afghanistan at the end of this year. Particularly, one of the top priority items for Ghani’s government will be to conclude two important security pacts with the United States and NATO respectively. The Bilateral Security Agreement (BSA, to be signed with the United States) and the Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA, to be signed with NATO) will allow additional foreign troops to stay on in Afghanistan beyond the end of this year for limited counter-terrorism operations and to provide training for Afghan security forces. Ghani and Abdullah both publicly declared their support for a continued U.S. and NATO presence in Afghanistan beyond 2014 and will sign the controversially delayed security agreements. Hamid Karzai, the outgoing Afghan president, refused to sign the agreements beginning in late-2013, arguing that proximity to Afghanistan’s presidential elections meant that his successor ought to sign the deals. Afghanistan’s allies, international investors regional powers, and, indeed, the Afghan people will be happy to see a new president settle into the presidential palace in Kabul soon, ending a period of considerable uncertainty. For now, it appears as if Afghanistan’s fragile political transition is back on track, but the government in Kabul is sailing into uncharted waters with this unity government. Get ready for some big changes in how Afghanistan is governed.By Ankit Panda
A Shaky Step Forward in Afghanistan
The agreement appears to have narrowly averted, for now, further violence and a disastrous conclusion to America’s longest war. For the deal to hold, Mr. Abdullah and Mr. Ghani will have to formalize the details of an agreement that is subject to interpretation on many fronts. For instance, under the deal, the president will have to issue a decree outlining the specific administrative powers of the new position, according to the four-page document. The president also has final say over the scope of that position’s authority.Mr. Ghani and Mr. Abdullah will also have to work to prevent some power brokers from undermining the compromise deal. Western officials rightly worry in particular about the governor of Balkh Province in the north, Atta Muhammad Noor, who was among those urging Mr. Abdullah not to concede.
The first sign of how rocky the path forward will likely be emerged just after the election commission pronounced Mr. Ghani the victor. The candidates had agreed, at Mr. Abdullah’s request, that election officials would announce the winner on Sunday but not the tally of audited votes. Mr. Abdullah had asked that the numbers be disclosed at a later date, believing that their immediate release would legitimize a hugely fraudulent process, possibly stoking unrest. But election officials leaked the results to Afghan media outlets anyway, giving the new governing partnership a bitter start.At the end of the day, the millions of Afghan voters who defied Taliban threats to cast ballots are now left wondering if their votes counted. Mr. Ghani’s presidency was not, by any reasonable measure, the result of a fair and credible election. Even so, Secretary of State John Kerry and his team in Kabul deserve recognition for formulating a power-sharing plan that gave the Afghans a way out of a crisis that could easily have plunged the country into a disastrous cycle of violence. If it works, this will mark the first peaceful transfer of power in the country’s history.
Mr. Ghani’s victory will mark the end of the decade-long tenure of President Hamid Karzai, who was supported by Washington but whose years in power were tainted by tolerance of corruption and marked by growing antagonism toward Washington. His refusal to sign a bilateral agreement with the United States to allow a small international military contingent to remain in the country for a couple of years — a precondition for continued foreign aid — deepened anxiety in Afghanistan unnecessarily. Both Mr. Ghani and Mr. Abdullah support the agreement.It is a relief to see Mr. Karzai hand over the reins of power. But the change of leadership in Kabul is dampened by serious concerns over whether the power-sharing deal will prove durable.
Pakistan is eyeing sea-based and short-range nuclear weapons, analysts say
In one of the world’s most volatile regions, Pakistan is advancing toward a sea-based missile capability and expanding its interest in tactical nuclear warheads, according to Pakistani and Western analysts. The development of nuclear missiles that could be fired from a ship or submarine would give Pakistan “second-strike” capability if a catastrophic nuclear exchange destroyed all land-based weapons. But the acceleration of Pakistan’s nuclear and missile programs is renewing international concern about the vulnerability of those weapons in a country that is home to more than two dozen Islamist extremist groups. “The assurances Pakistan has given the world about the safety of its nuclear program will be severely tested with short-range and sea-based systems, but they are coming,” said Michael Krepon, co-founder of the Stimson Center, a Washington-based global security think tank. “A cardinal principle of Pakistan’s nuclear program has been, ‘Don’t worry; we separate warheads from launchers.’ Well, that is very hard to do at sea.” Western officials have been concerned about Pakistan’s nuclear program since it first tested an atomic device in 1998. Those fears have deepened over the past decade amid political tumult, terrorist attacks and tensions with the country’s nuclear-armed neighbor, India, with which it has fought three wars. That instability was underscored this month as anti-government protests in the capital appeared to push Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif’s government to the brink of collapse. The political crisis was unfolding as Pakistan and India continued lobbing artillery shells across their border, in a tit-for-tat escalation that illustrated the continued risk of another war. For more than a decade, Pakistan has sent signals that it is attempting to bolster its nuclear arsenal with “tactical” weapons — short-range missiles that carry a smaller warhead and are easier to transport. Over the past two years, Pakistan has conducted at least eight tests of various land-based ballistic or cruise missiles that it says are capable of delivering nuclear warheads. Last September, Sharif, citing “evolving security dynamics in South Asia,” said Pakistan is developing “a full- spectrum deterrence capability to deter all forms of aggression.” The next step of Pakistan’s strategy includes an effort to develop nuclear warheads suitable for deployment from the Indian Ocean, either from warships or from one of the country’s five diesel-powered submarines, analysts say. In a sign of that ambition, Pakistan in 2012 created the Naval Strategic Force command, which is similar to the commands in the air force and army that oversee nuclear weapons. “We are on our way, and my own hunch is within a year or so, we should be developing our second-strike capability,” said Shireen M. Mazari, a nuclear expert and the former director of the Institute of Strategic Studies Islamabad, a hawkish Pakistani-government-funded think tank. Pakistan’s nuclear push comes amid heightened tension with U.S. intelligence and congressional officials over the security of the country’s nuclear weapons and materials. The Washington Post reported in September 2013 that U.S. intelligence officials had increased surveillance of Pakistan in part because of concerns that nuclear materials could fall into the hands of terrorists. State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki, asked whether the United States is concerned about a sea-launched Pakistani weapon, said it is up to Pakistan to discuss its programs and plans. But, she said, “we continue to urge all nuclear-capable states to exercise restraint regarding nuclear and missile capabilities. We continue to encourage efforts to promote confidence-building and stability and discourage actions that might destabilize the region.” During a visit to Washington for consultations with the Obama administration in July, Tariq Fatemi, Sharif’s senior foreign policy adviser, said the government had “no intention of pursuing” sea-based nuclear weapons. It is unclear how much direct knowledge Sharif’s government has about the country’s nuclear weapons and missile-development programs, which are controlled by the powerful military’s Strategic Planning Directorate. But the prime minister is the chairman of the country’s National Command Authority, a group of civilian and military officials who would decide whether to launch a nuclear weapon. Pakistani military officials declined to comment on the nuclear program. They note, however, that a January report by the Washington-based Nuclear Threat Initiative named Pakistan the “most improved” in safeguarding nuclear materials. Analysts say much about Pakistan’s program remains a mystery. Western experts, for example, are divided over whether Pakistan has the ability to shrink warheads enough for use with tactical or sea-launched weapons. “They may have done so, but I can’t imagine it’s very reliable,” said Jeffrey Lewis, a nuclear and nonproliferation scholar at the Monterey Institute of International Studies. Still, Lewis and other analysts say Pakistan is without doubt embarking on an ambitious multi-year strategy to enhance its nuclear arsenal and delivery systems. In 2011, nongovernment experts interviewed by The Post estimated that Pakistan had built more than 100 deployed nuclear weapons. Now Pakistan’s fourth plutonium-production reactor is also nearing completion, and while most assessments of the country’s warhead inventory have not changed much in recent years, analysts say Pakistan continues to produce weapons material and develop delivery vehicles, positioning itself for another spurt of rapid growth at any time. “They are going to make as much fissile material as they possibly can and keep making as many warheads as they possibly can,” said Pervez Hoodbhoy, a leading Pakistani nuclear expert and physicist. India, which experts estimate has 80 to 100 deployed nuclear weapons, has a stated policy of using them only in response to an attack. Pakistan has repeatedly declined to embrace a no-first-use policy. But concerns within Pakistan about India’s growing nuclear ambitions are helping to fuel Pakistan’s own advancements. India, too, has been stepping up research and development of offensive and defensive weapons systems. In 2012, India test-launched its first intercontinental ballistic missile, which it said has a range of more than 3,100 miles. In February, the Times of India reported that the missile, as well as the country’s first nuclear-powered submarine, could be deployed as early as next year. In May, India conducted its first test of a planned missile defense system. Much of India’s ballistic technology appears aimed at boosting its defenses against China, not Pakistan. But the Pakistani military has been shifting the focus of the country’s nuclear program over the past decade because of fears that Indian forces could use the threat of terrorism to launch a sudden cross-border strike. India has a sizable advantage in conventional weapons, and its army is more than twice the size of Pakistan’s. And in recent years, Pakistan’s army says, more than one-third of Pakistan’s 500,000 soldiers have been focused not on the eastern frontier, but on battling Islamist militants on the region bordering Afghanistan. So instead of working to enhance the range of its missiles, Pakistan is developing shorter-range cruise missiles that fly lower to the ground and can evade ballistic missile defenses, analysts say. Pakistan has repeatedly tested its indigenously produced, nuclear-capable Babur cruise missile, which has a range of 400 miles and can strike targets at land and sea, military officials said. In 2011 and last year, Pakistan also tested a new tactical, nuclear-capable battlefield missile that has a range of just 37 miles. “This is the miniaturization of warheads,” said Mansoor Ahmed, a strategic studies and nuclear expert at Quaid-i-Azam University in Islamabad. Maria Sultan, chairwoman of the Islamabad-based South Asian Strategic Stability Institute, an organization with close links to Pakistani military and intelligence officials, said the short-range missile is designed as a signal to India’s military. “We are saying, ‘We have target acquisition for very small targets as well, so it’s really not a great idea to come attack us,’ ” Sultan said. “Before, we only had big weapons, so there was a gap in our deterrence, which is why we have gone for tactical nuclear weapons and cruise missiles.” Still, even a limited use of nuclear weapons on the battlefield would likely trigger a major retaliatory strike from India, said Manpreet Sethi, a senior fellow at the New Delhi-based Centre for Air Power Studies. “The use of tactical nuclear weapons is not going to change an [Indian] offensive in any substantial way,” Sethi said. “Slow down, yes, but not stop.” Hans Kristensen, director of the Nuclear Information Project at the Federation of American Scientists, said the fact that Pakistani and Indian analysts even debate the outcome of a limited nuclear exchange is cause for alarm. “India and Pakistan have so many avenues into a conflict that could spin out of control,” Kristensen said. “The development of these weapons systems lowers the point where you could potentially see nuclear weapons come into use.”By Tim Craig and Karen DeYoung
Pakistan: PTI MNAs to spill beans on ‘forced resignations’: report
Pakistan todayA report in local English daily, Express Tribune, Monday claimed that disgruntled members of the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) will prove before the speaker of the National Assembly that their resignations were forced. The report quoted a PTI MNA, who wished to remain anonymous, that NA Speaker Ayaz Sadiq had asked PTI lawmakers to appear before him on Tuesday and verify signatures on their resignation letters. “Things will be made clear as MNAs will meet the speaker one on one,” said the report. While a majority of the party MNAs submitted their resignations, some including Gulzar Khan, Musarrat Ahmedzeb and Nasir Khattak refused to step down from the public office. The report also quoted a founding member of PTI, Akbar Babar who said that Imran Khan needs to take a look at the recent intra-party polls instead of demanding transparent elections in the country. “The party elections were ‘nothing more than a farce’,” he claimed, adding that party tickets were sold just like “fish in a market”. Some founding members met with disgruntled party lawmakers to discuss the ongoing situation. Babar said the meeting will discuss ways to release the party from the clutches of those who “hijacked it”. “It has become a one-man show and the party constitution does not allow that.”
Polio in Balochistan: Vaccinators in 4 districts not paid for three months
Pakistan: Afrasiab Khattak dubs PTI sit-ins a poll campaign

Pakistan: Making minorities disappear
By - Yasser Latif Hamdani
There has been a systematic attempt by the state since the 1980s to drive non-Muslim Pakistanis into oblivionFor those of us who are still free of cynicism towards this country of ours and those who believe sincerely in the much battered idea of Jinnah’s Pakistan, it is a solemn duty to ensure that whatever little we can contribute we should work towards that ideal of a humane and inclusive Pakistan for all its citizens. When I was growing up, one was accustomed to a much more diverse and multicultural Pakistan despite the fact that General Zia’s poison had begun to take effect. Bear in mind that I did not go to a missionary school but a regular private school called Bloomfield Hall in Lahore. Yet my first Islamiat teacher was an extremely learned man by the name of Innocent Joseph. I was taught seventh grade geography by an elegant Christian lady, Mrs Alam. My art teacher was a tall sari clad Hindu lady — I forget her name — who seemed like she was right out of an art film. The stern Mr Joseph Felix taught me Mathematics and it turned out that he was my father’s classmate at Don Bosco High School in Lahore, a fact that made my life hell. Mrs John, who later became the principal of another school chain, taught me English literature in eighth grade. I remember her attending the Khatm-e-Quran event of a fellow student. That she was Christian did not preclude her from being invited but I feel that this may not be possible today. These Pakistani teachers gave me, thankfully, a very different understanding of Pakistan, its history, its founder and its national identity from what I find today. None of them were cynical about the country, a sharp contrast to even those self-styled liberals today who revel in bashing the country and lying about its origins. While the non-Muslim Pakistani teachers drummed in me a sort of humanistic patriotism, Muslim teachers were another story; the less said the better. The fact of the matter is that these faces and names have receded. You do not see them around anymore. Sure, the missionary schools have them but now it is unheard of for other schools to have non-Muslim teachers. Even if they are there, they are hidden or too scared to speak up. They are too scared to voice opinions. There has been a systematic attempt by the state since the 1980s to drive non-Muslim Pakistanis into oblivion. I was recently approached by a delegation of the Church World Services, Pakistan, who opened my eyes to how systematic this state-driven process of driving minorities into hiding is. Their biggest gripe was the non-implementation of the job quota for minorities in Punjab province. There is a five percent quota in all government jobs that is mandatory by law. Unfortunately, the way the quota takes effect is at the interview stage, which means that very few non-Muslims actually make it past the entry test. The entry test itself is designed to keep non-Muslims out, with questions about Islam and the Holy Quran. So, in any event, the barriers to entry have been kept too high for non-Muslims. However, on top of this, Chief Minister Shahbaz Sharif’s ‘Modi-esque’ Punjab government has, through a notification dated March 27, 2010, stated that if the “qualified candidates” were not available for the reserved quota, these would automatically be unreserved and filled “on merit”. This notification is ultra vires the spirit of the constitution of Pakistan and the quota system that has been implemented under it. It is sheer injustice to the minorities and nothing else. No reasonable person, no matter what his political affiliation or ideological bent of mind, can find this ridiculous notification by the Punjab government justifiable. The tragedy that non-Muslims face is multilayered: first, their numbers are downplayed and were in any event fudged in the 1998 census. This is done to keep the quota question under wraps. A fair census, in my estimate, would show that the total population of non-Muslims in Pakistan far exceeds the four to five percent estimate at present. For example, 500,000 Hindus living in south Punjab are completely absent from this calculation. In Lahore alone, the population of Christians is more than one million according to the most conservative independent estimates. The overall population of Christians in Pakistan may well exceed 15 million. Add to this the Hindu population, close to five million in Sindh and a million more elsewhere, and the total population of non-Muslims begins to cross the 20 million mark. We are, for obvious reasons, not even counting the Ahmedi population because, principally, they reject the minority status forced upon them. There are other smaller minorities like the Sikhs who have historically migrated from the northwest to Punjab. In most cases, they are denied registration and national identity cards. Next the quotas they are given are not implemented as above. Whether federal or provincial, the numbers of non-Muslims decline rapidly as we go from lower pay grades to higher ones. Grade four and above, the percentage of non-Muslims employed falls below one percent. The number of non-Muslims in the higher bureaucracy today can be counted on one’s fingertips. They are all subject to the annual confidential reports, the format of which was amended by General Zia’s illegal regime to include a section on “Islamic Knowledge”. The woes do not end there. Union councils do not issue marriage certificates to non-Muslims. The National Database and Registration Authority (NADRA) only accepts the certificates of a handful of churches and a select few Gurdwaras (Sikh places of worship). A significant section of the Christian population that follows the Pentecostal tradition and the Episcopal tradition cannot therefore get their spouses registered. Hindus do not even have a marriage act to this date, which pretty much makes their marriage registration impossible! Consequently, the spouse of a Hindu legislator was denied a UK visa recently because she failed to prove her marriage to her husband. Speaking to Parsis in Quetta after partition, Jinnah famously said that a country founded to safeguard a minority could not be unmindful of minorities in its own midst. Yet that vision has been lost to expediency and the shortsightedness of our rulers. The key to returning to that vision and reclaiming Pakistan lies in the socio-economic empowerment of Pakistani minorities. Too much time has been wasted in raising and fighting ideological battles. Economically empower Pakistani minorities and they will be the greatest soldiers in the cause for a progressive and prosperous Pakistan. Is our ruling elite listening?
Pakistan: How we treat our minorities
Pakistan: Air strikes kill 23 suspected terrorists in North Waziristan

Turkey accused of colluding with Isis to oppose Syrian Kurds and Assad following surprise release of 49 hostages
PATRICK COCKBURNWith President Erdogan refusing to explain why Isis decided to release 49 of the country’s diplomats, suspicions are growing about Ankara’s murky relationship with the self-styled caliphate Mystery surrounds the surprise release of 49 Turkish diplomats and their families held captive for three months by Isis. The Turkish government is denying any deal with the hostage-takers, making it unclear why Isis, notorious for its cruelty and ruthlessness, should hand over its Turkish prisoners on Saturday without a quid pro quo. Hailed in Ankara as a triumph for Turkey, the freeing of the diplomats seized when Mosul fell to Isis on 10 June raises fresh questions about the relationship between the Turkish government and Isis. The Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan says the release is the result of a covert operation by Turkish intelligence that must remain a secret. He added on Sunday that “there are things we cannot talk about. To run the state is not like running a grocery store. We have to protect our sensitive issues; if you don’t there would be a price to pay.” Turkey denies that a ransom was paid or promises made to Isis. The freeing of the hostages comes at the same moment as 70,000 Syrian Kurds have fled across the border into Turkey to escape an Isis offensive against the enclave of Kobani, also known as Ayn al-Arab, which has seen the capture of many villages. The assault on Kobani is energising Kurds throughout the region with 3,000 fighters from the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) based in Iraq’s Qandil mountains reported to be crossing from Iraq into Syria and heading for Kobani. The Turkish security forces closed the border for a period on Sunday after clashes between them and the refugees. They fired tear gas and water after stopping Kurds taking aid to Kobani according to one account, or because stones were thrown at them as they pushed back crowds of Kurdish onlookers, according to another. Most of those crossing are women, children and the elderly, with men of military age staying behind to fight. Many Kurds are expressing bitterness towards the Turkish government, claiming that it is colluding with Isis to destroy the independent enclaves of the Syrian Kurds, who number 2.5 million, along the Turkish border. The pro-Kurdish Amed news agency asks “if Isis [is] the paramilitary wing of the of the neo-Ottomanism project of Turkey in the Middle East?” The Turkish government vehemently denies any collaboration with Isis. Nevertheless, the strange circumstances of both the capture of the 49 Turks and their release shows that Ankara has a different and more intimate relationship with Isis than other countries. Pro-Isis Turkish websites say that the Turks were released on the direct orders of “the caliph” Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi. They had been moved to Raqqa, the Syrian headquarters of Isis from Mosul, and both men and women were well-dressed and appeared to have suffered little harm from their imprisonment. This is in sharp contrast to the treatment of Alan Henning, the British taxi driver seized when taking aid to Syria, and of the journalists who have been ritually murdered by Isis. A number of factors do not quite add up: at the time the diplomats and their families were seized in June it was reported that they had asked Ankara if they could leave Mosul, but their request was refused. It was later reported by a pro-government newspaper that the Consul-General in Mosul, Ozturk Yilmaz, had been told by Ankara to leave, but had not done so. Former Turkish diplomats say that disobedience to his government’s instructions by a senior envoy on such a serious matter is inconceivable. Critics of Mr Erdogan and his Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoglu say that since the first uprising against President Bashar al-Assad in 2011 they have made a series of misjudgements about developments in Syria and how Turkey should respond to them.
Having failed to persuade Bashar al-Assad to make changes, they assumed he would be overthrown by the rebels. They made little effort to distinguish jihadi rebels crossing the 560 mile long Syrian-Turkish border from the others. Some 12,000 foreign jihadis, many destined to become suicide bombers, entered Syria and Iraq from Turkey. Only at the end of 2013, under pressure from the US, did Turkey begin to increase border security making it more difficult for foreign or Turkish jihadis to pass through, though it is still possible. A Kurdish news agency reports that three Isis members, two from Belgium and one from France, were detained by the Syrian Kurdish militia at the weekend as they crossed into Syria from Turkey. The hostages had no idea they were going to be freed until they got a telephone call from Mr Davutoglu. While treated better than other hostages, they were still put under pressure, being forced to watch videos of other captives being beheaded “to break their morale” according to Mr Yilmaz. He said that Isis did not torture people though it threatened to do so: “The only thing they do is to kill them.” The Turkish government may not be collaborating with Isis at this moment, but Isis has benefited from Turkey’s tolerant attitude towards the jihadi movements. As with other anti-Assad governments, Ankara has claimed that there is a difference between the “moderate” rebels of the Free Syrian Army and the al-Qaeda-type movements that does not really exist on the ground inside Syria.
Rise of Islamic schools causes alarm in secular Turkey


Pakistan : Bilawal Bhutto condemns attack on Hujra of PPP leader in Swabi
Bilawal Bhutto Zardari, Chairman, Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) has condemned the attack on the Hujra of a Pakistan People’s Party leader Major retired Fida in Maneri Payan area Swabi. “Monster of terrorism is attacking the nation from all sides. It is time to call a spade and shun the theory of ‘bad’ and ‘good’ terrorists,” he said. Bilawal Bhutto said his party stands for complete elimination of terrorists, as terrorism and extremism are the root causes of our problems from illiteracy to economic impediments. He demanded of the government to make special arrangements for the security of PPP leader.http://www.ppp.org.pk/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)