Saturday, October 14, 2017
China - Washington cannot unilaterally decide Iran nuclear deal’s future
According to US laws, once Trump decertifies the pact, Congress will have 60 days to re-impose sanctions. In an apparent move to ease international opinion, US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson said at a media briefing that Trump intends to abide by the Iran deal. But if the US re-imposes sanctions, Iran will retaliate by restarting its nuclear program and the process of using its nuclear power for civilian use as provided in the pact will be reversed.
The Iran nuclear deal was reached in July 2015 between Iran and six countries, the US, the UK, France, Russia, China and Germany after arduous negotiations. The UN Security Council then approved the deal. According to the pact, Iran promised to limit its nuclear programs while the EU, the US and the international community would lift their sanctions on Iran and the International Atomic Energy Agency would be responsible for making sure that Iran complies with the deal.
This is a typical international multilateral agreement. But since its implementation in January 2016, Washington has viewed it as a bilateral one to which it has the final say. US interests are the deciding factor as to whether Iran complies with the deal. The White House even uses it as a bargaining chip to gain Congress’ support.
US skepticism toward Iran’s compliance comes from concerns over Iran’s development of ballistic missiles. Washington hopes to impose tough sanctions on Iran to expand restrictions and prevent Iran from developing long-range strike weapons that carry nuclear weapons. But as an international agreement, any changes to it should serve a multilateral purpose. Unilaterally decertifying the deal would inevitably tarnish Washington’s international reputation and shake the foundation of the deal. The rivalry between the US and Iran is, in essence, one between the US and the international order.
The nuclear deal is not perfect, but it has provided a model for a political solution for other hotspot issues such as the North Korean nuclear crisis. Through political negotiations, the interests of different parties were coordinated, leading to a multilateral way of resolving thorny issues. The collapse of this deal would mean that the North Korean nuclear problem would be more difficult to settle. Pyongyang won’t believe the US, that it could easily junk an international agreement.
The shadow of war may again cloud the Middle East. A new twist in the Iran nuclear deal will further add to uncertainties in the world. Iran is much stronger than North Korea economically. At this critical time, sticking to the Iran nuclear agreement is crucial to maintaining peace in the Middle East and the current international order.
Iranian President Rohani said Trump cannot unilaterally terminate the agreement and Iran will continue to implement the deal. The leaders of Britain, Germany and France called on Washington and the US Congress to consider the consequence to regional peace before taking any action.
Still in a Cold War mentality, Washington is prone to take unilateral action. Besides, changes in the administration mean a new president can completely deny the actions of the previous president. A string of bilateral and multilateral agreements are now under review.
Despite strong opposition and resistance from the media and politicians, the White House has shown no plans to change its mind. Will the future world order be reshaped according to Washington’s will? Probably not, because other major powers will also exert their will through joint efforts.
#IranNuclearDeal - Opinion: America First. America Alone.
Author: Carsten von Nahmen (cmb)
Donald Trump's decision to decertify the Iran nuclear deal is a slap in the face for America's allies. The president risks isolating the US for the sake of his own fans — and his own ego, writes DW's Carsten von Nahmen.
Jutting chin. Clenched jaw. Narrowed eyes. Donald Trump played the strongman in his televised speech announcing the United States' new strategy on Iran. The protector of Americans against the big, bad world: that's how the president sees himself. And also how many of his supporters view him, and precisely why they voted for him. It was these supporters, more than anyone else, that Trump's speech was aimed at on Friday. It doesn't matter what the others think. America First. America Alone.
Challenging Obama's legacy
Throughout the 2016 election campaign, Trump described the 2015 nuclear deal that his predecessor Barack Obama had reached with Iran alongside European, Chinese and Russian partners as a mistake and the "worst deal ever." This campaign cry has followed him to this day, as has his promise to end the deal as president. And still. Trump didn't go that far on Friday. Not yet. His most important foreign policy and security advisers, among them Defense Secretary Jim Mattis, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster, had strongly advised Trump against such a step, as Iran's nuclear armament ambitions could not be controlled at all without the deal.
Strictly speaking, there is no reason to terminate the deal. The Iranian government is meeting the obligations that the treaty imposed upon it. European allies, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and even Trump's generals have confirmed this.
Changing the rules of the game
But always having to confirm to Congress and the American public every 90 days that Obama's central foreign policy legacy was actually working? That was just asking too much of Trump. And so the president pulled an old trick out of the bag, one that he had so gladly used in his previous life as a businessman and reality TV star. He simply redefined the rules of the game, according to his own terms. The determining factor is not whether Iran is meeting the conditions of the nuclear deal, but whether Iran is living up to the "spirit" of the deal. And if it is, Trump said, it's also whether the Iranian government behaves itself otherwise.
Which, naturally, it not doing. The mullah regime in Tehran represses its own people, threatens Israel with total destruction and supports Syria's dictator Bashar Assad, the Lebanese Hezbollah and other militants and terror groups in the region. That is abhorrent and unacceptable. But it's not what the nuclear deal is about. It's about preventing an uncontrolled nuclear arms race in the Middle East, the world's perpetual crisis hot spot.
And the deal has worked. From the perspective of the West, it's not perfect. It could even be called a compromise. But it's better than no deal.
Typical Trump
Some say the deal is not yet dead. Congress still can straighten out the situation. But in truth, the damage has been done. The writing on the wall is that agreements made with the United States are not worth the paper on which they are written, because the current American president can — anytime, without due cause — call them into question without offering a realistic alternative.
On top of that, the fact that Trump shoves responsibility for the solution to the problem off onto Congress only shows how irresponsible this man is. Typical Trump, making a pompous pronouncement to feel good about himself and satisfy his supporters. Others can deal with the details, thank you very much.
All those who, perhaps, at the beginning of Trump's time in office had hoped that the populist would grow into his office and take his responsibility for his country and the world seriously are now disappointed.
Sad!
Iran nuclear deal: Nobel Peace Prize winner says Trump is 'igniting new conflict rather than reducing risk of war'
By SHEHAB KHAN
The 2017 Nobel Peace Prize Winner has said Donald Trump is “igniting new conflict rather than reducing the risk of nuclear war” after the President’s announcement to withhold certification of the Iran nuclear deal.
The International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (Ican), the 2017 Nobel Peace Laureate, strongly criticised Mr Trump’s decision, who in his speech condemned Iran as a “fanatical regime”.
Speaking out against the move, Beatrice Fihn, the executive director of Ican, said Mr Trump’s move was a reminder of the immense nuclear danger facing the world.
"The Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) is a demonstration of how well diplomacy can work, and like the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons, it reflects the urgent global imperative to eliminate nuclear weapons and the grave threat they pose," Ms Fihn said.
"President Trump’s attempt to disrupt the Iran deal, despite the fact that the IAEA has repeatedly certified that Iran is complying with its terms, is a jarring reminder of the immense nuclear danger now facing the world and the urgent need for all states to prohibit and eliminate these weapons."
"If ever there were a moment for nations to declare their unequivocal opposition to nuclear weapons, that moment is now. There is an urgent need to strengthen existing and develop new norms against the use and possession of nuclear weapons by joining the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons," she added.
The leaders of Britain, France and Germany say they remain committed to the Iran nuclear deal and are "concerned by the possible implications" of Washington's decision to no longer back it in its current form.
Theresa May, Emmanuel Macron and Angela Merkel issued a joint statement calling the nuclear deal "the culmination of 13 years of diplomacy".
Hillary Clinton attacks Trump’s handling of Iran, North Korea
By Jonathan Lemire
Hillary Clinton says President Donald Trump’s threat to pull out of the Iran nuclear accord is “dangerous,” and she suggests her former campaign opponent is undermining the validity of the United States’ promises to other nations.
Trump on Friday accused Iran of violating the landmark 2015 accord, blaming the Iranians for a litany of sinister behavior and hitting their main military wing with anti-terror penalties. Trump, breaking his campaign pledge to rip up the agreement, did not pull the U.S. out or re-impose nuclear sanctions, though he left that option on the table. Clinton, in an interview recorded Wednesday and set to air Sunday on CNN, said Trump’s insistence on decertifying the deal, even though evidence has pointed to Iranian compliance, “makes us look foolish and small and plays right into Iranian hands.”
“That is bad not just on the merits for this particular situation, but it sends a message across the globe that America’s word is not good,” said Clinton, who spoke in advance of Trump’s announcement two days later. “We have different presidents, and this particular president is, I think, upending the kind of trust and credibility of the United States’ position and negotiation that is imperative to maintain.”
Clinton, who as secretary of state for President Barack Obama began negotiations on the deal, did say Iran is engaging in other dangerous behavior. For now, Trump is tossing the issue to Congress and the other nations in the accord, telling lawmakers to toughen the law that governs U.S. participation and calling on the other parties to fix a series of deficiencies. Those include the scheduled expiration of key restrictions under “sunset provisions” that begin to kick in in 2025, as well as the omission of provisions on ballistic missile testing and terrorism.
The 2016 Democratic presidential nominee also denounced Trump’s bellicose language toward North Korea, believing his verbal aggression has rattled American allies.
“We will now have an arms race — a nuclear arms race in East Asia,” Clinton predicted. “We will have the Japanese, who understandably are worried with missiles flying over them as the North Koreans have done, that they can’t count on America.”
She stressed that a diplomatic solution was preferred, suggested the inflammatory rhetoric played into Kim Jung Un’s hands and bemoaned Trump’s public undercutting of Secretary of State Rex Tillerson when he tweeted “Save your energy, Rex” after the nation’s top diplomat had suggested negotiations.
“Diplomacy, preventing war, creating some deterrents is slow, hard-going, difficult work,” said Clinton, who declined to answer when asked whether Tillerson should resign. “And you can’t have impulsive people or ideological people who basically say, ‘Well, we’re done with you.’”
Clinton, who recently released a book that recounts her election defeat to Trump, has been an aggressive critic of the president. The White House did not immediately return a request to respond to her comments.
2 million people roaming jobless in Afghanistan
Naheed Bashardost
As many as two million individuals are unemployed in Afghanistan, said the Ministry of Labor, Social Affairs, Martyrs and Disabled (MoLSAMD) on Saturday, adding it was mulling over draft schemes to reduce the level of joblessness. Acting Minister of MoLSAMD Faizullah Zaki said this during a press conference here held for presenting the ministry’s 3-year activity report.
“Based on the study by the World Bank (WB) about 900,000 of the country’s people eligible for work are unemployed. Thus, we, for creating job opportunities and overcoming these issues, are jointly working with trade unions and employers with regard to devising and executing policies in order to lower the level of unemployment.”
Zaki said about 70,000 youth had graduated from vocational schools over the past three years and one percent of them were absorbed into local and foreign organizations and the rest of others also had find jobs in various spheres.
The minister informed about the organizing of a huge conference in the next two months in Kabul to address the unemployment phenomenon and how to create jobs.
He went on to say that the biometric programme of retirees (computerized registration of identity) was also underway and about 67,000 people’s identities had been so far recorded.
He about the development budget of the ministry said: “Over the past several years, unfortunately the development budget wasn’t expended properly, but this year we have strong will to spend the entire allocated budget.”
According to the ministry’s media wing, this year’s development budget for the ministry is 14 million and 500,000 dollars and so far (fiscal year’s month 10) 45 percent has been spent.
What were Caitlan Coleman and Joshua Boyle really doing in Afghanistan?
By Amanda Erickson
In the weeks, months and years after Caitlan Coleman and Joshua Boyle went missing in Afghanistan, their families repeated the same story: They were young adventurers, drawn off the beaten track. “They were interested in cultures that are underdeveloped,” Caitlan's mother Lyn said in 2014. They didn't do things like stay in hotels or visit tourist traps. They were idealists, and also a little naive.
Soon after the pair married in 2011, they spent four months in Guatemala. And in the summer of 2012, they jetted off for Russia, Kazakhstan, Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan. Family members called it a backpacking trek. Afghanistan was not a part of the plan, at least not as far as anyone knew.
What happened next has become, by now, well-known. Coleman and Boyle did make their way to a remote area of Afghanistan outside Kabul, where they were kidnapped by the Taliban and imprisoned for five years before being rescued this week. Why did Boyle and Coleman, seven months pregnant, decide to go to Kabul? What were they trying to accomplish? We don't have the full story yet. But in the past couple of days, we've gotten some clues.
In comments to reporters, Boyle said he and Coleman went to Afghanistan to try to help “the most neglected minority group in the world, those ordinary villagers who live deep inside Taliban-controlled Afghanistan … where no NGO, no aid worker and no government has ever successfully been able to bring the necessary help.” In that same statement, Boyle described himself as a “pilgrim.”
It's not clear how he and Coleman intended to help, or what they were up to when they were kidnapped.
Coleman's friend suggested to USA Today that she and others had at least a vague notion that the couple intended to do some volunteer work. Sarah Flood said she related to Coleman's travel plans because she had just come back from a service trip to Ukraine. “The idea of going to a country and being helpful is something we absolutely shared,” Flood told USA Today. She also said that the trip had been Boyle's idea, but Coleman quickly got excited about it, even though she was ready to settle down in the United States and start a family.
And then there's the insight of Richard Cronin, who met Coleman and Boyle while they were in Central Asia. The pair befriended Cronin at a hostel in Bishkek. In a blog post from 2012, Cronin wrote that Boyle's excitement about Afghanistan convinced him to go. “I hadn’t thought seriously about traveling to Afghanistan until I started talking to Josh,” he wrote. “He was planning to travel there with his wife Caitlan very shortly. We started talking about Lawrence of Arabia and the explorer Richard Burton. He asked me if I admired these explorers. Of course I did. ‘Wouldn’t you like to be like one of them?’ ”
“I asked Josh where he wanted to go in Afghanistan and he replied All over,” Cronin continued. “He had also said it was safe provided you didn’t go to a region where there were foreign troops and the Taliban, namely the south.”
Boyle's fascination with the Middle East and Central Asia was more than a decade in the making.
After the 9/11 attacks, Boyle became consumed by questions of terrorism and Islam, studying up on the issue and even learning Arabic. A few years later, he got involved in an effort to get Omar Khadr, once the youngest detainee at the U.S. military detention center at Guantanamo Bay, released. Khadr pleaded guilty to killing a U.S. Special Forces medic. Boyle briefly married Khadr's sister.
As my colleague explained:
Boyle’s associations with the family led some U.S. intelligence officials to speculate that the visit to Afghanistan may have been part of a larger effort to link up with Taliban-affiliated militants. “I can’t say that [he was ever al-Qaeda],” said one former U.S. intelligence official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive information. “He was never a fighter on the battlefield. But my belief is that he clearly was interested in getting into it.”
Authorities denied that Boyle had any ties to terror.
His “first concern in life has always been helping others,” Alex Edwards, a friend of Boyle's since 2002, told Philadelphia magazine. “If things were different, and I was the one being held hostage, Josh wouldn’t rest until I was free,” says Alex. “He’d stage sit-ins. He’d put up posters. He’d dedicate his life to it. That’s just who he is.”
Joshua Boyle, now free after five years of captivity in Afghanistan - He's perhaps best known for his link to Khadr family
By JACQUIE MILLER
Joshua Boyle, now free after five years of captivity in Afghanistan, is perhaps best known for his brief marriage to Omar Khadr's older sister.
 |
| Zaynab Khadr, left, and her former husband Joshua Boyle protest in front of the Metro Convention centre in Toronto on Friday May 29, 2009. |
Boyle, the son of an Ottawa tax court judge, was married for about a year to Zaynab Khadr. She’s the eldest daughter of Ahmed Said Khadr, who was accused by the U.S. and Canada of being an associate and financier for the terrorist group Al-Qaeda. Ahmed Khadr studied at the University of Ottawa, and the family moved between Canada, Afghanistan and Pakistan.
Zaynab Khadr was a fierce defender of both her father and her brother, Omar Khadr, who was captured as a 15-year-old fighting with the Taliban in Afghanistan and charged with killing an American soldier.
How did Zaynab Khadr meet Boyle, a University of Waterloo graduate? Boyle had developed a keen interest in national security and human rights issues after the terrorist attacks of 9/11.
Boyle was principled, smart and a “crusader” by nature, said his friend Alex Edwards, who lives in Carleton Place. Boyle was captivated by the plight of Omar Khadr, who was being held in a U.S. prison in Guantanamo Bay, said Edwards.
“Here was this kid, this Canadian child, off in an illegal American prison, and everyone in (Canada) was vilifying the Khadr family, and Josh decided, ‘Hey, this isn’t right.’ So he went off and devoted several years of his life to help this innocent kid.”
Boyle had no connection to the Khadr family, but introduced himself and volunteered to help them, said Edwards.
Boyle acted as the Khadr family spokesperson in 2008 when Zaynab staged a hunger strike on Parliament Hill to protest her brother’s detention. (After a decade at Guantanamo, Omar Khadr was returned to Canada, and later received a $10.5 million settlement from the Canadian government for violation of his charter rights.)
Boyle married Zaynab Khadr in 2009. He was 25, she was 29. It was the third marriage for Zaynab. The first two were arranged: her first husband was sought as a conspirator in a bombing of the Egyptian Embassy in Pakistan; Osama Bin Laden was one of the guests at her second wedding in Afghanistan.
Back in Canada, Zaynab created controversy in 2004 for controversial remarks she made criticizing the way children were raised here and suggesting that the Sept. 11 terror attacks were justified.
Boyle defended his wife for her earlier remarks. In an email exchange with a Citizen reporter, Boylesaid his relationship with Zaynab had taught him that no one can accurately judge the character of a person they’ve never met.
“Are any of us honestly able to say that we have never uttered any phrases which, if they ran beside our name in the paper every month for five years, would paint an unflattering mental image in the public perception?” he asked, adding, “Let he without sin cast the first stone.”
Edwards said, as far as he knows, Boyle was not devoted to any particular political philosophy. He was a pacifist, anti-war and anti-abortion. “He once described himself to me as a hippie, Mennonite love child.”
Edwards knew Boyle over the course of more than a decade, mainly through an online role-playing Star Wars game. Boyle was a “very private person,” but had a reputation in the gaming world as being both cunning in getting people to do what he wanted and generous to new players, he said.
A few months after Boyle married Khadr, intruders broke into the west-end Ottawa home of his parents, Linda and Patrick Boyle. Patrick Boyle was a federal tax court judge.
Intruders smashed the front door, ransacked the house and left bullet holes in the windows. Nothing of value was taken, the Citizen reported. The Boyles were away at the time.
Joshua Boyle believed the break-in was somehow connected to his marriage.
“I’m sure I don’t have to speculate for you on the meaning of .22 calibre bullets fired from close range through residential windows following an unwarranted break-in by an intruder who left behind all the jewelry, cash and valuables in the house,” he wrote to the Citizen at the time.
“Perhaps somebody is unhappy that the Boyles are highlighting to the public just how human the Khadrs really are,” he wrote. At the time, he was living in Toronto with Zaynab and her daughter from a previous marriage.
The marriage didn’t last long, though. They divorced in 2010.
The next year, Boyle married Caitlan Coleman, a U.S. citizen who grew up in rural Stewartstown, Pa., according to an article in The Inquirer.
The pair met on Star Wars fan sites.
Coleman was home-schooled, according to the Inquirer, which quoted friends describing her as “a woman shaped by rural values, with a big-hearted curiosity about the wider world.”
The couple married while on a hike through Central America, the article said.
In the summer of 2012, they thought they had the experience to handle a backpacking trip to Central Asia, according to a video interview with Coleman’s parents.
Caitlan was pregnant at the time.
Afghanistan was not on their itinerary, so it’s unclear how they ended up there, said the Inquirer.
Boyle and Coleman were used to travelling in places most people don’t go, said Edwards.
The couple had done “freelance aid work” in South America before, so perhaps they meant to do the same in Afghanistan, he speculated.
“We can’t know for sure, but they probably meant to do much the same in Afghanistan and a number of other Central Asian nations,” Edwards wrote in a blog post. “What’s even less clear is why they thought this was a good idea. Joshua has a loose connection to Afghanistan, a deep respect for Islam — he may even have been in the process of converting — and a purely academic interest in terrorism, but none of that even remotely qualifies him to travel safely in Afghanistan. It could have been simple naiveté, but I, and many others, have always known Joshua as an exceptionally cunning and savvy man. Maybe he was overconfident. Maybe he was immature. Maybe this time Joshua just bit off more than he could chew.”
The couple was believed to be travelling in Wardak province in Afghanistan when they were abducted by a Taliban-affiliated group in the fall of 2012.
Afghan Taliban killed infant, raped US wife, says rescued Canadian man
A US-Canadian couple freed in Pakistan this week, nearly five years after being abducted in Afghanistan, returned to Canada on Friday where the husband said one of his children had been murdered and his wife had been raped.
American Caitlan Coleman and her Canadian husband, Joshua Boyle, were kidnapped while backpacking in Afghanistan in 2012 by the Taliban-allied Haqqani network. They arrived in Canada with three of their children.
“Obviously, it will be of incredible importance to my family that we are able to build a secure sanctuary for our three surviving children to call a home,” Boyle told reporters after arriving at Toronto’s Pearson International Airport, wearing a black sweatshirt and sporting a beard.
Pakistani troops rescued the family in the northwest of the country, near the Afghan border, this week. The United States has long accused Pakistan of failing to fight the Taliban-allied Haqqani network.
“The stupidity and the evil of the Haqqani network in the kidnapping of a pilgrim … was eclipsed only by the stupidity and evil of authorizing the murder of my infant daughter,” Boyle said, reading from a statement, in a calm voice.
“And the stupidity and evil of the subsequent rape of my wife, not as a lone action, but by one guard, but assisted by the captain of the guard and supervised by the commandant.”
He did not elaborate on what he meant by ‘pilgrim’, or on the murder or rape. Coleman was not at the news conference. Boyle said the Taliban, who he referred to by their official name – the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan – had carried out an investigation last year and conceded that the crimes against his family were perpetrated by the Haqqani network.
He called on the Taliban “to provide my family with the justice we are owed”. “God willing, this litany of stupidity will be the epitaph of the Haqqani network,” said an exhausted-looking Boyle.
He did not take questions form reporters. The family traveled from Pakistan to London and then to Toronto.
Boyle provided a written statement to the Associated Press on one of their flights saying his family had “unparalleled resilience and determination.”
AP reported that Coleman wore a tan-coloured headscarf and sat with the two older children in the business class cabin. Boyle sat with their youngest child on his lap. US State Department officials were on the plane with them, AP added.
‘Helping villagers’
One of the children was in poor health and had to be force-fed by their Pakistani rescuers, Boyle told AP. Reuters could not independently confirm the details.
They are expected to travel to Boyle’s family home in Smiths Falls, 80 km (50 miles) southwest of Ottawa, to be reunited with his parents. Canada has been actively engaged with Boyle’s case at all levels and would continue to support the family, the Canadian government said in a statement.
“At this time, we ask that the privacy of Mr Boyle’s family be respected,” it said. The journey home was complicated by Boyle’s refusal to board a US military aircraft in Pakistan, according to two US officials who spoke on condition of anonymity.
Boyle instead asked to be flown to Canada. But Boyle said he never refused to board any mode of transportation that would bring him closer to home.
Boyle had once been married to the sister of an inmate at the US military detention centre at Guantanamo Bay. The marriage ended and the inmate was later released to Canada.
The families of the captives have been asked repeatedly why Boyle and Coleman had been backpacking in such a dangerous region. Coleman was pregnant at the time.
Boyle told the news conference he had been in Afghanistan helping “villagers who live deep inside Taliban-controlled Afghanistan where no NGO, no aid worker, and no government” had been able to reach.
The Taliban and Haqqani network share the same goals of forcing out foreign troops and ousting the US-backed government in Kabul but they are distinct organizations with separate command structures.
Pakistan not to extend Hafiz Saeed’s detention
The JuD leader will remain under house arrest until the end of this month under the current order.
Pakistan’s government has withdrawn its request for extending the detention of Jamaat-ud-Dawa leader Hafiz Saeed, wanted by the United States.
Yahya Mujahid, a spokesman for JuD, said on October 14 that the government withdrew its application for a fifth detention extension for Saeed, but that he will remain under house arrest until the end of October under the current order.
The U.N. Security Council labelled the Jamaat-ud-Dawa leader a terrorist front group in 2008.
http://www.thehindu.com/news/international/pakistan-not-to-extend-hafiz-saeeds-detention/article19861841.ece
Pakistan's #AhmadiMuslims - Safdar’s apology awaited
Capt (retd) Safdar made a vitriolic speech on the floor of House in the beginning of the week. Until now, Prime Minister Shahid Khaqan Abbasi has carefully distanced himself from the position while the Interior Minister has condemned it. The Punjab Law Minister has also been in news for conflicting positions.
None of this is enough though.
If the ruling party’s policy is reflected in former PM Nawaz Sharif’s position on minorities and the Ahmadia community rather than in Safdar’s remarks, a show cause notice needs to be issued to the latter.
The difference between Sharif’s position (stated in the past and his lieutenants’ recent attempts at presenting a liberal image of the party) and Capt Safdar’s hateful remarks is of a fundamental nature. These two positions cannot co-exist in a political party without tension. It is incumbent upon those ascribing to the liberal position of a pluralist and tolerant society to demand this show cause notice against the MNA, if not a suspension of his party membership. History will judge them for their silence otherwise.
While the PM distanced himself from the MNA’s statement and said that no one in the party will agree with Safdar’s position, he also refused to categorise the latter’s remarks as hate speech. Instead, attributing them to a flow of emotions. This is worrying. Those remarks were despicable and it is exactly this kind of speech - that puts a persecuted group into a more vulnerable position - that is full of hate. Had it not been for those remarks, there would have been no show of street muscle by groups of bigots on Friday, against the community and those raising voice for the community’s right to all constitutional safeguards. These bigots don’t represent the will of the Pakistani people but their street strength enables them to hijack the discourse on religious matters. And the discourse they have been peddling stands against the inclusive, tolerant, and pluralist principles upheld by the founding father and recognised by those heading the elected and un-elected state institutions for sometime now. Demand for a show-cause notice leading to an apology from Safdar is, therefore, awaited from PML-N leaders who stand for this vision.
It is rather unfortunate that a debate on the issue in the Senate was prevented by none other than the Senate Chairman Raza Rabbani himself. He stopped PPP leader Sherry Rehman from voicing opposition to Safdar’s hate speech on the floor of the Senate by switching off her microphone. The Senate chairman has done a lot of good for strengthening democracy in this country. His decision to prevent a Senator from speaking on such an important issue does not go along with his democratic credentials though. Until religious bigotry is not clearly condemned by all political leaders, the violence against religious minorities cannot be tacked.
Meanwhile, the ISPR’s distancing itself from the venom spewed by the MNA has surely sent the right message. In his press conference, the ISPR DG showed a slide of photos highlighting prominent minority figures and their contributions.
The need now is for the authorities to reciprocate. The minorities have contributed and they continue to contribute for this country every day and every night on multiple fronts. State institutions have failed them and they continue to do so.
Every Pakistani has the right to comment on the economy: Khursheed Shah
Leader of the Opposition in the National Assembly said that every citizen, from a common man to the army chief, had the right to practice their speech on the economic situation of the country, taking an opposite stance to the interior minister's statement that the Director-Generaleneral Inter-Services Public Relations (ISPR) should refrain from comments on the country's economy.
In conversation with the media on Saturday, the Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) leader – commented on Interior Minister Ahsan Iqbal’s statements in regards to the military – saying that the army chief’s line of control will remain safe if the economy is stable.
He further went on to say that Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) had brought the issue regarding the finality of the Prophethood to a settlement.
Shah added that Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) leader has made a simple matter largely complex, saying that the politics of leveling accusations towards one another should be brought to an end.
The Opposition leader continued onwards saying that he always tried to serve the nation.
He added that ‘unemployment in Pakistan has risen due to non-development in the country.’
The AfPak tangle
By Afrasiab Khattak
The bloody summer this year in Afghanistan wouldn’t have been different from the last two years that saw a similar bloodshed had it not been for important political developments at the tail end of the fighting season. On August 21 US President Donald Trump declared a fresh strategy towards AfPak which underlined the regional nature of the armed conflict in Afghanistan. The new strategy also indicated significant changes in rules of engagement some of which can have a definite fallout for Pakistan. On September 4 a communique issued at the end of the BRICS Summit held in China demanded action against notorious terrorist networks ( most of them based in Pakistan). The list of terror groups included the name of Taliban. The aforementioned statement also expressed solidarity with Afghan state in its fight against terrorism. These developments made it quite clear that Pakistan’s policy of “good Taliban” has no takers in the world and in case of continuing with this policy the country is faced with definite prospects of international isolation. This is something that has been predicted by the foreign office professionals and political leadership of the country on many occasions but on every occasion the security establishment has come out with a knee jerk reaction accusing the civilians of committing a national security breach. After July 2015 no political initiative was taken for ending the armed conflict which has killed thousands of Afghans. Focus remained on the percentage of Afghan territory under “control” of Taliban and the rise in the said percentage was used as argument for questioning the legitimacy of Afghan state.
However the most recent international pressure was too big to be ignored. So on October 1 COAS General Qamar Javed Bajwa visited Kabul with a delegation to hold talks with Afghan leaders. Media has reported about agreements between the two sides on measures for creating conducive atmosphere for peace talks but no one went beyond expressing cautious optimism in the aftermath of talks due to bitter past experience. It seems the two sides have agreed to resume the quadrilateral process of negotiations that was disrupted after only one meeting in July 2015. Taliban had refused to turn up for the second meeting after publishing of the news about the death of Mulla Omar, the founder of Taliban. That was quite a flimsy excuse. Actually Taliban and their mentors wanted to gain time for capturing swaths of territory in Afghanistan for holding negotiations from a position of strength. Since they still haven’t been able to capture and hold a single province in Afghanistan in the last three years and their so called Emirate is still hiding and changing places on the eastern side of the Durand Line to avoid US drone strikes, why would they be participating in the negotiations?
But more important than whims and vagaries in Taliban behaviour is the Afghan policy of Pakistani security establishment. Taliban are regarded here to be the most effective tool for implementing the policy of strategic depth in Afghanistan. Since the inception of Taliban in 1994 there has been a unique consistency in this pro Taliban policy which has not seen a change even at the height of General Pervez Musharraf’s alliance with the US after September 11. Taliban’s leadership along with their Al-Qaeda allies were not only allowed to enter Pakistan but they could also reorganise here and launch a new round of war in Afghanistan. So far there is no sign of change in this policy on the ground although Pakistani security establishment has lived in denial for the last decade and a half. The contradiction in the position of our official spokespersons is unexplainable. On one hand they deny the existence of sanctuaries and on the other hand they say that they don’t want to bring Afghan war into Pakistan. If Afghan Taliban are not in Pakistan how will the fight against them enter Pakistan? Similarly FATA was supposed to have been cleared from both good and bad Taliban in Operation Zarb-e-Azb launched in 2014. But subsequently news about the relocation of Haqqanis from Waziristan to lower Kurram were confirmed by every US drone strike in the area which would take out important commander of the Haqqani network. The latest news about the rescuing of hostages from the same area is a good news on the one hand as precious human lives were saved but on the other hand it confirms the presence of sanctuaries of the Haqqani network. Even official press releases about Operations Khyber 4 indicate certain connection between the IS activities in Eastern Afghanistan and militant positions on Pakistani side of the Durand Line.
Any meaningful change in the Afghan policy of Pakistani security establishment would require inclusion of civilian government in shaping and executing of the said policy. It is a well known and repeated argument in Islamabad that only a political solution can be sustainable to the conflict in Afghanistan. If this argument is valid then keeping Afghan policy the monopoly of military by totally excluding the civilians from the process can be a self defeating line of action.The Pakistani Pashtun political leaders (belonging to political and religious parties) who have deep understanding of the situation and have considerable influence for pushing the solution are kept miles away from the country’s Afghan policy. It is beyond the reason in view of the fact that the flawed nature of the said policy has brought large scale death and destruction to the Pashtun belt in Pakistan. The security establishment has been totally dependent on a tactical approach and has failed to envision a strategic approach in its Afghan policy. It has resulted in worsening of the conflict for both Afghanistan and Pakistan. Last but not the least Pakistani Afghan policy is the byproduct of the jihadist project of 1980s that is in existence even today. Any other so called change in policy without dismantling it will be like running after the symptoms without touching the root cause.
#Pakistan - #PPP for putting Sharif family on ECL
Pakistan People’s Party on Friday demanded of the accountability court to place names of former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, Maryam Nawaz and Captain (r) Safdar on Exit Control List. The demand was made by PPP leader and Senator Sherry Rehman during a press conference at PPP Media Cell on Friday.
Commenting on Friday’s ruckus in accountability court Islamabad during the proceedings of case against Maryam Nawaz and Safdar, the PPP senator said that PML-N had once again repeated its history of attacking judiciary and the incident was a premature attempt to delay indictment of Sharif family in corruption cases.
She demanded of the courts to put names of former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, his daughter Maryam Nawaz and son-in-law Captain retd Safdar on ECL so that they could not escape from the country. PPP Senator Sherry Rehman condemned the incident in Islamabad’s accountability court and said that the PML-N considers itself above the law, constitution and democracy.
“We have always given respect to the judiciary despite having reservations on their decisions,” she said adding that he PML-N wanted to take advantage of opposition and government simultaneously. She said that the party had decided to acknowledge the sacrifices made by the workers during 50 years of the PPP struggle and would be given awards in the Golden Jubilee celebrations ceremony.
Furthermore, PPP General Secretary Nayyar Hussain Bokhari announced that the party has decided to celebrate its golden jubilee celebrations and will hold a public gathering in Parade ground Islamabad on November 30 to be addressed by PPP Chairman Bilawal Bhutto Zardari and other party leaders.
He said that these decisions were made in a meeting of party’s CEC chaired by PPP Chairman Bilawal Bhutto Zardari.
Addressing the press conference, Nayyar Bokhari, however said that if there would be Eid Miladun Nabi SAW on November 30 then the public gathering would be held on December 1.
“An international conference will also be held and delegations from within and outside country will participate in it,” he said. He said that it was PPP that had given most sacrifices for the democracy in the country, gave away 1973 constitution and later revived it in its real position and gave rights to the provinces including NFC award.
Another PPP leader Chaudhry Manzoor said that PPP had not only made struggle for the democracy but also for the labour class of the country, which is unmatchable from any other party.
“Our three leaders sacrificed for the democracy in the country and our leadership faced and defeated four martial laws and took historical steps for the democracy and people’s rights,” he said adding that they still stand alongside the workers and labour class of the country.
PPP leader and Senator Farhat Ullah Babar said that they had setup committees for the golden jubilee ceremony and convention and conferences would also be held at provincial level. He said that the current year is very important for PPP as it is not only the year of party’s golden jubilee but also the 10th death anniversary of Benazir Bhutto along with the general elections ahead in 2018.
He said that the party would also observe the year 2017 as FATA reforms year and the injustices faced by people of FATA would now come to an end. “They faced these injustices for last 70 years but this year would bring an end to it,” he said.
Responding to report of PPP leaders names in JIT report of banned People’s Aman Committee Uzair Baloch,
Babar said that there is no PPP leader mentioned in Uzair Baloch’s JIT and PPP had faced similar allegations in past also and would also face it in future.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)