Sunday, January 27, 2019

With Spies and Other Operatives, a Nation Looms Over Venezuela’s Crisis: Cuba


    By Kirk Semple

    When the opposition leader Juan Guaidó was briefly detained by Venezuelan intelligence agents last week, some saw the hand of another government at work.
    “This agency is controlled & directed by experienced oppressors sent by #Cuba & these kinds of tactics are textbook methods used by the Cuban regime,” Senator Marco Rubio of Florida said on Twitter.
    Cuba seems to loom over the political crisis roiling Venezuela as President Nicolás Maduro faces a robust challenge from Mr. Guiadó, who declared himself interim leader this past week. Cuba is a longtime ally of Venezuela and its biggest supporter in the region. The government of President Miguel Díaz-Canel has offered Mr. Maduro its “unwavering solidarity” and called Venezuela’s political turmoil “the attempt to impose a coup d’état, a puppet government at the service of the United States.”
    In the view of many of Mr. Maduro’s opponents, however, Cuba is to blame in large part for the Venezuelan president’s endurance in office. They point to the presence of Cuban operatives in the country — spies, intelligence and political advisers, counterintelligence agents, military trainers — and contend that they have propped up Mr. Maduro by helping to suppress dissent within the armed forces and throughout society.
    María Corina Machado, a Venezuelan opposition leader, said in an interview that the presence of Cubans in the Venezuelan armed forces was “unacceptable.” The Cuban government, she insisted, “must understand that they have to let go of Venezuela.”
    The two nations started drawing close with the election of Mr. Maduro’s predecessor, Hugo Chávez, in 1998. The relationship was driven by a deep friendship between Mr. Chávez and his Cuban counterpart at the time, Fidel Castro.
    “They were very close, like a father-and-son relationship,” said Richard Feinberg, professor at the University of California, San Diego, and a specialist on the Cuban economy.The two leaders developed a close economic and political alliance. In addition to sending security and military specialists to Venezuela, Cuba sent experts from other professions — including doctors, nurses, teachers and athletic coaches — to beef up the South American nation’s professional ranks.Still, some analysts say that while Cuba’s support for the current Venezuelan government is important, it ultimately will not be decisive.“This claim that Cuba is controlling Venezuela has been around, really, since Chávez started,” said David Smilde, a sociology professor and expert on Venezuela at Tulane University. “It’s been long overblown.”The Cubans, he added, “are key consultants and advisers, but I don’t think they’re calling the shots or telling them what to do.”
    While former military officials who have fled Venezuela have reported the involvement of Cubans within the security and intelligence forces, experts say the extent of that involvement remains shrouded in mystery.
    In testimony to the United States Senate in 2017, Luis Almagro, the secretary general of the Organization of American States and an outspoken critic of Mr. Maduro, asserted that there were about 15,000 Cubans in Venezuela and likened it to “an occupation army.”
    “There’s been a lot of speculation about this, and rumors about numbers and about how close they are to Maduro,” said Ted Piccone, a senior fellow in foreign policy at the Brookings Institution. “But I haven’t seen any hard, solid reporting on it.”
    Whatever the extent of Cuba’s support, Venezuela for years supplied heavily subsidized crude oil to the island nation, at a rate of about 100,000 barrels per day, experts said. Cuba would refine the surplus and resell it on the international market.According to a policy brief published by the Brookings Institution, by 2012 the trade in goods and services amounted to 20.8 percent of Cuba’s gross domestic product.During the Venezuelan economic crisis of the past several years, however, crude exports to Cuba have dropped as Venezuelan oil production has collapsed. In 2017, the financial health of Venezuela’s state-run oil company, Pdvsa, had declined so much that Cuba took the company’s 49 percent share in a Cuban refinery as payment for outstanding debts.In addition, the ranks of Cuban professionals working in the South American country have thinned in recent years, analysts say, and the relationship between Mr. Maduro and the current Cuban leadership is not nearly as warm as the friendship between their predecessors.“They are certainly ideological brothers-in-arms — against the United States and all that,” Mr. Piccone said. “But it doesn’t have the same friendliness as it used to. And the Cubans aren’t getting as much out of it as they used to.”
    Yet the alliance has been resilient. Mr. Maduro said in a televised broadcast this month that Venezuela would take in 2,000 Cuban doctors who left Brazil after a dispute between the Brazilian and Cuban governments. Medical clinics run by Cuban doctors once proliferated throughout Venezuela, but many have fallen into decay amid the economic crisis.
    Top Venezuelan military leaders announcing support for Mr. Maduro this past week. Cuban operatives have been seen as suppressing dissent in the rank and file.Top Venezuelan military leaders announcing support for Mr. Maduro this past week. Cuban operatives have been seen as suppressing dissent in the rank and file.CreditLuis Robayo/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images Political advisers still have the ear of key officials in the Maduro administration, though Mr. Smilde said: “Cubans often complain that Maduro doesn’t listen to them.”But perhaps most crucially to Mr. Maduro, Cubans remain a key component in the intelligence and military sectors, providing assistance with domestic surveillance, electronic wiretapping, and internal military surveillance — to help squelch dissent and shore up loyalty, analysts said.“A coup plot is a big worry,” said Harold Trinkunas, deputy director at the Center for International Security and Cooperation at Stanford University and an expert on Venezuela.In the absence of a clear information about the extent of Cuban involvement in Venezuela, rumors have spiraled, and outside assessments have often been molded for political convenience.Speaking at a United Nations Security Council meeting on Saturday, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo pointed to Cuba’s involvement in Venezuela, saying its intelligence officers have brought their “own worst practices” to Caracas.
    “No regime has done more to sustain the nightmarish conditions in Venezuela than the regime in Havana,” Mr. Pompeo said.
    There is plenty of motivation for Cuba to remain as involved as possible to shore up the Maduro administration. Havana risks losing an important economic benefactor, not to mention a leftist ally in a region that has lately seen a rightward shift.
    Should Mr. Guaidó and the opposition gain control in Caracas, “that would, of course, be very bad news for Havana,” Mr. Piccone said. “They will very quickly change the relationship with Cuba.”

    No interference in Venezuelan issues



    Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro on Wednesday announced cutting diplomatic ties with the US after opposition leader Juan Guaidó declared himself the country's interim president and US President Donald Trump formally stated his recognition of Guaidó.

    Currently, there are "two regimes" coexisting in Venezuela, which brings severe risk of political turmoil. The quick US recognition led nations of the Lima Group to imitate and recognize the Venezuelan opposition regime. Nonetheless the country's Defense Minister Vladimir Padrino López refused to recognize Guaidó, saying the military will defend the constitution and sovereignty. 

    A Russian foreign ministry spokesperson stated that Moscow supports Maduro and accused the US of attempting regime change, which is the nation's internal affair.

    The severe inflation triggered by the economic crisis has led to political chaos in Venezuela and the elections in May intensified the nation's separation. 

    The changes in Venezuela are not isolated cases. Development slowed in Latin America countries with a declining global economy. It was hard for left-wing parties to survive and right-wing regimes began to enter the stage. 

    The right-wing forces in Venezuela are strengthening and increasing pressure on the Maduro regime.

    In recent years, Washington has enhanced its interference in affairs of Venezuela and Cuba and attempted to regain influence in Latin America. The fast recognition of Guaidó signaled the strong US desire to intervene in Venezuela's internal affairs. 

    The move was aggressive with a clear goal, that is, to directly affect the  the country's political landscape. 

    From the viewpoint of maintaining the system of international law, such interference must not be encouraged. Independence and sovereignty are the most important defense for most countries to safeguard their own interests. If any outside forces stick their nose into a country's major internal affairs based on their values, there will be a huge loophole in the international order.

    For a long time, the US has been eager to replace international law with its geopolitical interests and values so as to legalize its interference. Washington has confused right and wrong by calling some normal interactions interference and penetration.

    Washington's move obviously forced Latin American countries to pick a side: left or right. Washington worsened disputes in these countries and damaged regional integration.

    It is unfortunate for Venezuela to experience two coexisting regimes. As long as the incident does not lead to bloody conflicts that trigger a humanitarian disaster and force the international community to step in, the political disputes should be solved, in the first place, by the country's different political forces. 

    All sides must keep calm and be alert about possible provocation to militarily intervene in Venezuela.

    The international community should encourage forces of Venezuela to peacefully solve the issue within the framework of dialogue. Picking sides will not be conducive to the solution, but intensify the rivalry, worsen the situation and possibly push the nation into long-term turmoil.

    Venezuela should not be another bloody battlefield of the color revolution.

    منظور پښتين: که پرلت نتيجه ورنکړه نو ښايي احتجاج پراخ کړو



    په کراچۍ کې د پښتون ژغورنې غورځنګ احتجاجي ناسته لا هم دوام لري او د غورځنګ مشر ويلي، که يې ملګري خوشي نشول نوښايي احتجاج پراخ کړي.

    د غورځنګ ملاتړي د خپل يو مشر عالمزيب مسود تر نيول کېدو وروسته د جنورۍ له ۲۴ مه د کراچۍ په سهراب ګوټ سيمه کې پرلت وهلی دی.
    دوی غوښتنه کوي چې عالمزيب مسود دې خوشی شي او د نورو ملګرو پرضد دې د پوليسو مقدمې ختمې شي.
    د جنورۍ پر ۲۷ مه په احتجاجي ناسته کې د نورو ورځو په پرتله زياتو خلکو ګډون وکړ.
    پرلت ته د کراچۍ د مهاجرو يوه ډله هم ورغلې وه چې د پښتون تحفظ موومېنټ د غوښتنو حمايت يې وکړ.
    د پښتون ژغورنې غورځنګ مشر منظور پښتين د ټيليفون له لارې پرلت ته په پښتو او اردو ژبو کې وينا وکړه.
    نوموړي پر خپله وينا کې وويل،دوی د پاکستان د ايين په چوکاټ کې د خپلو غوښتنو حل غواړي.
    هغه زياته کړه، د وزيرستاني ځوان نقيب مسود په وژنه تورن پوليس افسر راو انوار ازاد ګرځي خو بل خوا دده په وينا د دوی ملګري زندان ته اچول کېږي.
    خو راوانوار په قتل کې له لاس درلودلو انکار کوي او داوخت عدالت په ضمانت خوشی کړی دی.
    منظور پښتين زياته کړه چې پرلت به دوام لري خو که يې په څو ورځو کې نتيجه ورنکړه نو نو پخپله به کراچۍ ته ورځي او بيا کېدای شي د اسلام اباد پر لور لاريون پيل کړي.
    منظور پښتين په پرلت کې شامل غيرپښتنو ته په اردو ژبه کې هم څو خبرې وکړې.
    هغه وويل چې پښتون ژغورنې غورځنګ به د سينديانو، بلوڅانو او د مهاجرو د لادرکه کسانو مسيله راپورته کوي.
    د پښتون ژغورنې غورځنګ مخکښ عالمزيب مسود د کراچۍ پوليسو د جنورۍ پر ۲۱مه نيولی وو.
    پر هغه د ترهګرۍ ترڅنګ د بلوې او د خلکو را پارولو تورنه لګول شوي دي.
    پوليسو هغه د جنورۍ پر ۲۶مه سيند های کورټ ته وړاندې کړ چې عدالت په عدالتي ريمانډ جېل ته واستولی.
    د سيند واکمن ګوند پيپلز پارټۍ مشر بلاول بوټو زرداري له خپله طرفه د عالمزيب د قانوني مرسته لپاره وکيل ټاکلی دی.
    ددې ګوند يو مشر او پخواني سېنېټر فرحت الله بابر د جنورۍ پر ۲۶ مه له مشال راډیو سره د مرکې پر مهال ادعا وکړه چې د عالمزيب په نيونه د سيند حکومت خبر نه دی.
    هغه تور پورې کړ چې رينجرز او نورې ادارې د پيپلزپارټۍ بدنامولو لپاره دا کار کړی چې مقصد يې ثابتول دي چې پيپلز پارټۍ هم د پښتون ژغورنې غورځنګ خلاف ده.
    رينجرز لا په دې اړه څه نه ويلي.
    پښتون تحفظ مومنټ د جنورۍ په ۲۰مه، په کراچۍ کې د وژل شوي وزیرستاني ځوان نقیب الله مسود د اولني تلین په مناسبت جلسه وکړه چې ورته عالمزيب مسود هم وينا وکړه او یوه ورځ پس هغه پوليسو ونيولی.

    Afghans Upbeat About Talks, But Warn Against Deal On Gains



    Members of the public also called for details of the discussions to be released publicly.
    Afghans on Sunday said their hopes of peace had been raised following last week’s talks between the US and the Taliban in Doha, Qatar, but warned that no deal should compromise the gains achieved over the past 17 years.
    Members of the public also called for details of the talks to be released.
    “The warring factions should endorse peace, all parties to the war should come with some concessions,” said one Kabul resident, Mohammad Irfan.
    “We hope that these talks are in the interests of Afghanistan and the entire world; when there is peace in Afghanistan, this will be to the benefit of regional countries too,” said Hamidullah, another Kabul resident. 
    Meawhile, some residents said that details of the peace talks between the US and the Taliban must be disclosed so that people know what issues were discussed during the process.
    “People of Afghanistan are not aware of details of the talks and they are not informed whether these talks were in their favor or not,” said Idris, another resident.
    “All talks are carried out behind closed doors; they are not even allowing the media to observe these closed door talks - to know what they are talking about, therefore we do not have any idea about our future,” said Mukhtar Hazrati, another resident.
    Meanwhile, a number of women have also said they have strong reservations about the peace talks with the Taliban.
    “Afghan youths must be given a role and government must hear their voice about peace,” said Maryam, a resident in Kabul.
    “We want our rights (to be upheld), we want to go to academies for education, we want to go to university, we want the freedom of speech to work,” said Nazanin, another resident.
    This comes a day after reports surfaced in the media that US Special Representative for Afghanistan Reconciliation Zalmay Khalilzad and the Taliban had made “significant progress” over six days of talks in Doha, Qatar.
    Khalilzad said he had “more productive” meetings than in the past in Qatar. After wrapping up talks on Saturday in Doha, he left for Kabul for “consultations”.
    “Meetings here were more productive than they have been in the past. We made significant progress on vital issues,” he said in a tweet on Saturday night.
    Meanwhile, Pakistan’s Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi and his US counterpart Mike Pompeo also welcomed the developments.
    Pompeo has hailed what he called “significant progress” made by Khalilzad and said on Twitter: “Encouraging news from [Khalilzad].”
    "The US is serious about pursuing peace, preventing Afghanistan from continuing to be a space for international terrorism and bringing forces home. Working with the Afghan govt and all interested parties, the US seeks to strengthen Afghan sovereignty, independence and prosperity," Pompeo tweeted.
    Pakistan’s Qureshi on Sunday said last week’s talks between the United States and the Taliban was a "major diplomatic victory".
    This came after six days of talks between the US and Taliban – talks that were originally scheduled for only two days.

    #Taliban talks: Will negotiations lead to peace in #Afghanistan?

    The "significant progress" said to have been made during six days of talks between US officials and the Afghan Taliban suggests that both sides are serious about trying to find a peaceful solution to a 17-year conflict that has scarred Afghanistan.
    But with the Taliban currently refusing to hold direct talks with Afghan officials, and negotiations relating to "unsolved matters" still to continue, what has actually been agreed during the meetings in Qatar?
    Secunder Kermani, the BBC's Afghanistan correspondent, and senior Afghan journalist Sami Yousafzai, look at what we know so far about the talks, and what it could mean for the future of the country and the foreign forces operating there.

    How significant were the talks?

    Both the Taliban and US officials have said "progress" was made in the latest set of talks in Qatar, and despite continuing violence on the ground in Afghanistan, there seems to be a growing momentum to the peace negotiations.
    Leading analyst Ahmed Rashid told the BBC the talks were "enormously significant" and that "we've never been as close… to an end to the civil war in Afghanistan".
    The talks lasted for six days - longer than any of the other previous set of discussions that have been held during recent months.
    In the middle of the talks last week, the Taliban announced one of the group's founding members, Mullah Abdul Ghani Barader, would be appointed the new head of the Taliban's political office in Qatar, after recently being released from detention by Pakistani authorities.
    Mr Rashid said Mullah Barader "had a record of wanting peace and stability" and could help persuade grassroots members to accept any deal that is reached.

    What was discussed?

    The "progress" made seems to relate to two key issues:
    • When will American-led forces be withdrawn from Afghanistan?
    • A commitment from the Taliban that the group will not allow international jihadist groups like al-Qaeda to use the country as a base in the future.
    A senior Taliban official who attended the talks told the BBC that both sides had agreed to form two committees to draw up detailed plans on how to implement agreements in principle on these topics.
    The Taliban leader, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the committees would "identify routes for the withdrawal, and how much time is needed. We suggested six months, but are flexible".
    He said the committees would also produce concrete proposals on how the Taliban can sever any links to al-Qaeda, and would start work within the next week. The Taliban source added that another meeting with the US would likely take place in early February.
    Another source in the Taliban told the BBC that once an agreement had been drawn up, they would attempt to get other countries or international organisations to act as guarantors for it.

    What about a ceasefire?

    Both sides have said further talks are necessary to resolve outstanding issues.
    What remains unclear is how a ceasefire fits into current discussions. The Taliban position seems to be one that can only be declared once a withdrawal date for international forces has been agreed.
    A separate high ranking Taliban official suggested that the group was nervous about agreeing to a ceasefire before having established a firm settlement, as it could be difficult to convince grassroots fighters to take up arms again, after having laid them down.
    The other crucial issue is when the Taliban will agree to begin talking directly to the Afghan government. The Taliban official said the "committees" due to be established would also produce recommendations on this.
    So far, the insurgents have only engaged with the US, dismissing the administration of President Ashraf Ghani as "puppets."

    What's the Afghan government's view?

    In pointed comments at the World Economic Forum (WEF) in Switzerland earlier this week, Afghan President Ashraf Ghani said 45,000 members of the Afghan security forces had lost their lives since he took office in 2014.
    "It shows who is doing the fighting," he said.
    When asked about the progress of talks in Qatar, President Ghani responded tersely that the aim of the meetings was "to bring the Afghan government and the Taliban into face-to-face discussions and negotiations... then, the larger issues of the US presence and other international issues will be addressed".
    Many analysts have interpreted those comments as revealing a concern amongst Afghan authorities that they are being excluded from the discussions amidst the rush to bring the conflict to an end. US President Donald Trump is believed to be growing increasingly frustrated by the continued US presence in the country.
    Zalmay Khalilzad, the US special representative for Afghanistan reconciliation who has led talks for the American side, seemed aware of these concerns when he tweeted he was travelling to Kabul to brief President Ghani and said that any deal "must include an intra-Afghan dialogue."
    Presentational white space
    The discussions between the Afghan government and the Taliban are likely to be even more complicated and delicate than the discussions that have been held so far.
    They would have to include agreements on the role of women's rights and democracy in an Afghanistan where the ultra-conservative Taliban are a significant part of the political mainstream.

    What happened in previous peace talks?

    Previous attempts at peace have failed in their early stages.
    In 2015, talks between Afghan officials and the Taliban in Pakistan broke down after news emerged of the death of the Taliban leader Mullah Omar - with whose authority the Taliban team was supposedly meeting.
    Whilst in 2013, talks in Qatar were cancelled when the then Afghan President Hamid Karzai was angered by the presence of a Taliban flag at the group's offices in Qatar, and felt his authority was being undermined.

    #Pakistan - ALL SHIA PARTIES CONFERENCE LAMENTS DISCRIMINATORY POLICY OF STATE INSTITUTIONS

    Shia leaders, religious scholars and notables at a conference expressed disappointment over the discriminatory policy of some state institutions towards Shia citizens of Pakistan and demanded end to that policy.

    They expressed their views at an All Shia Parties Conference held in Karachi under the aegis of Majlis-e-Wahdat-e-Muslimeen Karachi chapter. 

    MWM’s Allama Syed Ahmed Iqbal Rizvi, former Senator and Jafaria Alliance head Allama Abbas Kumaili, Majlis Ulema-e- Shia Pakistan head Allama Mirza Yousuf Hussain, Haiyat-e-Aimma Masajid wa Ulma-e-Imamia Pakistan leader Allama Baqir Abbas Zaidi, Majlis-e-Zakireen Imamia president Allama Nisar Qalandari, Imamia Organisation Karachi region president Syed Ziaul Hassan, Markazi Tanzeem-e-Azadari leader Ali Raza Rizvi and MWM’s Allama Sadiq Jafari, Allama Ali Anwar, Allama Mubashir Hassan, Mir Taqi Zafar, Ahsan Abbas and other eminent figures attended the conference. 

    They condemned the continuous targeted murders of prominent Shia notables and termed it a plot aimed at destroying peace in Karachi. They said that first Syed Ali Raza Abidi was assassinated, after that father of an ISO office bearer and recently Mohammad Ali Shah were made targets. 

    They expressed dismay that no killer has been arrested so far. The Shia leaders expressed dissatisfaction over some policies being pursued by the state institutions. In particular, they lamented that terrorists were freed because of weak prosecution in the cases of Shia killings. They also denounced the enforced disappearance of many innocent Shia Muslims. They condemned the targeted murders of Shia Muslims. 

    All Shia Parties Conference demanded that discriminatory policy towards Shia Muslims of Pakistan must be rescinded and justice be done to them. The moot demanded that killers of Shia Muslims be arrested and be hanged to discourage terrorists from continuing the genocide against Shiites. It demanded that such cases be referred to military courts. 

    It demanded immediate release of those subjected to enforced disappearance without delay. 

    The huddle also demanded that restrictions on azadari rituals must be nullified forthwith. It stated that National Action Plan should be enforced in letter and spirit and this plan must not be diverted to patriot peace-loving citizens and it must be applied on terrorists specifically. It demanded that the fourth schedule law should also be applied on terrorists and their facilitators particularly on banned outfits and not on innocent law-abiding Shia leaders, scholars and notables.

    http://www.shiitenews.org/index.php/pakistan/item/36500-all-shia-parties-conference-laments-discriminatory-policy-of-state-institutions

    #Pakistan - Operating with impunity


    By 



    The complete intelligence failure and criminal negligence showed by the operation team in Sahiwal, and the poor cover-up in its wake merit a serious study into the workings of our Counter-Terrorism Departments.
    Pakistan is perhaps the only state where no authority exists to oversee its Counter-Terrorism Departments (CTDs) which enjoy next-to-brutal powers to eliminate “terror suspects”. Sahiwal’s allegedly staged encounter on January 19 has only exposed this lack of accountability of the department.
    After the incident, both the federal and provincial governments seemed clueless about any intelligence that led to this ‘operation’.
    CTD is solely a provincial force and part of the general police but it has a designated assignment within the system. All provincial CTDs share intelligence with the military and paramilitary forces and sometimes conduct secret joint operations. CTDs only coordinate with the National Counter Terrorism Authority (NACTA), the federal body, after the announcement of the National Action Plan (NAP).
    More than 5,000 personnel were exclusively hired and later trained by CTDs in all four provinces after the APS Peshawar massacre in December 2014.
    Interviews with senior officials associated with the joint investigation team (JIT), Punjab government, CTD, police, intelligence agencies, and home department indicate that the bone-chilling massacre in Sahiwal of an innocent family by the CTD Punjab was a complete intelligence failure. Criminal negligence was shown by the operation team; followed by a poor cover-up.
    They refer to quite a few arrests made in the week before the Sahiwal incident, involving Daesh fighters. They also claim that on January 17, a terrorist alert was issued by the Punjab CTD authorities about Daesh attacking some key figures.
    CTD sources suggest one of Daesh operators had been living in Chungi Amar Sidhu, Lahore, an area adjacent to Zeeshan Javed’s temporary residence, the driver of Suzuki Alto involved in the Sahiwal shootout.
    On January 19, as Zeeshan picked up the family and was driving out of Lahore in his car, a few fighters of Daesh were travelling along with them because the police does not search vehicles carrying familes. These Daesh fighters, CTD sources claim, were wanted in the kidnapping and murder attempt cases of former Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani’s son Ali Haider Gilani, ISI Inspector Omar Jilani, nephew of ex Chief Justice of Pakistan Tassaduq Jilani and four intelligence operators in Multan, Sahiwal and Faisalabad. Based on this information, the CTD commandos started following the family which ultimately led to Sahiwal killings.
    In the past few years, dozens of fake encounters have been exposed by the media — from Naqibullah Mehsud’s killing to many more in Balochistan and KP. According to the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan (HRCP) statistics, some 3,345 people have been killed by the law enforcement agencies in allegedly fake encounters in the past five years.
    “Pakistan desperately needs to modernise its CTDs,” opines former CTD Sindh chief, Sanaullah Abbasi, now IG Police Gilgit-Baltistan. “New rules for encounters should be introduced; method of execution and mode of intelligence-gathering should also be reviewed.
    Serving officials privately admit that most of these encounters were not thoroughly investigated. They suggest there is a dire need to define the rules of engagement in an encounter, like announcing or trying for arrest instead of firing. They also advise that procedures for verification of information received from intelligence agencies must be defined; modern gadgets to detect whether the other side is carrying weapons or not must be employed and live-movie method of all encounters with camera-fitted weapons should be adopted.
    “Pakistan desperately needs to modernise its CTDs,” opines former CTD Sindh chief, Sanaullah Abbasi, now IG Police Gilgit-Baltistan. “New rules for encounters should be introduced; method of execution and mode of intelligence-gathering should also be reviewed. There is a need to equip all CTDs with modern gadgets.”
     So far, all civilian law enforcement agencies, led by the CTDs, have arrested more than 19,123 suspects and activists of proscribed organisations who were involved in fuelling extremism and terrorism through hate speech and spreading hate material across the country. These operations were conducted under the National Action Plan (NAP) which also empowered the provinces to open special police stations by posting newly trained additional 5, 000 CTD personnel. Some 17,776 cases were registered against these individuals under the new laws but the conviction ratio has remained less than 16 percent, according to CTD’s official figures.
    Official statistics available with TNS point out lack of proper prosecution the country’s judicial system as only 570 (less than five percent) terrorists were convicted in the courts in the past four years. “Poor conviction ratio in terrorism cases is a major stumbling block in the way of countering terrorism,” says former IGP Afzal Shigri. “It is a failure of civilian government which could not revamp the criminal justice system despite the passage of four years; we did not see any headway even though it’s an integral part of the 20 points of the NAP,” he says, adding that many other key points were also ignored by the government.
    The new mandate of CTD Punjab, Sindh, Balochistan, and KP’s after 2011 was determined by the provincial authorities to “fight against all forms of terrorism”. Collectively, in all CTDs, 56 percent manpower is engaged in the intelligence wing, 20 percent workforce is engaged in the operations wing and 24 percent is associated with the investigation wing.
    The CTDs of all provinces also claim to have arrested around 821 LeJ activists, 370 Ludhianvi supporters, 577 of Malik Ishaq Group, 177 of Majlid Wahdat-ul-Muslimeen, 65 of al-Qaeda, 188 of Jamaat-ud-Dawa, 77 of Sunni Tehreek, 167 of Jaesh-e-Muhammad, 167 of Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan, 67 of Daesh, 71 of Lashkar-e-Khurasan and 144 miscellaneous militants in the last four years.
    According to CTD Punjab’s official data, the CTDs also keep an eye on more than 8,000 Fourth Schedulers (those under watch, restricted), around 5,300 Afghans, 1,400 RAPs (Returnees from Afghan Prisons), 99 LMEs (Lal Masjid Elements) and were considering adopting latest tools for better social media monitoring with linkages needed to give CTD/FIA access/direct link to databases to detect suspected financial and other transactions by amending the Fair Trial Act or ATA 1997.

    #Pakistan - #Sahiwalincident - A culture of brutality



     By Saad Rasool

    The facts of the Sahiwal incident, the heart-wrenching videos of mortified children who survived and the shifting stance of the counterterrorism Department (CTD) are too painful to be recounted in detail. Even more painful is contemplation of the idea that those who are responsible for protecting the life and security of our citizen (i.e. the law enforcement agencies) are precisely the ones that our citizenry has come to fear.
    Was the operation designed to target ISIS terrorist? Perhaps. Did it achieve the goal of killing militants? Maybe, in part. Is it possible that this operation neutralised a terrorist cell that was planning to perpetrate even more gruesome acts of violence? Possibly. But did the operation make Pakistanis feel safer? Absolutely not. Did it reduce our (constant) fear for life? Certainly not. Has it reinforced the pervasive idea that Pakistanis need to guard themselves against two forms of violence: (1) militants, and (2) law enforcement agencies? Most certainly, it did.
    If this was a one-off secluded event of state sponsored violence (terrorism?), there might have been some concession that could be extended to the CTD. However, incidents like the killing of Naqeebullah Mehsud by Rao Anwar, the Model Town massacre by PML(N) and countless other fake police encounters tell the story of State sponsored brutality in Pakistan. Per a recent report published by the HRCP, over the past four years (from January 2014 to May 2018), as many as 3,345 people have been killed in police encounters. Also, 10 passersby were killed and 53 were injured in these encounters. HRCP’s report further shows that this problem is not restricted to any one province. Interesting, despite all the barbarity of Punjab’s Gullu Butt police, Sindh is on top of the list in killing maximum people in police encounter, from January 2014 to May 2018.
    What are the reasons for police brutality? Why is it that the police force is consistently seen as an institution to fear, even by innocent citizens, as opposed to fulfilling its promise of being the protectors of our constitutional right to life and liberty? Why is it that the police forces, across all provinces, with the recent exception of KPK, continue to operate under an antiquated paradigm of law? Why is it that the province of Baluchistan and Sindh continue to function under the Police Act, 1861 (which was introduced by colonial masters to subjugate the local population)? Why is it that in the province of Punjab, the Police Order, 2002, has still not been implemented, in letter and spirit, over the past fifteen years? Why is it that citizen oversight mechanism, envisioned in the Police Order, 2002 (e.g. Public Safety Commissions and Police Complaint Authority) have still not been constituted, despite express judicial directions from the honourable Lahore High Court? Why is it that successive political governments – from the Musharraf regime to PPP to PML(N) and now, PTI – have consistently refused to implement legal measures that would make police an independent institution that is responsible to the people (as opposed to the political masters)?
    Regardless of how one views the project of peace and justice in Pakistan – from the law and order perspective, the counter-terrorism perspective, or the criminal justice system perspective – the role of civilian law enforcement agencies, and specifically the police, features as the central character of the discourse. The police apparatus and machinery permeates throughout our society – starting from issues as small as a domestic dispute or a local scuffle, to apprehending world-renowned terrorists, and preventing national tragedies.
    Over the past several years, experts in the field of law and order as well as counter-terrorism have been vociferously arguing that the prevalent police structure in Pakistan is tragically ill-equipped and untrained to fight the menace of modern day terrorism. The colonial police force, inherited by the State of Pakistan at independence, is structured in a manner that can only perform the role of containing local crowds, and apprehending/investigating the traditional crimes of robbery, dacoity, and personal disputes. In fact, at present, our police force is so entrenched in catering to colonial mob-control practices that it faces an institutional inertia towards shifting its focus to modern counter-terrorism techniques.
    Irrespective of who planned the Sahiwal operation and when, how it was implemented and by whom, what were the desired goals behind it and why, there is no justification – none – for the manner in which the Punjab Police (and its CTD) ‘shot first and asked questions later’. Even if CTD’s story about the suspects being terrorists is accepted, are there no standard operating procedures for apprehending a terrorism suspects who is driving down the highway in a 1000cc car? Is it all just left to the whims and judgment of the local jawan to decide when the shooting might start? Who authorizes the use of live fire ammunition, and under what circumstances is such use authorized? Why were lesser intrusive measures not employed first? Also, what happened to the idea of proportional use of force? Is it not an established doctrine of law enforcement – all across the world – that the State cannot use more than the minimum force required to neutralize the threat? Was the force/fire-power used in Sahiwal proportional to the immediate threat at hand?
    The truth is that the police has no real excuse to hide behind. Not even the excuse of ‘bad intelligence’. It is no defence to say that at least one person in the car was a ‘known terrorist’. What if such a terrorist was hiding inside an apartment building, housing thousands of people? Will the police bring the entire building down, killing all the other residents, just to get to their target?The Sahiwal incident (and earlier events of police brutality) lay bare the ugly truth about our police force, and its culture. A culture that frequently seems unconcerned with the consequences of their actions. This crisis of police culture cannot be fixed through external interventions or legislative measures. The responsibility of fixing its internal culture, rests with the police force itself – and in particular with senior officers of the police department.
    All across the world, the strength and legitimacy of civilian police forces stem from their moral authority. People do not follow police directives out of fear of their lives – instead, they listen to a traffic warden, or a constable, or a senior official, out of respect for the law, and respect for the symbol of the State that their uniform represents. Unfortunately, in Pakistan, this moral authority of the police department has entirely eroded. For now, the people of Pakistan are at war: with the militant, and with a police force that frequently acts in the same manner that militants do. This paradigm is as unsustainable as it is reprehensive. And it is time for conscientious members within the police force to reclaim the promise of their profession, and reassert themselves as compassionate guardians of our collective security.

    #Pakistan - Poverty; mother of all ills and evils



    By: Ajmal Meer Mehdi
    Today, world is global village, technology has manipulated the highest advancement and modernization in the name of science and computer. All the people of world are enjoying and entertaining the fruits of technology and its innovations. Still millions are looking for to entertaining the life and charms of this mortal world. One billion people in the world are living on less than one dollar a day. 2.7 billion People in the world are living on less than two dollars a day, (World Bank, 2014). Eleven million children die every year. 114 million children do not able to achieve basic education and 584 million women are illiterate. In every year, Six million children die due to malnutrition. 

    Every day 800 million people stay hungry in which 300 are children. 2.6 billion People of the world’s population (40 percent) are depriving from basic sanitation and one billion people are suffering to unsafe drinking water (UN Millennium Project, 2002). The areas of inequality such as unequal status of women and minority groups of low developed countriesrepresent this aspect of poverty. As a result, rich people continue to prosper while poor people lag behind. In the global scenario, in the last 30 years economic growth has occurred but along with the portion of poor people also increased. In 1960 the income of 20% of the richest countries has 30 times more than that of 20% of the poorest countries. It was 60 times greater in 1990. Only 20% of the world income is receiving by world poorest countries that are residing in poorest countries. 

    Thus in the last three decades the difference between the rich and poor has increased. Income distribution between rich and poor is unequal. Rich people 1000 million are 150 times are richer than the poor people of 1000 million. The access of these poor people is limited. They have only 0.2% access loans made by commercial banks, 1.3% access to international investment, 1% access to international trade and 1.7% access to international income. (World Bank report, 2014). Pakistan is wheel of social problems faced by common people in every aspect of their lives. Poverty in Pakistan is day by day growing because of social problems which are tolerated by citizens of country like illiteracy, over population, crime, economic disorder, environmental degradation etc.

    Under developed countries face this problem as obstacle in development and progress. Poverty creates shocking consequences which enhances the other problems along with worse outcomes. Poverty is challenging issue for any state or country as it possesses the roots for other issues which are also dangerous problems for country. The poverty should be addressed national as well as regional level by taking serious measures.

    Poverty is rapidly increasing problem of our society which has created the economic disorder and environmental degradation in country. Poverty is hazardous be it in any form relative, absolute, objective and subjective
    poverty. Poor people are suffering from the hundreds of other social problem in their daily lives

    Poverty is the persistent challenge facing Pakistan since its inception. The poverty issue of Pakistan is increasing more in rural areas where almost 70% of the population is living. Their livelihoods depend on rural economy. They have lack of basic necessities such as primary health care, education, safe drinking water and deteriorating social services. The income gap between haves and have-nots is increasing. Some provinces have more inequality, gender bias and lack of geographic and spatial capital. Purchasing Power Parity (PPP) is a common measure of poverty. Poverty lines are drawn on the basis of goods that satisfy a person for his basic needs. The units of these goods are converted into PPP. Furthermore, a head count ratio is calculated to represent the percentage of poor people in the total population. Poor people have no sufficient economic opportunities, deprived from representation and no access of information due to corruption of their countries. Corruption decrease the trust of poor people for public officials, increase cost of public services, hinder economic growth, increase inequality, violation of human rights and supersedes the rule of law. Corruption hurts the social, economic and political future of a country. 

    In the country where bribery, favoritism, nepotism and manipulations are prevailed then the fabric of developed society are weaken. Corruption is looming almost all segment of Pakistan and poor people are losing their money and confidence due to dreadful practice of corruption. Development is being impeded where lack of accountability, corruption, human rights violation, defiance of rule of law and military influence. Poor governance is a key cause of poverty in Pakistan. Political instability and corruption which are the result of bad governance have declined business confidence, decrease economic growth and declining public expenditure on basic needs. As a result, investment and development was decreased while poverty is increasing. 

    The political structures where influential individuals have the approach in the political instaurations using political power to grant privileges and appoint people to position those are not suitable according to their capabilities and merit, making the country damage. Extended patrilineal families or lineages, personal recommendation or influence and traditional patron client relations are harming the governance. The world is becoming advance and we still suffered in the basic problems, depending on aid and playing in the hands of coups. The increase diseases are not only reducing efficiency and power, but they also have the effect of reducing life expectancy. The reduced life expectancy means less number of working force, less incomes and less production. Moreover, majority of women in Pakistan command a very miserable and poor health standard.