Tuesday, January 6, 2015

Afghanistan Set Record for Growing Opium in 2014












After thirteen years of occupation by U.S. forces, Afghanistan set a record for growing opium poppies in 2014, according to data from the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC). Heroin is derived from the poppy.
A UNODC report—“Afghanistan Opium Survey 2014”--provides a “detailed picture of the outcome of the current year’s opium season and, together with data from previous years, enable the identification of medium- and long-term trends in the evolution of the illicit drug problem.”
“The total area under opium poppy cultivation in Afghanistan was estimated to be 224,000 hectares in 2014, a 7% increase from the previous year,” says the report.
Afhganistan Opium Poppy Production
Net opium poppy cultivation in Afghanistan grew from 209,000 hectares in 2013 to 224,000 hectares in 2014.
The UNODC has been tracking opium cultivation in Afghanistan since 1994, whne net Afghan opium production was 71,000 hectares. The 2014 cultivation of 224,000 hectares was more then triple the 1994 level.
According to the 2014 World Drug Report, also published by the UNODC, Afghanistan by far the world’s largest producer of opium. “The opium production in Afghanistan accounts for 80 percent of the global opium production (5,500 tons),” said that report.
In addition to having record high of opium production in 2014, Afghanistan saw opium poppy eradication decrease 63 percent. “A total of 2,692 hectares of verified poppy eradication was carried out by the provincial governors in 2014, representing a decrease of 63 percent from 2013 when 7,348 hectares of governor-led eradication (GLE) was verified by [Ministry of Counter-Narcotics and UNODC],” states the report.
Hilmand province was Afghanistan’s largest opium cultivator in 2014, producing 103,240 hectares.
“In 2014, 98% of total opium cultivation in Afghanistan took place in the Southern, Eastern and Western regions of the country,” explains the report.
Hilmand province was followed by Kandahar province which produced 33,713 hectares, Farah province which produced 27,513 hectares, Nangarhar which produced 18,227 hectares, Nimroz which produced 14,548 hectares, Uruzgan which produced 9,277 hectares, Badghis which produced 5,721 hectares, Badakhshan which produced 4,204 hectares, Zabul which produced 2,894 hectares, Laghman which produced 901 hectares, Kunar which produced 754 hectares, Hirat which produced 738 hectares, Day Kundi which produced 587 hectares, Ghor which produced 493 hectares, Kapisa which produced 472 hectares, Kabul which produced 233 hectares, and Sari Pul which produced 195 hectares.
Most of the U.S. casualties in Afghan War have occurred in the Hilmand and Kandahar provinces, which are also the two leading opium-growing provinces.
According to CNSNews.com’s database of U.S. casualties, from 2001 through 2014, 2,232 U.S. military personnel gave their lives serving in the Afghan War. Of those 2,232 casualties, 451 were in Hilmand province and 420 were in Kandahar. That represents 39 percent of the total casualties in the war.
“There is evidence that Afghan heroin is increasingly reaching new markets, such as Oceania and Southeast Asia, that had been traditionally supplied from Southeast Asia,” the report states.

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/ali-meyer/afghanistan-set-record-growing-opium-2014

Pakistan - Former President Zardari inaugurates two hydel power plants

http://mediacellppp.wordpress.com/



Pakistan Peoples Party Co-chairperson Asif Ali Zardari on Monday laid the foundation stone of two hydel power plants in Sukkur. One plant will be built at Rohri Canal and the other at Nara Canal, the two offshoots of left pocket of Sukkur Barrage.
The plant at RD-27 of Rohri Canal will be installed at a cost of $36.4 million, while the other will be built at RD-15 of Nara Canal at a cost of $47 million.
Both the power plants will be operated on run-of-river basis and are billed to be completed within 20 months. These power stations are being built by the Sindh government under the public-private partnership mechanism. Zardari was accompanied by Sindh Chief Minister Syed Qaim Ali Shah and the provincial minister for finance and energy, Syed Murad Ali Shah.

Pakistan and Islamic Ideology








By Kunal Singh

The heartbreaking attack on Army Public School by Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) was a brutal reminder to the Pakistani establishment of the repercussions of the treacherous policies they have been pursuing. Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif immediately announced that no distinction would be made between “Good Taliban” and “Bad Taliban.” India’s demand is that Pakistan go beyond the Taliban and take on Punjab-based terror outfits like Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT), which make no secret of their designs for India.
The expectation that Pakistan will end its policy of differentiation between terror groups like TTP and “strategic assets” like LeT is a little naive. GHQ Rawalpindi and ISI continue to have a symbiotic relationship with groups like LeT and Haqqani Network. These strategic assets are considered, by many experts, to have derived from historical imperatives and geo-political constructs that embattled Pakistan. While partially true, the relationship that the Pakistani establishment has with “good terrorists” has essentially to do with what Pakistan deems itself to be – an Islamic nation with a missionary zeal that borders on and flirts with fanaticism.
Like many other states in West Asia, Pakistan has not been able to reconcile its Islamic ideology with the Westphalian construct of the world of which it is a part. The Westphalian model of sovereignty that evolved from the Peace of Westphalia that ended the Thirty Years’ War (1618-48) created a multiplicity of states often founded on contradictory philosophies yet balancing each other. The birth of Pakistan necessitated a politico-religious project as a means to justify its existence as a nation distinct from India. Islam – which justified the creation of Pakistan – provided an identity for its sustenance and Pakistan embraced it immediately.
The institutions in Pakistan were deliberately and sometimes artificially coloured with Islamic ideology. The entire nation was on a mission to bolster its identity and ensure that it is devoid of any Indian influence. The impetus that this mission received waxed and waned through the history of independent Pakistan but a running thread of Islamic construct, quite at odds with the Westphalian model, has persisted. Its ambitions in Afghanistan and the desires to be the Islamic nuclear power, which it eventually did become, only reinforced the inherent tension between Islamic ideology and Westphalian world order.
One of the greatest manifestations of this tension is found in Pakistan’s education system. In a 2013 paper, Tufail Ahmad of the Middle East Media Research Institute pointed out the systematic distortion of history, social and religious studies in Pakistani textbooks aimed at resolving the identity crisis of Pakistan. The textbooks instill in students, sometimes quite radically, a spirit of jihad as an inextricable part of Pakistan’s Islamic credos. The books spew venom against Hindus, Jews and Christians and the same curriculum is forced on non-Muslim students.
The textbooks eulogize Muslim invaders like Mehmood Ghaznavi and Muhammad Ghori. The former is known for invading India seventeen times and plundering Hindu temples. The latter is known for defeating Prithviraj Chauhan in his second attempt. It is no coincidence that three of Pakistan’s ballistic missiles are named Ghaznavi, Ghori and Abdali, after three prominent Muslim invaders of medieval India.
Consider some of the statements in Pakistani textbooks: “Hindu has always been an enemy of Islam”; “Hindus worship in temples which are very narrow and dark places, where they worship idols”; or “[Christian] missionaries thought that if they could defeat Muslims, there would be no other religion that could take a position against them.” In Punjab province, Urdu book for Grade 5 teaches, “A selfish Jew was the owner of a well and he never allowed Muslims to take water from it (Page 32); Do you like it that we remain under these infidels (Page 56).”
If you think the story could not be grimmer, then consider the madrassahs where students are trained to bepesh imamskhateebs and madrassah teachers. A book by a Pakistani journalist Babar Ayaz, What’s Wrong With Pakistan? informs us that there are 12,448 madrassahs with 1.6 million male students in Pakistan (2010 data). Babar Ayaz, quite wistfully, adds, “…the system is producing one mullah for every 225 Pakistanis every year. It is in sharp contrast to one nurse for over 3,600 persons, and one doctor for some 3,400 persons.”
Islamic ideology is not just manifest in Pakistan’s education system, but in other institutions as well, including the judiciary, political parties, and of course the Army. This doesn’t even take into account the scores of terror camps that operate on Pakistani soil, many under the watchful eyes of ISI.
Even if Nawaz Sharif is sincere and powerful – and there are reasonable grounds to have doubt on both counts – mere statements will change nothing. The politico-religious project of Pakistan has embedded its institution with Islamic tenets that have become an impediment to freeing the country from radical Islamic groups. Pakistan needs a detoxification that is absolute and indiscriminate. Any attempt at selective riddance will only exacerbate the festering wounds that are now seriously troubling the Islamic Republic of Pakistan.

Obama's Mixed Signals to India and Pakistan



The United States’ diplomacy with India and Pakistan is off to an interesting start in 2015. In a move that is likely to raise eyebrows in India, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry will visit Pakistan this month after certifying the Pakistani government has taken “action against” anti-India terror groups Laskhar-e-Taiba (LeT) and Jaish-e-Mohammad (JeM). The authorization will allow the United States to deliver civilian aid to Pakistan under the Kerry-Lugar bill (otherwise known as the Enhanced Partnership with Pakistan Act of 2009). Meanwhile, India is gearing up to receive U.S. President Barack Obama later this month as the chief guest for the country’s Republic Day celebrations. Obama’s visit to India comes after Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s successful whirlwind tour of the United States in September 2014 and is expected to bring the two countries closer together.
The coincidence of these two visits continues to highlight the ongoing confusion in U.S. policy toward India and Pakistan. In a similar unfortunate coincidence, the United States announced that Pakistan would receive 160 leftover mine-resistant ambush protected (MRAP) vehicles worth $198 million right before Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s scheduled U.S. visit.
While the United States and Pakistan face an increasingly difficult partnership, there is considerable bipartisan support in the United States for closer relations with India. India’s previous Congress-led coalition government had trouble creating sustainable rapprochement with the United States on strategic issues. With the exception of the 2006 civil nuclear cooperation deal and limited maritime cooperation, the U.S.-India bilateral relationship remained under-capitalized. The ascent of Narendra Modi and the BJP in India represents an opening for the United States.
The United States’ aid relationship with Pakistan may cause a disproportionately negative Indian response given that relations between India and Pakistan took a nose-dive in the latter half of 2014. Indeed given that the founders of both LeT and JeM have successfully held public rallies in Pakistan in 2014, the U.S. certification that Pakistan has taken “action” against these groups may seem disingenuous to India. This will be doubly so because Section 203 of the Kerry-Lugar bill requires Pakistan to have “ceased support” to extremist and terror groups and to have “prevented” them from using Pakistani soil as their base of operations. While the Kerry-Lugar bill expired in 2014, only part of the allocated aid was disbursed last year.
It’ll be fascinating to see whether Modi brings up the issue of the United States’ continuing support for Pakistan later this month when the two leaders hold talks. Right now, the planned agenda for the Modi-Obama talks later this month is expected to include energy, defense, trade, investment, and possibly climate change.

In Pakistan, domestic threats begin to overshadow India





By Yelena Biberman
The Peshawar school massacre has sparked unprecedented societal and political mobilization against terrorism in Pakistan. From televised debates to private conversations, there is now an unmistakable demand for policy reorientation toward domestic sources of insecurity. However, three big questions remain: Is India still the main enemy? Is Tehrik-e Taliban Pakistan (TTP), the perpetrator of the deadliest terrorist attack in Pakistan’s history, the only domestic militant group threatening Pakistani security? What will replace TTP in the unstable tribal region bordering Afghanistan?
For more than three generations, Pakistan’s security policy and the dominant national narrative have positioned India as the primary and existential threat to Pakistan. The two countries fought four wars (in 1947, 1965, 1971 and 1999), with the last in the shadow of nuclear missiles. Pakistan’s army built up its capacity in response to India’s military power at the expense of the country’s economic development. The very idea of Pakistan is tied to the perception that India is a dangerous place for Muslims.
The Peshawar massacre offers India and Pakistan an opportunity to recast their relationship. Following the attack, Indian schools across the country and the parliament observed silence for the victims, and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi reached out in a 12-minute phone conversation to his Pakistani counterpart Nawaz Sharif. Nevertheless, many Pakistanis remain skeptical about the recently elected Hindu nationalist leader. They cite periodic confrontations along the Line of Control, which separates Pakistan- and India-controlled parts of Kashmir. Modi’s cancelation of August talks between the two countries’ foreign secretaries, in response to a meeting between Pakistan’s envoy in New Delhi and Kashmiri separatist leaders, also made a strong impression. Reimagining Islamist militants, and not Hindu nationalist-controlled India, as the chief threat to Pakistan after nearly 70 years of animosity between the two states is a tough sell.
Pakistan also has had a special connection to the Taliban. The latter has ostensibly allowed the former to maintain “strategic depth” in Afghanistan against India during the 1990s, after the United States withdrew from the region. The strategic depth doctrine hinges on the calculation that, in case of an enemy offensive, Pakistani military commanders would have space to withdraw, regroup and respond. After the United States invaded Afghanistan in 2001, Pakistan’s intelligence agency (ISI) secretly sheltered and provided logistical support to the (Afghan) Taliban. Some of the local Pakistani Pashtun tribesmen, who spent years in the company and service of the Taliban or al-Qaeda, became radicalized. In 2007, following the Pakistani forces’ bold Lal Masjid confrontation with the Islamists, the latter joined forces under the TTP banner. The TTP’s stated goal is to oppose the NATO forces in Afghanistan and wage a defensive jihad against the Pakistani forces. However, the TTP’s active involvement in organized crime (e.g. bank robberies, kidnapping for ransom and smuggling) makes it more a criminal than an insurgent outfit. Destroying the TTP will require not only a military, but also a law enforcement solution. In addition to its involvement in organized crime, the TTP has made large investments in Karachi-based businesses.

Pakistan votes for insurgents to face military trials

Pakistan is set to try terror suspects in military courts as part of plans to tackle insurgents after last month's school massacre in Peshawar.

Most parties backed the constitutional amendment in parliament's lower house, which needed a two-thirds majority.

It is the latest in a raft of anti-terror moves after the attack. Critics oppose handing the army more power and say suspects' rights are at risk.

The 16 December Taliban attack left 152 people dead, including 133 children.

On Monday, Pakistan Taliban leader Mullah Fazlullah released a video vowing more attacks on children.

It's only a matter of time before the military courts plan becomes law. The move is clearly in response to public demands for swift justice, and stems from a feeling that the judiciary has failed to convict militants. But have the reasons that led to the judicial failure been addressed?

Experts point out that the main failure of the system lies at the investigation stage. No legislation was ever attempted to enhance police powers to investigate terrorism-related offences. In scores of cases the police were forced to either release known militants they had arrested or just ignore their movements because they were thought to be allies of the security establishment.

Also, no witness protection programme was ever developed, and eyewitnesses hardly ever appeared in terror cases. Judges and prosecutors faced threats to their lives, too, making successful trials well nigh impossible even if evidence was available.

Civil activists say nothing has been done to fix any of these problems and they are yet to see conclusive proof that the state has actually decided to eliminate the non-state actors it is accused of nurturing. This is creating fears that the military courts may become an instrument of selective justice, and may further empower the military.

The bill introducing military trials for insurgents will now pass to the upper house before being signed into law by the president later this week.

It received the votes of all 242 lawmakers present, 14 more than the two-thirds majority required. Members of two religious parties and the opposition PTI party of former cricketer Imran Khan abstained.

Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif said in late December that establishing military trials would help ensure "terrorists pay the price" for their "heinous acts".

The military and government have said the trials are a response to extraordinary circumstances and will only remain in place for two years.

Interior Minister Chaudhry Nisar Ali Khan said last week that they would have a limited mandate, and that ordinary civilians would not be pursued by them.

The leader of the opposition, Syed Khursheed Ahmed Shah, said in parliament on Tuesday that while he had not been in favour of military courts in the past, "the Pakistani public's safety is our priority and it is the government's responsibility to keep the masses safe in this country".

"The bitter pill of this new law is being swallowed for the security of Pakistan," the Dawn newspaper quoted him as saying.

In an editorial the newspaper said political leaders had abdicated their responsibilities.

Critics of the military courts oppose handing the army more powers in a country with a history of military coups.

They also fear the process will lead to innocent people being convicted and executed without independent scrutiny inside the courts.

In the wake of the Peshawar attack, Pakistan also lifted a moratorium on the use of the death penalty, meaning hundreds now face execution.

Human rights groups say this will not combat terrorism and will only perpetuate a cycle of violence.
The military has also stepped up its campaign against militants in the tribal areas in the north-west of the country.

Experts: Pakistan’s Army Chief Is Right Man to Confront Terrorism

As Pakistan intensifies its military campaign against extremist Islamist groups the country's army chief is facing huge internal security challenges in dealing with the Taliban and other terrorist organizations. Many in Pakistan, including former military officials, see General Raheel Sharif as a straight-talking professional soldier who can successfully confront the country's extremists.

Video - ANP's Mian Iftikhar Hussain on death Anniversary of Aitezaz Hasan

U.S. denies Pakistan got clean chit, funds

http://www.thehindu.com/



"No certification sought for funds to Pakistan, and no funds disbursed since 2013," said State Department spokesperson

The U.S. government has denied Pakistan’s reports that the U.S. Congress had cleared $532 million to Pakistan on the Kerry Lugar Act that needs certification on action against the Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Mohammad.“No certification has been sought for funds to Pakistan, and no funds disbursed since 2013,” said State Department spokesperson Jen Psaki. A report in The Hindu had quoted the Associated Press of Pakistan, and an official Pakistan government release that the $532 million had been cleared, as reportedly disclosed by U.S. Ambassador to Pakistan Richard Olson to Finance Minister Ishaq Dar. In Delhi, the Ministry of External Affairs had criticised the reported certification that cleared the aid to Pakistan.
“How the Government of the United States of America decides to spend U.S.taxpayers’ money is entirely its prerogative,” said spokesperson Syed Akbaruddin in an official statement.“However, India does not believe that Pakistan is showing “sustained commitment” or making “significant effort” or ceasing support” or dismantling “bases of operations” of the Laskhar-e-Taiba, Jaish-e-Mohammad, the Haqqani network and quite possibly the al-Qaeda.”
The report in The Hindu had also highlighted how the two groups and their leaders Hafiz Saeed and Masood Azhar had addressed public rallies in Muzaffarabad and Lahore in 2014, the operative year for the disbursement of the funds. The Kerry-Lugar act, as the Enhanced cooperation with Pakistan act is commonly known has seen the US State department certify Pakistani government actions routinely since 2010.
The government also warned the U.S. that the two groups, based in Pakistan’s Punjab state were targeting Indian and other diplomats in Afghanistan as well. “With increasing citings of Punjabi/urdu speaking elements operating with terrorist groups inside Afghanistan, we now also know that these very groups also pose a significant threat to members of the international community working in Afghanistan including to Indian diplomatic personnel working in the Indian Embassy in Kabul and our four Consulates,” Mr. Akbaruddin said.
The issue is likely to come up for discussion when Mr. Kerry travels to Ahmedabad for the Vibrant Gujarat summit this weekend, and is expected to meet PM Modi separately as well. He is also travelling to Pakistan for the US-Pakistan strategic dialogue this month, and while Pakistani agency reports said he will fly directly from India on January 14th, the US Statedepartment would not confirm a date.

To Beat the Taliban, Pakistan Needs School Reform








BY 


On December 16, the 145 victims of the Army Public School attack in Peshawar, Pakistan, bore the burden of their nation’s failures and paid for them with their lives. The survivors that day witnessed the unthinkable, and lost their childhoods.
I went to school in Pakistan too, but it was a different country, one where children could still be children. Yet the seeds of today’s Pakistan had already been sown by the time I was in elementary school. This was the end of General Zia’s time—a man who ruthlessly Islamized the country beyond recognition, changing laws and curricula, restricting freedoms and transforming society.
After the horror in Peshawar, we have seen Pakistanis unite, at least for now—against the Taliban (TTP), who took responsibility for the attack in Peshawar, and who have killed tens of thousands of their fellow citizens over the last decade. The country is also united against Taliban apologists, such as the radical cleric Abdul Aziz of Islamabad’s Red Mosque, who refused to condemn the TTP until forced by days of protest to do so.
But until the attack in Peshawar, Pakistan’s media, its leaders and ordinary citizens shied away from naming terrorists and terrorist groups, refused to acknowledge their identity and instead pointed fingers at the U.S. and India for creating havoc in the country. This obfuscation and denial has allowed militants to garner sympathy, to survive and to operate freely.
For the last year and a half, with support from a U.S. Institute of Peace research grant, I have visited public and private schools following the official curriculum in Pakistan, attending classes and talking with high school students and teachers. I asked students about what they thought was causing terrorism in Pakistan.
The majority of them said that “foreign influences”—the United States and India, and sometimes Israel—were responsible. Some of these students gave a straight up conspiracy theory version of this argument, that these countries wanted to destroy Pakistan, and so they trained or funded or even sent terrorists into Pakistan. They said that it was impossible that Muslims could be responsible for killing other Muslims.
Others argued that terrorists engaged in attacks in retaliation for Pakistan having helped the U.S. in “America’s war”—in Afghanistan—or that they undertook terrorist attacks in response to U.S. drone strikes and involvement in Pakistan.
A smaller set of students argued that the terrorists want to implement Islam in Pakistan, that the country is on the wrong, un-Islamic path now—thus giving a religion-based justification for militant behavior.
These aren’t madrassa students. I visited public and private schools, the kind that reach a majority of Pakistan’s population. This isn’t down to illiteracy either—these students are in high school. What drives them to think this way?
It is easy to blame Pakistan’s media, because it often spouts these same conspiracy theories. But the blame rests with Pakistan’s curriculum, society and state. And, yes, the media.
For the last 35 years, Pakistan’s official curriculum has been an amalgam of religious dogma, historical half-truths, blatant lies, biases and conspiracy theories. The official textbooks teach children that Pakistan’s “ideology” is Islam; that its foreign policy is ideological—its guiding principle is friendship with the Muslim world; that various other religions and nations are “evil” and “the enemy”—especially India and the Hindus, but these words are also used for Jewish people and Israel.
A number of these textbooks glorify armed jihad, or struggle, against non-Muslims. The textbooks depict major historical events as the results of conspiracies—of Hindus and the British against Muslims in colonial India, rendering Pakistan’s independence necessary; and of the “secret arrangement of big powers” that led to the breaking up of Pakistan and the creation of Bangladesh. The West is described as having “two-faced” characters, and the United States is portrayed as having betrayed Pakistan at key points in its history.
Teaching revolves around rote memorization—line by line, page by page—and the sole purpose of classes is to ensure rote learning for board exams, where the material is expected to be regurgitated verbatim. There is no room for questioning the textbooks, no discussion in class, no mention of good versus bad sources of information, no alternate views presented.
It’s all black and white: Muslims and Pakistan are “good” and the rest of the world is not, and they are out to get us. Little wonder, then, that Pakistanis find it tough to believe the Taliban come from among them and are Muslims.
But for the origin of the specific conspiracy theories about the Taliban, we need look no further than elements of the Pakistani state and radical clerics. They function as “conspiracy entrepreneurs”—a paper by Sunstein and Vermeule sets up a useful framework for thinking about this—who use these theories to divert attention from their internal failings and pin blame elsewhere. Pointing the finger at India gives sustenance to Pakistan’s military, whose power depends on the conflict with India.
Pakistanis rely on the opinions of those in positions of authority to form their own—partly because of the country’s hierarchical society and culture, and partly because they are never taught how to seek and evaluate evidence in school—leading to these theories being accepted and then spreading quickly in “informational cascades.”
The outrage sparked by Peshawar has finally seen the government take anaggressive stance against the Taliban, with a force that has been lacking before. Pakistan’s Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif has announced that military courts will be set up to deal with terrorism cases.
There is finally some talk about reclaiming the narrative from Taliban apologists—Pakistan’s interior minister Chaudhry Nisar asked the media not to give airtime to Taliban sympathizers—and the need for madrassa reform. But we have heard nothing about the need for curriculum reform in eliminating the roots of our national sense of denial and sympathy for militants.
That is unsurprising. In part, this is because a decentralization law passed in 2010 saw the federal government delegate curriculum formation to the provinces. In fact, in one province, the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, marginal curriculum improvements made over the past few years are currently being reversed under pressure from Islamist parties in the province, and the word jihad is being reintroduced in their textbooks.
In part, it’s because the government just doesn’t get the need for such reform. We have an entire generation of policymakers schooled in this system who don’t realize there’s anything wrong with it, and who systematically push back against reform.
But despite the impediments, curriculum reform is urgent. With critical thinking capabilities and a reformed curriculum, when faced with conspiracy entrepreneurs like the terrorist Hafiz Saeed, who has blamed the Peshawar attacks on India, the Pakistani public would be equipped to counter their theories.
So it is time for Pakistan to rewrite its textbooks to give its citizens a real, complete picture of history—no conspiracies attached; to purge religious dogma and hatred toward others; to introduce critical thinking in the curriculum; and to encourage global citizenship.
This won’t be easy. Islamic parties will protest, but the government must ignore them. Teachers will need to be reeducated and retrained, and the results will be visible only in the long term.
But that is the only way to achieve a Pakistan for the next generation that is even safer than the one where I went to school.

Pakistan - An apology is not enough, Aamir Liaquat must be fired




 














Social media is once again flooded with outrage at ‘Dr’ Aamir Liaquat – our nation’s foremost televangelist. During an episode of his morning show Subh-e-Pakistan, aired on Geo TV on December 22, one of Liaquat’s guests, Syed Arif Shah Owaisi, used inflammatory language to accuse the Ahmadi community of being responsible for terrorism in the country including the Peshawar attack.
To no one’s surprise, Liaquat applauded the cleric’s hate speech. On December 27, an Ahmadi was shot dead in Gujranwala. Such a sequence of events is not new to Liaquat’s television career. In September 2008, he promoted similar hate speech on his Geo TV show which was followed by the murders of three prominent Ahmadi leaders within two days of the broadcast. Neither Geo TV nor Liaquat ever apologised for their role in the incitement of anti-Ahmadi violence.
Unfortunately for them, such blithe indifference is no longer possible in post-Peshawar Pakistan. Following a nation-wide uproar, Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority (PEMRA) issued a show-cause notice to Geo. Moreover, the channel issued a ‘clarification’ on December 30, apologising for the editorial lapse. The statement is available on Geo’s website. Several members of the civil society, who wrote to the channel’s management team, received personal replies assuring us that Geo is taking necessary steps to strengthen their editorial review process. These are all very positive developments and Geo should be commended for responding to the concerns of the public.
However, it is hard not to dismiss these steps as mere PR damage control tactics when the channel continues to let an unrepentant Aamir Liaquat continue with his program without so much as a hint of an apology. Not only that, the official ‘clarification’ released by the channel leaves much to be desired. The statement notes that ‘a comment made by a guest’ during the morning show ‘violated the network’s code of conduct’. Let us be clear that that the objectionable contents of this episode were not limited to one guest. After Owaisi was done declaring Ahmadis the common enemy of all Muslims and blaming them for the Peshawar attack, another guest, Hamza Ali Qadri, stepped in to inform the audience that the day Ahmadis were declared non-Muslims by the state in 1974, a member of that sect warned him of the violence that would be unleashed upon Pakistan to avenge the decision.
While it is perfectly true that during live transmissions it may be ‘difficult to control crowds and guests who speak their mind-sets,’ this excuse absolutely does not apply to this particular episode. Aamir Liaquat made absolutely no effort to redirect the conversation even though there were clearly several opportunities to do so as his guests paused between taking turns to insult Ahmadis. And far from being out of control, the audience only applauded Owaisi’s comments because Aamir Liaquat started to clap and gestured towards the audience to do the same. Attributing the violation of the network’s code to an isolated comment by a single guest is a mendacious attempt to exonerate Aamir Liaquat.
The statement, which reads more like a eulogy to Liaquat than an apology, further states that it is an ‘undeniable fact’ that Liaquat has promoted ‘multi-faith dialogue and harmony’ through his programs and encouraged the participation of religious minorities ‘more than any other program in Pakistan’s television history’. Whoever drafted this statement obviously doesn’t consider the Ahmadis as a religious minority because no representative of that community has ever participated in any of Liaquat’s shows. And while Liaquat may have the honour of fostering unprecedented dialogue with minority communities, as of today he also has the blood of three people on his hands.
Never one to shy away from airing his frequently misogynistic, jingoist and bigoted views, Liaquat is the face of mainstreamed religious extremism in Pakistan. His antics embody pretty much every problem that plagues our society today. And the fact that he is the star of the largest media group in the country only highlights the extent of our collective denial. The campaign to hold him accountable is in response to his chronic verbal diarrhoea on national TV and is not limited to a supposedly isolated comment made by a guest on his show.
Geo’s statement acknowledges that the channel itself has been ‘the victim of the wrong use of religion and several members of its team are facing threats’. This is obviously a reference to the accusations of airing allegedly blasphemous content on a morning show last May. How sad that this awareness on part of the channel’s team was not enough to stop Liaquat from accusing Junaid Jamshed of blasphemy and inciting violence against the ex-pop star. The level of hypocrisy at play here can be gauged from the fact that it was none other than Liaquat who was packed off to Makkah for damage control by the channel after the fiasco last summer.
And then there’s the matter of Liaquat hurling vulgarities at Junaid Jamshed’s mother. The ‘clarification’ that followed was even more disturbing as he extended his abuse to include his own as well as everyone else’s mother! Understanding the association between a person’s respect for Hazrat Aisha (RA) and their mother’s sexual history is a pleasure I shall leave to Liaquat’s many admirers.
But the good ‘doctor’ is at his finest when it comes to casting invectives at India to the deafening applause of an audience obviously very receptive to his brand of a gaali galoch laden Islam. His response to India’s ban on Pakistan’s hockey team was a new low even by his standards. In any other country, such obscenity would have earned his show a PG-18 rating. In Pakistan this kind of vulgarity passes for patriotism.
Like a common thug, he reacts to any and all critique with more trash talk. Two summers ago, a Pakistani columnist who dared to criticise his Ramazan transmission was declared the most ‘ghatiya insaan’ (pathetic person) in the world on national television. He recently responded to criticism in an Indian paper by threatening to gouge out the writer’s eyes. Perhaps he thinks he is once again showcasing his ‘lighter side’. That is the explanation he gave the New York Times regarding the embarrassing outtakes from his show which were leaked on YouTube in 2011. Earlier he had insisted that the video was doctored and even accused his favourite punch-bag, the Ahmadi community, of being responsible.
However, the issue is far more serious than that of vulgarity. There can be no greater dishonour of the victims of the Peshawar attack than to give space to those lying about the identity of the killers on national TV. And the Geo group has done it repeatedly, not only by allowing Liaquat to air his mindless jingoism on his morning show where everyone from Ahmadis, Jews and Indians are accused of orchestrating the Peshawar attack, but also by running an article in two of their flagship publications in response to the blowback against Subh-e-Pakistan’s episode featuring Owaisi and company. In this article, an absolutely unapologetic Liaquat once again accuses Ahmadis and India of mounting the ‘propaganda’ against him. To make matters worse, Geo’s official clarification links back to this article! I am sorry but it is hard to believe in the channel’s sincerity when their ‘apology’ features their unrepentant star promoting the very bigotry that precipitated the whole issue in the first place.
We are at war. And this war is not against a group of individuals. It is against an ideology. The killing of Ahmadis, Shias, Christians, Hazaras, and Hindus is just as terroristic as the Peshawar attack. We can wage countless Zarb-e-Azabshang every terrorist in the country but we will never stop creating their replacements as long as we do not confront radicalism in all its forms. In the episode of Subh-e-Pakistan, aired one day after the Peshawar massacre, Liaquat said,
“We should be very clear about who our enemy is.”
He’s right. We should be very clear.
And the fact is that our enemy is neither India, nor the Jews nor the CIA. It is a home-grown extremist ideology that the likes of Aamir Liaquat routinely unleash on national TV. His vitriol cannot be controlled. He must be fired. War demands sacrifices. It is time Geo placed greater premium on human lives than on TRP ratings.

Military Operations: New Year Presents For Balochistan





By Malik Siraj Akbar



There is deep public outrage in Balochistan against an operation conducted by the Frontier Corps (FC) on January 2 in Mashky area that killed a mother and four of her sons.
Similar operations have increased in the district of Khuzdar. The FC and the Home and Tribal Affairs Department have confirmed that these operations were actually conducted. But they paint a picture that looks different from the local people’s account concerning the killing of women and terrorizing children. The government says these operations were carried out against the Baloch insurgents. This is partly true given that BBC Urdu quoted a spokesman for the underground Lashker-e-Balochistan confirm that one of its commanders and three fighters were killed in a recent clash with the security forces.
On January 4th, the Baloch National Front (BNF), an alliance of pro-free Balochistan political organizations, called a shutter down strike in the province to protest against the military operations being carried out in different parts of the province. The call for the strike paralyzed every day life. But military operations and subsequent calls for shutter down strikes have become the order of the day for the past many years now. Neither the security forces stop carrying out these operations nor do these political rallies, protests and hunger strike camps from the Baloch nationalists and human rights organizations improve the conditions on the ground.
The beginning of reckless operations in Balochistan does no bode well for the new year we have just started. Generally people start the year with setting new goals and hope for better and peaceful days. At this point, we have to pause for a moment and reflect what has gone wrong in Balochistan and why these operations are still taking place one and half year after the democratic elections and the induction of a seasoned Baloch nationalist as the chief minister.
The military operations across Balochistan show that Dr. Malik Baloch, the Chief Minister, has failed in fulfilling the responsibility he was entrusted. The Chief Minister’s party, the National Party, did not appear as the number one or two on the list of election winners. In spite of that, Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif supported the idea of electing Dr. Malik as the provincial chief executive. They hoped that he would be able to initiate negotiations with the Baloch armed groups and their leaders in exile.
Since taking over, the Chief Minister has been engaging in work avoidance and buying time instead of focusing on the actual goal of brining peace to the province. His actions for conflict resolution are limited to lip service while his commitment and capabilities are also questionable. These fresh operations will only make it much harder for him to convince the Baloch armed groups to go on the negotiating table.
After the Mashky incident, Akbar Hussain Durrani, Balochistan’s Home Secretary, told BBC Urdu, “we don’t need permission from anyone to carry out these operations.” That is clearly stepping out of one’s institutional and constitutional authority. Even if the security forces have credible evidence about the presence of insurgents in civilian areas, we strongly discourage extrajudicial killings. The security forces have an obligation under the constitution and the international law to prove the charges against the individuals they suspect of engaging in ‘terrorism’. In addition, under no circumstances should any citizen be denied the right to access a lawyer and face free, fair and transparent trial. The security forces in Balochistan are brazenly violating all these these prerequisites while dealing with the Baloch population. The Home Secretary or the Inspector General of the FC cannot become the judge, jury and executioner at the same time.
The extraconstitutional actions of these senior government officials indicate that perhaps the Chief Minister has no control over them or covertly supports them only to save his own job. When the government forces kill an unarmed mother with four of her sons, this will naturally redirect the rest of the families to look up to the armed groups as their savior. These actions generate support for the insurgents and make the government operations totally ineffective in whatever goals they are intended to achieve. How would the insurgents trust the government and agree to negotiate when these operations are so indiscriminate against the unarmed civilians?
With nearly four decades of rich experience in progressive politics, CM Malik will only be disfiguring his political legacy by staying quiet against the same operations which were once carried out during General Musharraf’s time against the Baloch population and the current CM used to oppose them as an opposition leader.