#Yemen: 1,000 days of war

By Karl Schembri

Thousands of public service employees across Yemen have not been paid their salaries for more than a year and a half.

One thousand days of war in Yemen: thousands killed, tens of thousands wounded, and millions pushed towards famine.

The humanitarian crisis in Yemen is entirely man-made, the result of three years of brutal violence and insidious tactics that continue to deprive millions of people of basic supplies and services.

A staggering 1.2 million civil servants haven't received their salaries in more than a year, leaving health, education, and sanitation services without the people and resources needed to keep them running. Public infrastructure has been damaged and homes destroyed, forcing more than three million to flee their homes, most with only what they can carry. People living in congested conditions have too little access to money, food, water and medicine.

Prices are up but purchasing power is down, forcing people to make difficult choices with the few resources they have - water or transport to hospital? Medicine or food?

Wednesday marks 1,000 days since the military coalition led by Saudi Arabia began bombing rebel forces who seized the capital, Sanaa, and other territory during a lightning-quick offensive. 

Today, the Saudi-led coalition's ongoing blockade on commercial fuel is choking a struggling population, and obstructions from the Houthi rebel authorities within Yemen prevent what there is from reaching people.

As a result, water pumps are switched off, hospital generators stop running, the cost of transport is out of reach and 22.2 million people in Yemen now depend on humanitarian aid.

About 16 million people cannot access safe water or healthcare, 4.5 million children are at risk of losing access to education, 8.4 million Yemenis are close to starvation.

The following photo story collected from Yemen by the Norwegian Refugee Council sheds light on the devastating impact of the last 1,000 days on ordinary Yemenis.

A man points at his house destroyed by air strikes in Sanaa. Destruction in the Yemeni capital is everywhere: houses, health centres, wedding halls, and even children's playgrounds have been targeted by the raids. KARL SCHEMBRI/NRC/AL JAZEERA

A man walks by civilian houses destroyed in Sanaa. KARL SCHEMBRI/NRC/AL JAZEERA

Ali Mothana Ali, 50, from al-Dhalea, was seriously wounded when his house was hit. "The air strike that hit my house, it caught me just outside my home. Shrapnel from the explosion hit me. I sustained facial injuries, splinters had to be extracted from my pelvis, and metal sliced off part of my leg. I survived because neighbours rushed me to a nearby village for treatment. With my injuries, I am disabled. I cannot work to feed my children. I am the only bread winner for my family, my oldest son is 10 years old." NUHA MOHAMMED/NRC/AL JAZEERA

Fighting has also been fierce outside of Sanaa, displacing up to three million Yemenis across the country. Molok, from Saada, had to flee with her children and grandchildren together with 460 families when their neighbourhood was bombed more than two years ago. She has been living in an informal settlement in Houth ever since. ALVHILD STROMME/NRC/AL JAZEERA

Only a photograph and a lot of rubble is what remains of Omar's former home in Taiz. "It took me 10 years to build this house, stone by stone, to make sure my children have a roof over their heads. It was gone in a blink." In late 2015, armed groups ordered him to leave; his village had become a battleground. Omar and his family fled the house just days before it was leveled by air strikes. NUHA MOHAMMED /NRC/AL JAZEERA

Mahmoud Zeid and his wife Sabah speak of the day they fled their home in July 2015, following an air strike close to their neighbourhood in Jabal al-Nugm. Mahmoud used to work as a tailor, but since the war and blockade started he no longer has a job. Sabah suffers from kidney failure. They have six children. NRC provides them with food aid in a project funded by the UN's World Food Programme. Mahmoud said: "We have to survive. There is no food, no spending money like there used to be. We get a plate or two of food and get on with it. Even then we don't even have cooking gas." KARL SCHEMBRI/NRC/AL JAZEERA

Wedad is a single mother with four children from Amran. She says the dramatic hunger and poverty she's been pushed into makes her prefer to die. "I pray God, please let us die or solve this, or let us die silently - that people would wake up in the morning and find us dead. It cannot be worse than what we have been through already. We felt the hunger, we felt the cold, we have been through everything." NUHA MOHAMMED/NRC/AL JAZEERA

Amani, 12, from Taiz lost her father and has been displaced ever since. "The clashes got intense and we were the last family to escape from the village. We fled to a safer place and knew our father was a little way behind us when a shell hit and killed him. He died on the spot but we did not know. We kept calling his phone but got no answer and only later we heard he was dead. Everything is bad about fleeing your home: here there is no water, no firewood, we have nothing. Back home we had everything. I used to go to school, but now I cannot. I am afraid of the war; the scariest thing is hearing the bombs, the shotguns and the shells. We were terrified. We were hiding in our room and fearing death." NUHA MOHAMMED/NRC/AL JAZEERA

Ahlam, 4, has spent two years in an informal settlement outside Houth in northern Yemen, living in extremely dire conditions. Her family fled from Saada in 2015 after their neighbourhood came under attack. ALVHILD STROMME/NRC/AL JAZEERA

In this settlement outside Houth, Obaid, 9, (left) and his friend Modrek collect empty plastic bottles to sell for recycling. "If we collect one full, large bag, we get 150 Yemeni rials [US$0.60]," said Obaid. "I used to go to school. I like studying. But there is no school here." As the war continues, millions of children in Yemen, a country where only 60 percent of the population could read and write before the war, are deprived of an education. NUHA MOHAMMED/NRC/AL JAZEERA

The crisis in Yemen is brutal on children, many of whom are dying of starvation and acute malnutrition. Amani is a five-month-old baby weighing only 2kg. Here she is in the malnutrition section of al-Sabeen Hospital in Sanaa. "Our neighbours gave us money to take Amani to the hospital," her mother Fatima said. "I’m so worried that once we're out of here we won't find enough food for my baby." NUHA MOHAMMED/NRC/AL JAZEERA

Mohammed's family travelled by road for close to 15 hours through several checkpoints to reach al-Sabeen Hospital with their malnourished child. "We had no choice, there are no functioning facilities in our area now," his father Waheeb said. "There is nothing." At two years of age, Mohammed weighs 5.9kg and cannot sit unassisted. NUHA MOHAMMED/NRC/AL JAZEERA

One-year-old Fatima weighs 4.2kg. She was brought to al-Sabeen Hospital by her mother when she became unwell and developed a fever and has since been receiving care for acute malnutrition. Fatima is one of four children but failing to thrive like her older siblings. A collapsing economy and impediments to the movement of humanitarian supplies have left millions of Yemenis in urgent need of life-saving aid and protection. NUHA MOHAMMED/NRC/AL JAZEERA

Yemenis queue at a food voucher distribution point in Sanaa. The Norwegian Refugee Council is helping some of the hardest-hit families with food vouchers and other assistance. A staggering 8.4 million Yemenis are now close to starvation after 1,000 days of war and a blockade of food, fuel and medicine. KARL SCHEMBRI/NRC/AL JAZEERA

Dr Zikra Abdullah Saif works at al-Sabeen Hospital in Sanaa. "Our tragedy now is that we cannot do our job the way we should, while we are struggling for our basic food. If the war continues and we keep being unpaid, we will have to flee to the villages. We will bring water from the well, plant, and live a simple way of life. We'll have to flee from the cities and live like people did in primitive times."

GLOBAL FIGURES URGE US, UK, FRANCE TO STOP FANNING FLAMES OF SAUDI WAR ON YEMEN

Over 350 high-profile global figures have urged the US, Britain and France, the three Western backers of Saudi Arabia’s bloody offensive on Yemen, to use their UN Security Council seats and help ease the sufferings the Arab nation instead of fanning “the flames of war” there.

Nobel peace prize laureates, politicians, diplomats, former military generals, religious leaders and celebrities issued a statement addressed to US President Donald Trump, UK Prime Minister Theresa May and French President Emmanuel Macron on Tuesday.

The statement marked the 1,000th day since the Saudi regime and a group of its vassal states unleashed a military campaign against Yemen, at a time when the Arabian Peninsula state was grappling with an internal conflict.

The Saudi offensive was launched in support of Yemen’s former Riyadh-friendly government and against the country’s Houthi Ansarullah movement, which has been running state affairs in the absence of an effective administration.

“December 2017 marks 1000 days of a war that has turned the Middle East’s poorest country into the world’s largest humanitarian crisis, leaving Yemen ravaged by preventable diseases and on the verge of a historic famine,” the statement read.

Yemen is “at a tipping point,” it noted, criticizing the international community for failing to take action in order to bring an end to “the man-made catastrophe” there.

“The US, UK, and France, as permanent members of the UN Security Council and major weapons suppliers to Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, bear a special responsibility to use the full extent of their leverage to press their partners in the region to end the crisis. Instead of stoking the flames of a war that is strangling an entire population and risks destabilizing the entire region, they could be the brokers of peace,” the statement read.

The three have been the biggest arms suppliers to the Saudi regime since the war on Yemen broke out, according to a report by the campaign group Control Arms in September.

Since the onset of the war, the Saudi-led coalition has imposed a naval and aerial blockade on Yemen under the pretext of blocking alleged arms supplies to the Houthi fighters. The siege, however, has caused severe shortages of food and medicine, endangering the lives of millions of aid-reliant Yemeni citizens.

The Western-backed offensive has, however, achieved neither of its goals as it has been met with stiff resistance from Ansarullah fighters and popular groups.

The statement further warned that the blockade “has made an already catastrophic situation worse. It has barred delivery of life-saving food, medicines and fuel, leading to hospitals shutting down, and whole cities without clean water or working sanitation.”

“To prevent further catastrophe and famine, Yemen needs an immediate ceasefire; an end to all blockages on access for food, fuel and medical supplies; and investment in a new, inclusive peace process,” it added.

“If you don’t want the burden of the lives of thousands more Yemeni children on your hands, then the time to act is now. Yemen can’t wait any longer," the statement concluded, addressing Trump, May and Macron.

The Saudi-led war has so far killed more than 12,000 people and led to a humanitarian crisis as well as a deadly cholera outbreak in Yemen.

Last month, the Riyadh military angered the world community and international rights groups by tightening the already-crippling blockade after Yemeni forces fired a retaliatory missile that hit near an airport in the Saudi capital.

http://www.shiitenews.org/index.php/saudi-arab/item/32141-global-figures-urge-us-uk-france-to-stop-fanning-flames-of-saudi-war-on-yemen

Video Report - ‘Saudis using starvation as weapon in Yemen, breach intl law’ – UK govt

Trump’s National Security Strategy Is a Farce

Roger Cohen

The Trump Administration has put out its new national security strategy. This is a farce. On any one issue, President Trump and his team have several contradictory positions. That’s what happens when your priority as president is to use foreign policy to throw red meat to your base while other cabinet members are scrambling to stop Armageddon.

“It’s impossible to know what the United States position is on any number of subjects,” a European ambassador told me last week. “We could go sleepwalking into a war.”

Let’s start with North Korea, whose small but growing nuclear arsenal is overseen by Kim Jong-un, a leader as volatile as Trump. Last week, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson said the Trump Administration’s policy toward North Korea is “really quite clear.” He said, “We’re ready to talk anytime North Korea would like to talk, and we’re ready to have the first meeting without precondition.” That was Tuesday at the Atlantic Council. By Friday, at the United Nations, Tillerson was setting conditions.

North Korea must cease “threatening behavior” before talks can begin; it must “earn its way back to the table;” and pressure will “continue until denuclearization is achieved.”

Denuclearization is not going to happen in the real world. If that’s the condition, there will be no talks. As for Trump, he has said Tillerson is “wasting his time trying to negotiate with Little Rocket Man.” He has warned that the United States is “locked and loaded.” He has never embraced talks without preconditions, favored by France, Britain and sometimes Tillerson.

Clear enough already?

Oh, I should add that Nikki Haley, the United States ambassador to the United Nations, was not present when Tillerson spoke. Great optics there: Haley and Tillerson are known to be at loggerheads, with the secretary of state (regarded by some as a dead man walking) suspecting Haley wants to succeed him.

Now, effective pressure on North Korea has three components: China, China and China. Trump’s new national security strategy identifies China as “a strategic competitor.” It suggests the United States will get tough on Chinese “cheating or economic aggression.”

Great timing there: Trump is asking President Xi Jinping to cut off crude oil exports to North Korea as his “strategy” lambasts China. Our president believes everyone will do his bidding because he says so. Hello! You want a favor? You don’t double down on confrontation.

I mentioned red meat: war with North Korea, tearing up the Iran nuclear deal, recognizing Jerusalem as the Israeli capital and promising to move the American embassy there some day — all this gets the blood up for Trump’s base. (Of course, words exceed action and appearance is all, as with everything in Trump’s world). I also mentioned Haley, who did not show up for Tillerson but put on quite a show over Iran the day before at a military base in Washington.

Before I get to the Haley show, involving some Iranian-made missiles “on loan from Saudi Arabia,” a little background on Iran is needed. The 2015 Iran nuclear deal sent the country’s nuclear program into reverse, guaranteed rigorous international inspections, and put the country much further from a bomb than it had been. In return, Iran got sanctions relief. The deal, concluded with the United States and five other world powers, is working. It was not intended to usher in an American-Iranian love-fest or realign Iranian policy in Syria. It was intended to stop Iran going nuclear. Tearing it up would be a colossal strategic error.

Tillerson recognizes this; he’s urged preservation of the deal. Trump calls it “the worst deal I’ve ever seen negotiated” and, in October, declined to recertify it. This kicked to Congress the issue of whether to reimpose sanctions within 60 days. It did not, and from what I hear the White House did not press for sanctions. (Remember, noise without action is Trump’s only discernible “national security strategy.”)

By mid-January, Trump has to decide whether to sign waivers on Iran sanctions. My guess is he will to avoid blowing up the deal. Meanwhile, the administration is reviewing whether to block Boeing’s agreed $20 billion sale of jetliners to Iran. So what’s the policy here? Show implacable hostility to Iran, possibly short of destroying the deal, barring a mishap.

Clear enough, already?

Enter Haley with her Iranian missiles of dubious provenance demonstrating no provable infringement of international law. What a performance! “Absolutely terrifying,” she declared, before saying that “the nuclear deal has done nothing to moderate the regime’s behavior in other areas.” It was not supposed to do that.

Iran has a nasty regime that does despicable things from time to time. It also has a substantial moderate wing, headed by President Hassan Rouhani. Moderates have been reinforced by the nuclear deal. The best way to lock in hard-liners for the next two decades would be to tear it up.

On North Korea and Iran, on Israel-Palestine and Syria and Saudi Arabia-Qatar, the Trump administration is all over the place. As Tillerson noted last week, it has no “wins” in diplomacy. That’s not surprising. It also has no national security strategy. It has outbursts.

Republicans Goof Up While Passing Tax Bill

By Matt Fuller and Arthur Delaney

The House will have to revote on the bill after the Senate passes a corrected version.

After years of false starts and failed promises, House Republicans had another one Tuesday ― they passed a tax bill with provisions that were struck down by the Senate parliamentarian.

Even though House Republicans already congratulated themselves in a series of speeches, the House will have to vote again on Wednesday, after the Senate passes the final tax bill. House Republicans had passed what they thought would be the final tax proposal on Tuesday 227-203, with 12 Republicans voting no.

But now the Senate will send back to the House a similar bill ― with the stricken provisions omitted ― before the tax legislation will go to President Donald Trump for his signature.

It’s a small gaffe, but one typical of this process. Republicans rushed a bill to the floor and ended up embarrassing themselves.

Still, this hiccup is just a formality. The bill will almost certainly pass the Senate, where it is expected to come up for a vote late Tuesday night or early Wednesday morning, and then clear the House with the same members voting for and against it.

The bill is, without a doubt,

Trump and the GOP Congress’ most significant legislative achievement since Republicans gained control of the House, Senate and White House.

But the “win” may end up costing Republicans. This bill is far from the congressional victory Republicans had sought to run on during next year’s midterm elections: It’s deeply unpopular, with approval ratings that were already significantly underwater and grew worse over the past few weeks as the legislation neared final passage.

A CNN poll in November showed 31 percent of voters viewing the tax bill favorably, with 45 percent opposing it. A poll conducted in the past week showed 33 percent supporting the bill, but 55 percent now against it.

When Senate Republicans passed their initial version of the measure just a few weeks ago, many Republicans didn’t care that the bill wasn’t popular. Republicans simply believed the lack of support was due to bad polling and voters not fully understanding the proposal.

Likewise, Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) told reporters Tuesday morning that he had “no concerns whatsoever.”

“I got to say, if people are out there on TV telling mistruths, disguising the facts of this thing, that’s going to make it unpopular,” Ryan said, adding that taxpayers will be happy when they see changes in their pay next year ― both from adjustments to taxes withheld from their paychecks and higher pay from booming business conditions.

But the facts of this bill are what make it unpopular. For one, the bill repeals the individual mandate in Obamacare, which would result in higher prices for people relying on Obamacare for health insurance. And far from a “middle-class tax cut,” as Trump and other Republicans promised, the measure is truly a massive corporate tax cut ― the top rate goes down from 35 percent to 21 percent ― and a smaller tax cut for individuals in the seven individual income brackets.

Independent analysts have said wealthy taxpayers would benefit the most, in large part because they pay more taxes from the start. But households at every income level would see a tax cut next year, according to an analysis of the conference bill from the Joint Committee on Taxation, which scores tax legislation for Congress.

Starting in 2021, however, some income groups would start seeing slightly higher rates. And because the proposal sets most individual cuts to expire in eight years ― a budget gimmick to reduce the bill’s cost in a 10-year budget window ― all households earning less than $75,000 would see higher taxes in 2027 (due in large part to the bill including an unfavorable permanent change to the way tax brackets are indexed to inflation)

Republicans have waved off concerns about the sunsetting tax cuts by saying a future Congress won’t let them expire. That’s a change from Ryan’s position earlier this year, when he insisted the cuts be permanent. In the end, Ryan got half his way ― the corporate tax cuts are permanent, but the individual reductions are not. Republicans finance these cuts, in part, by raising taxes on some people. The bill ends much of the state and local tax deduction, which lets filers write off the cost of their local taxes. As a compromise to some of the high-tax states most affected, the bill allows filers to deduct up to $10,000 of their local taxes by some combination of their choice. But that won’t be enough for many high-income people in states like New Jersey, New York and California. As with an earlier version of the bill, a number of Republicans from New Jersey and New York voted against the legislation, though most California Republicans still got onboard. Republicans chose a policy approach that came with a built-in political headache: They have been unable to guarantee that no household would face higher taxes under the plan even as it piles on all that debt.

If their bill simply cut tax rates, everybody would benefit. But because of the way the bill lowers rates while eliminating deductions ― thereby exposing more income to taxation in some cases ― Republicans have been unable guarantee a tax cut for everybody. So even though most households would be better off under the changes next year, some will be worse off. Still, the majority of the bill is “paid for” by increasing deficits. The measure would add $1.4 trillion to the national debt, the Joint Committee on Taxation said. Republicans have claimed that increased economic growth would boost business receipts and offset the revenue loss, though no credible economic analysis has shown that.

Republicans have largely ignored those criticisms by just focusing on how the tax cuts would boost the economy. They’ve also largely looked past the effects on housing, charitable giving and state budgets.

Those effects flow from a simplification of the tax code. The legislation would increase the standard deduction from $12,700 to $24,000 for a married couple (an increase Republicans have falsely characterized as “doubling” the deduction). Currently, only about 30 percent of households find it worthwhile to “itemize” for expenses such as mortgage interest, charitable donations and local taxes. With the bigger standard deduction, experts say only 5 percent would.

While their tax filing process would be simpler, for many households, the tax incentive to take out a bigger mortgage or donate to charity would be smaller, which could squeeze housing markets and the nonprofit sector. And a new cap on the amount of local taxes that can be deducted would put pressure on state lawmakers to either reduce those taxes ― resulting in less revenue for priorities like public education ― or shift them to other sources that are still deductible, such as business payrolls.

“Don’t be a high-tax state,” Rep. John Shimkus (R-Ill.) said after the vote. “Be a low-tax state “

According to Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), the Senate parliamentarian said three provisions were ineligible for the fast-track process, including one measure allowing parents to use special 529 savings accounts for home-schooling expenses.

“In the mad dash to provide tax breaks for their billionaire campaign contributors, our Republican colleagues forgot to comply with the rules of the Senate,” Wyden and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) said in a joint statement.

The lead House author of the bill, Rep. Kevin Brady (R-Texas), has said he expects Congress will need to pass another bill next year to fix any mistakes in the tax bill.

Video Report - #CNN WOLF 12/19/17: #TAX BILL VOTE

Video Report - Blitzer presses Trump adviser: Has he read security document?

Video Report - Bernie Sanders Reprimands Republicans' Tax Cuts For The Rich

Pashto Music - Sardar Ali Takkar - ماله بله لاره نشته د جنون او د جانانه ګني خوښه مې خندا ده ، ډیره ډیره د ژړا نه عبدالغني خان

#Pakistan: Catholics denounce lethal bombing of Methodist church in #Quetta

The Dec. 17 attack was merely the latest on Christian targets in recent years, with scores of private Christian homes burned, churches looted and defiled, and private Christian citizens harassed and physically assaulted.


The Christian share of the population is only about 1.5 percent
After the bombing of a Methodist church in northwestern Pakistan that left nine people dead, the country’s Catholic-sponsored National Commission for Justice and Peace has condemned what it called “the cowardly and inhuman attack on the church and innocent worshippers.”

Sixty people were also injured in the Sunday bombing at Bethel Memorial Church, located in Quetta in northwestern Pakistan, near the border with Afghanistan. The assault has been credited to the Islamic State group.

While applauding security forces for their prompt intervention, the commission called upon the Pakistani government to do more to combat the violence perpetrated by militant Islamic movements.

“The commission calls upon the government to bring the perpetrators to justice and address extremist elements and root causes of this intolerance,” the statement said. “They further stress the need to tighten measures for protection of all citizens, especially during this time of Christmas.  They also request the community to cooperate with officials and extend their volunteer services for the protection and security of people during the Christmas season.”

The statement was signed by Archbishop Joseph Arshad of Lahore; Father Emmanuel Yousaf, national director of the commission; and Cecil S. Chaudhry, a layman who serves as the body’s executive director. The National Commission for Justice and Peace was founded in 1985 by the Pakistan Catholic Bishops’ Conference.

“The uncertainty of life is inevitable, but precious lives lost in such an untimely manner are increasing in Pakistan,” the statement said.

“We thus pray to our Lord Jesus Christ that as a nation He may grant us strength, wisdom, tolerance and peace. May God give strength to the families of the victims to endure the loss of their loved ones and speedy recovery for the injured,” it said.

The commission’s statement also calls for the full implementation of a landmark June 19, 2014, ruling by Pakistan’s Supreme Court holding that freedom of religion must also include freedom of conscience, thought, expression, belief and faith, issued in the wake of the bombing of a church in Peshawar that killed 100 people.

Finally, the statement calls on government officials “to join hands with local church volunteers in providing them adequate training on emergency situations.”

The Dec. 17 attack was merely the latest on Christian targets in recent years, with scores of private Christian homes burned, churches looted and defiled, and private Christian citizens harassed and physically assaulted.

Although Christianity is one of the two largest non-Christian religions in Pakistan with an estimated 2.5 million adherents (the other being Hinduism), the Christian share of the population is only about 1.5 percent.

At times the climate of persecution of Christians in the country can become so intense that extreme measures may seem the only alternative to call attention to their plight. In 1998, Bishop John Joseph of Faisalabad shot himself to death in protest over the execution of a Christian man on trumped-up blasphemy charges brought by Muslim accusers.

http://timesofahmad.blogspot.com/2017/12/pakistan-catholics-denounce-lethal.html

It's time Pakistan banned the two-finger test for decoding consent in rape trials

By Zainab Z. Malik

2017 will go down in history as the year mainstream discourse on sexual violence was finally forced to confront the universal impunity enjoyed by perpetrators of assault.

Unfortunately, these global developments have failed to trigger any corresponding debate on the inability of Pakistan’s criminal justice system to provide redress to survivors.

In a country where conviction rates for rape are less than 4% and the National Police Bureau records an average of over 3,000 reported cases every year, the need for gender-sensitive legal and policy reform has never been more critical.

In recent years, any attempts to end impunity have focused on the introduction of piece-meal legislation, which whilst important for political visibility of the women’s movement, has failed to translate into increased conviction rates.

Key amongst the reasons underlying the limited impact of legislative developments in sexual assault is the central role played by gender stereotypes and biases in judicial proceedings in Pakistan. From the time of the registration of the complaint by the police to the sentencing of the perpetrator, whether or not the victim’s character is in line with what is deemed ‘chaste’ or ‘pure’ has a far greater bearing on the outcome of the case rather than the nature of the violation she has suffered.

Stereotypes pertaining to what is a ‘good woman’ remains the primary consideration for police, prosecutors and judges to decide whether or not a victim’s claim of rape deserves reliance.

In many ways, the decision to come forward and report the crime is the first instance where the criminal justice system begins to view the victim with suspicion.

It is presumed that a woman with honour would never bring shame upon herself by admitting that she had been raped. A ‘true victim’ in many ways is one that never comes forward.

Under the Pakistan Penal Code, Section 375, lack of consent on the part of the alleged victim is the primary ingredient for categorising an act of intercourse as rape. The existence of consent or lack thereof cannot be objectively quantified and thus it falls on the judge to decide whether or not to believe that a victim’s account is reliable. Reported judgments are littered with references to a victim’s ‘loose morals’ and ‘easy virtue’ which are taken as irrefutable evidence that she consented to the alleged act and thereby rendering her testimony as false. For instance, the Lahore High Court in Fahad Aziz v State (2008) disregarded the victim’s rape complaint as “she appeared to be a woman of easy virtue [and] indulged in sexual activities”.

Similarly in another decision by the Federal Shariat Court in 2006, the accused was acquitted of all rape charges as the “victim girl was of easy virtue and though she was unmarried and of 16 years, but had lost her virginity”.

The determinative nature of the victim’s character to judicial decision making is reinforced by reliance on outdated ‘medical’ tests called two-finger rape tests. A relic of British India, the archaic test involves inserting two fingers into the vagina of the victim in order to determine whether or not she is “habituated to sexual intercourse”.

The test is not a legal requirement but a medical practice that has become part of legal jurisprudence.

The affirmative findings of a test i.e. deeming the victim to be habituated to sexual intercourse if her vagina admits two fingers, are relied upon by courts to presume consent.

Thus a woman with a sexual history is assumed to consent forever more and therefore can never be raped. For instance, the Lahore High Court in Naveed Masih v The State(2008) refused to rely upon the statement of the victim as the “medical report revealed that hymen of victim was torn and vagina admitted two fingers easily”.

On the other hand, the Lahore High Court accepted the testimony of the victim in Amanullah v. State (2009) as “vagina admitted two finger tight fully and painfully which showed that sexual intercourse had been firstly committed with her [committed for the first time] and further that she was not a woman of easy virtue and was not used to committing sexual intercourse” [explanation added].

Former British colonies including India, Malaysia and Bangladesh have progressively began banning reliance on these tests.

There is a growing recognition that not only is there no scientific link between the laxity of one’s vagina and sexual history, a victim’s ‘character’ is irrelevant on the alleged act being adjudicated upon. Additionally, in order to protect victims, most countries have promulgated character-shield laws that bar the introduction of evidence pertaining to the character or sexual history.

However, not only does Pakistan continue to hold on to the two-finger test but its victims must withstand aspersions on their character and sexual histories during the course of the rape trial which often lasts for several years.

In fact, the character of the victim is the primary accused in the trial, with the conduct of the accused being a secondary consideration. It is thus little surprise that not only are convictions low, but victims themselves prefer to reach informal settlements with accused rather than put up with a trial.

Legal and policy reform barring gender stereotypes pertaining to the character of the victims from legal proceedings on sexual assault is urgently needed.

Whilst social norms pertaining to acceptable behaviour will not change overnight, the criminal justice system has an obligation to institute gender-sensitive mechanisms that provide adequate redress to victims without subjecting them to additional violations of their privacy and dignity.

Only then can the recent legislative amendments achieved their desired impact.

Pakistan - Faizabad sit-in was an act of political opportunism at its finest

By Hanzla Sajid

By allowing hardliners to dictate terms to the state, a dangerous precedent has been set by the incumbent government yet again.

Just last month, Khadim Hussain Rizvi and his group of followers took over a vital intersection between the twin cities, threatening the flow of life in the capital of a nuclear-armed federation. The sight of bearded men, defying state writ brought on an eerily familiar feeling of Lal Masjid bandits in 2007. The resemblance was uncanny; rogue elements with their loud speakers and hard-line rhetoric demanding implementation of what they thought the version of Shariah should be.

Sure, one could argue that the respect of the Holy Prophet (peace be upon him) is above all in a state that is declared an Islamic Republic by its constitution, but were the means used by Khadim Hussain Rizvi and his followers (armed in many cities) be declared lawful or even Islamic?

Would a law abiding citizen have taken the same path as Rizvi? And most importantly, would any other law abiding citizen been granted as much concession for the two weeks sit-in as have been provided to this particularly foul mouthed preacher? Surely we have seen the state give lesser room to manoeuvres to doctors demanding fair wages and even to blind people demanding basic employment.

By allowing hardliners to dictate terms to the state, a dangerous precedent has been set by the incumbent government yet again; One only needs to assemble a couple hundred men, occupy the capital and threaten to jam the wheel of life across the country. The rest of the followers just need to unleash hell on public transport, government infrastructure and roads in other major cities. A mini-coup like atmosphere, with a tinge of pseudo-religious touch.

Of the damages incurred is a long and multi-pronged story. Hundreds of vehicles were set on fire while government property, used by the masses, was shamelessly vandalised, all the while shouting religious slogans, undoubtedly inspired by their leader at the helm of affairs.

A motorbike is hardly used by the elite or governing class, against which the protesters were undoubtedly coming to vandalise. These bikes may have served as the only transport of the sole breadwinner of a poor family. One can almost say that this is not what a religion of peace would endorse. This is not, of course, to discredit Islamic teachings, but to highlight the hypocrisy of a flawed figure at the center of the controversy: Khadim Hussain Rizvi .

Whatever spin-off of the religion he has come up with, this is certainly not Islam . Notwithstanding the monetary losses incurred to the national exchequer, common man and common sense, the disillusioned hardliners have hit the soft image of the country. The one that nearly a decade of democracy and countless operations by the military against terrorism have succeeded to project. These armed protesters might have managed to damage the soft image of the country in a way that not even the 'agents' they often accuse of.

Forget the PR nightmare for the country and the field day western mainstream media had for reporting the hijacking of the country by a bunch of armed hooligans, one can imagine the monumental screw up when even sports website Cricinfo reads 'Religious unrest disrupts domestic cricket in Pakistan'. Bravo Mr Rizvi, we don't need enemies as long as we have patriots such as you in our ranks.

For those interested in the religious side of things, there are times when the Holy Prophet (peace be upon him) let go of the insults hurled at him and there are times when the death of the perpetrators was sanctioned, directly or indirectly. But one thing was always clear that the property and lives of fellow Muslims (and citizens) were declared forbidden for the fellow Muslims. The Holy Prophet (peace be upon him) even forbade such scorched-earth policies in the times of war. These gentlemen appear to have forgotten these basic pleasantries in peacetime.

People who were looted, their shops and livelihood set on fire and vehicles vandalised, have been subjected to victimisation by those instigated or inspired by Mr Rizvi's antics. A far cry from someone who aspires to be a defender of the Holy Prophet (peace be upon him)'s Sunnah.

What this looks like, loud and clear, is an act of political opportunism at its finest. The religious political party had its debut in NA-120 elections. It was only a matter of time before its party heads ventured into political opposition as well. The aim has been achieved. Khadim Hussain Rizvi has come out of the whole fiasco with a better political profile and is primed to reappear in the coming elections. The cost to the country, is an indifferent collateral to every politician in the country. Why should Rizvi's rise to the big stage be any different?

Reviewing Pakistan's Anti-Terror Fight, 3 Years After the Peshawar School Attack

By Daud Khattak

Why is the world reluctant to recognize Pakistan’s sacrifices in the fight against terrorism? The APS attack and its aftermath serve as a test case.

Another year has gone by, the third since the massacre at a military-run school in Pakistan’s northwestern town of Peshawar. Unlike the previous two anniversaries, this year the grief and agony of the victims’ families was overshadowed by political gimmicks, with the country’s top court at center stage.

For the families, it is another year without the realization of the promises and tall claims made by the civilian and military leadership. For Pakistan, the dream of a peaceful, tolerant and pluralistic society is still shrouded in the hateful slogans of sectarianism, political and ethnic confrontations, and deepening suspicions and divisions among the key state organs.

What else could better define Pakistan’s sacrifices in the ongoing fight against terrorism than the slaughter of innocent children at the Army Public School (APS) on December 16, 2014? Moreover, the horrific attack came at a time when Pakistan was (and still is) struggling to assure its American allies of its sincerity in this 17-year-long anti-terror war and to convince Washington to take note of Islamabad’s genuine concerns.

Looking back at the APS bloodbath, and the attacks on universities, mosques, churches, Imam Bargahs, markets, police stations and offices and personnel of other security agencies of the past three years, one may honestly question when Pakistan will no longer need to “do more” to fight terrorism.

This is a genuine question, especially at a time when Pakistan’s relationship with the United States is fraught with mutual misunderstandings. The two sides are struggling to synchronize their conflicting interests in Afghanistan and mitigate the doubts and misunderstandings in this often fraught but long-standing relationship.

Here we need a pause to find out why the world is still reluctant to recognize Pakistan’s sacrifices in the fight against terrorism. The APS attack and its aftermath can serve as a test case.

Soon after the tragedy, the political and military leadership put their heads together and unanimously approved a comprehensive strategy, known as the National Action Plan (NAP), to tackle the scourge of terrorism, extremism, and radicalism head on. This also included an across-the-board action against all militant groups and those spreading and supporting violent extremism, irrespective of their being in favor of or against the state.

Operation Zarb-e-Azb, launched six months ahead of the APS attack, inflicted a crushing blow on the Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) and its affiliates in its self-proclaimed emirates of North Waziristan, followed by their eviction from Tirah and Rajgal valleys in the Khyber tribal district bordering Afghanistan’s eastern Nangarhar province.

All this came with much fanfare and a sense of relief for most Pakistanis, who had been suffering the brunt of terrorist bomb blasts and suicide attacks on a near daily basis since 2007. But the expulsion of the TTP from Pakistan’s tribal areas was only one part of the hard mission. The bigger challenge was how to counter the spread of radicalism that nurtures violent extremism.

A glance at the last three years reveals that the military courts awarded death sentences to individuals mostly unknown to the majority of Pakistanis. The APS victims’ parents want punishments for the ones who blatantly claimed the massacre and continued their attacks on educational institutions to terrorize the people.

Although terrorist attacks have declined considerably over the past few years, there is no visible plan, nor apparently the will, to counter the elements spreading radicalism and extremism. Religious extremists are in control of the mainstream narrative, with one fresh example being the 21-day sit-in at the Faizabad Interchange in Islamabad last month.

The state stood helpless before 1,500 to 2,000 religious zealots and their leaders, who spit the venom of hatred against any one whose religious views contrast their narrow concepts of Islam and Muslimhood. The protest ended only when the federal government agreed to the resignation of its law minister. This was in clear violation of the National Action Plan agreed upon by Pakistan’s religious, political, and military leadership.

Meanwhile, the Tehrik-e-Labbaik Ya Rasool Allah (TLYA) and Milli Muslim League (MML) of Hafiz Muhammad Saeed are coming forward to contest the national and provincial assemblies elections without denouncing violence. Another cleric, Maulana Samiul Haq, who is openly eulogizing the Taliban and their jihad in Afghanistan has recently become the darling of Pakistan Tehrik-e-Insaaf (PTI), the party seen as the leading contender in the upcoming parliamentary election.

Last year, the PTI government in the northwestern Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province released 300 million rupees(roughly $3 million) for the Darul Uloom Haqqania, the seminary led by Maulana Samiul Haq, in the name of reforms. A year on, no signs of the promised reforms are visible. Was that huge sum meant to appease the person proudly calling himself “father of the Taliban?”

Samiul Haq is a staunch supporter of the Afghan Taliban who never denounces their attacks in Afghanistan, whether against civilians or the Afghan and international security forces. His continued prominence is one of the major reasons that Pakistan’s sacrifices go unnoticed or ignored by the United States and its NATO allies when it comes to the global war against terrorism.

Like any sovereign country, Pakistan reserves the right to defend its national interests and there are instances in history — from South Asia to the Middle East and Africa and even Europe — where states supported unsavory groups or leaders to safeguard their perceived or genuine national interests in a particular region.

While it is easier to befriend the enemy of your enemy, it is really an uphill task to befriend the enemy of your friend or ally and keep the friendship intact the same time.

Taliban, the Haqqanis, or other jihadi groups may not be considered an existential threat to Pakistan or its national interests in the short run, but the waves generated by their presence and activities are certainly promoting extremism and encourage groups with extremist tendencies to impose their agendas with the use of force.

Yesterday, it was the megaphone from the minarets of mosques and madrassas (religious seminaries), today it is the sit-ins and siege politics of the hardliners, who, if left unchallenged, will speak through the barrel of gun tomorrow to impose their harsh religious views.

It was not long ago that Mullah Fazlullah, then a simple cleric, and his father-in-law Sufi Muhammad, led the ragtag Lashkar (army of volunteers) of Pashtuns to fight the armed-to-the-teeth international forces in Afghanistan in late 2001. The state did not move as Fazlullah and Sufi were gathering people and leading them across the border to Afghanistan, because this did not pose any threat to Pakistan’s peace and security. Upon his return, Fazlullah started his illegal FM radio broadcasts and the state continued its meaningful silence.

The seriousness of the situation dawned upon the Pakistani leaders only when Fazlullah declared war against Pakistan in the aftermath of the operation against Jamia Hafsa and Lal Masjid (the Red Mosque) in July 2007. After two years of fighting and numerous military operations, the Pakistani security forces managed to defeat the Fazlullah-led Taliban in Swat/Malakand. Since then, Mullah Fazlullah has been hiding across the border in Afghanistan and his TTP fighters launch attacks on Pakistani civilians and security forces from time to time. The December 16, 2014 attack on the military-run school in Peshawar was one of these.

When I approached Falak Naz Bibi, mother of two victims, Noorullah Durrani and Saifullah Durrani, for an interview on the first anniversary of the APS attack in 2015, she was all tears and sighs. On the third anniversary in 2017, Falak Naz Bibi is worried about the future of other children and wants the state to find a permanent solution to Taliban terror.

“The government could not save my sons. But, for God’s sake, you must ensure safety for the rest. Leadership does not mean slogans and chairing meetings. Leadership means lead from the front… the leader is one to risk his life to save others,” said Bibi, the wife of a retired army soldier, as tears rolled down her cheeks.

Aurang Zeb Khan, father of the 16-year-old Hassan Zeb, another victim of the APS terrorist attack, has decorated a room in his house with the photos, books, trophies, drawings, and clothes and shoes of his son. Each night, Aurang Zeb goes to sleep in the same room, with the hope that his teenage son will visit him in his dream. “But he never comes… I don’t know why,” Khan told one of my journalist colleagues in a recent interview.

Like the APS victims’ parents, the majority of Pakistanis want their country’s political and military leadership to revisit and, if possible, change the policies of the past three decades to safeguard the future of their country and coming generations.

After #QuettaChurchAttack, #Pakistan Continues to Blame Foreign Powers for Terrorism

By Shah Meer Baloch

Once again, Balochistan bleeds while the government adopts the same old response: fingerpointing.

Balochistan’s capital city bleeds again after 9 people were killed and more than 50 were injured in an attack on Quetta’s Bethel Memorial Methodist Church on Sunday, leaving many questions swirling in the minds of the people as Pakistan once again blames foreign infiltration and neighboring countries for supporting and harboring terrorists.

Responding to the terrorist attack on the church even before an investigation was conducted, Minister of Home and Tribal Affairs Sarfraz Bugti tweeted:

“Till the safe haven of terrorists prevail in #Afghanistan, menace of terrorism shall continue to plague #Balochistan, #Pakistan.”

Credit for the attack has been claimed by the Islamic State. But one wonders how ISIS would get support from Afghanistan when the Islamic militant group is currently in a war with the country. Wasn’t the immediate response and blame coming from the minister the same diversionary tactic we’ve come to expect from the establishment?

In response to Bugti’s tweet, Mariam Ispahani (an entrepreneur and writer, as noted on her profile) replied:

“Minister Saab, the terrorist problem is also inside #Pakistan and must be dealt with first. So… let’s not throw all the blame on #Afghanistan please.”

While a number of extremist militant groups are active in Balochistan, Pakistani authorities have repeatedly failed to crack down on them, and instead blame attacks on foreign meddling.

Since 2016, ISIS has been very active in Pakistan, and specifically in Balochistan. There have been five major attacks in Balochistan claimed by ISIS, including the latest one on the church. The other four involved Shah Noorani, the Quetta Police Academy, the Civil Hospital, and the Pir Rakhel Shah Shrine in Jhal Magsi, in which almost 220 were killed and some 450 were wounded. Despite the fact the Islamic militant organization has been taking responsibility for the attacks, Pakistani authorities have rejected the strong presence of ISIS in the country. Just this past September, the local police removed an ISIS flag in Islamabad, Pakistan’s capital, after a citizen reported it to the police.

When ISIS claimed responsibility for the August 8, 2016 attack on the Civil Hospital in Quetta which killed 100 people, including 64 lawyers, and injured more than 160, the top civil-military leadership rushed to the city. Former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif then declared, “No one will be allowed to disturb the peace in the province that has been restored thanks to the countless sacrifices by the security forces.” Pakistani leadership blamed RAW, India’s intelligence agency, for that attack. A similar response came after the attack on the Quetta Police Academy – the prime minister and army chief strongly condemned the attack, then convened a high-level meeting to discuss matters related to counterterrorism. One year later, what transpired during those high-level meetings has still not been made public.

This blaming of hostile countries is not new. Hours after the attack on the Police Academy, the top official of the Frontier Corps of Balochistan put the blame on “terrorists who belonged to Lashkar-i-Jhangvi (LJ) militant group… communicating with their handlers in Afghanistan.” It is possible that other countries might be involved in sponsoring terrorism in Pakistan, but the question that arises here is this: If the Frontier Corps official was aware of this communication, why were the terrorists not prevented from attacking? If he was unaware of it before the incident, how could the investigation be completed in just two or three hours?

Dr. Ayesha Siddiqa, a senior Pakistani defense analyst, lamented the remarks by Balochistan government spokesman Anwar Kakar during a BBC Urdu debate last year when the spokesman blamed the Indian and Afghan intelligence agencies. When contacted, Siddiqa responded, “I still stand by what I said. However, Sarfraz Bugti’s context is a bit different. Bugti wants to use the argument to label the entire Baloch nationalism as a case of violent extremism which then can be targeted by the state.”

Pakistan often claims support of Baloch nationalists comes from its neighbors in the region, not extremist groups like Islamic State.

“Didn’t you guys just say that the Indians and Afghans were supporting the Baloch nationalists?” Siddiqa asked, referring to the Pakistani authorities. “How come supporters of the Baloch nationalists now become supporters of the Islamic State?

There has always been a tendency in Pakistan to shift the blame onto RAW or Afghan intelligence to placate the public and divert their attention from questioning the security establishment. However, to date, no investigation has come to a logical conclusion.

Ms. Siddiqa believes extremist forces have infiltrated the Baloch nationalists since insurgents seem to always seek help from other groups.

Malik Siraj Akbar, founder of Baluchistaniat, a think tank based in the United States, said, “Balochistan is a point of interest because it shares borders with Iran and Afghanistan. [Insurgents] can easily cross borders. The government has sympathies for them as well.”

Akbar added that “there is tremendous support for these people inside Balochistan’s mosques and madrassas. [The] state is happy to have these schools so that they can keep a check on Baloch nationalism. Many religious schools, if not all, provide intellectual guidelines and refuge to these terrorists.”

One reason for the unrest and terrorist activities in Balochistan is that most decisions related to the province have always been made by the federal government and the establishment, whether it involves security, politics, or the economy. There has really been no power sharing despite the fact that 18th Constitutional Amendment ensures the devolution of power to the federating units from the Pakistani central authority. This amendment has not been implemented in letter nor in spirit. Last year the Balochistan government urged the federal government to share power with the province to keep terrorist activities in the province in check under the pre-1958 powers given by the Frontier Crimes Regulations (FCR).

Speaking to the Senate’s Functional Committee on Human Rights last year soon after the attack on Police Academy in Quetta, Balochistan Home Secretary Mohammad Akbar said: “The provincial administration has no legal power in Balochistan, which has become a war zone.” Akbar further added, “Balochistan has become a cocktail of insurgencies, religious extremism, and other criminal activities. We cannot hide that the system has failed in Balochistan.”

The Balochistan chief minister’s secretariat, surrounded by many checkpoints, is not more than one kilometer away from the church where the blast on Sunday occurred. Somehow the terrorists made it through the high-security zone.

Pakistan needs all its major political parties to sit down together and devise a plan for defeating terrorism, and then put forth that plan on the table of the security establishment.

But rather than working together to defeat the menace of terrorism and questioning the security establishment over security lapses, most of the Pakistani political parties have been maligning one another. Bilawal Bhutto Zardari, chairman of the Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP), targeted the prime minister of Pakistan in his recent tweet:

“Outraged, frustrated and saddened by the terrorist attack in #Quetta. Cowards attack the weak, innocent and vulnerable. Adding insult to injury this attack comes a day after our PM declared his government had defeated terrorism. The apathy of the state sickens me.”

Terror is a double-edged sword. It cuts both ways. The war against religious extremism cannot be won by shifting the blame to others and covering one’s own blunders. The convening of high-level security meetings will not achieve peace until the state stops making distinctions between good and bad terrorists. It is high time the state takes responsibility for its ill-conceived policies and starts fresh by eliminating all safe sanctuaries of terrorists, like the Taliban’s Quetta Shura, and refrains from using extremists to counter Baloch nationalists or any other forces.

For sustainable peace under a so-called democracy, there must be power sharing between the provinces and the Federal Government as stipulated by the 18th Amendment, especially on issues involving provincial security, politics, and the economy. Unless and until these rights are enforced, peace will only be a distant dream for a province plagued by poverty and insurgency.

Lastly, but equally important, I have two questions.

To all political parties in Pakistan:

Is it not your obligation to unceasingly demand answers for the lapses in security which enable the ongoing deadly attacks against Pakistani citizens? Unless, of course, you are a member of a party that condones such attacks or offers assistance to the attackers.

To the Pakistani law-enforcement agencies:

Rather than afterwards blaming “foreign conspiracies,” shouldn’t you be reporting your successes in thwarting attacks, and the arrests of those plotting those attacks? Effective security agencies in other countries do not target those who publicly protest injustices; rather, they are using their highly trained operatives to actually prevent attacks against their country’s citizens.

PPP’s recent public meetings have frustrated opponents: Bilawal

Chairman Pakistan Peoples Party Bilawal Bhutto Zardari has said that millions of people, workers and Jiyalas from all over Pakistan will attend the 10th martyrdom anniversary of Shaheed Mohtarma Benazir Bhutto at Garhi Khuda Bux, Larkana on December 27.

A meeting held at Bilawal House on Monday, the PPP leaders from Sindh briefed the Chairman about the arrangements being made by the party for the 10th martyrdom anniversary at her mausoleum.

Those attended the meeting including Leader of the Opposition Syed Khursheed Shah, Faryal Talpur, Syed Qaim Ali Shah, Nisar Ahmed Khuhro, Murad Ali Shah, Maula Bux Chandio, Waqar Mehdi and Saeed Ghani.

Bilawal Bhutto Zardari said that party has to make additional and expanded arrangements on the occasion so that people coming from nook and corner of the country face no difficulty during their political pilgrimage to the last resting place of their leader.

The PPP Chairman also said that growing popularity of the Party and its successful recent public meetings have frustrated the opponents. He said that PPP was only national level Party having roots across the country while rest are either regional or bubble parties.

Bilawal Bhutto Zardari reiterated that PPP will win the next general elections all over Pakistan.

Pakistan considering plan to use yuan in trade with China

Pakistan is considering a proposal to replace the U.S. dollar with the Chinese yuan for bilateral trade between Pakistan and China, the English-language daily newspaper Dawn reported on Tuesday.

According to Reuters, bilateral trade between the countries totaled $13.8 billion in 2015 to 2016.

Interior Minister Ahsan Iqbal, who has been central to the planning and implementation of China-Pakistan economic ties, was reported discussing the proposal after unveiling a long-term economic development cooperation plan for the two countries.

Iqbal said Pakistan would continue to use the rupee domestically.

The long-term plan highlighted key cooperation areas between the neighboring states including road and rail connections, information network infrastructure, energy, trade and industrial parks, agriculture, poverty alleviation and tourism.

The plan marks the first time the two countries have said how long they plan to work together on the project, known as the China Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC,)taking the economic partnership to at least 2030.

China has already committed to investing $57 billion in Pakistan to finance CPEC as part of Beijing’s “Belt and Road” initiative to build a new Silk Road of land and maritime trade routes across more than 60 countries in Asia, Europe and Africa.

https://www.samaa.tv/economy/2017/12/pakistan-use-yuan-trade-china/