#Pakistan - The Khorasan chapter threat

Muhammad Amir Rana

WITH the Afghan Taliban takeover of Kabul, the militant Islamic State group’s Khorasan chapter (IS-K) has also come under the global radar after its horrific recent bombing in the Afghan capital. Many experts are projecting the terrorist group as a major threat to the Taliban regime as well as to regional peace and security. The terrorist attack in the high security zone of the Kabul airport during the evacuation of foreigners and under-threat Afghans have strengthened perceptions that IS-K will become a major factor of instability in Afghanistan and beyond.

However, the potential threat posed by IS-K must be assessed objectively and scientifically without falling for any vague ‘evidence’. The Taliban may also tend to exaggerate the threat with a view to winning the support of the regional powers especially Russia, China and the Central Asian states, which are concerned about the terrorist group. IS-K may also want to make Afghanistan a launching base in its efforts to restore its lost ‘caliphate’ of Iraq and Syria. But does it have the potential to convert Afghanistan into a new battlefront?

First, one must investigate the strengths of the terrorist group. After taking over power in Afghanistan, the status of the Taliban has apparently changed from a non-state to a state actor. That has ‘elevated’ the status of IS-K as a major violent non-state actor in Afghanistan. Now the group can use all those strategic and propaganda tactics against the Taliban regime, which the Taliban once used against the outgoing regime. IS-K has a history of effective use of its propaganda capabilities. After the Kabul attack, it fed the media with the propaganda it had long been desiring to unleash in Afghanistan. The group conveyed a message that besides being “filthy nationalists”, the Taliban were merely America’s puppets like their predecessors in Kabul, and were not capable of bringing peace to the country. Most importantly, it has challenged the ideological credentials of the Taliban while declaring them apostates and companions of the ‘Crusaders’. IS-K has also claimed that it is the sole custodian of the ideology of an ‘Islamic state’. The potential threat posed by IS-K must be assessed objectively and scientifically.

In recent years, IS-K has managed to survive in Afghanistan in the form of small cells, which were also found involved in sporadic high-impact terrorist attacks. Some reports suggested these cells were used as proxies in many instances. After the Taliban takeover of Kabul, IS-K can make a global call for intensifying its violent campaign. There is no demonstrable evidence available that the group can survive long if it changes its strategy and launches big-scale guerrilla operations. According to the group’s own accounts, the current head Shahab al-Muhajir is considered a great strategist and expert in urban warfare, and he will continue relying on his terrorist strategies. The Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, the central body of the terrorist group, is also focusing on the restoration of its image and glory and has ordered its chapters all over the world to raid prisons to release its detained members. Hundreds of IS-K prisoners were among those recently freed from Afghan jails and are reportedly being hunted by the Taliban.

Even before the Taliban takeover, the IS-K was creating new pockets in Afghanistan, especially along the borders of Tajikistan and Uzbekistan. These border areas have large Salafi populations that suits IS-K because of their sectarian affinity. Also, apart from Afghan and Pakistani members, several IS-K fighters come from Central Asia and China’s Xinjiang region. If the group succeeds in its relocation plan, it could hit several targets. One of the reasons for Russia’s engagement with the Taliban was to seek assurances against the IS-K’s march towards northern Afghanistan and further to Central Asia. The Taliban have taken over the northern regions first, not only to reduce the prospects of any local uprising but also to eliminate the chances of IS-K’s advance. However, IS-K will continue focusing on these areas, as unlike the border with Pakistan, even a smaller resistance by IS-K can create problems for the Taliban regime and can disturb their relations with China and Russia.

The IS-K will also be of advantage to the Taliban regime to get legitimacy through acting against it and winning the support of its regional allies. Meanwhile, it will be a major security concern, and IS-K will remain a big ideological challenge as well.

The real potential of the IS-K will be determined by its ability to survive in Afghanistan including through displaying political and ideological flexibility. Since its inception in January 2015, the group’s ideological differences with the Taliban have remained a major bone of contention. It is less likely that the terrorist group will show any flexibility in that regard in the future and allow the entry of recruits from either the ranks of Taliban rebels or from the TTP without their conversion to their brand of Salafism. A recent IS-K statement reflects that the group will not amend its ideologically oriented policy just to gain more recruits. Rather, the group is focusing on expanding its urban network and is hunting for educated youth which was alienated after the Taliban victory and become prone to ideological radicalism.

It is interesting that the IS-K and TTP have survived long while living together in the same vicinity in the Kunar and Nangarhar provinces. Neither have challenged the other and even when the Haqqani Network expelled IS-K fighters from some areas of Kunar, the TTP remained a silent spectator. The TTP might have avoided confrontation with IS-K because many of its former commanders are now in the group. Thus, despite having ideological differences both have tried to keep their human resources intact. There are few chances that the TTP will join hands with IS-K as it is an ally of Al Qaeda with allegiance to Mullah Haibatullah, the Taliban’s supreme leader.

The probability is also very low that the defeated Afghan army and police will join IS-K ranks as happened in Iraq. Unlike the Iraqi army, the Afghan army was demoralised and was not ready to fight. Secondly, the IS-K is an external and weak terrorist outfit, which cannot manage massive inclusions.

The IS-K is a potential terrorist threat, but not beyond being controlled. If the Taliban and regional actors craft better strategies and the ‘drone support’ from the US remains intact, the IS-K can be neutralised effectively.

https://www.dawn.com/news/1644581/the-khorasan-chapter-threat

Taliban confirms meet between leader Mullah Baradar & Pakistan’s ISI chief Faiz Hameed

Hameed dashed to Kabul on an unannounced visit last week, becoming the only high-ranking foreign official to visit Kabul since the Taliban seized the Afghan capital in mid-August.

The Taliban on Monday confirmed that Pakistan’s powerful intelligence chief Lt Gen Faiz Hameed has met its de-facto leader Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar, amidst efforts by the insurgent group to finalise a government in Afghanistan.Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) Director General Lt Gen Hameed dashed to Kabul on an unannounced visit last week, becoming the only high-ranking foreign official to visit Kabul since the Taliban seized the Afghan capital in mid-August.

During a press conference in Kabul on Monday, Taliban spokesman Zabihullah Mujahid confirmed that the ISI chief had met with Mullah Baradar during his visit to Kabul, BBC Urdu reported.

The Taliban has assured Islamabad that Afghan territory will not be used against Pakistan, it said.

Earlier, Pakistani media reported that a delegation of senior officials led by Lt Gen Hameed was in Kabul at the invitation of the Taliban, but the insurgent group said that Islamabad had proposed his visit to Kabul.

On Sunday, the Taliban said that the top Pakistani spy was in Afghanistan to improve bilateral relations between Kabul and Islamabad.

Ahmadullah Wasiq, deputy head of the Taliban’s Cultural Commission, said that the Taliban leaders talked with Lt Gen Hameed about bilateral relations and the problems of Afghan passengers at the Torkham and Spin Boldak passes between Afghanistan and Pakistan.

“This Pakistani official has come to solve Afghan passengers’ problems at the border areas, especially in Torkham and Spin Boldak. They wanted (his visit to Kabul) and we accepted, Wasiq was quoted as saying by TOLO news.

Pakistan on Thursday temporarily closed the Chaman border crossing – the second-largest commercial border point with Afghanistan after the Torkham commercial town in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa due to security threats.

At his press conference, Mujahid noted that the recent delegation to Kabul said the crossings had been closed due to security concerns linked to release of prisoners inside Afghanistan, and requested checks for those seeking to enter or leave the country.Citing sources close to Hizb-e-Islami party leader Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, the channel said that Pakistan’s intelligence chief also met him and discussed the current situation in the country.In a short video clip circulated in the media last week, Lt Gen Hameed was seen trying to respond to questions by a journalist who first asked: Will you be meeting senior people in the Taliban?”

“No, I’m not clear ” the ISI chief said and looked towards Pakistan ambassador to Kabul Mansour Ahmad Khan, who was standing by his side, to respond to the question.

In response to another question, Hameed smiled and said: “Don’t worry, everything will be okay.”

Hameed’s visit to Afghanistan came amidst mounting pressure on the Taliban to form an inclusive government acceptable to the international community. The insurgent group is struggling to give shape to a broad-based and inclusive administration acceptable to the international community.

It was the first high-level visit of any Pakistani official to Afghanistan since the Taliban took over Kabul on August 15, in a move that surprised both their foes and friends.

Since then, the Taliban have been trying to form a government but so far have held back the announcement.

Pakistan was often accused by the Afghanistan government of giving the Taliban military aid, a charge denied by Islamabad.

https://theprint.in/world/taliban-confirms-meet-between-leader-mullah-baradar-pakistans-isi-chief-faiz-hameed/728837/

پاکستان پیپلزپارٹی کبھی بھی چور دروازے سے اداراتی دھاندلی کرنے کی اجازت نہیں دے گی اور اس کی ہر فورم پر مخالفت کرے گی۔ سیکریٹری جنرل پاکستان پیپلزپارٹی پارلیمنٹیرینز سینیٹر فرحت اللہ بابر

پاکستان پیپلزپارٹی نے سینیٹ کی کمیٹی برائے پارلیمانی امور کی ساخت میں یکطرفہ تبدیلی کرکے اسے حکومت کی جانب جھکانے کی سخت مذمت کی ہے۔ ساخت میں یہ تبدیلی اس وقت کی گئی ہے جب حکومت الیکٹرانک ووٹنگ مشین پر متنازعہ قانون سازی کرنا چاہتی ہے سیکریٹری جنرل پاکستان پیپلزپارٹی پارلیمنٹیرینز سینیٹر فرحت اللہ بابر نے ایک بیان میں کہا ہے کہ پاکستان پیپلزپارٹی کبھی بھی چور دروازے سے اداراتی دھاندلی کرنے کی اجازت نہیں دے گی اور اس کی ہر فورم پر مخالفت کرے گی۔ 

جمعہ کے روز سینیٹ سیکریٹریٹ نوٹیفکیشن کے ذریعے پی ٹی آئی کی ایک رکن کو پارلیمانی امور کی کمیٹی میں شامل کر لیا اور اس کے لئے نہ تو قائد حزب اختلاف اور پارلیمانی امور کمیٹی کے چیئرمین سے کوئی مشاورت بھی نہیں کی۔ ایک نیا ممبر شامل کرنے کا مقصد اس متنازعہ بل کو بلڈوز کرنا ہے۔ انہوں نے کہا کہ اس کمیٹی کی اصلی ساخت میں 13ممبر شامل تھے جن میں اپوزیشن اور حکومت کے چھ چھ ممبر تھے اور اس کمیٹی کے چیئرمین پی پی پی کے سینیٹر تاج حیدر ہیں ۔ اس کمیٹی میں توازن خراب کرنے کے لئے پہلے چیئرمین سینیٹ نے یکطرفہ طور پر پی پی پی کے سینیٹر مصطفی نواز کھوکھرکو بغیر کوئی وجہ بتائے کمیٹی سے نکال دیا حالانکہ یہ ان کا اختیار ہی نہیں ہے۔

 جب اس اقدام کی پرزور مخالفت کی گئی تو مصطفی نواز کھوکھر کی کمیٹی کی رکنیت بحال کر دی گئی۔ جس کے بعد سینیٹ سیکریٹریٹ نے ایک نوٹیفکیشن کے ذریعے پی ٹی آئی کی ثمینہ ممتاز کو اس کمیٹی میں اضافی رکن کے طور پر شامل کر دیا۔ سینیٹر فرحت اللہ بابر نے کہا کہ کچھ عرصہ قبل سینیٹ سیکریٹریٹ نے اس کمیٹی کے چیئرمین کو اس بات کی اجازت نہیں دی کہ وہ فافن کو الیکٹرانک ووٹنگ مشین کی بریفنگ پر دعوت دیں۔ یہ تمام اقدامات یہ ظاہر کرتے ہیں حکومت ہر صورت میں انتخابات میں دھاندلی کرنا چاہتی ہے۔ انہوں نے کہا کہ پیپلزپارٹی کا موقف اس بارے میں نہایت واضح ہے۔

 اس سے قبل 2018ءکے انتخابات میں آرٹی ایس کو بٹھا دیا گیا تھا اور اس کے علاوہ مشین کے ذریعے پلاٹوں کی قرعہ اندازی میں بھی ٹیکنالوجی کی ساکھ پر سوالات اٹھا دئیے ہیں۔ اس تجرے کے بعد الیکٹرانک ووٹنگ مشین پر اعتماد کا سوال ہی پیدا نہیں ہوتا اور جب تک تمام سیاسی پارٹیوں کا اتفاق رائے نہ ہوجائے الیکٹرانک ووٹنگ مشین استعمال نہیں کی جا سکتی۔ اس کے علاوہ الیکشن کمیشن اوار تمام اسٹیک ہولڈروں کو بھی اس تمام معاملے میں شریک کرنا انتہائی ضروری ہے اور یہ بات بھی دیکھنا ہوگی کہ دیگر ممالک میں الیکٹرانک ووٹنگ مشینوں کا استعمال کیوں کامیاب نہیں ہو سکا۔ 

پاکستان پیپلزپارٹی چوری چھپے اس قسم کی دھاندلی کی ہر قیمت پر مذاحمت کرے گی۔

https://www.ppp.org.pk/pr/25445/

شہداء کی لازوال قربانیاں، فوجی جوانوں کا غیرمتزلزل عزم اور عوام کا ناقابل تسخیر اتحاد ہماری طاقت اور ہمارے روشن مستقبل کی ضمانت ہے، چیئرمین پاکستان پیپلز پارٹی بلاول بھٹو زرداری

اسلام آباد / کراچی (5 ستمبر 2021) پاکستان پیپلز پارٹی کے چیئرمین بلاول بھٹو زرداری نے کہا ہے کہ شہداء کی لازوال قربانیاں، فوجی جوانوں کا غیرمتزلزل عزم اور عوام کا ناقابل تسخیر اتحاد ہماری طاقت اور ہمارے روشن مستقبل کی ضمانت ہے۔ یومِ دفاع کے موقعے پر میڈیا سیل بلاول ہاؤس کی جانب سے جاری کردہ اپنے پیغام میں پی پی پی چیئرمین نے کہا کہ پاکستان پیپلز پارٹی کی جدوجہد پاکستان کو مضبوط سے مضبوط تر بنانے کے لیے ہے۔ 

یومِ دفاعِ پاکستان کے موقعے پر قوم کو مبارکباد دیتے ہوئے چیئرمین بلاول بھٹو

زرداری نے کہا کہ یوم دفاع منانے کا مقصد پاکستان کی جغرافیہ، اس کے نظریے اور جمہوریت کا تحفظ کرنا ہے۔ پی پی پی چیئرمین نے نشاندہی کرتے ہوئے کہا کہ یہ ملک کے پہلے منتخب وزیراعظم شہید ذوالفقار علی بھٹو تھے، جنہوں نے قوم کو ایٹمی پروگرام کا تحفہ دیا، جبکہ یہ ان کی دختر وزیر اعظم شہید محترمہ بینظیر بھٹو تھیں، جنہوں نے ملک کو میزائل ٹیکنالوجی پروگرام دیا، تاکہ ملک کے دفاع کو ناقابل تسخیر بنایا جائے۔

 بلاول بھٹو زرداری کا کہنا تھا کہ وہ تمام فوجی جوان، جنہوں نے پاکستان کے دفاع کے لیے اپنی جانیں قربان کیں، ہماری قومی تاریخ کے ناقابل فراموش ہیرو ہیں۔ انہوں نے مزید کہا کہ میں آج یوم دفاع کے موقع پر پوری قوم کی جانب سے اپنے شہداء کے خاندانوں کو مکمل یکجہتی کا یقین دلاتا ہوں۔ انہوں نے کہا کہ وہ ان تمام شہریوں کو بھی سلام پیش کرتے ہیں، جنہوں نے دہشت گردی اور انتہا پسندی کے خلاف جنگ میں بے مثال قربانیاں دی ہیں۔

 بلاول بھٹو زرداری نے اس عزم کا اعادہ کیا کہ وہ قائد اعظم محمد علی جناح کے فلسفے کی روشنی میں نظریہ پاکستان کی پیروی مضبوط دفاع کے ساتھ کریں گے۔

https://www.ppp.org.pk/pr/25442/

Music Video - Doja Cat - Kiss Me More

Video Report - Syria agrees to transit gas and electricity to crisis-hit Lebanon

Video - Le Martinet: A French communist village | DW News

Video Report - 'Sort of like an American Taliban': Acosta calls out GOP figures

OPINION: How Has Joe Biden Become So Unpopular?

 JAMELLE BOUIE

President Biden’s job approval rating is on the downslope. As of Friday morning, he was at 45.8 percent approval and 48.5 percent disapproval — from a high of 54 percent approval, 41 percent disapproval at the end of his first 100 days.

There is a laundry list of reasons for this. Not only is the United States still in the grip of a pandemic, but also the Delta variant of the coronavirus has led to record infections and deaths in Florida, Texas and other states with relatively low vaccination rates (and where officials have taken a stand against mitigation efforts). At the same time that Delta took hold, Biden also faced a huge backlash from the press and his partisan opponents over the American withdrawal from Afghanistan, which began in chaotic fashion with the collapse of the Afghan National Army, the subsequent advance of the Taliban and of course the suicide bombing in Kabul that killed 13 U.S. service members.

The administration quickly adjusted to the chaos, though, and by the time the last American soldiers left on Monday, the U.S. military and its allies had evacuated around 124,000 people, including thousands of U.S. citizens and tens of thousands of Afghan nationals. And as seen in the latest jobs report from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the economy is growing at a slower rate than it did at the start of the summer.

Taken together, you have a pretty good explanation for why Biden is doing much worse with the public than he was at the beginning of the year.

One of the most consistent findings from the past 20 years of public opinion research is that each new president is more divisive than the last. George W. Bush was more divisive than Bill Clinton; Barack Obama was more divisive than Bush; Donald Trump was more divisive than Obama; and Biden may well end up more divisive than Trump, at least in terms of approval rating by partisan affiliation. Some of this reflects circumstances, some of it reflects the individuals, but most of it is a function of partisan and ideological polarization. Modern presidents have a high floor for public opinion but a low ceiling.

This is a major change from the 1970s and 1980s, when the public was less polarized and numbers could swing from the low 30s (even the 20s) to the high 60s and beyond. At the peak of his popularity, in the wake of the Persian Gulf War of 1991, George H.W. Bush had a job approval rating of 89 percent, including 82 percent among Democrats and 88 percent among independents. Those numbers are just not possible in today’s environment.

Biden’s slide is noteworthy, but it is also exactly what we should expect given the structural conditions of American politics in the 21st century. But this cuts against the unstated assumption that a president should have an approval rating above 50 percent. It’s an assumption that, as Sam Goldman, a professor of political science at George Washington University, observed, is “another example of how we’ve adopted the deeply exceptional midcentury interlude as our baseline — partly because it remains our vision of normality, and partly because that’s when reliable data start.”The “deeply exceptional midcentury interlude” — roughly speaking the years between the end of World War II and the election of Richard Nixon in 1968 — is the source of a lot of our normative understandings of American politics, despite the fact that the conditions of that period are impossible to replicate. When politicians and political observers pine for an era of bipartisanship, they are pining for the 1950s and 1960s (and to an extent the 1970s).If we were to look farther back in time, to say, the late 19th century, we might find an era that, for all of its indelible foreignness, is closer to ours in terms of the shape and structure of its politics, from its sharp partisan polarization and closely contested national elections to its democratic backsliding and deep anxieties over immigration and demographic change.

We don’t have polling data for President Grover Cleveland. But we do know that he won his victory in the 1884 election by 37 votes in the Electoral College and a half-a-percent in the national popular vote. His successor, Benjamin Harrison, lost the popular vote by a little less than 1 percent and won the Electoral College by 65 votes. Those narrow results suggest, I think, a similarly narrow spread for presidential approval — high floors, low ceilings.

American politics eventually broke out of its late-19th-century equilibrium of high polarization and tightly contested elections. In the 1896 presidential election, William McKinley became the first candidate in decades to win more than 50 percent of the popular vote, beating his Democratic opponent, William Jennings Bryan, by 4.3 percent. He won re-election in 1900 and after his assassination the following year, his successor, Theodore Roosevelt, would win in 1904 by the most lopsided margin since Abraham Lincoln’s 1864 re-election victory. What changed in American politics to produce more decisive national victories? Well, that’s not a happy story. Suffrage restrictions of immigrants in the North, the rise of Jim Crow in the South, and the success of capital in suppressing labor revolt and setting the terms of political contestation had removed millions of Americans from the electorate by the turn of the 20th century. Political power was concentrated and consolidated in a bourgeois class (mostly) represented by the Republican Party, which, with the exception of Woodrow Wilson’s twin victories in 1912 and 1916, held the White House from 1897 to 1933. It would take another catastrophe, the Great Depression, to change that landscape.

As for the tectonic force that might break our partisan and ideological stalemate? It is impossible to say. Oftentimes in history, things seem stable until, suddenly, they aren’t. https://www.nytimes.com/2021/09/04/opinion/biden-job-approval-rating.html

Video - Pakistan Peoples Party Workers Convention in Dera Ghazi Khan

Pakistan faces accusations of undercounting Hindus, Christians in latest census

 

• The results of Pakistan's sixth Population and Housing Census were delayed after some provinces, including Sindh and Balochistan flagged the issue of undercounting.

Religious minorities in Pakistan have accused the government of undercounting them in the latest census data published in May, four years after the survey was conducted. The survey for the sixth Population and Housing Census was undertaken under former Pakistan Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif and got completed in 2017. The results, however, were delayed after some provinces, including Sindh and Balochistan flagged the issue of undercounting.

Pakistan Bureau of Statistics published the data of the sixth Population and Housing Census after approval from a constitutional body that resolves power-sharing disputes between the provincial and federal governments. While Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and Balochistan caved in under pressure from the Imran Khan government, Sindh continued to raise objections on the census data.

According to the 2017 census data, Pakistan’s overall population has grown to 207.68 million, an increase of around 75 million since 1998 when the country recorded 132.3 million people. The census suggests that the Muslim population in Pakistan grew by 96.47% while the population of other religious minorities reported negligible growth and even shrank in some cases.

Hindus in Pakistan account for 1.73% of the total population while Christians make up for 1.27% of Pakistani residents. Other minorities like Ahmaddiyas account for less than 0.1% of Pakistan’s population. Karachi Supreme Court attorney Neel Keshav claimed that the Hindu population in Pakistan is likely to be much higher, reported Pakistan Today.

"The 1998 census data showed a Hindu population of nearly 2 million. Yet the new census showed that it had only risen to 3.5 million in 20 years," the Pakistani daily quoted Keshav as saying.

Human rights groups have frequently raised concerns over the condition of religious minorities in Pakistan. The Human Rights Commission of Pakistan (HRCP) had said in a 2019 report that both the Hindu and Christian communities in Sindh and Punjab continued to report cases of forced conversion.

"Even though Christians have migrated overseas and converted to Islam, our church records make us suspect that Christians may have been undercounted by at least half a million. We're struggling to find accurate data, and somehow the government is not helping. It is not investigating," Pakistan Today quoted Center for Social Justice Director Peter Jacob as saying.

https://www.hindustantimes.com/world-news

How the Taliban's Afghanistan takeover could hurt US-Pakistan ties

By S Khan

NATO has said Pakistan has a "special responsibility" to make sure Afghanistan lives up to its international commitments. But some Pakistanis say they refuse to be the "scapegoats" of the West's failure in Afghanistan.

The fall of Kabul to the Taliban has left many people in Pakistan questioning their country's future relations with the US.  

Some hard-liners in Pakistan say Washington will blame Islamabad for the Islamic fundamentalist group's takeover of Afghanistan.   

Pakistan's Human Rights Minister Shireen Mazari wrote an article on Tuesday asserting that "her country would no longer accept being scapegoated for the failures of others."  

Bill Emmott, former editor-in-chief of The Economist, wrote last week in a commentary for Project Syndicate that "the blame" for failure in Afghanistan and the return of the Taliban "lies largely with Pakistan and America's inability to bring the country onside."  

Pakistan is said to be the largest backer of the cloistered group of the Taliban whose regime was recognized by Islamabad when they governed Afghanistan from 1996 to 2001.  

Husain Haqqani, the South and Central Asia director at the Hudson Institute — a Washington-based think tank — says Pakistan's past role in Afghanistan has always created friction between Washington and Islamabad.  

"Most Americans believe Pakistan's consistent support enabled the Taliban to succeed," Haqqani told DW.   

"There is resentment against Pakistan's role in Afghanistan which may not help improve US-Pakistan ties in the near future," he added.  

Waning interest for Pakistan   

Pakistan in the past relied heavily on the US military and financial assistance, with some estimates suggesting that the country may have received over $30 billion (€25.5 billion) from Washington since 2001.   

Islamabad also received generous aid packages and financial assistance during the Cold War when it was a close ally of the US.   

But Haqqani says there is very little support in Washington "for resuming large-scale economic or military assistance for Pakistan right now."   Author Ayesha Siddiqa believes Washington has "lost interest" in Islamabad. Pakistan has always sought funds and military assistance from the US, but such support would no longer be on the cards, Siddiqa told DW.

"The ties are already strained and there is a sanction-like situation with Pakistan being in the grey list of FATF (Financial Action Task Force)," she added.

The China factor

Defense analyst General Amjad Shoaib says Pakistan's close ties with China have also strained Washington-Islamabad relations.Pakistan has sought a strategic partnership with China, throwing support behind the Belt and Road Initiative, Shoaib told DW, adding that the move particularly did not go down well with Washington.The US still has many supporters in Afghanistan, he says, predicting that the war-torn country would be used against Pakistan by "pampering" Baloch insurgents who would target Chinese interests in Pakistan.

According to Haqqani, the US and Pakistan have very different foreign policy strategies, and so will have to find a new basis.

"Pakistan has made the strategic choice of aligning with China while the US seems to have chosen India as its strategic partner in the region. With tactical cooperation relating to Afghanistan diminishing, the relationship will have to find a new basis," he told DW. Pakistan's 'special responsibility'

NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg on Friday told reporters that Pakistan "has a special responsibility to make sure that Afghanistan lives up to its international commitments" and does "not once again become a safe haven for international terrorists."

"A stable Afghanistan is in the interest of all countries and not least the neighbors as Pakistan," he said at the press conference.

According to Haqqani, "Any evidence of international Jihadi groups becoming active again will also result in sanctions against Afghanistan which has implications for Islamabad as well." But for Amjad Shoaib, the US could use the "pretext" of human rights and the presence of international terror groups to blackmail Pakistan. The defense analyst questioned why such groups were not eliminated during NATO's 20-year-long occupation.

Disruptions to Pakistan's economy

Economist Azra Talat Saeed warns that deteriorating Washington-Islamabad relations would have a catastrophic impact for Pakistan. Saeed also believes the US will use its leverage against Pakistan. "The US and its allies will make it more and more difficult for us (Pakistan) to access funds," she told DW, adding that the country is at risk of economic chaos like Iran and Venezuela. Saeed believes that Washington will pressure Saudi Arabia and its Gulf allies to "create problems for Pakistani workers" and cause crucial remittances to plummet.

"This would be very devastating for our economy," she said.

The coronavirus pandemic has already dealt a severe blow to Pakistan's economy, prompting the closure of over 55,000 small businesses, rendering more than 20 million people jobless. The country already faces over $100 billion dollars in external debt.

Salman Shah, a former federal minister for finance, says that if Pakistan is "pushed to the corner," then Islamabad has Russia, China and other regional countries "to fall back upon."

"We wish to have good ties with the US and want it to be involved economically in the region," he told DW.

Pakistan’s Support to the Taliban is One of the Greatest Feats of Covert Intelligence

 

N.C. Asthana

The presence of the Inter-Services Intelligence chief in Kabul this week is an in-your-face reminder of Pakistan’s role in protecting and promoting the Afghan Taliban during the course of the latter’s war with the United States.

Pakistan’s aim throughout was to use the Taliban as a proxy to curtail Indian influence in Afghanistan. and, circumstances permitting, to perhaps escalate violence in Kashmir.

During this period, India invested $3 billion worth of goodwill in Afghanistan – building civilian infrastructures like dams and schools – but its efforts came to naught in a matter of few days. This is because the Indian strategic establishment’s military assessment of the war in Afghanistan – which relied on ‘wisdom’ borrowed from the United States – was wrong from the very beginning. It should have been clear to New Delhi that something was fundamentally flawed in the American strategy when the 21,600 pound MOAB (Mother of All Bombs), the 15,000 pound Daisy Cutter and 2,000 pound Thermobaric bombs failed to break the will of the Taliban to continue fighting. However, India persisted with American blinkers on its vision.

We did not wake up even when the Taliban, beginning in 2005, stopped engaging the Americans in direct combat and started laying emphasis on asymmetrical warfare tactics like suicide bombing and IED attacks. We could never appreciate the fact that the US counterinsurgency strategy floundered because ‘securing’ the territory won or liberated proved enormously difficult, both operationally and in terms of cost.

What Pakistan has gained and stands to gain On the other hand, by helping the Taliban come back to power, Pakistan has ensured that its eastern frontier is rendered safe from two of its old fears: Afghan alignment with India; and a refugee flow that could cause destabilisation among Pakistan’s Pashtuns. The Taliban have also, as Anatol Lieven points out, given the Pakistani military an assurance that they will not, at least for the time being, support any Pashtun Islamist rebellion within Pakistan.

Contrary to what some Indian diplomats think, the mere fact that the Taliban still do not recognise the border between Afghanistan and Pakistan is not likely to make much difference to the equation. The Durand Line might not be buried but there are issues and forces much larger than that which are at work, and its ghost cannot haunt Pakistan to its detriment.On August 17, Noor Wali, the emir of the TTP (Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan) congratulated the Taliban. However, so far there is no indication that the Taliban will help the anti-Pakistan establishment TTP merely on grounds of ethnicity. Even if morality is not their strong suit, they know that fighting Pakistan on Pakistani soil would be materially different from fighting the US on Afghanistan soil.More importantly, the Taliban know that the Pakistani army had never gone whole hog in its 2003 counterterrorism operations in the FATA (Federally Administered Tribal Areas) bordering Afghanistan against pro-Taliban insurgents enjoying a safe haven there. Gen. Musharraf undertook the action basically to appear to be doing a favour to the US under its pressure. However, as K. Alan Kronstadt et al had pointed out in their 2008 study for the Congressional Review Service, long-held doubts existed about Islamabad’s commitment to some core US interests and the operations were largely ineffectual with the militant groups having only grown stronger and more aggressive in 2008. Finally, I do not think that too much should be read into the release of TTP ex-deputy Maulvi Fakir Mohammad from a Bagram prison. When the Taliban freed hundreds of prisoners, there was no good reason that they would hang on to a TTP leader.

Pakistan’s 22-month long counterterrorism operations in North Waziristan were undertaken after 2014 far more seriously and were effective too, having killed some 3,400 militants. However, by that time their concerns were different. The fate of Afghanistan was sealed by then. In 2011 itself, Robert Gates had confirmed that the US was holding reconciliation talks with the Taliban; two agreements were signed in March-April 2012. This time, Pakistan knew that investments from China would not materialise if Chinese workers kept getting killed.

How US intelligence floundered in Afghanistan

Christine Fair writes that Washington failed to understand the perturbing nature of Pakistan’s interests in Afghanistan, and ignored very early signals that Musharraf had in fact done a U-turn on its U-turn on the Taliban. This assessment, though corrret, does not capture the whole sordid story.

Pakistan’s support to the Taliban prior to 9/11 was not a closely-guarded secret. When analysts say that the Taliban regrouped across the border in Pakistan at the end of 2001, from where they waged an insurgency for 20 years, they forget that the ‘border across Pakistan in FATA’ was not a black hole where the Taliban simply got lost.

The US was using Pakistani air bases and was in full contact with the Pak military. It stretches credulity to believe a nation that spent over $500 billion during 2001-13 on intelligence ­– as revealed by the Washington Post – and $527 billion more during the next seven years, was so utterly inept that it had no idea of Pakistan’s relationship with the Taliban for over two decades. Logically, only two conclusions are possible: either the famed capability of US intelligence is a hoax or, finding itself mired in a faulty strategy in Afghanistan, Washington was left with no option but to ignore what Pakistan had been doing.

It was an open secret that Pakistan had given safe haven and support to the Taliban while overtly denying their presence on Pakistani soil except in the FATA on the border with Afghanistan. The Pak army even had the gall to claim that they had carried out a 20-month long operation in the area and cleared it of the Taliban.

In 2016, Sartaj Aziz had admitted in a talk at Washington’s Council on Foreign Relations, “We have some influence on them because their leadership is in Pakistan, and they get some medical facilities, their families are here. So we can use those levers to pressurise them to say, ‘come to the table’.”

Had the US not given up on Taliban by then, could they have not pressurized Pakistan or used their HUMINT to take those leaders out? Were they so naïve as to blindly believe in the claim of the Pak army regarding military operations against the Taliban in FATA? Could US intelligence not verify their claims? If they chose not to verify, it was their mistake. Apparently, the ISI was so persuasive that they took the US for a ride or the US had run out of options.

Later also, it was indeed very clever of the ISI to make it clear that Pakistan could not negotiate with the Taliban on behalf of the Afghan government.

ISI gained its expertise during mujahideen war

The US-driven mujahideen war against the former Soviet Union in Afghanistan in the 1980s was one of the most brilliant covert operations ever designed in the history of warfare and intelligence. The CIA’s covert operation was called ‘Operation Cyclone’, in which they recruited, armed and trained fighters on a massive scale—according to some estimates, the mujahideen casualties were in the range of 150,000 to 180,000. It cost the US about $20 billion in that era.

Since the US was extremely particular about ‘plausible deniability’ for the entire operation, they had no option but to involve the ISI in recruiting, arming and training the mujahideen. Since the training had to be imparted secretly, the invented the device of the madrasa. The CIA and ISI opened a large number of such ‘Islamic schools’ in the remote, border areas. Instead of religious education, they were given military training there. Arms for the mujahideen were arranged from the illicit arms bazaar across the world. Weapons were shipped to Pakistan and from there they were sent over land to the fighters in Afghanistan. Brig. Mohammad Yousaf has described the operation in detail in his books, Afghanistan: The Bear Trap: The Defeat of a Superpower and Silent soldier: The man behind the Afghan jehad General Akhtar Abdur Rahman Shaheed.

The whole operation was brilliant in theory. There was but a small undesirable side-effect. And the world is paying the price of that side-effect even now. ISI, being closely involved in the whole process, pilfered a great quantity of arms. Citing arms-trades specialist James Adams in his book, Unholy Wars: Afghanistan, America and International Terrorism, John K. Cooley writes that between the delivery point at Karachi to the border checkpoints of the Pakistani army from where they were meant to be distributed to the Mujahideen, the ISI pilfered about 50% of the arms, which ended up either in their warehouses or sold off in international black market.

During the Battle of Kandahar (2011) as a part of 2011 Taliban Spring Offensive, foreign-aid officials leaving the city at the time or shortly before fighting broke out, reported seeing grease paper everywhere as the Taliban removed the wrappings from the packed weapons. It is understood that the weapons had come directly from ISI warehouses. An idea of the scale on which Pakistan siphoned off money can be had from a revelation by Andrew Elva of the Federation for American Afghan Action, who had claimed before the US Senate that between 1980 and 1981 itself, the ISI had siphoned off $700 million out of $1.09 billion in aid earmarked by the Congress for the rebels. The still unexplained 1988 Ojhri arms depot explosion in Rawalpindi may also have been part of this process.

ISI’s crowning glory In the 20 years from 2001 to 2021, the ISI pulled the wool over the American eyes with such panache that, despite a constant uncomfortable feeling all along about what they had been doing, the Americans could never pin any clear blame on Pakistan. Having earned their spurs in the Mujahideen War, the ISI, while pretending to be an ally of the US in their two-decade long war in Afghanistan, pulled the rug from under their feet.

They duped the only superpower in the world. They made them believe that they were undertaking counterterrorism operations against the militants hiding in FATA in 2003, whereas they cleverly avoided putting all their might behind it. They continued to equip the Taliban with weapons from the Mujahideen War. The smallarmssurvey.org publication ‘Surveying the Battlefield: Illicit Arms in Afghanistan, Iraq and Somalia’ infers from an analysis of the seized caches that most Taliban weapons were of older models. It also says that in 2005, the Afghan Defence Ministry had reported 475 seizures of weapons, including more than 2,000 rockets, 4,000 land mines, and 5 million cartridges on the border with Pakistan. Similarly, in January 2007, Afghan forces found 40 truckloads of machine guns, explosives, and rockets belonging to the Taliban that were hidden in mountain caves near the border with Pakistan. Obviously, the ISI had ‘made’ them ‘survive’ the 2003 military operations! As Stephen Tankel discloses in his US Institute of Peace study, they established a pattern of military incursions into FATA followed by peace deals that empowered the pro-Taliban Pashtun militants. These included a February 2005 peace agreement with Baitullah Mehsud in South Waziristan and the September 2006 Waziristan Accord in North Waziristan.

From a purely professional angle, what Pakistan has achieved in Afghanistan today has to be regarded as one of the greatest feats of covert intelligence. If anyone deserves to celebrate the Taliban victory, it is surely the ISI.

https://thewire.in/south-asia/pakistans-support-to-the-taliban-is-one-of-the-greatest-feats-of-covert-intelligence

Several soldiers killed in southwestern #Pakistan suicide bombing

At least three soldiers killed and 15 others wounded near Quetta in Balochistan province, police said.

A suicide bomber has detonated his explosives near a security checkpoint in restive southwestern Pakistan, killing at least three paramilitary personnel and wounding 15 others.The attacker walked towards the checkpoint manned by the paramilitary Frontier Corps on Quetta-Mastung Road, 25km (15 miles) south of Quetta, capital of Balochistan province, senior police officer Azhar Akram said on Sunday.

A suicide bomber on a motorcycle packed with 6kg of explosives rammed one of the vehicles in a convoy, Akram said.

He said some of the wounded were in critical condition and the death toll could rise, adding body parts were found at a distance from the security post after the bombing.

Banned armed group Pakistan Taliban, known by the acronym TTP, claimed responsibility for the attack.

It was the first time TTP claimed an attack on Pakistani security forces since the Taliban – a separate organisation – took control of neighbouring Afghanistan.TTP, which renewed its allegiance to the Afghan Taliban after the fall of Kabul, has recently stepped up its campaign against the Pakistani army.“Condemn the TTP suicide attack on FC checkpost in Mastung Road, Quetta,” Prime Minister Imran Khan said in a tweet.

Attacks continue

Balochistan has also seen a low-level armed uprising by Baloch separatist groups for nearly 20 years, calling for independence for the gas and mineral-rich province. Most attacks on security forces in Balochistan in the recent past have been claimed by Baloch separatist groups Balochistan Liberation Army and Balochistan Liberation Front.Balochistan, bordering Iran and Afghanistan, is a key province in southwest Pakistan, where China has been working on projects related to the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor. The projects, including road construction, power plants and agricultural development, have cost billions of dollars.

China has in recent years also played a key role in developing the deep-water port of Gwadar on the Arabian Sea. But there have been attacks on Pakistanis and Chinese working on the economic corridor projects.

A suicide bomber last month detonated his explosives near a vehicle carrying Chinese workers, killing two Pakistani children playing by the roadside and wounding a Chinese national and two other Pakistanis in the port city of Gwadar.

Suspected separatists also last month hurled a hand grenade at a store selling national flags in Quetta, killing one man and wounding four others who were buying flags to celebrate Pakistan’s independence day.

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2021/9/5/several-troops-killed-in-southwestern-pakistan-suicide-bombing

Video Report - #Afghanistan #Taliban #China Wion Wideangle | China and the Taliban: friends with benefits?

Video Report - Cuba vaccinates children as young as two to re-open schools amid Covid-19 spike

Video - US State Secretary Blinken delivers remarks on Afghanistan

Video Report - #MSNBC #KevinMcCarthy #January6 ‘There Is No Legal Authority McCarthy Has To Issue Threats’: Social Media Firms Expert Says

Video Report - Acosta rolls the tape on far-right threats to democracy

Music Video - #GhezaalEnayat #Newsong - Ghezaal Enayat صلح Peace غزال عنایت

Video Report - د افغانستان، سیمې او نړۍ تازه خبرونه او ډیر نور په زړه پوري راپورونه

Don’t Assume a Taliban-Ruled Afghanistan Means Smooth Sailing for Pakistan

By Maryam Raashed

@maryam_raashed

Don’t Assume a Taliban-Ruled Afghanistan Means Smooth Sailing for Pakistan.

With the withdrawal of the U.S.-led coalition forces from Afghanistan and reclamation of political power by the Afghan Taliban, countries in the region are shifting to respond to the emerging scenarios. For nearby countries like China, Russia, the Central Asian republics, India, and Pakistan, the political, economic, and security stakes in Afghanistan remain high. To Afghanistan’s east, Pakistan has been preparing to cope with the changing political and security dynamics in Afghanistan, and whatever may follow in the future. From pressing for a politically inclusive settlement to evacuations and delivery of medical supplies, Islamabad is trying to keep its position in Afghanistan strong.

As simple as it may sound, engaging with the Taliban will not be an easy affair for Islamabad. Contrary to the general belief that Islamabad exercises considerable leverage over the Afghan Taliban, the coming days may reveal the limitations of Pakistan’s influence. The Taliban of today possess a renewed vigor. The group has emerged as a dominant political force in Afghanistan, poised to assume the reins of government. The United States’ direct talks with the Taliban, resulting in a U.S. withdrawal, and the unexpectedly quick fall of Kabul have bolstered the Taliban’s image as victors in a war against a mighty superpower. Moreover, the world’s major powers, European states, and the world at large, have developed the uneasy understanding that Taliban are a political reality in Afghanistan. Hence, the Taliban’s power quotient, domestically and internationally, has considerably risen since the last time they were in power. Pakistan is no longer their only option for international support.

Even during the last period of Taliban rule, Pakistan’s leverage over the Afghan Taliban was overestimated. Pakistan remained unable to exercise its leverage on the issue of Durand Line, which is a key national security concern for Islamabad. During the Taliban’s rule in the 1990s, Pakistan was unable to pressure the Taliban into observing human rights. These examples are telling of the limits of Pakistan’s leverage over the Afghan Taliban.

Most recently, three incidents particularly raise concerns over how Pakistan’s engagement with the Afghan Taliban will evolve. First, the Taliban freed Pul-e-Charkhi prisoners which included a senior TTP commander Maulvi Faqir Muhammad. Second is the Afghan Taliban’s display of discontent over the fencing of the Afghanistan-Pakistan border. And third are the Afghan Taliban’s claim that the issue of Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) has to be dealt by Pakistan, and not Afghanistan, though Islamabad has long complained that TTP militants find safe harbor across the border.Pakistan is closely following the developments in Afghanistan. This focus on Afghanistan stems from the idea that any untoward development in Afghanistan will have a direct and impactful bearing on Pakistan. To put this into perspective: Pakistan lost over 80,000 lives and suffered over $150 billion worth of economic losses owing to the global war on terror in Afghanistan. Therefore, for Pakistan, a politically negotiated settlement is the only viable way to stability in Afghanistan. This policy orientation hinges on Pakistan’s desire for a stable Afghanistan — one without the internecine power struggles that provide operational spaces for militant groups. In tandem, Pakistan sees engagement with Afghanistan as a bedrock for encouraging the Afghan Taliban to conduct themselves responsibly in world politics.

Pakistan’s concerns help explain its actions since the fall of Kabul to the Taliban. From August 14 to August 28, Pakistan had evacuated more than 7,000 foreigners from Afghanistan, via some 400 special flights. Pakistan International Airlines was the first airline to carry medical supplies to Afghanistan on August 30. The plane flew from Dubai to the city of Mazar-i-Sharif, carrying 12.5 tonnes of supplies.

Pakistan is engaging with the Afghan Taliban, but this engagement should be cautiously delimited by Pakistan’s prime national security interests. Anti-Pakistan militancy is the primary concern. Apart from the threat of militancy, three other major issues should form the basis of Pakistan’s security calculus vis-a-vis Afghanistan: mutual border management, repatriation of Afghan refugees from Pakistan, and an earnest commitment by the Taliban government to human rights. In particular, anything less than the Afghan Taliban’s active role in taking on anti-Pakistan militants operating on Afghan soil and mutual border management should be unacceptable to Pakistan.

Pakistan has long pressed the Afghan Taliban to crack down on TTP and Islamic State Khorasan (ISK, also referred to as ISIS-K). While the Taliban are fighting against ISK, they have not taken decisive action against the TTP. On the issue of the TTP, while speaking on a talk show on August 29, Taliban spokesman Zabihullah Mujahid said; “The issue of the TTP is one that Pakistan will have to deal with, not Afghanistan.” That is a worrying sign of the Afghan Taliban’s interest in tackling the issue. Hence, how the TTP question will develop Pakistan remains to be seen. In particular, Islamabad must press the issue of TTP leadership residing in Afghanistan.

Pakistan considers border management critical for beefing up its security against terrorist infiltration, terror attacks, and illegal border transgressions from Afghanistan. Historically, management of the border has remained a contentious issue owing to Afghanistan’s refusal to recognize the Durand line. In fact, contesting the legality of the Durand line as an international boundary can be considered as one of the few issues that unites the differing Afghan political factions. While Pakistan has unilaterally fenced around 90 percent of the border, it must continue to pressure Afghanistan to initiate border patrolling at the Afghan side. To give perspective, attacks against Pakistani forces along the border have continued even after Kabul’s fall to the Taliban.

The repatriation of Afghan refugees from Pakistan and Afghanistan’s commitment to human rights can be viewed as two sides of the same coin. Currently, Pakistan is hosting over 4 million Afghan refugees (around 90 percent of the total Afghan diaspora). So far, Pakistan has not registered any new incoming refugees. However, this should not dilute Islamabad’s concerns over the issue of refugees. In this regard, Islamabad will need meaningful engagement with the Taliban, prioritizing the facilitation of a formal repatriation of Afghan refugees. The Taliban should also be pushed to forge a domestic environment that is conducive to refugee repatriation.

The issue of human rights under Taliban rule generally gains the most traction in external audiences. While the Afghan Taliban are notorious for their human rights violations, we should not forget that Afghanistan’s human rights crisis has continued even under other governments. To put this into perspective, a 2013 report by the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada revealed how gross human rights violations by the power elites remained a characteristic feature of Afghan society even under the U.S.-backed government. However, fears over an escalation of human rights violations under the Taliban rule are justified due to the group’s history. Human rights violations should be condemned irrespective of who is in power; for Pakistan, there is also the practical concern that abuses in Afghanistan will translate into an expanding refugee crisis.

In terms of geoeconomics, which is the overarching theme of Islamabad’s foreign policy currently, Afghanistan remains vital for Pakistan. Historically, policymakers in Pakistan had largely viewed Afghanistan through a geostrategic lens. While Pakistan may seek to approach Afghanistan with a multidimensional, economically-driven approach in the longer run, the overriding focus on security cannot be overcome unless these issues are addressed. Hence, more than anything, political stability in Afghanistan remains paramount for Pakistan.

As of now, Pakistan is trying to secure its interests in Afghanistan, while remaining in step with the international community. As a first step, Pakistan decided to await other countries’ recognition of the Taliban’s government in Afghanistan and refrained from recognizing it right away. This posture could be understood as Pakistan’s diplomatic move to remind the Taliban that Pakistan is not an unconditional backer; a give-and-take will form the basis of Pakistan’s engagement with the Taliban. Islamabad’s Afghan policy needs to be prepared for many topsy-turvy developments. It is still highly uncertain if the Taliban will establish an all-inclusive government by peaceful negotiation or consolidate their control through military might. Other unanswered questions include the extent of political and military resistance to the Taliban, how far the new government will decentralize and devolve power to local authorities, and much more.

Afghanistan’s stability is the most desirable scenario for Pakistan. Like any other country, national security imperatives are and shall remain foremost for Pakistan. However, the resources that Pakistan has at its disposal, including its much-hyped influence over the Taliban, are limited. Pakistan may seek to be a partner in peace, but the responsibility of ensuring a peaceful Afghanistan lies on the bigger players. Stability in Afghanistan has to qualify as a concern for the international community at large. Multilateralism was not an option after the Soviet Army withdrew; it must be the choice following the U.S. withdrawal.

https://thediplomat.com/2021/09/dont-assume-a-taliban-ruled-afghanistan-means-smooth-sailing-for-pakistan/

Top Pakistani official travels to Afghanistan

BY CAMERON JENKINS

Pakistan's intelligence chief made a trip to Afghanistan's capital on Saturday, according to two country officials who spoke to The Associated Press on the condition of anonymity. Pakistani Gen. Faiez Hameed reportedly met with Taliban leadership during his trip, but it was not made clear at the time what was discussed.

According to the AP, the Pakistani intelligence service holds the greatest amount of outside influence when it comes to the Taliban. Leaders of the Taliban have previously located their headquarters in Pakistan and kept in contact with the country's Inter-Services Intelligence agency.

Both the U.S. and former Afghan governments have accused Pakistan of providing the Taliban with military aid in the past, but the country has repeatedly denied it, the AP noted.

India’s ambassador to Qatar held a formal meeting with the Taliban early last week, discussing the safe return of Indian nationals to their homes.

At the time, India had faced criticism for not communicating with the Taliban after the country invested over $3 billion in Afghanistan.

“India is very important for the region and we want to trade and economic relations with it. We expect the relationship will continue like before,” Sher Mohammad Abbas Stanekzai, the head of the Taliban’s Political Office in Doha said, then.

https://thehill.com/policy/international/middle-east-north-africa/570836-top-pakistani-official-travels-to-afghanistan

https://thehill.com/policy/international/middle-east-north-africa/570836-top-pakistani-official-travels-to-afghanistan

Notable politicians join PPP during Chairman Bilawal’s Multan visit

 

We have to take forward the legacy of the elders of the Pakistan Peoples Party and this is our obligation to fulfill that dream of people’s prosperity and wellbeing. Quaid-e-Awam Shaheed Zulfikar Ali Bhutto had founded this party to serve the people. Quaid-e-Awam had promised to give “Roti, Kapra aur Makan” but the present ruler who is selected is snatching these things from the poor people. Shaheed Mohtarma Benazir Bhutto had provided jobs to thousands of youngsters during her government in1993-1996 so that the economy of the country could stand on its own feet. Then Mian Sahib during his government sacked those employees but in the next PPP government, our Prime Minister Syed Yousuf Raza Gillani reinstated them through the parliament. Now this selected government has sacked those 20,000 employees again.

 The common man of this country is suffering from historic unemployment, poverty and inflation due to this selected government. We can take the country and its people out of this quagmire through the ideology of Quaid-e-Awam and the manifesto of Shaheed Mohtarma Benazir Bhutto. We all have to work together to convince people that if we want to save Pakistan then we have to support the Pakistan Peoples Party. Insha Allah, we will form the next government, and once again there will be Awami raj.

He said this while addressing party workers at the residence of late Syed Nazim Hussain Shah. He condoled with his sons Liaqat Ali Shah and Barrister Mudassir Hussain Shah on the passing away of their parents late Syed Nazim Hussain Shah and Mrs. Nazim Hussain Shah. He said that Nazim Hussain Shah’s services for the party and the common people are unforgettable.
 
Chairman PPP arrived in Multan this morning and spent a very busy day meeting political leaders of the area and visiting residences of notable PPP leaders who have passed away recently to condole with the families of departed souls and offering fateha. Large numbers of PPP workers gave a roaring reception to their Chairman Bilawal Bhutto Zardari at Syedan Wala Bypass, Shershah road and other places. Rose petals were showered on the cavalcade.
 
Twice elected member National Assembly from Layyah and former federal minister Bahadur Khan Sehar called on Chairman Bilawal Bhutto Zardari and invited the Chairman for dinner at his place on 11 September which was happily accepted by Chairman Bilawal. Bahadur Khan Sehar will formally announce joining the party at that event. Former Prime Minister Syed Yousuf Raza Gillani and Makhdoom Ahmed Mehmood were also present at the meeting.
 
Earlier a ticket holder of Pakistan Muslim League-Quaid-e-Azam (PML-Q), Mian Mazhar Abbas and MQM ticket holder from Muzaffar Garh, Amjad Ali Amjad called on the Chairman PPP and announced joining PPP. Makhdoom Ahmed Mehmood, Khawaja Rizwan Alam, Natasha Doulatana, Haider Zaman Qureshi, Basroji, Abdul Qadir Shaheen, Hasan Murtaza and Shahzad Saeed Cheema were also present on the occasion.
 
During the day, Chairman Bilawal spoke to the opposition leader in the National Assembly Shahbaz Sharif and discussed the political situation and the appointment of members Election Commission of Pakistan.
 
Chairman Bilawal visited the residence of general secretary PPP Multan, A D Khan Baloch and condoled his brother’s death and offered fateha. Chairman PPP also visited the residence of former senior deputy president PPP Multan, Ali Haider Zaman Gardezi and condoled with him on his brother Col R Nasir Zaman Gardezi’s death and offered fateha for the departed soul. Rao Sajid, Abdul Qadir Shaheen and Haider Zaman Qureshi were also present during these visits.

https://www.ppp.org.pk/pr/25430/

Music Video - Janet Jackson - That's The Way Love Goes

Video Report - President Biden Receives a Briefing from Local Leaders on the Impacts of Hurricane Ida

Video Report - President Biden Delivers Remarks on August Jobs Report

Video Report - Putin: Break up of Afghanistan is in no country's interest

Video Report - Afghanistan, Abortion rights in Texas, Macron in Marseille, China gaming ban

- LEMAR Pashto NEWS 03 September 2021 | د لمر د ۷ بجو خبرونه - ۱۴۰۰ د وږی ۱۲ نېټه

Video Report - #Pakistan #Taliban #Islamabad Gravitas: Pakistan pays the price for helping the Taliban

U.S. presses Pakistan as Afghan crisis spirals, leaked docs show

By NAHAL TOOSI

Pakistan’s ambassador questioned reports of Taliban reprisals as U.S. diplomats struggle with refugee arrivals.

The Biden administration is quietly pressing Pakistan to cooperate on fighting terrorist groups such as ISIS-K and Al Qaeda in the wake of the Taliban takeover of Afghanistan.

In response, Pakistan — long accused by U.S. officials of aiding the Afghan Taliban — has hinted that Islamabad deserves more public recognition of its role in helping people now fleeing Afghanistan, even as it has downplayed fears of what Taliban rule of the country could mean.These exchanges and others, described in emails, sensitive but unclassified cables and other written materials obtained by POLITICO, offer a glimpse into how tensions between Washington and Islamabad linger after two decades of war in Afghanistan. They suggest that the two governments are far from lockstep on the road ahead, even now that the United States has pulled its troops from Afghanistan.In one discussion with a U.S. official, for instance, Pakistani Ambassador to the United States Asad Majeed Khan appeared to question reports that the Taliban are carrying out revenge attacks in Afghanistan — including claims that the group has been executing its perceived enemies in door-to-door raids.

Khan told the American official that, according to Pakistani “ground observations,” the Afghan Taliban “were not seeking retribution, and in fact were going home to home to assure Afghans that there will not be reprisals,” according to parts of a memo circulated among U.S. diplomats. The U.S. official, Ervin Massinga of the State Department, is described as noting that “he has seen reporting to the contrary and hopes the Taliban do not seek revenge.”

Meanwhile, in Islamabad, the U.S. embassy is being strained by the Afghan refugee crisis. U.S. diplomats were scrambling just days ago to get answers from Washington to an array of questions about how to handle the influx of people arriving in Pakistan from neighboring Afghanistan.

Pakistani officials at the embassy in Washington and beyond did not immediately offer comment for this story. A spokesperson for the State Department said, “We don’t comment on leaked documents, nor do we comment on private diplomatic conversations.”

The Biden administration has been unusually circumspect about revealing its contacts and discussions with Pakistan. While Pakistan’s actions often appear at odds with the United States, it nonetheless is a nation with links to the Afghan Taliban whose cooperation on fighting terrorism can be helpful. It’s also a nuclear-armed country American officials would prefer not to lose entirely to Chinese influence.

President Joe Biden has not spoken yet with Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Khan. Khan’s wait for a call from the American leader has been the stuff of Pakistani media gossip and memes.

In the past month, as the Taliban made rapid gains across Afghanistan, Secretary of State Antony Blinken spoke directly only once to Pakistani Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi, according to what’s been made public by the State Department. Readouts of these diplomatic calls are usually so bland as to be useless to observers and the press, but this one, from Aug. 16, was unusually devoid of detail.

About a week earlier, Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin spoke with Pakistan’s Gen. Qamar Javed Bajwa. Biden’s national security adviser, Jake Sullivan, met with his Pakistani counterpart, Moeed Yusuf, in late July — a meeting confirmed via a Sullivan tweet but no White House readout.

“It’s clear that the Biden administration from the top levels seems to have pretty deep reservations about Pakistan, born of years of experience, and is not willing to either give Pakistan a pass or kudos for anything that Pakistan might like,” said Daniel Markey, a South Asia specialist who served at the State Department from 2003 to 2007. In the wake of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, as the United States invaded Afghanistan to topple the Taliban regime at the time, U.S. officials leaned on Pakistan for help. Pakistan cooperated to some degree, especially in late 2001, but critics say it has played a double game ever since. Pakistani security forces had long fostered the Afghan Taliban, effectively supporting their harsh rule in 1990s Afghanistan. Following the U.S. invasion, Islamabad is alleged to have harbored Taliban leaders and fighters on its soil, undermining U.S. efforts to defeat the Islamist militia. Some analysts also suspect Pakistani training and tactical assistance helped the Taliban quickly sweep to power in Afghanistan over the past month.

Former officials say that, among other reasons for its support, Pakistan sees the Afghan Taliban as a partner in any future fight against rival India. Pakistan also helped deliver Afghan Taliban leaders to peace talks with the United States and the now-fallen Afghan government, even as Islamabad has long officially dismissed the idea that it actively supports the Afghan Taliban.

Pakistan has been more helpful to the United States in its fight against Al Qaeda and other terrorist groups, but even that cooperation has been questioned. It was in Abbottabad, Pakistan, after all, that the United States found and killed Al Qaeda chief and Sept. 11 mastermind Osama bin Laden in 2011. The Pakistani government denied knowing he was there.That said, Pakistani help in tracking down and targeting terrorist targets in Afghanistan now that the U.S. has withdrawn troops would be “useful, if you can get it,” a former senior U.S. diplomat said. Getting humanitarian aid to Afghanistan in the future may require using supply lines that run through Pakistan, the former diplomat added.The Afghan Taliban’s triumph in August may not prove a long-term victory for Pakistan. The win has emboldened groups like the Pakistani Taliban, who have long used terrorist attacks and other means to try to overthrow the Pakistani government. The refugee crisis sparked by the Taliban’s victory in Afghanistan, too, is sure to test Pakistan, which already hosted numerous people displaced from the neighboring country. The meeting between Massinga and Khan took place on Aug. 26, the day that some 170 Afghans and 13 U.S. troops were killed in a bombing at the Hamid Karzai International Airport in Kabul, which the U.S. was using to help evacuate at-risk Afghans, Americans and others. U.S. officials blamed the attack, which also wounded many people, on ISIS-K, an offshoot of the Islamic State terrorist organization and a rival of the Afghan Taliban.

The Pakistani ambassador offered condolences and the use of Pakistani medical facilities, according to the description of the meeting. Massinga used the moment to indicate that Pakistan could help on other fronts.

“Acknowledging the tragedy, Massinga underscored the mutual interest Pakistan and the United States have in targeting ISIS-K and al-Qa’ida,” the description states. In response, the Pakistani ambassador “acknowledged ISIS-K was a common enemy for the Taliban as well.”

Massinga expressed appreciation for Pakistan’s role in helping evacuees get out of Afghanistan, according to the meeting notes. The portions seen by POLITICO did not specify exactly what Pakistan was doing. At one point in the talk, however, “Khan intimated the Pakistani government would also appreciate public acknowledgment for the country’s assistance on the evacuation front.” (An Aug. 20 statement of gratitude from Blinken to several countries for their help in the evacuations did not mention Pakistan, but earlier this week the U.S. Embassy in Islamabad tweeted its appreciation for Pakistan’s support.) Aside from his questioning of the reports about Taliban reprisals, Khan at other moments appeared to be defensive of the Afghan Taliban.

The Pakistani ambassador “claimed the Taliban were not stopping any third country nationals from getting to [the Kabul airport], but acknowledged there were some issues with Afghans getting through checkpoints.” Khan also highlighted Pakistan’s “effort in pushing the Taliban (while acknowledging it was increasingly difficult to get in contact with them) to form an inclusive government in Kabul.” Lisa Curtis, who was a senior National Security Council official dealing with Afghanistan and Pakistan during the presidency of Donald Trump, said Islamabad and Washington appear to remain far apart on how Pakistan can be helpful in Afghanistan.

“If anybody is arguing that we need Pakistan’s support to try to moderate Taliban behavior, I think they should remember that we didn’t get that support for 20 years, so we’re unlikely to get it now that the Taliban is in power in Afghanistan,” she said.

A separate message obtained by POLITICO contains an Aug. 28 cable described as “an urgent request for guidance” on how to deal with “a rapidly increasing number of requests to assist Afghans in Pakistan” who were or claimed to be eligible for resettlement to the United States.

In many of the cases, the embassy referred inquiries to the United Nations refugee agency or partner NGOs. But it was struggling to handle requests “from offices within the State Department and the interagency — as well as from international organizations, sponsors, and individual applicants, some of whom have appeared in person” to deal with myriad specific cases that included helping people arriving at the Afghan-Pakistan border.

The embassy officials asked for guidance on several questions, such as how they should help Afghans with a Special Immigrant Visa application “in process but not yet approved,” and those who say they are eligible for that visa program or others but who have no referrals on file.

Embassy officials indicated that things would only get harder.

“The pace of these requests is creating an ad hoc system of responses that both taxes mission resources and increases potential confusion over guidance and responsibilities,” the cable states. “Moreover, we assess that the number of these requests is likely to dramatically increase as operations shift from evacuating Kabul by air to assisting individuals who cross into Pakistan over land.”

Two days later, on Aug. 30, the embassy issued a staff notice, obtained by POLITICO, announcing it was creating a “task force for Afghanistan-Pakistan issues.”

The goal of the unit, the notice said, is “to lead and coordinate the mission’s response to humanitarian, refugee, evacuee, and related issues associated with Afghanistan.”

By signing up you agree to allow POLITICO to collect your user information and use it to better recommend content to you, send you email newsletters or updates from POLITICO, and share insights based on aggregated user information. You further agree to our privacy policy and terms of service. You can unsubscribe at any time and can contact us here. This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

https://www.politico.com/

پی پی پی عوام کو روزگار دیتی ہے، جبکہ عمران خان اور میاں نواز شریف کے ادوار میں لوگوں سے نوکریاں چھین لی جاتی ہیں۔چیئرمین پاکستان پیپلز پارٹی بلاول بھٹو زرداری

  پاکستان پیپلزپارٹی چیئرمین بلاول بھٹو زرداری نے کہا ہے کہ ان کی جماعت پاکستان کو بچانے نکلی ہے

عوام میرا ساتھ دیں۔ انہوں نے مزید کہا کہ پی پی پی عوام کو روزگار دیتی ہے، جبکہ عمران خان اور میاں نواز شریف کے ادوار میں لوگوں سے نوکریاں چھین لی جاتی ہیں۔ ضلع گھوٹکی کے علاقے بشیرآباد میں سینیٹر جام مہتاب ڈہر کی رہائش گاہ پر معززینِ علاقہ، پارٹی کارکنان و عہدیداران سے ملاقات کے موقعے پر خطاب کرتے ہوئے پی پی پی چیئرمین نے کہا کہ ہم سب نے مِل کر اس ظالم، نااہل، ناکام ترین اور ناجائز حکومت کو بھگانا ہے، جس نے عوام کے ووٹ، جیب اور پیٹ پر ڈاکہ ڈالا ہے۔ موجودہ حکومت نے پانی، گئس اور حقِ روزگار پر بھی ڈاکہ ڈالا ہے۔ چیئرمین بلاول بھٹو زرداری نے کہا کہ عوام کو ریلیف صرف تب ہی ملا ہے، جب پاکستان پیپلز پارٹی کی حکومت آتی ہے۔

 انہوں نے نشاندہی کرتے ہوئے کہا کہ پی پی پی کی گذشتہ حکومت کے دوران تنخواہوں میں 120 فیصد اور پینشنز میں 100 فیصد اضافہ کیا گیا، جبکہ میاں صاحب اور خان صاحب کے دور میں ایسا نہیں ہوتا۔ بینظیر انکم سپورٹ پروگرام جیسے منصوبوں کا آغاز کیا جاتا ہے، جس سے غریب خواتین کی مالی معاونت ہوتی ہے۔ چیئرمین پی پی پی نے کہا کہ سندھ کی عوامی حکومت کا پیپلز پاورٹی رڈکشن پروگرام بھی بینظیر انکم سپورٹ پروگرام کی طرح ایک انقلابی پروگرام ہے۔ ہم چاہتے ہیں کہ ہر صوبے میں ایسی حکومت ہو، جو عوام کو ریلیف دے۔ چیئرمین بلاول بھٹو زرداری کا کہنا تھا کہ خانصاحب اور میاں صاحب نے ہمیشہ بوجھ عوام پر ڈالا ہے۔

 شہید ذوالفقار علی بھٹو اور شہید محترمہ بینظیر بھٹو نے ہمیں یہ سکھایا ہے کہ اگر غریب آدمی کو معاشی طور پر مضبوط کیا جائے گا، تو اس سے پوری معیشت طاقتور ہوگی۔ اگر عام آدمی کے بجائے امیر آدمی کو فوائد پہنچائے جائیں تو وہ سرمائے کو خرچ کرنے کے بجائے محفوظ کرلیتا ہے جس سے معیشت کو فائدہ نہیں ہوتا۔ انہوں نے کہا کہ عمران خان کی بجیٹ میں ریئل اسٹیٹ اور بئنکرز سمیت امیروں کو ایمنسٹی دی جاتی ہے، لیکن عام آدمی کے لیئے کوئی ایمنسٹی نہیں ہوتی۔ عام آدمی کے لیئے ہر مہینے پئٹرول، گئس، کھانے پینے کی اشیاء کی قیمتوں میں اضافہ کیا جاتا ہے۔ 

چیئرمین بلاول بھٹو زرداری نے کہا کہ ہم سمجھتے ہیں کہ معاشی بحرانوں میں جتنا زیادہ لوگوں کو روزگار ملے گا، تو معیشت آگے بڑھے گی۔ لیکن وہ لوگ سمجھتے ہیں کہ جتنے کم ملازمین ہوں گے، خزانے پر اتنا کم بوجھ پڑے گا۔ جبکہ ہم سمجھتے ہیں کہ جتنے زیادہ لوگوں کے پاس روزگار ہوگا، اتنے زیادہ لوگوں کے پاس پئسہ ہوگا، اور وہ پئسہ ملک کی معیشت کو چلائے گا۔ انہوں نے کہا کہ شہید محترمہ بینظیر بھٹو کے دور میں ملازمتیں حاصل کرنے والے 20 ہزار لوگوں کو باوجود پارلیمان کی جانب سے بحال کیئے جانے کے باوجود دوبارہ برطرف کردیا گیا ہے۔ .

دریں اثناء، چیئرمین بلاول بھٹو زرداری کو سینیٹر جام مہتاب ڈہر نے سندھ کی روایتی اجرک اور ٹوپی پہنائی گئی۔ اس موقعے پر وزیراعلی سندھ سید مراد علی شاہ، ناصر حسین شاہ، مکیش چاولہ اور دیگر رہنما بھی موجود تھے۔

https://www.ppp.org.pk/pr/25426/