Investigations into the March 3 Islamabad Judicial Complex attack that killed ten people and the March 21 twin bombings in Peshawar that killed 20 people have concluded that these assaults were ordered by the TTP top brass which were then planned and executed by four Taliban commanders - Qari Mansoor and Mufti Hasan from the Mohmand Agency, Hafiz Daulat from the Orakzai Agency and Abdullah from the Khyber Agency.
According to well-informed sources in security agencies, those investigating the three terrorist attacks (claimed by the little known Ahrarul Hind) have been able to collect credible evidence which shows that these assaults had been ordered by none other than the fugitive TTP ameer Mullah Fazlullah in a bid to further erode the authority of the government especially at a time when it was holding talks with the Taliban.
While the TTP spokesman Shahidullah Shahid had refuted involvement in these attacks, an Ahrar spokesman had claimed responsibility for all these attacks including the one targeting the Judicial Complex, saying the prevailing judicial system including the courts was un-Islamic and their struggle would continue till the implementation of the Shariah law in Pakistan.
The Islamabad court attack took place just 24 hours after TTP’s ceasefire announcement which clearly stated that the TTP leadership had advised all the subgroups to respect their ameer’s call for a ceasefire and completely refrain from all jehadi activities during the set time period. The TTP spokesman had claimed after the attack that all the groups operating under the umbrella of the Tehrik-e-Taliban were obliged to follow the orders of their ameer and a stern action would be taken if some TTP-linked militant faction is found involved.
However, those investigating the post-ceasefire terrorist attacks have been able to get hold of the telephonic conversation of some close aides of Fazlullah and four TTP commanders who had planned and executed the Islamabad court attack and the twin bombings in Peshawar under specific instructions not to claim responsibility for them.
Information Minister Pervaiz Rasheed had announced on March 22 that the Taliban had assured the government side to trace out the Ahrarul Hind-linked militants who were involved in the post-ceasefire attacks.
However, it seems that these attacks, which had claimed 30 lives, have been forgotten by the government as well as the Taliban sides in a bid to make the talks process a success. Claiming responsibility for the post-ceasefire attacks, Ahrarul Hind had claimed that it has already parted ways with the Pakistani Taliban because it was opposed to holding peace talks with the government. However, it seems that the so-called Ahrarul Hind is now toeing the TTP line by not conducting any more terror attacks especially when the government is seriously considering to release the ‘non-combatant Taliban prisoners’. However, well-informed officials in the security establishment still believe that the TTP leadership was not at all sincere in a permanent peace deal with the state of Pakistan and that it was using the peace dialogue as a ploy to buy time and avert a likely military action in North Waziristan. These officials regretted that the government is negotiating with a violent terrorist group which has known Afghan and Indian links and which has the explicit agenda of overthrowing the state of Pakistan and to replace it with a Taliban Emirate. They pointed out that all the known demands of the TTP are in conflict with a constitutional and democratic polity where fundamental rights and the rule of law are meant to be paramount.
Informed quarters in the security establishment regretted that the ruling political elite is literally pressuring the khaki leadership to concede to even those demands of the TTP which tantamount to surrendering the authority of the state to a bunch of the non-state actors whose are being string-pulled by the Indian and Afghan security establishments. Besides demanding the release of 156 ‘non-combatant prisoners’, the TTP also wants the military to accept its domination over sections of the North Waziristan by withdrawing troops. But the khakis are resisting the civilians’ pressure on these key demands by reminding that Mullah Fazlullah had himself declared on October 3, 2013 that the talks with the government were a component of war which is still continuing. He had stated this while claiming responsibility for killing the General Officer Commanding of Swat, Major General Sanaullah Khan Niazi.
The khakis further point out the pertinent fact that every time a peace deal was struck in the past, the Taliban had used it to their advantage by reinforcing their falling jehadi infrastructure, solidifying their bases and taking over large areas of the KPK and Fata, besides ensuring the release of their jehadi prisoners and receiving handsome monetary compensations, before unilaterally scrapping the deal. The khaki circles believe, even if a peace deal is struck with the Taliban on their terms, it would not last longer as had been the case in the past. According to them, the Taliban only wanted to avert a military action in Waziristan and they have effectively averted it by trapping the government in peace talks.
To a question, a senior security official said, despite all the hullabaloo of peace talks, the army was still ready for a possible military action in Waziristan.
“After the martyrdom of 23 Frontier Corps jawans by the Taliban last month, 48 army units were dispatched to North Waziristan for a possible military action and aerial strikes were launched against the hideouts and the ammunition deports of the TTP by the fighter jets of the Air Force. Had the security forces been allowed to carry out a massive action against the Taliban at that time, the situation would have been much different in North Waziristan today.
The army would have uprooted the TTP’s jehadi infrastructure besides setting up its own basis there”, the security official said.To a question, however, he added that a military action in future would be less effective because of the fact that the TTP has already shifted much of its ammunition and 40 percent of its fighters from North Waziristan to the Mohmand Agency, Orakzai Agency, Khyber Agency and the Balochistan Province.
Friday, March 28, 2014
Pakistan: TTP had ordered attack on Islamabad court, say findings
Investigations into the March 3 Islamabad Judicial Complex attack that killed ten people and the March 21 twin bombings in Peshawar that killed 20 people have concluded that these assaults were ordered by the TTP top brass which were then planned and executed by four Taliban commanders - Qari Mansoor and Mufti Hasan from the Mohmand Agency, Hafiz Daulat from the Orakzai Agency and Abdullah from the Khyber Agency.
According to well-informed sources in security agencies, those investigating the three terrorist attacks (claimed by the little known Ahrarul Hind) have been able to collect credible evidence which shows that these assaults had been ordered by none other than the fugitive TTP ameer Mullah Fazlullah in a bid to further erode the authority of the government especially at a time when it was holding talks with the Taliban.
While the TTP spokesman Shahidullah Shahid had refuted involvement in these attacks, an Ahrar spokesman had claimed responsibility for all these attacks including the one targeting the Judicial Complex, saying the prevailing judicial system including the courts was un-Islamic and their struggle would continue till the implementation of the Shariah law in Pakistan.
The Islamabad court attack took place just 24 hours after TTP’s ceasefire announcement which clearly stated that the TTP leadership had advised all the subgroups to respect their ameer’s call for a ceasefire and completely refrain from all jehadi activities during the set time period. The TTP spokesman had claimed after the attack that all the groups operating under the umbrella of the Tehrik-e-Taliban were obliged to follow the orders of their ameer and a stern action would be taken if some TTP-linked militant faction is found involved.
However, those investigating the post-ceasefire terrorist attacks have been able to get hold of the telephonic conversation of some close aides of Fazlullah and four TTP commanders who had planned and executed the Islamabad court attack and the twin bombings in Peshawar under specific instructions not to claim responsibility for them.
Information Minister Pervaiz Rasheed had announced on March 22 that the Taliban had assured the government side to trace out the Ahrarul Hind-linked militants who were involved in the post-ceasefire attacks.
However, it seems that these attacks, which had claimed 30 lives, have been forgotten by the government as well as the Taliban sides in a bid to make the talks process a success. Claiming responsibility for the post-ceasefire attacks, Ahrarul Hind had claimed that it has already parted ways with the Pakistani Taliban because it was opposed to holding peace talks with the government. However, it seems that the so-called Ahrarul Hind is now toeing the TTP line by not conducting any more terror attacks especially when the government is seriously considering to release the ‘non-combatant Taliban prisoners’. However, well-informed officials in the security establishment still believe that the TTP leadership was not at all sincere in a permanent peace deal with the state of Pakistan and that it was using the peace dialogue as a ploy to buy time and avert a likely military action in North Waziristan. These officials regretted that the government is negotiating with a violent terrorist group which has known Afghan and Indian links and which has the explicit agenda of overthrowing the state of Pakistan and to replace it with a Taliban Emirate. They pointed out that all the known demands of the TTP are in conflict with a constitutional and democratic polity where fundamental rights and the rule of law are meant to be paramount.
Informed quarters in the security establishment regretted that the ruling political elite is literally pressuring the khaki leadership to concede to even those demands of the TTP which tantamount to surrendering the authority of the state to a bunch of the non-state actors whose are being string-pulled by the Indian and Afghan security establishments. Besides demanding the release of 156 ‘non-combatant prisoners’, the TTP also wants the military to accept its domination over sections of the North Waziristan by withdrawing troops. But the khakis are resisting the civilians’ pressure on these key demands by reminding that Mullah Fazlullah had himself declared on October 3, 2013 that the talks with the government were a component of war which is still continuing. He had stated this while claiming responsibility for killing the General Officer Commanding of Swat, Major General Sanaullah Khan Niazi.
The khakis further point out the pertinent fact that every time a peace deal was struck in the past, the Taliban had used it to their advantage by reinforcing their falling jehadi infrastructure, solidifying their bases and taking over large areas of the KPK and Fata, besides ensuring the release of their jehadi prisoners and receiving handsome monetary compensations, before unilaterally scrapping the deal. The khaki circles believe, even if a peace deal is struck with the Taliban on their terms, it would not last longer as had been the case in the past. According to them, the Taliban only wanted to avert a military action in Waziristan and they have effectively averted it by trapping the government in peace talks.
To a question, a senior security official said, despite all the hullabaloo of peace talks, the army was still ready for a possible military action in Waziristan.
“After the martyrdom of 23 Frontier Corps jawans by the Taliban last month, 48 army units were dispatched to North Waziristan for a possible military action and aerial strikes were launched against the hideouts and the ammunition deports of the TTP by the fighter jets of the Air Force. Had the security forces been allowed to carry out a massive action against the Taliban at that time, the situation would have been much different in North Waziristan today.
The army would have uprooted the TTP’s jehadi infrastructure besides setting up its own basis there”, the security official said.To a question, however, he added that a military action in future would be less effective because of the fact that the TTP has already shifted much of its ammunition and 40 percent of its fighters from North Waziristan to the Mohmand Agency, Orakzai Agency, Khyber Agency and the Balochistan Province.
China takes no sides on Ukraine crisis, Xi tells Europe
President Xi Jinping said on Friday China would not take sides with the West or Russia over Ukraine, disappointing any hopes Beijing might add its weight to international pressure on Moscow for annexing Crimea.
"China does not have any private interests in the Ukraine question," Xi told a news conference with German Chancellor Angela Merkel. "All parties involved should work for a political and diplomatic solution to the conflict."
China has adopted a cautious response to the Ukraine crisis, not wanting to alienate its ally Russia or make comment directly on a referendum in which Crimea voted to join Russia, lest it set a precedent for restive regions of its own such as Tibet.
In an U.N. Security Council vote earlier this month on a draft resolution to condemn the Moscow-backed referendum in Crimea, China's abstention effectively isolated Russia.
"If I were Russia, I would not be satisfied with the number of votes in favor of Russia," said Merkel, who despite her country's close trade ties with Moscow and heavy reliance on Russia gas exports has backed European Union and U.S. sanctions.
The chancellor, who has tried to use her influence on Russia President Vladimir Putin to de-escalate the crisis, called the U.N. vote a clear sign "that the international community is not very happy with what Russia has done".
China has signaled understanding for Russia's position, saying what is happening "has historical reasons". Chinese state media has also expressed sympathy for Moscow.
DELICATE DIPLOMACY
But China has also said it wants to develop "friendly cooperation" with Ukraine. Its foreign ministry said this week Beijing would play a "constructive role" on international financial aid for Ukraine, though it stopped short of saying whether Beijing would participate directly.
"We support the constructive efforts the international community has made to de-escalate the situation and are open to any concepts which serve to calm the situation and to bring about a political solution," Xi said in Berlin.
"The Chinese side always respects the principles of international relations and non-intervention in the internal business of other states," he said.
The Chinese leader's first visit to Germany since becoming president last year saw the signature of business deals that will add to bilateral trade that was worth about 140 billion euros last year.
But business considerations did not prevent Merkel from publicly raising China's patchy record on human rights and free speech with the visiting president.
"Broad and free expression of opinion is of course a very important element to promote the creativity of a society, be it in research, culture or civil society," said the chancellor.
There was no official comment on reports that Xi might visit a monument to the Holocaust in Berlin during his visit. China likes to contrast Germany's profound atonement for its World War Two atrocities with what it sees as Japan's reluctance to do so.
Ties between the Asian rivals took a turn for the worse in December last year when Prime Minister Shinzo Abe visited a Tokyo shrine China sees as a symbol of Japan's militaristic past because it honors wartime leaders and millions of war dead.
But Xi did use a speech in Berlin on Friday evening to recall Japan's wartime invasion of the Chinese city of Nanjing and say that such atrocities "are still fresh in our memory".
Amnesty urges Obama to criticize Saudi human rights record
Barack Obama: Russia must pull back troops from Ukraine border
President says Putin should begin negotiations directly with Ukrainian government and international community
Barack Obama has called on Russia to withdraw its troops from the Ukraine border and start negotiating.Obama told CBS News that the decision by the Russian president, Vladimir Putin, to assemble forces on the border may "simply be an effort to intimidate Ukraine, or it may be that they've got additional plans". Although estimates of troop numbers vary, Obama said that "to de-escalate the situation" Russia should "move back those troops and begin negotiations directly with the Ukrainian government as well as the international community". He also said Putin had been "willing to show a deeply held grievance about what he considers to be the loss of the Soviet Union", and the Russian leader should not "revert back to the kinds of practices that … were so prevalent during the cold war". "There's a strong sense of Russian nationalism and a sense that somehow the west has taken advantage of Russia in the past and that he [Putin] wants to in some fashion … reverse that or make up for that," Obama said. "What I have repeatedly said is that he may be entirely misreading the west. He's certainly misreading American foreign policy. We have no interest in circling Russia and we have no interest in Ukraine beyond letting Ukrainian people make their own decisions about their own lives."
President Vladimir Putin: Professional actions by Russian military saved Crimea from bloodshed
http://voiceofrussia.com/Russian President Vladimir Putin has said that the events in Crimea have demonstrated a high level of readiness of the Russian Armed Forces and he thanked the military service members stationed in the peninsula for their stamina and professionalism. "The recent events in Crimea were a serious test. They demonstrated both the completely new capabilities of our Armed Forces and the high morale of the personnel," the president said at a ceremony introducing the top officers on the occasion of new appointments and rank awarding.
Zeenat Karzai : ''Afghanistan's First Lady''
By Malali Bashir
Have you ever seen Afghanistan's current first lady? Has anybody?Throughout the time her husband has been in office, Zeenat Karzai has remained unengaged and hidden inside Arg -- the Afghan presidential palace. But in many ways, this might not have been expected. Even if she had no interest in politics, or no option to be active on behalf of other Afghan women, her training as a medical doctor might have motivated her to press the international community for help in developing medical technology and facilities inside the country, where hundreds of women still die during childbirth each year. Undoubtedly, Afghanistan has seen a lot of progress in women's rights under Karzai's government; women even have their own ministry now. Nonetheless, it would have had a far greater impact if the first lady had also taken part in rebuilding her country. (The rare photo above was taken during a meeting with Laura Bush inside the Presidential Palace in Kabul in 2006). Zeenat Karzai could also have taken part in her husband's presidential election campaigns. Her participation may not necessarily have won more votes, but it would have sent a message to Afghan women that their first lady was not only aware of their problems, but also interested in working towards solving them. It would have assured them that she would work for their rights inside the presidential palace. But Mrs. Karzai did not, and with her husband's term ending in the next few months, her chance has passed. In April, Afghans will elect a new president, and with him will come a new first lady. But even while the faces inside Arg will change, the hopes of Afghans, especially Afghan women, for a new reality may remain unrealized. The role of most Afghan women today does not extend beyond the walls of their own homes, and females working outside are not accepted easily. This is probably the biggest reason that after King Mohammad Zahir Shah's reign none of Afghanistan's first ladies have been seen in public or active in society. Nine candidates have registered for the Afghan presidential elections of 2014. Some of them do not have good records of allowing women their basic human rights, but if they win, they will be sworn to honor the Afghan constitution that safeguards them. And some information is known about the wives of several prominent candidates, such as Ashraf Ghani Ahmadzai and Abdullah Abdullah, giving voters a sense of what kinds of first ladies they would be. Ghani, the former finance minister who was listed among the Top 100 Global Thinkers by Foreign Policy magazine in 2010 and was voted the No. 2 world thinker in 2013 by readers of Prospect magazine, is married to Rula Ghani, who he met in Lebanon, where he attended the American University of Beirut. On Saturday, March 8, Rula accompanied her husband to an event in support of Afghan women on International Women's Day and to a campaign event in Kabul where she delivered a short speech. According to Ghani's electoral campaign team, , during the event, women's rights activists applauded her presence as a positive gesture and called upon other potential first ladies to "follow her lead." As for Abdullah, his wife was not seen during his 2009 presidential campaign, though she stood next to him on election day to cast her vote. While it is unclear if the couple remains together or has separated, if the former is true, the women's rights activists who appreciated Mrs. Abdullah's public appearance in previous elections would have high expectations of her, should her husband win. Another one of the frontrunners is Zalmai Rasoul, known as "Arg's candidate" and "Karzai's favorite." Yet, if he gets elected, Afghanistan will officially be deprived of a first lady because the 71-year-old former foreign minister is reportedly unmarried. During the Tokyo conference in 2012, apart from holding "inclusive, transparent and credible" elections, fighting corruption and improving good governance and enforcing the rule of law, Afghanistan made a commitment to defending human rights. The presidential candidates have slightly touched on the women's rights issue during the campaign, but have not addressed it as one of their priority topics. Last month, women's rights activists called upon the presidential candidates to come up with more comprehensive plans regarding women's rights in Afghanistan. In order to keep the commitments made in Tokyo, Afghanistan's next first lady could do a lot in helping the next president of the country. In Afghanistan's deeply traditional society, laws are still passed today that further diminish the basic human rights of women. Even though Karzai did not sign the law that would have prohibited family members from testifying as witnesses to crimes committed against women by male relatives, the law did pass through the parliament. Yet there are other examples of laws that are part of an effort of legally stripping women of their human rights, including: the Shia family law, which legalizes marital rape and bans wives from going out of their houses without their husbands' permission -- it was approved by lower house of parliament and signed by Karzai in 2009, though he later decided to review it after facing international criticism; the law that lowered the proportion of provincial council seats reserved for women from 25 percent to 20 percent; and the backlash by conservative members of parliament against the Elimination of Violence Against Women law. Ironically enough, the news of a possible approval of a law that legalizes the stoning of adulterers in Afghanistan came out on the Day for Elimination of Violence Against Women. Given the current situation in Afghanistan, it is hard to believe that any of the previously mentioned women or the other candidates' wives would come forward more often to take part in their husbands' presidential campaign. But at least one woman -- the woman who will become the first lady as a result of the 2014 elections -- will have the chance to play a prominent role in working for women's rights in Afghanistan. Even though there are no official duties assigned by the constitution to the first ladies of the country, it's time that the trend changes and the next first lady does not restrict herself to remaining obscure. It's time for the next first lady to start, not only actively hosting social events, but also actively participating in the development of the country and play the role of a good adviser to the president on pressing issues. She could advise the president on implementing programs for women's rights, furthering their economic independence and access to education, and enabling them with a greater voice in the law-making process.
http://southasia.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2014/03/27/afghanistans_first_lady_0
Iran bent on release of kidnapped border guards:FM
www.shiitenews.comIran's Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif said on Friday that Iran does its best to secure safe and sound release of the kidnapped Iranian border guards in Pakistan. The foreign minister posted the remark on his facebook on Friday. Our round-the-clock effort is ensuring safe and sound return of the dear ones to their families and not the publicity or slogans for mere false hopes which not only afford the least help to freedom of the dear ones but also make the issue further complicated,ˈ said Zarif. On March 26, Zarif wrote a letter to the UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon to clarify fate of kidnapped Iranian diplomat in Yemen and five Iranian border guards abducted by a terrorist group in Pakistan. The Iranian foreign minister in his letter has asked the UN secretary-general to urge the concerned countries to expedite probing into the fate of the abducted diplomat and border guards. ˈOn this ground and to avoid likely consequences of writing a letter to the UN chief and of its publication, hours long exchange of view and consultations were made to prevent God forbids not adverse impact on release of our dear ones,ˈ Zarif further wrote in his Facebook. He referred to intensive efforts launched by all Iranian officials, including President Hassan Rouhani and foreign ministry officials, for the purpose and said any consideration observed up to so far in that connection by the officials is ˈtimes more sensitive and more seriousˈ. To the end of his Facebook anecdote, Zarif hoped for success in release of the Iranian border guards.
Is Pakistan aiding Syrian rebels?
Deutsche Welle
Pakistan denies claims it is arming Syrian rebels at Saudi Arabia's behest. Experts, however, say Islamabad is not only providing military equipment to anti-Assad groups, it's also helping jihadists to go fight in Syria.
Pakistani and international media have reported about Pakistan-based Wahhabi militant groups, including al Qaeda and the Taliban, sending their members to Syria to fight against President Bashar Assad's forces. Some observers claim these fighters are also getting some kind of state support. Despite the Pakistani government's categorical denial of any involvement in the Syrian conflict, the Islamic Republic's opposition parties, including the main opposition Pakistan People's Party (PPP) led by former President Asif Ali Zardari, have challenged Islamabad's claims. A number of political experts in Pakistan also disagree with the government's stance that it did not get itself involved in the violent Syrian conflict on Saudi Arabia's request. "We strongly reject the media speculation that Pakistan has changed its position on Syria or is supplying arms to Syrian rebels directly or indirectly. These impressions are totally baseless and misleading," Sartaj Aziz, an advisor to Pakistani Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif on national security and foreign affairs, recently told the country's parliament. The discussion about whether or not the Pakistani government armed the Syrian rebels commenced after the Saudi Crown Prince, Salman bin Abdulaziz, travelled to Pakistan last month.
"I would like to clarify that during the Saudi Crown Prince's visit, the two sides only mentioned the need to enhance bilateral cooperation in the field of defense with an aim to have a mutually beneficial defense and security cooperation," said Aziz. According to news agency AFP, which quoted a source close to Saudi decision-makers, Riyadh was interested in getting Pakistan-made shoulder-launched anti-aircraft missiles, known as Anza, and anti-tank rockets, to aid the rebels. "The United States could allow their to allies provide the rebels with anti-aircraft and anti-tank weapons following the failure of Geneva talks and the renewed tension with Russia," AFP quoted the head of the Gulf Research Centre, Abdel Aziz al-Sager. Ghaffar Husain, a London-based researcher and counter-terrorism expert, told DW that Saudi-Pakistani alliance is decades-long, and that it is highly likely that Riyadh could have asked for Islamabad's assistance in turning the tide in Syria.Claims 'not exaggerated' Ali K. Chishti, a security expert in Karachi, told DW that Pakistan's assistance to Syrian rebels was of covert nature, and that it was obvious why Pakistan did not officially admit it. "I don't think that the claims that Pakistan is helping Syrian opposition are incorrect or exaggerated. Islamabad believes that since Iran is openly supporting the Assad regime, which is responsible for killing hundreds of thousands of people in his own country, it is justified to aid the rebels," said Chishti.
Sharif's personal involvement
Some experts argue that the alleged Saudi-Pakistani deal on Syria was a result of Sharif's personal connections with the Saudi rulers. Earlier this month, Pakistan received a 1.5 billion USD loan from Riyadh, which Pakistani opposition parties claimed was a "gift' from Saudis to Sharif for his "services" to the kingdom. Husain says Pakistan has "the expertise, weapons and fighters for the Syrian war, and Saudi Arabia has the cash that Pakistan desperately needs right now." Naqvi, however, says that any other head of the government in Islamabad would have complied with the Saudi demands. "We must not forget that Sharif has no say in defense related matters. It is the Pakistani army which calls the shots. Former President Zardari would not have acted differently in this scenario."
For Chishti, accepting the Saudi demands was a sensible decision: "Iran is openly supporting Assad whereas Saudi Arabia is aiding the rebels - both for their sectarian interests. Why would then the Pakistani state, which follows the Saudi Wahhabi Islamic ideology, side with the Shiite Tehran on this?"Pakistani militants migrating to Syria "A large number of foreign fighters are based in Pakistan's northern Waziristan area, which shares border with Afghanistan. Some of them are now migrating to Syria. The Pakistani Taliban have actually established a cell to monitor the Syrian situation. Al Qaeda's head, Aymen al-Zawahiri sent out a message to Pakistani militants to move to Syria," told Chishti, adding that Muslim al Shishani, a Chechen commander from North Waziristan, was one such Islamist who migrated to Syria on March 27.
The expert, however, is not sure whether it's a good thing for the Pakistani state. "We need to see how certain non-state actors are being used in this conflict. It can be a double edged sword," he said. For his part, Naqvi says there is "structural linkage" between the Pakistani military apparatus and the jihadists. "These militants have been doing what the army thinks is in Pakistan's geo-strategic interests," said Naqvi. The expert is of the view that Pakistan finds itself in a quagmire for not keeping itself non-aligned in regional and international conflicts and will ultimately have to pay a big price for its actions.
Pakistan: Hamza Shahbaz should listen to the families affected by terrorism
Sindh Information Minister and Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) leader Sharjeel Memon said on Friday, while responding to Hamza Shahbaz’s statements that it would be better if Hamza made the suggestions to federal government and not to Bilawal, Dunya News reported. Reacting to Hamza Shahbaz’s statements, Sindh Information Minister Sharjeel Memon said that it is better if Hamza Shahbaz makes suggestions to federal government and convince them not to bow before terrorists. Reiterating that he should keep his suggestions to himself, Memon said instead of making childish statements, Hamza Shahbaz should listen to the families affected by terrorism. He said people of Pakistan have serious reservations over government and Taliban’s reconciliation policy, adding that federal government is insulting Pakistan’s constitution by negotiating with terrorists. Memon said Punjab government should stop sheltering terrorists, claiming that federal government deems no difference among an ordinary Pakistani, Taliban and Lashkar-e-Jhangvi (LeJ). He said that 2 different standards of laws were made while violating the constitution. Meanwhile, National Assembly’s opposition leader Khurshid Shah said that Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) bore sizeable loss in the past and that party cannot afford more risks. He said that Punjab government should inform about the investigations over threats received by Bilawal. Shah also wrote a letter to Chief Minister (CM) Punjab Shahbaz Sharif reiterating a complete investigation should be carried out over the matter of death threats received by Bilawal. He said that PPP is taking the matter rather very seriously, adding that he hopes Punjab government will complete the investigation soon and inform about the results.http://mediacellppp.wordpress.com/
Pakistan: Minorities in the Islamic Republic
Ahmadiyya Times
By Adnan Falak
For the Ahmadiyya community perhaps, the situation is most undesirable as it is considered a black mark just to declare their religious identity.The Lahore resolution laid out the blue print for Pakistan. It envisioned an independent homeland for Muslims, consisting of “independent states” of geographical contiguous areas with a Muslim majority. It also called for the provision of “adequate, effective and mandatory safeguards for minorities in these units [independent states for Muslims] for the protection of their religious, cultural, economic, political, administrative and other rights and interests.” If Pakistan was meant to be a country where Muslims could live according to their aspirations, then it was also supposed to offer equal status to minorities; a thought that the great Quaid expressed in a press conference at New Delhi on July 14,1947. According to Quaid -e- Azam, “Minorities, to whichever community they may belong, will be safeguarded. Their religion, faith or belief will be secure. There will be no interference of any kind with their freedoms of worship. They will have protection with regard to their religion, faith, their life, their culture. They will be, in all respects, the citizens of Pakistan.” Far from being “in all respects the citizens of Pakistan,” and enjoying “political and administrative rights,” minorities in Pakistan today face a Pakistan that is dangerous for them to live in, a fact highlighted by our ranking as the fifth most unsafe country in the world for minorities. The State of Minorities Report 2013 explains this situation: “Pakistan has become one of the deadliest countries in the world for ethnic and religious minorities. In 2012, targeted attacks against the country’s minority communities rose significantly, with little or no action taken by the government to protect them.” Militant organisations are indiscriminately targeting Shias across Pakistan, assassinating their leaders and attacking their religious processions. According to Human Rights Watch, “The Pakistani Taliban and its affiliates have conducted unprecedented attacks in 2013 on the country’s Muslim and non-Muslim religious minorities, claiming responsibility for most major bombings and vowing further violence. Human Rights Watch has recorded dozens of attacks on Shias in 2013, including some of the worst attacks on the community in Pakistan’s history. Amongst Shiites, Quetta’s Hazara community is bearing the brunt of the sectarian attacks. According to some estimates, nearly a quarter of those who are killed in sectarian violence since 2012 are Hazaras. This campaign of sectarian cleansing has severely disrupted the daily life of Hazaras. Human Rights Watch’s Ali Dayan Hasan said in an interview, “Hazara religious pilgrims, students, shopkeepers, vegetable sellers, doctors and other professionals have been targeted leading to not just widespread fear but increasingly restricted movement and a ghettoisation of community members, increasing economic hardship and curtailed access to education.” Hindus and Christians are also living in onerous conditions. The story of Rinkle Kumari of Mirpur Mathelo highlights the misery of Hindus in Sindh. The girl was abducted, forcibly converted and was later married to a Muslim man. Many other Hindu girls met a similar fate, and in each case, perpetrators coerced the family of the aggrieved to stay silent or accept the consequences. Last year the case of Rimsha Masih exposed the plight of Christians in Pakistan. Rimsha, a juvenile with a learning disability was framed by a local Muslim cleric. The girl was taken into custody and locked in prison under blasphemy laws, and the accused was denied the right of bail. However, an uproar in the media forced the government to investigate the incident, leading to the acquittal of the girl. For the Ahmadiyya community perhaps, the situation is most undesirable as it is considered a black mark just to declare their religious identity. They are ostracized, harassed, threatened, targeted, and their places of worship and graveyards are desecrated. Ethnic minorities in Pakistan are also getting similar treatment. In their case however, the accused are not sectarian and extremist groups but state institutions. In Balochistan, locals are abducted, only to end up later as mutilated corpses dumped by roadsides. According to Reuters, “The bodies of hundreds of pro-independence rebels have been found across the Balochistan province and many more have gone missing in the past several years.” The Baloch activists have accused state agencies of undertaking a “kill and dump policy” to crush dissent, but the government has denied such accusations. Unfortunately, in all of this, the state is acting as a hapless bystander, failing miserably to discourage intolerance and to reign in sectarian groups who target minorities whenever and wherever they desire with impunity. Facing such circumstances, many members of minorities are fleeing Pakistan and seeking asylum abroad. The purpose of Pakistan was to create a welfare state for Muslims and non- Muslims, where they could lead their lives with the complete rights and obligations of citizenship and with their religious identities protected. Nearly seventy four years since the adoption of the Lahore resolution, we have created a country where minorities are terrorised and persecuted, a place where sectarianism runs amok and where Muslim clerics openly promote hatred and violence against minorities. If we don’t check our zeal of Islamization, and do not assure that all citizens of Pakistan are protected, treated equally and given the freedom of association and worship, we stand to fail the test of history.
http://ahmadiyyatimes.blogspot.com/2014/03/pakistan-minorities-in-islamic-republic.html
Pakistan: Nothing for families of victims of terrorism in the talks
PPP demands probe into LeJ’s threat to Bilawal
Punjab police in action after Bilawal receives a threatening letter from LeJ
Pakistan: SA passes resolution against threats to Bilawal
Sindh Assembly (SA) on Friday unanimously passes a resolution against threats to Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) Patron-in-Chief Bilawal Bhutto Zardari.
The resolution was presented in the SA by Abdul Sattar Rajpar.
Yesterday, Bilawal Bhutto said on Twitter that he had received life threats from Lashkar-e-Jhangvi, an outlawed militant outfit.
Bilawal tweeted,” received threat letter from LEJ. Will hold Punjab government responsible 4 LEJ attacks if Sharif cont 2 give them protection & refuse2 take action.”
Salma Farooqi, Female Polio Vaccinator, Brutally Killed In Pakistan
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/Salma Farooqi worked on the frontline of Pakistan's battle with polio, helping to vaccinate children in one of the world's last havens for the crippling disease. On Monday, her bullet-riddled body was found, bearing marks of torture, after unidentified gunmen attacked her home near the Pakistani city of Peshawar. Farooqi disappeared when a group of armed men raided her family home in Gulozai village overnight Sunday, relatives told Pakistan's DAWN newspaper. "Salma was fast asleep next to me when the men came in, beat me and tied me and the children up," Farooqi's husband Mohammad Karim Khan described to The Guardian. "It took us an hour to free ourselves and then we saw that Salma had disappeared." The next day, her mutilated body was found about 2.5 miles away. “The armed men cut her lips and broke her hands and dumped the body in the fields outside Peshawar,” a police official told NBC News. Police are still investigating whether Farooqi was killed because of her work, but the brutal murder sends a chilling message to health workers who are frequently targeted by militants in Pakistan, The Guardian notes. Many of those working for the vaccination program currently work under the cover of armed Pakistani police after a series of militant attacks on vaccinators has left at least 30 polio health workers dead since 2012. Some Islamic militants in the country accuse the polio program of being a cover for Western espionage, or a conspiracy to sterilize Muslim children, according to The Guardian. Pakistan is one of three countries in the world that remain polio-endemic, along with Nigeria and Afghanistan. The Pakistani strain of polio was recently discovered in Syria, highlighting the World Health Organization's warning that the disease's steady decline of the past decades could be reversed. Farooqi's home province of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa in north-west Pakistan, as well as neighboring tribal districts, are some of the world's worst hotspots for the disease, according to Agence France Presse.
Bilawal Bhutto receiving threats from banned Lashkar-e-Jhangvi
Bilawal Bhutto, the chairperson of the Pakistan Peoples Party,has received threats from the banned Lashkar-e-Jhangvi.
"Received threat letter from LEJ. Will hold Punjab govt responsible 4 LEJ attacks if Sharif cont 2 give them protection & refuse2 take action," Bilawal, son of late Prime Minister, Benazir Bhutto and former President, Asif Zardari tweeted on Thursday night.
The PPP which rules the southern Sindh Province, has in the past accused the Punjab government of sheltering the LeJ, which is also reported to have sent threat letters to the provincial government, warning them to stop "atrocities", otherwise they would resort to targeting law enforcing agents and government officials.
A spokesman for Bilawal House, the official residence of the Zardari family, said steps have been taken to increase security for Bilawal and his sisters after the LEJ threats.
Bilawal's mother was assassinated shortly after addressing a public rally in Rawalpindi and before that she had survived a suicide bomb attack after returning to Pakistan from an exile.
Thursday, March 27, 2014
Movie: 'Noah' to sail to No. 1 at the box office
An Old Testament epic will storm theaters this weekend with hopes of attracting a boatload of moviegoers.
Director Darren Aronofsky's $130-million-budgeted "Noah" is expected to generate around $40 million in ticket sales in the U.S. and Canada through Sunday, according to people who have seen pre-release audience surveys. Paramount Pictures, which is releasing the film, has predicted a softer gross of $30 million to $33 million.
An opening in the projected range for the special effects-heavy, big-budget disaster film — starring Russell Crowe as the biblical boat-builder — will almost certainly make it the No. 1 movie at the domestic box office. If "Noah" is a hit, it will be the latest in a string of religion-inspired successes.
"Son of God," a less-expensive New Testament retelling culled from Mark Burnett and Roma Downey's "Bible" miniseries, opened this year with $25.6 million in revenue, propped up by bulk purchases from Christian groups, and has since gone on to gross $56 million. The modern-day campus drama "God's Not Dead" opened last weekend with a surprisingly strong $9.2 million from just 780 theaters.
Aronofsky's dark take on the Book of Genesis story of Noah's ark, financed by Paramount and Regency Enterprises, marks a departure for a director best known for lower-budget fare such as "Black Swan," "The Wrestler" and "Requiem for a Dream."
The PG-13-rated film has faced criticism from the outset, both from religious groups that questioned how faithfully it would treat its source material along with conservatives who decried its emphasis on environmental themes. Reviews by film critics have been generally positive, according to Rotten Tomatoes.
The scripture-sourced slate won't end with "Noah." Upcoming God-themed movies include "Heaven Is For Real," "Exodus," "Last Days in the Desert" and "Mary," all coming at least a decade after the massive success of Mel Gibson's "The Passion of the Christ."
"Noah" began its maiden voyage in Mexico and South Korea a week ago with a strong $14 million, and it's likely to play well overseas. Alongside Crowe, the disaster picture's stars include Anthony Hopkins, Jennifer Connelly and Emma Watson.
Last week's chart-topper "Divergent," the teen dystopian adventure starring Shailene Woodley, should continue to pull in plenty of box-office cash. Lionsgate is hoping the Summit Entertainment film will kick off another strong young-adult franchise after the massive success of the "Hunger Games" series. Its second weekend could add around $25 million to its domestic total of more than $60 million.
In "Noah's" wake, Arnold Schwarzenegger's new crime thriller "Sabotage" is not likely to see much action at the multiplex. The movie about a DEA team whose elite agents are targeted by a ruthless drug cartel, is expected to take in less than $10 million in its debut. The $35-million picture was financed and produced by QED International and is getting its U.S. release from Open Road Films.
Wes Anderson's "The Grand Budapest Hotel," expanding to 970 theaters, should continue to impress with a weekend tally of around $10 million. The quirky director's latest, distributed domestically by Fox Searchlight Pictures, has amassed more than $14 million in its limited run.
The new "Cesar Chavez" biopic could bring in around $5 million from 660 locations. Michael Peña plays the civil rights activist and labor organizer in the film directed by Diego Luna and produced by Pantelion Films, a joint venture between Lionsgate and the giant Mexican media company Grupo Televisa.
"Bad Words," an R-rated comedy written and directed by "Arrested Development" star Jason Bateman, is expanding to around 600 theaters and could gross $5 million or less.
http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/envelope/cotown/la-et-ct-noah-sabotage-grand-budapest-hotel-20140326,0,4391185.story#ixzz2xCP2IoJd
G8 to G7 - it's no big deal
Unfortunately, Russia is not as clever as China
Putin demands quick legislative groundwork for Crimea, Sevastopol
Russian President Vladimir Putin on Thursday demanded that the Russian parliament promptly ensure the necessary legislative groundwork for the economic and social development of Crimea and Sevastopol. Russia's President also announced the country's intention to build national payment-processing systems, similar to those in China and Japan.
"It is necessary to ensure legislative groundwork for everything that concerns the development of the economy and social spheres of Crimea and Sevastopol," the president said at a meeting with the upper house’s council.
Putin said their accession to Russia necessitated a solution to many tasks. "We must smoothly, carefully, consistently and professionally ensure the entry of Crimea and Sevastopol into our legal system without creating problems for the people, but on the contrary creating conditions for the development of the economy and social spheres in Russia’s new entities," the president added.
Read more: http://voiceofrussia.com/news/2014_03_27/Putin-demands-quick-legislative-groundwork-for-Crimea-Sevastopol-6006/
Obama to Visit Saudi Arabia, Key Source of Funding for Growing Jihadi Militarism in Middle East
Despite Saudi Arabia’s funding and arming of militants in Syria, Iraq and beyond, President Obama is set to visit the kingdom this week to meet with King Abdullah. It’s the only Middle Eastern or Gulf nation on Obama’s overseas itinerary. Many analysts say the conflict in Syria has grown into a proxy war between Saudi Arabia and Iran. Saudi Arabia’s links to jihadist groups go back decades. Fifteen of the 19 Sept. 11 hijackers were Saudi. The 9/11 Commission Report identified Saudi Arabia as the main source of al-Qaeda financing. And in 2010, WikiLeaks published U.S. diplomatic cables which identified Saudi Arabia as the world’s largest source of funds for Islamist militant groups. Members of Congress and human rights organizations have also been calling on Obama to address the kingdom’s treatment of women, religious minorities and political activists. We are joined by Patrick Cockburn, Middle East correspondent for The Independent. Cockburn wrote The Independent’s recent five-part series examining the resurgence of jihadists across the Middle East, "Al-Qa’ida’s Second Act: Why the Global 'War on Terror' Went Wrong."
NERMEEN SHAIKH: "Al-Qaida, the Second Act. Why the Global 'War on Terror' Went Wrong." That’s the name of the new five-part series published in the U.K.'s Independent newspaper that examines the resurgence of jihadists across the Middle East. A key part of the series examines how Saudi Arabia has openly backed militant groups in Syria, Iraq and other countries. Many analysts say the conflict in Syria has grown into a proxy war between Saudi Arabia and Iran. Saudi Arabia's history of backing jihadist groups goes back decades. Fifteen of the 19 September 11th hijackers were Saudi. The 9/11 Commission Report identified Saudi Arabia as the main source of al-Qaeda financing. And in 2010, WikiLeaks published U.S. diplomatic cables which identified Saudi Arabia as the world’s largest source of funds for Islamist militant groups.
AMY GOODMAN: Despite this record, Saudi Arabia remains a close U.S. ally. President Obama is heading to Saudi Arabia this week to meet with King Abdullah. Saudi Arabia is the only Middle Eastern or Gulf nation on Obama’s overseas itinerary. Members of Congress and human rights organizations have also been calling on Obama to address the kingdom’s treatment of women, religious minorities and political activists. To talk more about Obama’s visit to the oil-rich kingdom, we go to London to speak with Patrick Cockburn, the Middle East correspondent for The Independent who wrote the five-part series on the resurgence of al-Qaeda. One of the pieces is called "Is Saudi Arabia Regretting Its Support for Terrorism?" So, can you answer that question, Patrick Cockburn, and also talk about it in the context of President Obama meeting with King Abdullah?PATRICK COCKBURN: The Saudis have got rather nervous at the moment that—having supported these jihadi groups, that are all either linked to al-Qaeda or have exactly the same ideology and method of action of al-Qaeda, so they’ve introduced some laws saying that—against Saudis fighting in Syria or elsewhere. But it’s probably too late for this to have any effect. The al-Qaeda-type organizations really control a massive area in northern and eastern Syria at the moment and northern and western Iraq. The largest number of volunteers fighting with these al-Qaeda-type groups are Saudi. Most of the money originally came from there. But these people now control their own oil wells. They probably are less reliant on Saudi money. Will President Obama’s visit make much difference? It’s doubtful. I mean, it’s a rather extraordinary relationship, which doesn’t get much attention, between Saudi Arabia and the United States. Saudi Arabia is one of the few theocratic absolute monarchies on Earth, and therefore it was always absurd to be allied to Saudi Arabia in a bid to introduce secular democracy in Syria or Libya or anywhere else. So, probably, they will come out with comforting statements, and the Saudis will be saying to Obama, "Well, look, we’re taking measures against the jihadis now, so let’s step up our attempts to overthrow Assad in Syria." But in practice, the groups that they’re supporting are closely linked to Jabhat al-Nusra, the main al-Qaeda group. So I don’t think things are going to change very much. NERMEEN SHAIKH: I want to turn to U.S. diplomatic cables released by WikiLeaks in 2010. In a December 2009 memo, then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton identified Saudi Arabia as the world’s largest source of funds for Islamist militant groups such as the Afghan Taliban and Lashkar-e-Taiba. She writes, quote, "While the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia takes seriously the threat of terrorism within Saudi Arabia, it has been an ongoing challenge to persuade Saudi officials to treat terrorist financing emanating from Saudi Arabia as a strategic priority. Due in part to intense focus by the [U.S. government] over the last several years, Saudi Arabia has begun to make important progress on this front and has responded to terrorist financing concerns raised by the United States through proactively investigating and detaining financial facilitators of concern. Still, donors in Saudi Arabia constitute the most significant source of funding to Sunni terrorist groups worldwide." Patrick Cockburn, that was a U.S. diplomatic cable from 2009 released in 2010. Could you explain why you think the U.S. has been hesitant to act against Saudi Arabia in the way that it has against other countries in the Arab world following 9/11, and especially following these revelations? PATRICK COCKBURN: It’s pretty extraordinary, given that so much of what happened on 9/11 can be traced back to Saudi Arabia. Why hasn’t there been a greater reaction in the U.S. and the rest of the world? Well, the Saudis have cultivated people in Washington, government in Washington. There are enormous arms sales by the U.S. to Saudi Arabia. The arms on orders—on order at the moment are worth a total of $86 billion—fighter aircraft, helicopters, everything else. And they’ve also spent money cultivating former diplomats, officials, academics and so forth. And therefore, there hasn’t been—though I find this rather amazing—more pressure on Saudi Arabia or on the U.S. government to stop Saudi Arabia supporting jihadi movements. It’s not just money. It’s, I mean, a lot of it, propaganda of a satellite television, which is anti-Shia, anti-Christian, anti-Jewish, hate propaganda. So long as they have these methods of propaganda, they can probably raise men and money to send to Syria and Iraq and elsewhere. AMY GOODMAN: Patrick, this trip that President Obama—accompanied by Secretary of State John Kerry, to show the significance of it—in the United States is being seen as a reconciliation trip, the U.S. wanting to improve its relationship with Saudi Arabia, especially frayed when Saudi Arabia wanted the U.S. to be tougher on Iran—interestingly, Saudi Arabia sharing the same view as Israel on this issue. Can you talk about that in the context of the role Saudi Arabia is playing in the world? PATRICK COCKBURN: Yes, I mean, last year, there was difference between Saudi Arabia and the U.S. over the support of al-Qaeda-type organizations in Syria, which in turn are destabilizing Iraq. Saudi Arabia was eager for Obama to launch a military assault on Syria last August after the use of poison gas in Damascus. They were vocally upset when the U.S. didn’t do this. They have pushed for a U.S. war with Iran, going back several years. King Abdullah is quoted by—on a diplomatic cable as saying, "Cut off the head of the snake." So they’ll try to ensure that they’re at one with the U.S. in trying to bring down Assad and opposing Iran. NERMEEN SHAIKH: Patrick Cockburn, you’ve also pointed out that these Islamist groups, violent Islamist groups, have proliferated since 9/11, and especially after the killing of Osama bin Laden in 2011. Could you explain what the distinction is, if any, between al-Qaeda and all of these offshoot groups, and if the hesitation on the part of the U.S. has to do with the fact that these new groups operate regionally rather than in the West? PATRICK COCKBURN: Yes, I think that they draw too great a distinction—I mean, Washington draws too great a distinction between people who have a direct operational link to the remains of Osama bin Laden’s al-Qaeda in Pakistan and other groups that have the same ideology, operate in the same way, have the same methods. And you could see that in Libya, when—where the U.S. ambassador, Christopher Stevens, was killed by jihadis, who were not, in fact, al-Qaeda, and he seems to have thought, and the people around him thought, were not as dangerous as al-Qaeda. And tragically, he and they were proved wrong. You can see that in Syria at the moment, that the largest group, the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, is not in fact part of al-Qaeda—it used to be. There’s a new group, Jabhat al-Nusra, which is the official representative, but there isn’t much difference between these groups. They’re all pretty well the same. They are extraordinarily bigoted. They’re extraordinarily brutal. They kill Shia or any other nonfundamentalist Muslims who fall into their hands. So, pretending that one group, simply because it’s funded by Saudi Arabia, is not the equivalent of al-Qaeda, I think, is self-deception—and self-deception which may well have disastrous results, you know, as happened in Afghanistan in the 1980s, which eventually produced the Taliban and Osama bin Laden’s al-Qaeda. AMY GOODMAN: In 2011, Democracy Now! spoke to former Senator Bob Graham and asked him about how part of the 9/11 Commission Report remains redacted. BOB GRAHAM: The suppressed pages were in the Congressional Joint Inquiry. We worked diligently throughout 2002 to gather as much of the information as we could and to make recommendations. We had an 800-plus-page report, one chapter of which, which related primarily to the role of the Saudis in 9/11, was totally censored. Every word of that chapter has been denied to the American people. AMY GOODMAN: What about that, Patrick Cockburn? You know, Bandar Bush, of course, as he was called, the Saudi ambassador to the United States, sitting out on the Truman Balcony with President Bush the day after the 9/11 attacks. Fifteen of the 19 hijackers were from Saudi Arabia. And then Bandar Bush, the former U.S.—Saudi ambassador to the U.S., being one of the major forces behind the forces, the rebel forces in Syria? PATRICK COCKBURN: Yes, it’s sort of—it’s amazing. And, I mean, it’s had a very unfortunate consequence by not going after the very obvious roots of al-Qaeda in Saudi Arabia, in terms of money and political support and so forth. This has enabled al-Qaeda to grow again. I mean, al-Qaeda, I worked out on the map, now controls an area in northern Syria and northern Iraq which is about the size of Great Britain. Al-Qaeda was rather a small organization at the time of 9/11. Since then, we’ve had the war on terror. We’ve had vast resources poured into this, increase in intelligence and security services, rendition, torture, everything else. And at the end of it, al-Qaeda and its affiliates are far larger than they were in—at the time of 9/11. I mean, this is a pretty extraordinary situation. AMY GOODMAN: Of course, I just want to clarify, Bandar Bush was the nickname for him. His name was Prince Bandar bin Sultan. He’s now Saudi Arabia’s intelligence minister. Nermeen? NERMEEN SHAIKH: Patrick Cockburn, that’s right, he’s the intelligence minister now, but as you point out in one of your articles, he’s no longer in charge of Saudi Arabia’s policy in Syria. Could you explain what you think the impact of that decision will be, and whether Saudi policy with respect to the rebels is actually changing? PATRICK COCKBURN: I mean, it’s a very good question, and I think we’re going to maybe see the answer over the next week. Maybe one of the things it will be interesting to see, what comes out of Obama’s visit. Bandar bin Sultan’s policy in Syria failed somewhat disastrously. He wanted to get rid of Assad; they failed to do that. Instead, we’ve had these jihadi, al-Qaeda-type organizations grow enormously. And they now, sort of really the whole way from Baghdad to the Mediterranean, they control much of the territory. Now, the Saudis are—seem to be taking a slightly more diplomatic line, but what they’re saying is: "We shall support jihadis, who are different from al-Qaeda but will still be able to overthrow Assad. We’ll do this from Jordan." But will this really happen? And if they do fund a anti-Assad army there, would it just be a mercenary army that has no real support within Syria? AMY GOODMAN: We’re going to move onto a segment next on Iraq. And earlier this month, Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki accused Saudi Arabia and Qatar of openly funding the Sunni Muslim insurgents in western Anbar province. He told France 24, quote, "I accuse them of inciting and encouraging the terrorist movements. I accuse them of supporting them politically and in the media, of supporting them with money and by buying weapons for them." If you could, finally, comment on that, as well as your final comment in your recent piece, saying, "All the ingredients for a repeat of 9/11 are slipping into place, the difference today being that al-Qa’ida-type organisations are now far more powerful." PATRICK COCKBURN: Yeah, the Iraqis have felt for a long time, but didn’t say so openly, that Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the Gulf monarchies were an essential prop to al-Qaeda in Iraq through private donations, through hate preachers, anti-Shia preachers, and finally they’ve come out and said it. And they have a lot of evidence also from suicide bombers who were captured before they blew themselves up. On the other question, yes, definitely. I mean, you know, these drone attacks in Yemen and Waziristan, these declarations of victory, I think, just divert attention from the fact that you look at the map, that al-Qaeda and al-Qaeda-type groups, that are no different from those that followed Osama bin Laden, now control a large territory. They have large revenues from oil wells. They have lots of experienced people. At the moment, they’re fighting against Assad and the Iraqi government. But they don’t Ike the governments of the West anymore. They’re not ideologically committed to only one enemy in their home countries. So if they do want to start making attacks in the West again along the lines of 9/11, they’re far better equipped militarily and politically, financially and any other way than they were when the attacks of 9/11 were originally made. AMY GOODMAN: Patrick Cockburn, we want to thank you for being with us, Middle East correspondent for The Independent, just concluded a five-part series on the resurgence of al-Qaeda, including that piece, "Is Saudi Arabia Regretting Its Support for Terrorism?" President Obama is visiting Saudi Arabia on Friday along with Secretary of State John Kerry. When we come back, two women, a U.S. soldier and an Iraqi feminist, join together for the right to heal on this 11th anniversary of the U.S. invasion of Iraq. Stay with us.
http://www.democracynow.org/2014/3/26/obama_to_visit_saudi_arabia_key
Turkey shuts off YouTube after 'Syria invasion plan' leak
Access to YouTube has been cut off in Turkey after an explosive leak of audiotapes that appeared to show ministers talking about provoking military intervention in Syria. Other social media have already been blocked ahead of tumultuous local elections. The latest leaked audio recording, which reportedly led to the ban, appears to show top government officials discussing a potential attack on the tomb of Suleyman Shah, the grandfather of the founder of the Ottoman Empire.The tomb is in Syrian territory, but protected by Turkish soldiers.
On the tape, Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoğlu is heard to say that Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan sees any attack as an "opportunity" to increase Turkish presence in Syria, where it has staunchly supported the anti-Assad rebels. Security chief Hakan Fidan then goes one step further, and suggests staging a fake attack to give Turkey a casus belli to intervene in the conflict.
Turkish officials have recently vowed to protect the tomb as its "national soil."
The Foreign Ministry in Ankara reacted to the tape by issuing a statement, calling the leak a “wretched attack” on national security. It also claims the tape was “partially manipulated.”
"These treacherous gangs are the enemies of our state and people. The perpetrators of this attack targeting the security of our state and people will be uncovered in the shortest time and will be handed over to justice to be given the heaviest penalty," the ministry said.
A source inside the office of President Abdullah Gül, who has taken a softer line than Erdoğan over the series of government leaks, told Reuters that access to YouTube may be restored if the sensitive content is removed, even though the original video has been deleted.
Invoking national security and privacy concerns has been the government’s tactic in fighting off a stream of leaks showing top officials engaging in unsavory or downright illegal practices.
Erdoğan has also repeatedly claimed that most of the audio recordings are fakes. He labeled the latest audio revelation "villainous" during a stump speech in Diyabakir.
Twitter, another popular source for leaks, has already been shut down in Turkey since March 20, after a court order.
Since then, the California-based social network and organizations have fought in several courts to have the decision reversed, calling it “disproportionate and illegal.” A court ruling in Ankara on Wednesday supported the appeal, but the country’s regulator has a month to unblock Twitter, leading to speculation that any such move would only take place after the election. The incumbent party also enjoys the benefit of robust privacy legislation passed last month, which makes it easy to cut off any website even before any violation has been legally proven. The US has led the chorus of international condemnation, calling the government’s moves "censorship" tantamount to “21st century book-burning.”
Pakistan: Christian man awarded death penalty in Joseph Colony case
A court in Pakistan sentenced a Christian man to death for blasphemy Thursday, his lawyer said, over an incident that triggered a riot in the country's second-largest city.
Sawan Masih was convicted of insulting the Prophet Mohammed (PBUH) during the course of a conversation with a Muslim friend in the Joseph Colony neighbourhood of Lahore in March last year.
Naeem Shakir, one of Masih's lawyers, told AFP: “The judge has announced the death sentence for Sawan Masih.
“We will appeal the sentence in the Lahore High Court.”Verdict and sentence were announced inside the jail where Masih was held, Shakir said.
The country has had a de facto moratorium on civilian hangings since 2008. Only one person has been executed since then, a soldier convicted by court martial.
Pakistan has extremely strict laws against defaming Islam, including the death penalty for insulting the Prophet Mohammed (PBUH), and rights campaigners say they are often used to settle personal disputes.
Masih has maintained his innocence and argued the real reason for the blasphemy allegation was a property dispute between him and his friend.
No one was killed in the rampage through Joseph Colony last year but the incident highlighted the sensitivity of blasphemy in Pakistan.
Some 97 per cent of the 180 million population are Muslim, and even unproven allegations can trigger a violent public response.
Earlier this month an angry mob set fire to a Hindu temple in the southern city of Larkana over the alleged desecration of a Quran.
A recent report from a US government advisory panel said Pakistan used blasphemy laws more than any other country in the world, listing 14 people on death row and 19 others serving life sentences for insulting Islam.
In January an elderly Briton was sentenced to death in Pakistan for blasphemy, though his lawyers said the court had failed to consider “overwhelming” evidence of his mental illness.
Afghans Criticize Government’s Handling Of International Norouz Event
The Paghman Hill Castle was a year in the making, cost more than $10 million, and was meant to host one of the biggest events of the year in Afghanistan -- the international festival marking Norouz, the Persian New Year.
But in a move that has been widely criticized, the Afghan government abruptly ditched its original plan to hold the one-day event at a specially-built castle in Paghman, a picturesque resort town outside Kabul. Instead, the festival has been moved to the grounds of the capital's heavily fortified presidential palace.
The government’s official reason for the move was that work on the castle was incomplete. Many in Kabul have accused the government of negligence and poor mismanagement. Others have said the real reason for the decision is the government’s inability to provide security for the event, despite Kabul’s insistence that security concerns did not factor into its decision.
The international Norouz festival is hosting around 700 local and foreign leaders from 11 countries, including the leaders of the Central Asian republics and of Iran, Iraq, Pakistan, and Azerbaijan. The high-level delegations in attendance will hold high-level talks on regional security and trade on March 27, after which they will attend the Norouz festivities in the presidential gardens.
The festivities include traditional performances by dancers from all 11 countries represented at the event. There will also be a live concert performed by local musicians as well as an arts and craft convention, and foods that traditionally accompany the holiday will be served to guests.
Security is extremely tight in Kabul, where several thousand soldiers and police are on high alert. Many of the main roads in the capital have been closed or cordoned off, and people have been advised to stay at home.
Presidential Retreat?
Originally, the festivities were planned to be held at the three-story Paghman Hill Castle and a vast garden that had been constructed. The castle and surrounding areas are now expected to be used as a presidential retreat and a location to host foreign guests.
The Afghan government has offered a muddled explanation for why the celebration in Paghman was canceled.
Gul Agha Ahmadi, the head of the government-appointed Committee for Norouz Celebrations, which is organizing the festival, has said the government moved the venue because construction of the castle was incomplete. Ahmadi denied security concerns were behind the sudden shift of venue.
The government’s decision comes after a recent spate of deadly militants attacks that have left dozens dead across the country. Violence has soared ahead of the April 5 presidential election that militants have vowed to disrupt.
But the Ministry of Urban Development and Housing Affairs, which oversees the project, declared last week that the venue was complete and “ready to welcome our guests.”
National 'Disgrace'
Afghan lawmakers and citizens have vented their anger at the government’s decision to relocate the event.
Sayed Mohammad, a resident of Kabul, said the Norouz event is a chance for the country to showcase its rich culture and traditions, but that in moving the venue the government has brought embarrassment to the country.
“It’s a disgrace," Mohammad said. "The government should have organized the event properly. They should have organized the security so these [foreign guests] could come to [Paghman].”
Ghulam Hussain Naseri, a member of parliament, was also critical of the last-minute change of venue. “The Norouz festival in Paghman has been planned since last year," he said on March 25. “The government should have thought about possible security problems way before. This shows their negligence.”
Abdul Aziz, another Kabul resident, called the government’s official reason for suddenly changing the venue a sham. He said the government is simply incapable of providing security.
“The government keeps saying we will ensure security," Aziz said. "They say we have the military and the police and will ensure 100-percent security. But they can’t -- there are attacks everywhere on every day.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)